the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 14 Mar 2022
Assessing the impacts of tropical cyclones on rice production in Bangladesh, Myanmar, Philippines, and Vietnam
Abstract. Information on agriculture-related damage and losses in Asia is under-reported in major multi-peril disaster databases. National disaster databases in some countries may have information on agricultural losses, but this information is not always available. We address this knowledge gap by creating a database of cyclone-induced rice damage from 1970–2018 for four major rice producing countries in Asia which experience frequent and intense tropical cyclones as a result of their geographical location (Philippines, Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Myanmar). We collated information using online news sources on rice damage locations, rice area damaged, loss in rice production, and loss in rice value from 1970–2018. Of the 1,046 cyclone events recorded, 138 events were associated with rice damage and loss, and majority of these events (93 %) happened in the Philippines and Vietnam. The average area of rice damaged per cyclone event ranged from 42,407 ha in Vietnam to 423,075 ha in Myanmar. The average rice production loss per cyclone event ranged from 460,667 metric tonnes in Bangladesh to 2,943,088 metric tonnes in the Philippines. Losses in rice production value from 1970–2018 were only reported in the Philippines and amounted to an average of US$42 million per cyclone event. Although Category 4 events tend to cause the most damage, tropical storms and Category 1 events were more frequent, especially in Vietnam. While our study is limited by the availability and quality of online news sources, we provide an assessment of rice agricultural damage from tropical cyclones in major rice producing countries in Asia.
- Preprint
(984 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(588 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
CC1: 'Comment on nhess-2022-4', Eric Strobl, 01 Jun 2022
This study collects data on relevant tropical cyclones, and their damages to rice production across three countries from a variety of sources. As such the information is useful as a set of preliminary statistics. However, the analysis needs to go much further and try to disentangle what aspects of tropical cyclones drive the observed damages. In particular this requires creating a more detailed data set of the locally experienced wind speeds, the location of rice, the timing relative to the growing season, the amount of locally experienced windfields etc. These data would then need to be subjected to a regression analysis to properly identify what is driving observed differences in damages. Only then can the results be considered meaning and useful for policymakers and future research. May I also note that gathering data on ex-post reported damages as the authors do here is likely to involve selection bias (in terms of the reporting) and measurement error, that would need to be addressed, or at the very least discussed.
Thus, while the effort in data collection should be applauded, this in and of itself does not merit publication. A thorough analysis of the data in the lines suggested above would certainly be required.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-4-CC1 -
RC2: 'CC1 again as RC', Eric Strobl, 13 Jun 2022
This study collects data on relevant tropical cyclones, and their damages to rice production across three countries from a variety of sources. As such the information is useful as a set of preliminary statistics. However, the analysis needs to go much further and try to disentangle what aspects of tropical cyclones drive the observed damages. In particular this requires creating a more detailed data set of the locally experienced wind speeds, the location of rice, the timing relative to the growing season, the amount of locally experienced windfields etc. These data would then need to be subjected to a regression analysis to properly identify what is driving observed differences in damages. Only then can the results be considered meaning and useful for policymakers and future research. May I also note that gathering data on ex-post reported damages as the authors do here is likely to involve selection bias (in terms of the reporting) and measurement error, that would need to be addressed, or at the very least discussed.
Thus, while the effort in data collection should be applauded, this in and of itself does not merit publication. A thorough analysis of the data in the lines suggested above would certainly be required.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-4-RC2 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Janice Ser Huay Lee, 21 Jul 2022
We thank the reviewer for this review, especially under these circumstances related to the pandemic.
We agree that the data collected is a set of preliminary statistics and the analyses could be developed further should we have more information on locally experienced wind speeds, location of rice, and other factors mentioned by the reviewer. Unfortunately, we were unable to obtain these fine-scale measurements mainly due to the coarse resolution of sites of damage we could glean from the articles. For example, these articles report damages in an aggregated fashion and do not provide the coordinates of where damage happened. Hence, this hindered our ablity to collect more fine-scale measurements as required by the reviewer.
We will take note of the suggestion to incorporate a discussion on selection bias in terms of reporting.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-4-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Janice Ser Huay Lee, 21 Jul 2022
-
RC2: 'CC1 again as RC', Eric Strobl, 13 Jun 2022
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2022-4', Masayuki Yokozawamyokoz@waseda.jp, 02 Jun 2022
This paper collects data on the impact of tropical cyclones on crop production in the Southeast Asian region. Collecting such data is valuable and important for planning and devicing adaptation measures in the face of the impacts expected to result from climate change. However, the dataset in this paper is not valid for future studies. There is little information available for past impact assessments. In particular, the information on the intensity and timing of cyclone strikes and the growing stage of the crop at that time is very important, because the impact of the cyclone can vary greatly depending on the conditions of the crop. Additionally, the trajectory data are also important, which greatly affect impacts on the crop. While there may be difficulties in obtaining such data in the target areas, more quantitative data are needed to assess the impacts. It is difficult to accept from the current analysis.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-4-RC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Janice Ser Huay Lee, 21 Jul 2022
We thank the reviewer for this review especially under these current circumstances.
As mentioned in our previous response to RC2, we agree that the data falls short of a more quantitative analyses expected by the reviewers. We may be able to source for information related to the growing stage of the crop based on IRRI's rice calendar for the region, but we would have to check the resolution of this dataset and if it is more of a national or sub-national dataset.
Could the reviewer clarify what they mean by 'trajectory data'? Thank you.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-4-AC2
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Janice Ser Huay Lee, 21 Jul 2022
Status: closed
-
CC1: 'Comment on nhess-2022-4', Eric Strobl, 01 Jun 2022
This study collects data on relevant tropical cyclones, and their damages to rice production across three countries from a variety of sources. As such the information is useful as a set of preliminary statistics. However, the analysis needs to go much further and try to disentangle what aspects of tropical cyclones drive the observed damages. In particular this requires creating a more detailed data set of the locally experienced wind speeds, the location of rice, the timing relative to the growing season, the amount of locally experienced windfields etc. These data would then need to be subjected to a regression analysis to properly identify what is driving observed differences in damages. Only then can the results be considered meaning and useful for policymakers and future research. May I also note that gathering data on ex-post reported damages as the authors do here is likely to involve selection bias (in terms of the reporting) and measurement error, that would need to be addressed, or at the very least discussed.
Thus, while the effort in data collection should be applauded, this in and of itself does not merit publication. A thorough analysis of the data in the lines suggested above would certainly be required.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-4-CC1 -
RC2: 'CC1 again as RC', Eric Strobl, 13 Jun 2022
This study collects data on relevant tropical cyclones, and their damages to rice production across three countries from a variety of sources. As such the information is useful as a set of preliminary statistics. However, the analysis needs to go much further and try to disentangle what aspects of tropical cyclones drive the observed damages. In particular this requires creating a more detailed data set of the locally experienced wind speeds, the location of rice, the timing relative to the growing season, the amount of locally experienced windfields etc. These data would then need to be subjected to a regression analysis to properly identify what is driving observed differences in damages. Only then can the results be considered meaning and useful for policymakers and future research. May I also note that gathering data on ex-post reported damages as the authors do here is likely to involve selection bias (in terms of the reporting) and measurement error, that would need to be addressed, or at the very least discussed.
Thus, while the effort in data collection should be applauded, this in and of itself does not merit publication. A thorough analysis of the data in the lines suggested above would certainly be required.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-4-RC2 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Janice Ser Huay Lee, 21 Jul 2022
We thank the reviewer for this review, especially under these circumstances related to the pandemic.
We agree that the data collected is a set of preliminary statistics and the analyses could be developed further should we have more information on locally experienced wind speeds, location of rice, and other factors mentioned by the reviewer. Unfortunately, we were unable to obtain these fine-scale measurements mainly due to the coarse resolution of sites of damage we could glean from the articles. For example, these articles report damages in an aggregated fashion and do not provide the coordinates of where damage happened. Hence, this hindered our ablity to collect more fine-scale measurements as required by the reviewer.
We will take note of the suggestion to incorporate a discussion on selection bias in terms of reporting.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-4-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Janice Ser Huay Lee, 21 Jul 2022
-
RC2: 'CC1 again as RC', Eric Strobl, 13 Jun 2022
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2022-4', Masayuki Yokozawamyokoz@waseda.jp, 02 Jun 2022
This paper collects data on the impact of tropical cyclones on crop production in the Southeast Asian region. Collecting such data is valuable and important for planning and devicing adaptation measures in the face of the impacts expected to result from climate change. However, the dataset in this paper is not valid for future studies. There is little information available for past impact assessments. In particular, the information on the intensity and timing of cyclone strikes and the growing stage of the crop at that time is very important, because the impact of the cyclone can vary greatly depending on the conditions of the crop. Additionally, the trajectory data are also important, which greatly affect impacts on the crop. While there may be difficulties in obtaining such data in the target areas, more quantitative data are needed to assess the impacts. It is difficult to accept from the current analysis.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-4-RC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Janice Ser Huay Lee, 21 Jul 2022
We thank the reviewer for this review especially under these current circumstances.
As mentioned in our previous response to RC2, we agree that the data falls short of a more quantitative analyses expected by the reviewers. We may be able to source for information related to the growing stage of the crop based on IRRI's rice calendar for the region, but we would have to check the resolution of this dataset and if it is more of a national or sub-national dataset.
Could the reviewer clarify what they mean by 'trajectory data'? Thank you.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2022-4-AC2
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Janice Ser Huay Lee, 21 Jul 2022
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,101 | 983 | 60 | 2,144 | 81 | 48 | 49 |
- HTML: 1,101
- PDF: 983
- XML: 60
- Total: 2,144
- Supplement: 81
- BibTeX: 48
- EndNote: 49
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
