Sampling Uncertainty is Critical for Setting Forecast-Based Anticipatory Action Triggers
Abstract
As of 2022, nearly 5 million smallholder farmers across more than a dozen countries are covered by Anticipatory Action (AA) programs. AA programs are aid schemes triggered when seasonal forecasts of precipitation fall below a locally-determined drought threshold. These thresholds are generally calculated to meet a donor- or government-specified expected trigger frequency. However, the observational precipitation record in many regions with AA programs is limited, and interannual and interdecadal autocorrelation in the climate patterns driving seasonal precipitation further reduce the effective sample size used to calculate these thresholds. AA trigger thresholds are highly sensitive to this limited observational record, increasing the risk that action is not triggered when it is needed or that programs become financially unsustainable due to excessive triggers. In practice, forecasters are aware of this uncertainty and ad hoc decisions on whether to trigger action are often made if seasonal forecasts are close to the threshold. Seeking a more formalized, statistically sound alternative to these ad hoc approaches, governments and humanitarian agencies have asked for transparent and intuitive metrics of trigger uncertainty. To address this demand, we illustrate how a simple statistical method (bootstrap resampling) can quantify the practical uncertainty in drought thresholds due to a limited observational record. Examining United Nations-supported operational AA forecasts in sub-Saharan Africa, we demonstrate how this method quantifies critical underlying uncertainty, enabling these AA systems to meet the state-of-the-art demanded by donors and the WMO.
Related
- Uncertainty analysis of a machine learning-aided ensemble forecast for coastal flood maps
- Uncertainty Quantification in Forecast Comparisons
- Reduction of uncertainty in near-term climate forecast by combining observations and decadal predictions
- Structure Function Sampling Uncertainty: A Gaussian-Increment Reference Framework
- Uncertainty in broad-scale coastal flood damage cost assessments under sea-level rise: critical needs for more accurate protection data
BibTeX
@misc{mauerman2026sampling,
title = {{Sampling Uncertainty is Critical for Setting Forecast-Based Anticipatory Action Triggers}},
author = {Max Mauerman and Nathan Lenssen and Kevin Schwarzwald and Daniel Osgood and Ahmat Younous Abdel-lathif},
howpublished = {EarthArXiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.31223/x56233},
url = {https://eartharxiv.org/repository/view/15800/},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Sampling Uncertainty is Critical for Setting Forecast-Based Anticipatory Action Triggers
AU - Max Mauerman
AU - Nathan Lenssen
AU - Kevin Schwarzwald
AU - Daniel Osgood
AU - Ahmat Younous Abdel-lathif
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/27
PB - EarthArXiv
DO - 10.31223/x56233
UR - https://eartharxiv.org/repository/view/15800/
AB - As of 2022, nearly 5 million smallholder farmers across more than a dozen countries are covered by Anticipatory Action (AA) programs. AA programs are aid schemes triggered when seasonal forecasts of precipitation fall below a locally-determined drought threshold. These thresholds are generally calculated to meet a donor- or government-specified expected trigger frequency. However, the observational precipitation record in many regions with AA programs is limited, and interannual and interdecadal autocorrelation in the climate patterns driving seasonal precipitation further reduce the effective sample size used to calculate these thresholds. AA trigger thresholds are highly sensitive to this limited observational record, increasing the risk that action is not triggered when it is needed or that programs become financially unsustainable due to excessive triggers. In practice, forecasters are aware of this uncertainty and ad hoc decisions on whether to trigger action are often made if seasonal forecasts are close to the threshold. Seeking a more formalized, statistically sound alternative to these ad hoc approaches, governments and humanitarian agencies have asked for transparent and intuitive metrics of trigger uncertainty. To address this demand, we illustrate how a simple statistical method (bootstrap resampling) can quantify the practical uncertainty in drought thresholds due to a limited observational record. Examining United Nations-supported operational AA forecasts in sub-Saharan Africa, we demonstrate how this method quantifies critical underlying uncertainty, enabling these AA systems to meet the state-of-the-art demanded by donors and the WMO.
ER -