Introduction Drought is a complex, slow-onset phenomenon that affects more people than any other natural hazard and results in serious economic, social, and environmental impacts in both developing and developed countries.  Drought conditions have been widespread in recent years in Europe, North Africa, the Mid-East and West Asian countries, India, China, North and Central America, and South America.  Recent droughts in Africa have placed more than 30 million people at risk for hunger and malnutrition.  In Ethiopia, an estimated 11 million people are at risk of experiencing food shortages as a result of a drought that has cut cereal production by 20 to 30 percent.  Afghanistan has experienced 4 consecutive years of drought in which precipitation has been 55 percent of the long-term average.   India is currently experiencing its worst drought in 15 years.  Twelve states have been drought declared and more than 300 million people are affected.  In Australia, drought has increased the nation’s trade deficit to its highest level in 2 years, cut wool production by 40 to 60 percent, cut summer harvests to their lowest levels in 20 years, and resulted in damages of A$300 million to residential properties because of cracking foundations. Since 1996, severe drought has occurred throughout large portions of North America, including the United States, Mexico, and Canada.  More than 5 consecutive drought years affected northern Mexico and the south-central and southwestern United States during this period and resulted in serious impacts and aggravated existing transboundary water conflicts between Mexico and the United States.  With more than 300 river basins currently being shared by 2 or more countries, drought conditions will continue to exacerbate international water conflicts. Growing concerns about a future increase in the frequency and severity of drought and mounting evidence of the expanding vulnerability of many countries to drought further underscore the importance of placing greater emphasis on pro-active drought policies and preparedness. One of the trends associated with recent drought events has been the growing complexity of drought impacts.  Past drought impacts have been linked most closely to the agricultural sector, for obvious reasons.  These impacts continue and are increasing in many countries as poor land use practices, rapidly increasing population, inappropriate government policies, environmental degradation, poverty, and civil conflicts exacerbate food production potential.  However, in many nations, particularly those characterized by more complex economies, the impacts of drought quickly ripple to other sectors as drought conditions extend for multiple seasons and years.  In the United States, for example, recent droughts have produced significant impacts on transportation, recreation and tourism, energy production, wildland and forest fires, and the environment, endandering the existence of animal and plant species and aggravating soil erosion.  In 2002, 50% of the United States was affected by moderate, severe, and extreme drought, and estimates of losses range from $11 to $20 billion. Drought conditions have continued into 2003 for most of the western United States, and impacts may be more severe than in 2002. In both developing and developed countries, the impacts of drought are often an indicator of nonsustainable land and water management practices, and drought assistance or relief provided by governments and donors often encourages land managers and others to continue these practices.  It is precisely these existing resource management practices that have often increased societal vulnerability to drought (i.e., exacerbated drought impacts).   This often results in a decreased resilience of individuals and communities and an increased dependence on government.  One of the principal goals of drought policies and preparedness plans is to move societies away from the traditional approach of crisis management, which is reactive in nature, to a more pro-active, risk management approach.  The goal of risk management is to promote the adoption of preventative or risk-reducing measures and strategies that will mitigate the impacts of future drought events, thus reducing societal vulnerability.  This paradigm shift emphasizes preparedness, mitigation, and improved early warning systems (EWS) over emergency response and assistance measures. Drought is a creeping natural hazard that is a normal part of climate for virtually all regions of the world. Drought onset and end are often difficult to determine.  In fact, there is often widespread disagreement among scientists as to whether a drought exists and its level of severity.  Certainly this confusion explains, to some extent, the lack of progress in drought preparedness in most countries.  Drought early warning systems must be an integral part of preparedness plans, but to date most of these systems have been largely ineffective for a variety of reasons.  Improved coordination within and between levels of government and with regional and international organizations, as well as the application of new technologies and tools, provide unprecedented opportunities in drought monitoring that are proving to be effective in some settings.  It is essential that lessons learned in drought monitoring, planning, mitigation, and policy be shared between countries and regions in order for nations to reduce their vulnerability to drought in the immediate future. Drought Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Drought risk is a product of a region’s exposure to the natural hazard and its vulnerability to extended periods of water shortage.  If nations and regions are to make progress in reducing the serious consequences of drought, they must improve their understanding of the hazard and the factors that influence vulnerability. The frequency of occurrence of meteorological drought at various levels of intensity and duration defines the drought hazard for drought-prone nations and regions.  It is critical for countries to better understand this hazard and how it varies temporally and spatially and establish comprehensive and integrated drought early warning systems that incorporate climate, soil, and water supply factors such as precipitation, temperature, soil moisture, snowpack, reservoir and lake levels, ground water levels, and streamflow.  It is also essential that we identify trends in temperature and precipitation amounts, changes in the seasonal distribution and intensity of precipitation events, and other changes in climate that might be helpful in understanding how the hazard may change on a temporal and spatial basis in the future. Vulnerability to drought is dynamic and influenced by a multitude of factors, including population growth and regional shifts in population, urbanization, technology, government policies, land use and other natural resource management practices, desertification processes that reduce the productivity of the natural resource base, water use trends, and increasing environmental awareness.  Individually, these factors are important because they may increase or decrease vulnerability.  Collectively, they can have a drastic effect on the types and magnitude of impacts associated with drought.  Thus, current concerns about the escalating impacts of drought may be the result of an increased frequency of drought events (i.e., meteorological drought), changes in vulnerability, or a combination of these elements. Drought Monitoring and Early Warning A recent report published by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) documented the shortcomings and needs of drought early warning systems.  The shortcomings noted were: · data networks–often of inadequate density and data quality for meteorological and hydrological monitoring and lacking for other key climate and water supply parameters (e.g., soil water, stream gauges); ·  data sharing–inadequate data sharing between government agencies and the high acquisition costs for these data by end users limits application of data for drought research and to enhance drought preparedness, mitigation, and response activities; ·  early warning system products–data and information products are often not end user friendly and users are not trained in the application of this information in decision making; · drought forecasts–unreliable seasonal forecasts and the lack of specificity of information provided by forecasts limit the uses of this information by farmers and other weather- sensitive industries; ·   drought monitoring tools–inadequate indices for detecting the early onset and end of drought, although the Standardized Precipitation Index is a new tool that is being widely used to detect the early emergence of drought in many countries; · integrated drought/climate monitoring–drought monitoring systems should be integrated and based on multiple indicators to fully understand the magnitude, spatial extent, and impacts of drought; ·   impact assessment methodology–lack of impact assessment methodology hinders impact estimates and the activation of mitigation and response programs; ·  delivery systems–data and information on drought conditions, seasonal forecasts, and other products are often not delivered to users in a timely manner; · global early warning systems–a global drought assessment product based on multiple key drought indicators or indices (e.g., SPI, satellite data) would be helpful to international organizations, NGOs, and others in detecting emerging drought areas and potential food deficit areas. Drought Policy and Preparedness Drought-prone nations should develop national drought policies and preparedness plans that place emphasis on risk management rather than following the traditional approach of crisis management, where the emphasis is on reactive emergency response measures.  Crisis management decreases self-reliance and increases dependence on government and donors.  This approach has been ineffective because response is untimely (i.e., post-impact), poorly coordinated within and between levels of government and with donor organizations and NGOs, and poorly targeted to drought-stricken groups or areas.  Many governments and others now understand the fallacy of crisis management and are striving to learn how to employ proper risk management techniques to reduce societal vulnerability to drought and therefore lessen the impacts associated with future drought events. Developing vulnerability profiles for regions, communities, population groups, and others will provide critical information on who and what is at risk and why.  This information, when integrated into the planning process, can enhance the outcome of the process by identifying and prioritizing specific areas where progress can be made in risk management. In the past decade or so, drought policy and preparedness plans have received increasing attention from governments, international and regional organizations, and NGOs.  Simply stated, a national drought policy should establish a clear set of principles or operating guidelines to govern the management of drought and its impacts.  The policy should be consistent and equitable for all regions, population groups, and economic sectors and consistent with the goals of sustainable development.  The overriding principle of drought policy should be an emphasis on risk management through the application of preparedness and mitigation measures.  Preparedness refers to pre-disaster activities designed to increase the level of readiness or improve operational and institutional capabilities for responding to a drought episode.  Mitigation actions, programs, or policies are implemented during and in advance of drought to reduce the degree of risk to human life, property, and productive capacity.  Emergency response will always be a part of drought management because it is unlikely that government and others can anticipate, avoid, or reduce all potential impacts through mitigation programs.  A future drought event may also exceed the “drought of record” and the capacity of a region to respond.   However, emergency response should be used sparingly and only if it is consistent with longer-term drought policy goals and objectives. A national drought policy should be directed toward reducing risk by developing better awareness and understanding of the drought hazard and the underlying causes of societal vulnerability. The principles of risk management can be promoted by building greater institutional capacity within countries through encouraging the improvement and application of seasonal and shorter-term forecasts, developing integrated monitoring and drought EWS and associated information delivery systems, developing preparedness plans at various levels of government, adopting mitigation actions and programs, and creating a safety net of emergency response programs that ensure timely and targeted relief. Drought Preparedness Networks: Stimulating Regional and Global Cooperation and Information Sharing As new technologies, tools, and methodologies become available and are subsequently adopted by drought-prone countries and regions, the importance of sharing this information and experience is paramount to future advances in drought preparedness.  One way to accomplish that goal is through development of a network of regional networks for drought preparedness.  Such networks, relying heavily on the Internet for linking institutions within and between regions, will facilitate the exchange of information and experiences. The NDMC and International Drought Information Center (IDIC) at the University of Nebraska are working in partnership with ISDR and other key U.N. agencies, U.S. federal agencies, NGOs, and appropriate regional and national institutions to build a global drought preparedness network that will promote the concepts of drought preparedness and mitigation with the goal of building greater institutional capacity to cope with future episodes of drought.  In essence, this global drought partnership will enhance current national and regional institutional capacities through expansion of the NDMC=s drought information clearinghouse on the World Wide Web and by building regional drought preparedness networks.  Working individually, many nations and regions will be unable to improve drought coping capacity.  Collectively, working through global and regional partnerships, the goal of reducing the magnitude of economic, environmental, and social impacts associated with drought in the 21st century can be achieved.  Information on drought EWS, automated data collection techniques, drought indices and indicators, triggers for mitigation and response actions, planning methodologies, drought policies, and mitigation actions and programs are just a few of the areas where interaction between countries and regions can expedite progress on drought preparedness. Donald A. Wilhite - Director, National Drought Mitigation Center and International Drought Information Center, and Professor and Associate Director, School of Natural Resource Sciences, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska 68583 U.S.A.