↓ Skip to main content

The Rufiji River flood: plague or blessing?

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Biometeorology, June 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
Title
The Rufiji River flood: plague or blessing?
Published in
International Journal of Biometeorology, June 2007
DOI 10.1007/s00484-007-0105-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stéphanie Duvail, Olivier Hamerlynck

Abstract

The building of a large multipurpose dam is planned at Stiegler's Gorge on the Rufiji River (Tanzania). Both national and local authorities have strongly emphasised the flood control aspect of the dam as they see the Rufiji floods as a major constraint to development. Though it is true that the Rufiji River has a high flow variability at various timescales, the flood perception in local communities differs from this view. The floods, essential for the sustenance of floodplain fertility, and therefore of the farming system, and vital to the productivity of most of the natural resources on which local communities depend, are perceived as a blessing, whilst droughts and the absence of regular flooding are perceived as the main threat. Historically, most of the food shortages in Rufiji District are associated with drought years and the myth of "the flood as a plague" emerged only in the late 1960s during the Ujamaa villagisation policy. The persistence of this myth is favoured by the inadequate assessment of the complexity of the local economies by the District technical staff. This difference in perception of the flood has major implications for development options. Under the current dam design, the alteration of the flooding pattern would have negative consequences for the downstream wetland and forest ecosystems and the flood-associated livelihoods of some 150,000 people. A cost-benefit analysis of flood control measures and a study of a dam design that would maintain the beneficial aspects of flooding should be accorded the highest priority.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 90 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 15%
Student > Master 14 15%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 5 5%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 24 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 24 26%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 10 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 8%
Engineering 6 7%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 26 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 July 2019.
All research outputs
#5,145,112
of 24,716,872 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Biometeorology
#556
of 1,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,491
of 76,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Biometeorology
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,716,872 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,365 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 76,925 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.