Hydrological modelling for sustainable rural and urban landscapes in Latvia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22616/j.landarchart.2025.27.05Keywords:
hydrological modelling, sustainable landscape planning, land use impact, flood risk management, METQ modelAbstract
Effective landscape planning requires a comprehensive understanding of how land use affects hydrological processes - especially in regions such as Latvia, where climate change, urbanisation, and fragmented hydrological data complicate decision-making. This study applies the METQ conceptual rainfall–runoff model to three representative Latvian catchments (Iecava, Pērse, and Imula), each characterised by differing forest, agricultural, and urban land use patterns. Using long-term hydrometeorological data and detailed land cover classifications, the model was calibrated and validated to simulate daily runoff dynamics and explore the influence of land use on flood risk and water balance. Results indicate that forested and semi-natural areas attenuate peak flows and enhance baseflow retention, while intensively cultivated and urbanised landscapes increase surface runoff and flood potential. Scenario simulations further reveal that even small increases in impervious area can significantly elevate peak discharge, whereas the implementation of green infrastructure can mitigate these effects. The study demonstrates that METQ provides reliable, spatially explicit hydrological insights that support sustainable land use planning, particularly in data-scarce contexts. The findings emphasise the importance of incorporating hydrological models into spatial planning and environmental assessment processes. Such integration allows planners and designers to visualise the consequences of development decisions, evaluate alternative land use configurations, and enhance landscape resilience in the face of climate change. The approach presented here offers a transferable model for landscape planning in other Baltic and Northern European regions facing similar socio-environmental challenges.
References
1. Apsīte, E., Elferts, D., Lapinskis, J., Briede, A., & Klints, L. Changes in magnitude and shifts in timing of the Latvian river annual flood peaks. Atmosphere, 2024, 15(9), p. 1139.
2. Bakute, A., Grinfelde, I., & Lagzdiņš, A. Application of the model METQ for hydrological calculations. Research for Rural Development, 2017, 1, p. 139−144.
3. Beven, K. J. Rainfall–runoff modelling: The primer. 2nd ed. Wiley-Blackwell, 2012.
4. European Environment Agency. Climate change, impacts and vulnerability in Europe 2016: An indicator-based report. 2017. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/climate-changeimpacts-and-vulnerability-2016
5. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Directive 2007/60/EC of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks. Official Journal of the European Union, 2007, L 288, p. 27−34. http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2007/60/oj
6. Grinfelde, I., & Bakute, A. Urban hydrological response unit parameter calibration and verification for conceptual hydrological model METQ. Engineering for Rural Development, 2017, 16, p. 1117−1122.
7. Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K., & Martinez, G. F. Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling. Journal of Hydrology, 2009, 377(1–2), p. 80−91.
8. Kundzewicz, Z. W., Krysanova, V., Dankers, R., Hirabayashi, Y., Kanae, S., Hattermann, F. F., … Schellnhuber, H. J. Differences in flood hazard projections in Europe – their causes and consequences for decision making. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 2016, 62(1), p. 1−14.
9. Loucks, D. P., & van Beek, E. Water resource systems planning and management: An introduction to methods, models, and applications. Springer, 2017.
10. Moriasi, D. N., Arnold, J. G., Van Liew, M. W., Bingner, R. L., Harmel, R. D., & Veith, T. L. Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Transactions of the ASABE, 2007, 50(3), p. 885−900.
11. Opperman, J. J., Galloway, G. E., Fargione, J., Mount, J. F., Richter, B. D., & Secchi, S. Sustainable floodplains through large-scale reconnection to rivers. Science, 2009, 326(5959), p. 1487−1488.
12. Pahl-Wostl, C. Transitions towards adaptive management of water facing climate and global change. Water Resources Management, 2007, 21(1), p. 49−62.
13. Seibert, J. Regionalisation of parameters for a conceptual rainfall–runoff model. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 1999, 98–99, p. 279−293.
14. Ziegler, A. D., Giambelluca, T. W., Tran, L. T., Vana, T. T., Nullet, M. A., Fox, J. M., ... Vien, T. D. Hydrological consequences of landscape fragmentation in mountainous northern Vietnam: Evidence of accelerated overland flow generation. Journal of Hydrology, 2004, 287(1–4), p. 124−146.
15. Zīverts, A., & Jauja, I. Mathematical model of hydrological processes METQ98 and its applications. Nordic Hydrology, 1999, 30(2), p. 109−128.
16. Zölch, T., Henze, L., Keilholz, P., & Pauleit, S. Regulating urban surface runoff through nature-based solutions—An assessment at the micro-scale. Environmental Research, 2017, 157, p. 135−144.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Landscape Architecture and Art

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.