Jump to content

Course:CONS200/2026WT2/ Causes and Consequences: Glacial Lake Outburst Floods in the Hindu Kush Himalaya

From UBC Wiki

Introduction

Tsho Rolpa glacial lake, Nepal. Glacial lakes such as Tsho Rolpa are an important focus of GLOF hazard assessment in the Hindu Kush Himalaya.

Glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) are sudden floods caused by the failure of glacier-fed lakes, especially lakes dammed by ice or unstable moraines.[1] In the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH), they have become an increasingly important hazard as glacier retreat has altered the regional cryosphere and changed the number, size, and distribution of glacial lakes.[2][3]

At the same time, roads, hydropower projects, settlements, and other infrastructure have expanded along valley floors, increasing downstream exposure to flood impacts.[4] In the HKH, GLOF consequences extend far beyond their immediate physical destruction. They can damage bridges, farmland, transport corridors, and hydropower facilities, while also complicating development, hazard planning, and risk governance in mountain regions.[1][4]

Background and context

Regional setting

The Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) is a transboundary mountain region extending about 3,500 km across all or part of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal, and Pakistan. It contains the headwaters of ten major river systems, including the Amu Darya, Indus, Ganges, Brahmaputra, Irrawaddy, Salween, Mekong, Yangtze, Yellow River, and Tarim. About 240 million people live within the HKH, and the river basins originating there provide water and other ecosystem services to roughly 1.9 billion people downstream.[5]

Glacial landscape in the Hindu Kush Himalaya. Sentinel-2 imagery of the Zemu Glacier region shows the high-altitude glacial terrain of the HKH, including glaciers, lakes, and steep mountain topography.

Glacial lakes and changing hazard context

The HKH contains extensive glacier, snow, and permafrost systems. In this setting, glacial lakes commonly form as glaciers retreat and meltwater accumulates behind natural dams, especially moraines. Moraine-dammed lakes are especially important in GLOF studies because moraine dams are generally less stable than bedrock barriers and are therefore more frequently prioritised in hazard assessments.[2][6]

The regional hazard context has changed significantly over recent decades. Widespread glacier thinning and retreat have altered the cryosphere across the HKH, and satellite-based studies show substantial change in Himalayan glacial lake area between 1990 and 2015.[2][3] ICIMOD’s first HKH-wide assessment identified 25,614 glacial lakes covering about 1,444 km² across five major river basins, with more and larger lakes in the eastern HKH. The same assessment noted especially high numbers of moraine-dammed lakes in the Ganges and Amu Darya basins.[6] Together, these trends indicate that the physical conditions associated with GLOF hazard have become more widespread, even though not all lakes present the same level of risk.[3][6]

More recent transboundary inventories have focused on potentially dangerous glacial lakes (PDGLs). In the Koshi, Gandaki, and Karnali basins, one inventory identified 3,624 glacial lakes larger than 0.003 km² and selected 47 PDGLs: 21 in Nepal, 25 in the Tibet Autonomous Region of China, and 1 in India. Of these, 42 were located in the Koshi basin. This concentration has contributed to the Koshi basin’s prominence in regional GLOF risk assessment and monitoring.[7]

Historical occurrence

GLOFs are not new in the HKH. ICIMOD reports that more than 50 GLOF events have been recorded in the region, although historical records remain incomplete and are concentrated mainly in Bhutan, China, Nepal, and Pakistan.[6] In the broader High Mountain Asia region, which extends beyond the HKH, a recent database documented 697 GLOFs between 1833 and 2022 and reported 6,906 fatalities, while also noting that downstream impacts are often poorly recorded.[8] Major HKH examples include the 4 August 1985 Dig Tsho outburst in Nepal, the 6 October 1994 Luggye Lake outburst in Bhutan, and the 4 October 2023 South Lhonak outburst in Sikkim, India.[9][10][11] These events show that GLOFs are a long-standing regional hazard, although they are now being documented more systematically than in the past.[8]

Causes and drivers

GLOFs in the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) do not result from a single cause. They are produced by the interaction of long-term cryospheric change, local lake and dam conditions, and short-term trigger events. Glacier retreat has increased the number and size of glacial lakes in many parts of the region, but whether a particular lake fails depends on additional factors such as moraine stability, glacier-lake contact, surrounding slope conditions, and the occurrence of avalanches, landslides, intense rainfall, or internal erosion.[2][3][8]

Climate and cryospheric change and glacier retreat

Glacial lakes in the Bhutan-Himalaya. Satellite imagery shows rapidly forming glacial lakes on debris-covered glaciers in the Himalaya, illustrating the changing cryospheric conditions associated with GLOF hazard.

The broadest driver of GLOF hazard in the HKH is regional warming and the glacier retreat associated with it. Widespread glacier thinning and recession have altered the cryosphere across the region and have increased the number of sites where meltwater can accumulate in overdeepened basins or behind moraine complexes.[2][3] Climate change is a long-term hazard driver rather than the immediate trigger of every GLOF. Its importance lies in the way it changes the physical setting: more lakes form, existing lakes expand, and some remain in direct contact with glacier termini, increasing the possibility of calving, slope failure, or dam destabilisation.[1][8]

Glacial lake growth is better understood as a long-term hazard driver than as an immediate cause of any single outburst. Lakes that expand rapidly or maintain glacier contact can store larger volumes of water and may become more sensitive to sudden disturbances, while shorter-term triggers help determine when individual outbursts occur.[3][8]

Lake expansion and unstable moraine or ice dams

Many high-risk lakes in the HKH are impounded by loose moraine dams rather than bedrock barriers.[12][7] Moraine dams are often heterogeneous. They may contain buried ice, unconsolidated sediment, and internal drainage pathways. These characteristics can reduce stability over time and make a dam more vulnerable to seepage, piping, overtopping, or structural collapse.[13][8] Lake growth can further increase instability. As water volume rises, hydrostatic pressure on the dam also rises. If the dam contains dead ice or already has weak internal drainage, continued expansion may make breach more likely. This is one reason moraine-dammed lakes are repeatedly prioritised in hazard assessments. Their danger lies not only in water storage, but in the fragility of the barrier holding that water in place.[13][12][7] The 4 August 1985 Dig Tsho outburst in Nepal is one of the best-known examples of moraine-dam failure in the region. In that event, a large ice-and-rock avalanche entered the lake, generated a surge wave, overtopped the moraine dam, and released an estimated 6–10 million m³ of water.[9]

Glacial lake outburst flood at Pakistan’s Shishpar glacier, Pakistan. Sentinel-2 imagery shows the lake before and after the May 2022 outburst, illustrating how rapid lake growth and overflow can trigger destructive downstream flooding in the HKH region.

Immediate triggers

Short-term triggers initiate many individual GLOFs in the HKH. Reported trigger processes include ice or rock avalanches into lakes, landslides and rockfalls from surrounding slopes, intense rainfall, rapid inflow from melt or upstream drainage, seismic shaking, and internal erosion of moraine dams.[13][8] Many documented events involve more than one of these processes, which is why GLOFs are often described as compound hazards rather than simple dam-break floods. Avalanches and landslides are especially important because they can generate displacement waves. If a large mass enters a lake, the resulting surge may overtop the dam and start rapid incision. Once erosion begins, breach enlargement can proceed quickly. Rainfall can also play several roles at once: it can raise lake level, destabilise surrounding slopes, increase runoff into the lake, and weaken moraine material.[13][12]

The 1994 Luggye Lake outburst in Bhutan is a good example of a cascading trigger sequence. Sudden drainage from the upstream Druk Chung lake increased hydrostatic pressure on the Luggye moraine dam and contributed to failure, releasing about 18 × 106 m³ of water.[10] This event involved linked failures between neighbouring lakes rather than a single trigger. The 2015 Lemthang Tsho outburst in Bhutan illustrates a different trigger pathway. That event has been linked to two days of intense rainfall that destabilised a supraglacial lake wall and opened a glacial drainage pathway. A nearby earthquake on the same day was considered unlikely to have been the main trigger.[14] A more recent compound-trigger example is the 4 October 2023 South Lhonak outburst in Sikkim, India. A 2026 reconstruction linked the event to a large landslide into the lake and glacier calving, which together contributed to moraine collapse and breach of the terminal dam.[11]

Why some lakes are especially hazardous

Locations of selected glacial lakes in the Nepal Himalaya. Map showing the locations of eight glacial lakes assessed in the Nepal Himalaya.

Not all glacial lakes present the same level of hazard. Regional assessments usually consider lake size, lake growth, dam condition, glacier-lake contact, and the likelihood that avalanches or landslides could enter the lake.[12][7] A lake that is expanding quickly, remains in contact with a calving glacier, is impounded by weak moraine material, and is surrounded by steep unstable slopes is generally treated as more dangerous than a lake lacking these characteristics. This logic is reflected in the ICIMOD–UNDP inventory of potentially dangerous glacial lakes in the Koshi, Gandaki, and Karnali basins. That assessment identified 47 potentially dangerous glacial lakes (PDGLs), including 42 in the Koshi basin alone.[7] In the same inventory, the most critical lakes were associated with continued expansion, loose moraine material, and surrounding slope or avalanche conditions that could affect the lake or dam.[7]

Hazard ranking depends on more than lake size. It also depends on how a lake is connected to glaciers, slopes, and downstream valleys. A relatively smaller lake may still be dangerous if its dam is weak, if surrounding slopes are unstable, or if there is a strong possibility of wave generation from avalanche or landslide impact. In the HKH, GLOF causes operate at multiple scales. Climate change and glacier retreat shape the broader hazard context, moraine instability and lake expansion increase susceptibility, and shorter-term triggers such as avalanches, rainfall, or cascading drainage determine when failure occurs.[1][8][13]

Consequences

The consequences of GLOFs in the HKH extend far beyond the source lake. These floods are sudden, high-energy, and often sediment-rich. As they move through steep, confined valleys, they can destroy settlements, roads, bridges, farmland, and hydropower infrastructure, while also causing fatalities, displacement, and long-term geomorphic change.[1][4][15]

The severity of a GLOF depends not only on the size of the source lake, but also on downstream valley conditions and exposure. Floodwaters can entrain large volumes of sediment and debris, increasing destructive power as they travel downstream. Impacts are therefore shaped by both physical processes and human geography. In the HKH, many settlements, transport corridors, and energy projects are concentrated along narrow river valleys, where warning times are short and alternative routes are limited.[15][4][8]

High human exposure to glacial lake outburst floods in High Mountain Asia. Global exposure to potential GLOF runout tracks is concentrated in only a few mountain regions, with High Mountain Asia standing out as one of the most heavily exposed.

Human impacts

Human impacts include fatalities, injuries, displacement, and disruption to homes, livelihoods, and public services. Their severity depends partly on flood travel time and partly on the location of settlements in exposed valley floors.[8] In many mountain valleys, communities have only limited time to respond once a breach has begun, especially where monitoring and early warning systems are weak. The 1994 Luggye GLOF in Bhutan caused 21 deaths and severe downstream damage. Punakha Dzong, located about 93 km downstream, was also damaged.[10] Floods released in remote glacial basins can still damage major downstream settlements and cultural sites. The 2023 South Lhonak outburst in Sikkim caused 24 confirmed fatalities, left more than 70 people missing, and affected more than 60,000 people across four districts.[11] In the modern HKH, GLOF impacts include not only direct loss of life, but also disruption to transport, electricity, services, and housing after infrastructure failure.[11]

Human consequences also include indirect effects that are less consistently recorded in disaster databases. Damage to roads, bridges, schools, health posts, and water systems can disrupt daily life long after floodwaters have receded. In remote mountain regions, even a single destroyed bridge or damaged road segment can isolate entire communities and delay rescue, medical care, and supply delivery.[4][8]

Collapse and debris-flow route during the 2021 Chamoli disaster, India. Sentinel-2 imagery shows the aftermath of the February 2021 disaster in Uttarakhand, with the collapse site marked and the downstream route of the debris flow visible along the valley system.

Infrastructure and economic impacts

Infrastructure losses are a recurring feature of HKH GLOFs because roads, bridges, hydropower systems, irrigation works, and settlements are concentrated along river corridors.[4][15] This makes valley-floor development especially vulnerable to short-duration, high-magnitude floods.

The Dig Tsho outburst destroyed the nearly completed Namche Small Hydel project about 11 km downstream and caused damage over a distance of roughly 50–60 km. Losses were estimated at more than US$3 million.[9] Dig Tsho remains a well-known case because it demonstrated that a single GLOF could destroy expensive infrastructure and disrupt a regional development project in a matter of hours. The 2023 South Lhonak outburst destroyed 13 bridges and a major hydropower installation in the Chungthang area.[11] This was significant not only because of the direct financial losses, but also because bridge and hydropower failure disrupted transport and energy supply over a much wider area.[11] In mountain regions, infrastructure losses often have cascading effects: transport becomes more difficult, trade is interrupted, communities are isolated, and reconstruction is slower and more expensive than in lowland areas.[4][1]

Farmland and irrigation systems are also exposed. Floodwaters can erode cultivated land, bury fields beneath coarse sediment, or destroy irrigation channels and access routes. Although these losses are not always recorded as consistently as bridge or hydropower damage, they are important in mountain valleys where agriculture remains a key part of household livelihood and food security.[1][4]

Flood damage in Uttarkashi, Uttarakhand, India. Ground-level photograph taken during the Uttarkashi flood of 2013, showing severe river and bridge damage in a Himalayan valley.

Environmental and geomorphic impacts

GLOFs are not only flood disasters; they are major geomorphic events. They can mobilise large boulders, erode channel banks, trigger secondary landslides, and deposit thick sediment downstream.[15] In some valleys, this sediment-rich character makes GLOF impacts more destructive than annual monsoon floods. Cook et al. (2018), using observations from the July 2016 event in the Bhotekoshi–Sun Koshi system in Nepal, showed that boulder mobilisation during a GLOF can greatly increase erosive power and may dominate fluvial erosion and channel–hillslope coupling tens of kilometres downstream of glaciated headwaters.[15] GLOFs can reshape channels, alter sediment transfer, and leave geomorphic effects that continue long after the initial flood wave has passed.[15]

These environmental effects can also amplify later hazards. Channel incision or bank undercutting may destabilise adjacent slopes, while heavy downstream sediment deposition can alter river behaviour and affect later floods. GLOFs can reorganise valley systems and create conditions for additional erosion, instability, and infrastructure vulnerability.[15][1]

Why consequences may be increasing

Current evidence does not show a simple long-term increase in moraine-dammed GLOF frequency in the Himalaya.[16][8] This finding complicates any simple assumption that glacier retreat automatically produces more outburst floods. However, the absence of a clear frequency increase does not mean the hazard is becoming less important. Several studies suggest that potential consequences are increasing because glacial lakes are expanding and downstream exposure is rising.[1][17] One widely cited estimate suggests that about one million people in High Mountain Asia live within 10 km of a glacial lake.[17][1]

Recent modelling in Bhutan shows how strongly exposure shapes potential consequences. A national-scale hazard and exposure assessment estimated that more than 11,000 people, more than 2,500 buildings, more than 250 km of road, more than 400 bridges, about 20 km² of farmland, and four hydropower dams are exposed to potential GLOFs.[18] GLOF consequences are shaped by the distribution of people and assets as well as by the physical characteristics of the source lake. In the HKH, rising consequences are therefore linked not only to physical hazard, but also to land use, infrastructure concentration, and limited warning time. A GLOF that might once have affected a sparsely populated valley can now damage bridges, roads, hydropower plants, farmland, and settlements in regions where development has expanded along river corridors.[4][1][18]

Risk reduction and the path forward

Current GLOF risk reduction in the HKH focuses on hazard identification, lake monitoring, targeted engineering, and downstream preparedness. These efforts have improved significantly in recent decades, but they remain uneven across the region and are strongest where governments, international agencies, and research institutions have been able to combine funding, technical expertise, and long-term monitoring.[8][7]

Monitoring and hazard identification

One major approach is the continued expansion of lake inventories, remote sensing, field validation, and hazard ranking. This is one of the most feasible regional responses because it can be applied across large mountain areas and updated repeatedly as lake conditions change.[7][8] Better monitoring improves the identification of rapidly changing lakes, helps governments prioritise limited resources, and supports earlier warning for downstream communities. However, monitoring does not remove hazard by itself. It is a necessary foundation for risk reduction, not a complete solution.[1]

Engineering intervention

A second approach is direct engineering intervention at a small number of high-risk lakes. These projects aim to lower water levels or reduce pressure on unstable moraine dams through controlled drainage, outlet construction, or similar works. Tsho Rolpa in Nepal was placed on Nepal’s priority list in 1997, and by 2000 mitigation activities had reduced its water level by 3 m, although later reassessment showed that the lake remained hazardous and continued to require monitoring.[19] In Bhutan, a three-year project lowered Raphstreng lake by 4 m, and from 2008 to 2012 Thorthormi lake was manually lowered as part of a larger UNDP–GEF-supported programme that also improved downstream preparedness.[20][21] High-altitude engineering is expensive, difficult to maintain, and unrealistic for the large number of potentially dangerous lakes across the HKH. For that reason, direct engineering is most effective when reserved for a relatively small number of critical lakes rather than treated as a universal solution.[1][8]

Flood warning siren. Early warning systems can reduce loss of life where warning times are short, even when they cannot prevent physical damage.

Early warning and community preparedness

Early warning and community preparedness are essential. They cannot prevent physical damage in the way that source-area engineering can, but they are more scalable and can significantly reduce mortality where warning times are short.[8][18] Preparedness also includes evacuation planning, public education, communication protocols, and regular updating of local response strategies. These measures are especially important in the HKH because many downstream communities have little time to respond once a breach begins.[1][18]

Integrated risk reduction

Recent work in Nepal shows a broader shift toward integrated risk reduction. In 2025, the Green Climate Fund approved US$36.1 million for a seven-year project led by Nepal’s Department of Hydrology and Meteorology with UNDP support.[22] The project aims to expand monitoring and early warning systems, lower water levels at four high-risk glacial lakes, and strengthen downstream protection through measures such as reforestation, check dams, and vegetative gabion walls.[22] This programme combines engineering, monitoring, ecosystem restoration, and local preparedness in a single framework.[22]

Chilime Hydropower Dam, Nepal. Infrastructure such as hydropower dams, roads, and bridges is often concentrated in narrow mountain valleys, increasing downstream exposure to GLOF impacts.

Land-use planning and infrastructure siting

A longer-term challenge is reducing downstream exposure itself. Stronger land-use planning, infrastructure siting, and design standards in exposed valleys may do less to prevent lake failure, but they directly address one of the main reasons GLOF consequences are rising: more roads, bridges, hydropower systems, and settlements are being built in valley-floor flood paths.[4][18] If downstream exposure continues to increase, future GLOFs may become more damaging even if flood frequency does not.[16][1]

Transboundary coordination

The HKH also presents a transboundary governance problem. Many dangerous lakes and river systems lie in basins that cross national borders, while hazard monitoring and emergency communication often remain fragmented between states and institutions.[5][7] Stronger regional cooperation in data sharing, hazard communication, and emergency planning would improve preparedness, although coordination remains difficult in practice.

Conclusion

Glacial lake outburst floods in the Hindu Kush Himalaya are shaped by long-term cryospheric change, unstable lake and dam conditions, and short-term trigger events such as avalanches, landslides, and intense rainfall.[1][2][8] Their consequences depend not only on the physical characteristics of the source lake, but also on downstream exposure, including settlements, infrastructure, farmland, and hydropower systems located in vulnerable mountain valleys.[4][18] Current risk reduction efforts have improved hazard identification, monitoring, engineering intervention, and early warning, but no single strategy is sufficient on its own. In the HKH, reducing future GLOF risk will require a combination of monitoring, targeted engineering, preparedness, more cautious valley development, and stronger regional cooperation.[7][1][8]

References

  1. ↑ 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 Rather, A. F., Ahmed, R., Shamim, T., Farooq, A., Mir, R. A., Wani, O., Gulzar, S. H., & Ahmed, P. (2026). Glacial lakes and GLOFs in a warming Himalaya–Karakoram region: Current understanding, challenges, and the way forward. npj Natural Hazards, 3, 7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44304-026-00168-w
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Bolch, T., Shea, J. M., Liu, S., Azam, M. F., Gao, Y., Gruber, S., Immerzeel, W. W., Kulkarni, A., Li, H., Tahir, A. A., Zhang, G., & Zhang, Y. (2019). Status and change of the cryosphere in the extended Hindu Kush Himalaya region. In P. Wester, A. Mishra, A. Mukherji, & A. B. Shrestha (Eds.), The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92288-1_7
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Nie, Y., Sheng, Y., Liu, Q., Liu, L., Liu, S., Zhang, Y., & Song, C. (2017). A regional-scale assessment of Himalayan glacial lake changes using satellite observations from 1990 to 2015. Remote Sensing of Environment, 189, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2016.11.008
  4. ↑ 4.00 4.01 4.02 4.03 4.04 4.05 4.06 4.07 4.08 4.09 4.10 Schwanghart, W., Worni, R., Huggel, C., Stoffel, M., & Korup, O. (2016). Uncertainty in the Himalayan energy-water nexus: Estimating regional exposure to glacial lake outburst floods. Environmental Research Letters, 11(7), 074005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/7/074005
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD). (n.d.). The Hindu Kush Himalaya. https://www.icimod.org/who-we-are/the-hindu-kush-himalaya/
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 Maharjan, S. B., Mool, P. K., Lizong, W., Xiao, G., Shrestha, F., Shrestha, R. B., Khanal, N. R., Bajracharya, S. R., Joshi, S., Shai, S., & Baral, P. (2018). The status of glacial lakes in the Hindu Kush Himalaya. ICIMOD Research Report 2018/1. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD). https://lib.icimod.org/records/q27cs-w1b80
  7. ↑ 7.00 7.01 7.02 7.03 7.04 7.05 7.06 7.07 7.08 7.09 Bajracharya, S. R., Maharjan, S. B., Shrestha, F., Sherpa, T. C., Wagle, N., & Shrestha, A. B. (2020). Inventory of glacial lakes and identification of potentially dangerous glacial lakes in the Koshi, Gandaki, and Karnali river basins of Nepal, the Tibet Autonomous Region of China, and India. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD). https://doi.org/10.53055/ICIMOD.773
  8. ↑ 8.00 8.01 8.02 8.03 8.04 8.05 8.06 8.07 8.08 8.09 8.10 8.11 8.12 8.13 8.14 8.15 8.16 8.17 Shrestha, F., Steiner, J. F., Shrestha, R., Dhungel, Y., Joshi, S. P., Inglis, S., Ashraf, A., Wali, S., Walizada, K. M., & Zhang, T. (2023). A comprehensive and version-controlled database of glacial lake outburst floods in High Mountain Asia. Earth System Science Data, 15, 3941–3961. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-3941-2023
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 ICIMOD (2011). Glacial lakes and glacial lake outburst floods in Nepal. Kathmandu: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. Prepared for the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) / The World Bank. https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/publication/final_report_Glacial%20Lakes%20Outburst%20Floods%20Nepal.pdf
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 10.2 Wangchuk, T., & Tsubaki, R. (2024). A glacial lake outburst flood risk assessment for the Phochhu river basin, Bhutan. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 24, 2523–2540. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2523-2024
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 Mohanty, L. K., Gantayat, P., Dixit, A., Adhikari, M. D., Biswas, R., & Singh, V. K. (2026). Sequence of events that led to the South Lhonak lake outburst flood in Sikkim, India. Scientific Reports, 16, 9741. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-35895-7
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 12.3 Rounce, D. R., Watson, C. S., & McKinney, D. C. (2017). Identification of hazard and risk for glacial lakes in the Nepal Himalaya using satellite imagery from 2000–2015. Remote Sensing, 9(7), 654. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9070654
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 Harrison, S., Kargel, J. S., Huggel, C., Reynolds, J., Shugar, D. H., Betts, R. A., Emmer, A., Glasser, N., Haritashya, U. K., Klimeš, J., Reinhardt, L., Schaub, Y., Wiltshire, A., Regmi, D., & Vilímek, V. (2018). Climate change and the global pattern of moraine-dammed glacial lake outburst floods. The Cryosphere, 12, 1195–1209. https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-1195-2018
  14. ↑ Gurung, D. R., Khanal, N. R., Bajracharya, S. R., Tsering, K., Joshi, S., Tshering, P., Chhetri, L. K., Lotay, Y., & Penjor, T. (2017). Lemthang Tsho glacial Lake outburst flood (GLOF) in Bhutan: cause and impact. Geoenvironmental Disasters, 4, 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-017-0080-2
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6 Cook, K. L., Andermann, C., Gimbert, F., Adhikari, B. R., & Hovius, N. (2018). Glacial lake outburst floods as drivers of fluvial erosion in the Himalaya. Science, 362(6410), 53–57. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat4981
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 Veh, G., Korup, O., von Specht, S., Roessner, S., & Walz, A. (2019). Unchanged frequency of moraine-dammed glacial lake outburst floods in the Himalaya. Nature Climate Change, 9, 379–383. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0437-5
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 Taylor, C., Robinson, T. R., Dunning, S., Carr, J. R., & Westoby, M. (2023). Glacial lake outburst floods threaten millions globally. Nature Communications, 14, 487. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-36033-x
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 Rinzin, S., Dunning, S., Carr, R. J., Allen, S., Wangchuk, S., & Sattar, A. (2026). Advancing glacial lake hazard and risk assessment in Bhutan through hydrodynamic flood mapping and exposure analysis. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 26, 1015–1037. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-26-1015-2026
  19. ↑ International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD). (2019, July 24). Reassessing Tsho Rolpa glacial lake. https://www.icimod.org/reassessing-tsho-rolpa-glacial-lake/
  20. ↑ United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2022, April 21). Preparing for a “tsunami in the sky”. https://stories.undp.org/preparing-for-a-tsunami-in-the-sky
  21. ↑ United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (n.d.). Reducing Climate Change-induced Risks from Glacial Lake Outburst Floods in Bhutan. https://www.adaptation-undp.org/projects/ldcf-glof-bhutan
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2025, July 1). Green Climate Fund approves $36.1 million to help Nepal protect lives and livelihoods from glacial flood risks. https://www.undp.org/nepal/press-releases/green-climate-fund-approves-361-million-help-nepal-protect-lives-and-livelihoods-glacial-flood-risks


This conservation resource was created by Course:CONS200.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Course:CONS200/2026WT2/_Causes_and_Consequences:_Glacial_Lake_Outburst_Floods_in_the_Hindu_Kush_Himalaya&oldid=893738"