Hindu Kush-Karakoram-Himalaya Under Threat: Climate Change, Cryosphere Hazards, and the Imperative for Regional Cooperation
Abstract
The Hindu Kush-Karakoram-Himalaya (HKH) often described as the Third Pole because it contains the largest concentration of snow and ice outside the Arctic and Antarctic anchors Asia’s hydrological security by feeding ten major river systems and sustaining livelihoods across some of the world’s most densely populated downstream plains. The region is undergoing rapid, elevation-amplified warming and accelerating cryosphere change, including glacier mass loss, permafrost degradation, and the growth and reorganization of glacial lakes. One of the most acute manifestations of this transformation is the rising systemic risk from glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs), low-probability but high-impact events capable of cascading across borders through shared river basins, infrastructure corridors, and coupled energy-trade systems. Drawing on the contemporary scientific literature on High Mountain Asia (HMA) cryosphere dynamics and GLOF processes, and anchoring the analysis in recent transboundary and near-transboundary flood events, this study argues that regional cooperation implemented through interoperable monitoring, real-time hydrometeorological and cryosphere data exchange, harmonized risk standards, and joint early-warning and response protocols offers a rare set of non-zero-sum gains. It can reduce disaster losses and uncertainty for the region while creating durable channels of technical trust. Building on existing regional platforms such as ICIMOD, emerging WMO Third Pole climate services, and operational experience from China’s Glacial Lake Management System and India’s expanding GLOF risk initiatives, the study proposes a scientifically grounded cooperation oriented toward risk reduction, transparency, and shared human security.
Keywords: Hindu Kush-Karakoram-Himalaya; Third Pole; glacial lake outburst flood (GLOF); risk governance; regional cooperation; cryosphere hazards; early warning systems.
The Hindu Kush-Karakoram-Himalaya (HKH) arc extends roughly 3,500 km across eight countries and is widely recognized as a core element of the Earth system for Asia. It is the headwater region for ten large river systems including the Indus, Ganges, Brahmaputra/Yarlung Tsangpo, Mekong/Lancang, Yangtze/Jinsha, and Yellow/Huanghe, whose basins underpin regional food, water, and energy security at enormous scale (International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, 2026a, 2026b). The downstream population that relies directly or indirectly on HKH water and ecosystem is estimated at near two billion people, with consequences that propagate through agriculture, urban water supply, hydropower generation, and industrial production.
In this context, climate change is a systemic risk multiplier. The HKH Assessment led by the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) (2019) emphasizes that warming in mountain environments is amplified relative to global mean warming and that even under ambitious global mitigation consistent with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C target, warming in the HKH is expected to be higher, with profound implications for glacier stability, seasonal snow, and the timing and reliability of runoff. The scientific consensus on mountain cryosphere vulnerability is similarly strong at the global level. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2019, 2021) concludes with high confidence that glaciers in high mountain regions will lose substantial mass through the twenty-first century under all emissions scenarios, reshaping hazards, water availability, and ecosystems.
This study focuses on the evolution of glacial lakes and the changing probability and consequences of GLOFs that convert cryosphere change into human and geopolitical risk. It then advances the claim that regional cooperation is technically necessary for credible risk governance in transboundary basins. Importantly, the argument rests on how hazards work in physical systems that ignore borders, and on what the scientific and disaster-risk literature identifies as essential to reducing deep uncertainty.
Cryosphere Changes and The Growth of Glacial-lake Risk in High Mountain Asia
Mountain warming is rarely spatially uniform. The HKH is characterized by complex elevation gradients, monsoon-westerly interactions, and strong land-atmosphere feedback that together produce elevation-dependent warming signals and changing cryosphere-hydrology coupling. Long-term warming has accelerated in recent decades, with implications that include higher freezing levels, altered snowfall fractions, and shifts in the seasonality of meltwater contribution to rivers (Krishnan et al., 2019). At the global scale, glaciers lost on the order of 273 ± 16 gigatons per year from 2000 to 2023, with the rate increasing substantially in the later part of that period, demonstrating the acceleration that underlies expanding meltwater storage and hazard reconfiguration (The GlaMBIE Team, 2025).
The most direct bridge from glacier mass loss to abrupt flood hazard is the creation and expansion of glacial lakes. More than 110,000 glacial lakes exist globally, covering roughly 15,000 km², and their total area increased by about 22% per decade from 1990 to 2020 (Zhang et al., 2024). More than 3,000 GLOFs have been recorded from 850 to 2022, with High Mountain Asia accounting for a substantial fraction of events and exposure. These numbers matter because they shift the policy conversation away from exceptionalism treating each disaster as an outlier toward a structural interpretation in which lake growth and increasing exposure create a loaded system primed for cascading impacts. High Mountain Asia, in particular, has experienced rapid growth in the number and extent of glacial lakes and deglaciation is increasingly reorganizing proglacial landscapes as remote-sensing data has shown. Within HMA, 27,205 glacial lakes (total area ~1,806 km²) were identified in 1990 and 30,121 lakes (total area ~2,080 km²) in 2018, signaling broad-scale lake expansion over recent decades (Wang et al., 2020).
The hazard pathway from more and larger glacial lakes to more disasters is not purely monotonic. While glacier retreat can increase lake number and area, whether this translates into damaging GLOFs depends on how evolving lakes interact with dam stability and surrounding slope and ice conditions (Veh et al., 2025). Outbursts are typically triggered events, initiated by processes such as ice or rock avalanches and landslides into a lake, progressive dam degradation and breach, drainage through englacial and subglacial pathways, intense precipitation, or seismic shaking, which then interact with lake geometry and dam material and structure (Dubey & Goyal, 2020; Tweed & Russell, 1999; Walder & Costa, 1996; Westoby et al., 2014). The governance implication is that early warning should be event-sensitive and trigger-aware, not based only on long-term lake-area trends. Effective systems monitor and interpret short-timescale precursors such as high-frequency precipitation and temperature, slope or moraine deformation, lake-level dynamics, and near-real-time imagery (Wang et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2025). This is precisely where cooperative science becomes strategically valuable, because the data needed to diagnose triggers including meteorology, remote sensing, geotechnical and slope indicators, and hydrologic lake observations are typically distributed across jurisdictions and agencies, especially in transboundary basins (Allen et al., 2022).
GLOFs as Transboundary Cascading Hazards
Recent disasters in the Himalayas illustrate how GLOFs and related high-mountain floods propagate through coupled human-natural systems. In August 2024, a GLOF in Nepal’s Thame Valley caused widespread destruction to homes, bridges, and critical facilities, displacing residents and destabilizing the valley. A joint field investigation by Nepal’s disaster authority and ICIMOD documented impacts and emphasized the need for integrated, long-term risk management and real-time monitoring (Maharjan et al., 2025). The Thame case is analytically important because it illustrates that even relatively small or previously unremarkable lakes can produce severe downstream impacts when triggers and geomorphic constraints align.
A second instructive example occurred on 8 July 2025 along the Nepal-China border, when catastrophic flooding on the Bhote Koshi River washed away the Friendship Bridge at Rasuwagadhi and disrupted trade and hydropower infrastructure. Upstream glacial-lake processes in Tibet were discussed as a plausible cause, with the flood being traced to drainage from a supraglacial lake in Tibet (Sharma 2025a, 2025b). Beyond immediate tragedy and damage, Rasuwagadhi demonstrates a governance reality when a single upstream cryosphere event can instantaneously become a regional economic and infrastructure shock, affecting customs corridors, power generation, and local livelihoods. In practice, the first minutes and hours of a GLOF are precisely when shared warning protocols and trusted communication channels matter most, and precisely when they are hardest to improvise.
A third type of event sometimes underappreciated in public discourse is the outburst of small or newly formed supraglacial lakes. Small lakes in steep mountain settings can generate unexpectedly severe downstream floods and should be integrated into hazard assessments that historically focused on larger moraine-dammed lakes (Sattar et al., 2025a). This finding carries direct implications for regional cooperation because it expands the set of lakes that should be monitored and raises the premium on near-real-time satellite products and automated detection methods that can identify rapidly forming lakes before they fail.
These cases suggest that the relevant policy frame is not glacier melt alone, but cascading, compound risk. Cryosphere change interacts with extreme precipitation, landslides, dam and hydropower vulnerability, and the political economy of mountain development. In Sikkim, for example, the October 2023 South Lhonak Lake disaster highlighted the vulnerability of infrastructure and the need for stronger early warning and preparedness across mountain valleys (Sattar et al., 2025b). Although this event occurred within India, it underscores the transboundary nature of risk as river basins and hydropower corridors cut borders and run through zones where hazard frequency and intensity are changing.
Why Regional Cooperation is Technically Necessary
Transboundary cryosphere hazards take place in deep uncertainty and create a fundamental information asymmetry across nations. Upstream jurisdictions, such as on the Tibetan Plateau, have access to the first critical observations of hazard formation, while downstream nations like Nepal, India, and Bangladesh bear the overwhelming exposure. This geography creates a structural incentive for shared monitoring, yet the current state of cooperation is precarious. For instance, the bilateral Memorandums of Understanding between India and China, for sharing hydrological data on the Satluj and Brahmaputra/Yarlung Zangbo Rivers, which explicitly acknowledged the value of upstream data for flood forecasting and disaster management (Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, 2013), expired in 2022 and 2023 respectively and have not been renewed (Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, 2025). This halt in data flow has created a dangerous information vacuum, making it a scholarly imperative to reflect on the rational-choice models of cooperation in the region.
The central task is not to simply prove that cooperation is good, but to examine past and existing models of cooperation and the changing nature of risk to make a compelling case for modernizing cooperation in the region. Existing instruments are limited by their seasonal, station-based focus on conventional monsoon floods, rendering them ill-suited for the rapid-onset, complex dynamics of cryosphere-triggered hazards like GLOFs. Modernization requires integrating cryosphere and hazard-chain observables into operational exchange. This shift is supported by the UN-recognized International Year of Glaciers’ Preservation (2025), which elevates glaciers as a policy priority, and the World Meteorological Organization’s emerging Third Pole climate services, formalized through the Third Pole Climate Forum and the Third Pole Regional Climate Centre Network, explicitly oriented toward monitoring and prediction of cryosphere risks in High Mountain Asia (World Meteorological Organization, 2024). These platforms can provide neutral technical standards and shared products that reduce friction and help harmonize methodologies across nations.
While such regional platforms cannot directly replace sovereign data exchange, they offer a crucial bridge and create complex interdependence between nations. The emerging framework for anticipatory governance proposed by Ahmed et al. (2026) suggests a pathway of moving beyond bilateral state-centric agreements toward basin-scale cryospheric observatories and centralized digital platforms that consolidate data for forecasting and warning. By establishing common monitoring standards, harmonizing methodologies, and creating shared scientific products, these platforms can build an epistemic community of researchers and practitioners. This shared technical foundation can keep channels of communication open and maintain a baseline of shared knowledge, making it technically and politically easier to resume formal data-sharing when bilateral relations allow, while also providing crucial data products in the interim.
Building on Existing Foundations
Regional cooperation in HKH is not starting from zero. ICIMOD (2025) has long served as a neutral platform for regional science-policy engagement. Its public documentation of partnerships, including with China’s National Natural Science Foundation, indicates a resumption and expansion of joint work after the COVID-19 pause, with substantial funding for multi-year research and capacity-building projects spanning 2024-2027. The policy relevance of such projects lies not only in their scientific outputs but in their creation of epistemic communities of researchers and practitioners who share methods, data norms, and professional trust. In transboundary risk governance, epistemic communities often outlast political cycles because they are grounded in shared problem-solving tasks and technical verification.
Operational models also matter because they convert science into practice. A prominent example is China’s Glacial Lake Management System (GLMS), implemented since 2019, which integrates monitoring, early warning, engineering interventions, and structured responsibility systems for lake management. GLMS as an integrated framework of engineering measures and early warning can reduce future flood intensity but requires rapid information exchange including for transboundary areas (Wang et al., 2026). Its significance for regional cooperation is twofold. First, it demonstrates that an integrated approach can be operationalized in high-altitude settings, blending remote sensing with local capacity and engineered risk reduction. Second, by treating transboundary communication as an explicit component of effectiveness, it provides a concrete template for how bilateral arrangements could be structured without politicizing sensitive terrain.
India’s policy direction is broadly complementary, with growing emphasis on hazard mapping and lake prioritization, early-warning installations, and preparedness protocols (National Disaster Management Authority, 2020). The key opportunity is not to rank approaches but to enable interoperability by adopting common lake identifiers and metadata standards and aligning hydrometeorological baselines and evaluation procedures, so that countries can learn systematically from warning performance and response outcomes.
Beyond scientific and hydrological platforms, there is potential to integrate GLOF response into existing regional frameworks for humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR). South Asia has several such mechanisms, often operating under military-to-military or regional diplomatic umbrellas such as the South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme and under SAARC (Canyon, 2022; Gong, 2025; Nandy & Naha, 2022). While these institutions are typically post-disaster in focus, they represent existing channels of communication and operational trust that could be leveraged. As Ahmed et al. (2026) argue, effective preparedness requires moving beyond reactive crisis management toward a framework of anticipatory governance and integrated risk management. In this light, existing HADR mechanisms could be expanded or adapted to include pre-disaster elements of a GLOF response strategy. This could involve joint simulation exercises focused on transboundary flood scenarios, pre-agreed protocols for the rapid deployment of assets (like helicopters for evacuation or engineering units for temporary dam stabilization), and the sharing of logistical infrastructure during a crisis. While these mechanisms cannot replace the need for upstream monitoring and early warning, they can form a critical second tier of cooperation, ensuring that when a warning is issued, the response is immediate and coordinated across borders. The operational experience of these bodies in navigating sensitive geopolitical terrain could offer valuable lessons for building the durable channels of technical trust this study envisions.
Toward Cooperation Fit for 21st Century Cryosphere Risk
Effective regional cooperation on Third Pole hazards should be designed around operational requirements rather than diplomatic symbolism. The first requirement is near-real-time situational awareness. In practice, this means treating transboundary basins as shared risk sheds where lake condition, precipitation extremes, and slope instability signals are monitored continuously using satellites, automated sensors, and community reporting. Existing HMA-wide inventories demonstrate that region-scale mapping is feasible, and that lake numbers and areas can be tracked systematically, but early warning requires higher temporal resolution than multi-year inventories can provide (Wang et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2024). Cooperation can therefore prioritize shared access to rapid satellite analyses and harmonized nowcasting products, particularly in headwater corridors where minutes to hours can separate a warning from a catastrophe.
The second requirement is the modernization of data-sharing instruments from conventional hydrology to cryosphere-to-flood chains. Existing MoUs on hydrological information exchange already establish a precedent and an institutional interface between agencies. A scientifically upgraded arrangement would extend exchange beyond seasonal river gauge readings to include lake-level anomalies where monitored, automated detections of new supraglacial lakes, precipitation intensity estimates in headwaters, and standardized event attribution packages after floods. The Rasuwagadhi 2025 disaster shows why it matters. When downstream flooding occurs without local rainfall, attribution depends on upstream evidence, and uncertainty can exacerbate both social anxiety and bilateral suspicion (Reuters 2025a, 2025b). Regularized, pre-agreed attribution workflows of shared satellite basemaps, timestamped lake-area change detections, and jointly curated event chronology would reduce post-disaster controversy and improve learning.
The third requirement is interoperable early warning and community preparedness. Literature and post-event investigations repeatedly show that warning systems fail when alerts are not trusted, not understood, or not actionable. The Thame Valley investigation highlights the need for integrated disaster management and mitigation strategies that connect scientific assessment to community readiness and long-term risk governance (Maharjan et al., 2025). For regional cooperation, this implies that early warning should be aligned not only between national agencies but across border communities who may share languages, trade ties, and river exposure. Interoperability can be designed without compromising sovereignty. Alerts can be issued domestically while being derived from shared upstream indicators, drills and training can be coordinated through neutral institutions, and thresholds can be calibrated collaboratively while operational control remains national.
The fourth requirement confronts the politically sensitive role of infrastructure as both a driver and victim of risk. As hydropower expands across the Himalayas driven by decarbonization goals, the scientific community must confront whether it remains a neutral arbiter when research increasingly documents how poorly sited infrastructure multiplies risk. Ahmed et al. (2026) explicitly condemn governance failures that permit such expansion without updated hazard assessments, arguing that cryosphere-specific analyses must be mandatory in environmental impact assessments and exclusion zones legally enforceable. Science, therefore, serves as a critical reminder against maladaptive practices. This transforms cooperation from a diplomatic exercise into a pragmatic necessity where harmonized, risk-sensitive infrastructure planning and joint guidelines for GLOF design floods are essential to protect multi-billion-dollar investments and ensure regional energy security against losses that would cascade across borders.
The fifth requirement is sustained scientific collaboration with open, verifiable outputs. This is where ICIMOD-anchored projects and NSFC-supported collaboration are especially valuable, because they generate peer-reviewed knowledge and training pipelines. Open-access datasets, jointly authored hazard assessments, and transparent uncertainty communication create credibility and reduce the risk that climate science becomes securitized. Moreover, collaboration can be nested within broader global initiatives such as the International Year of Glaciers’ Preservation through which funding and visibility for adaptation projects can be increased without presenting bilateral work as politically exceptional.
Climate Cooperation as Trust-building
It is tempting to frame regional climate cooperation as a moral imperative and expect that nations will inevitably cooperate in the face of climate-related risks. If scientific evidence alone were sufficient, effective cooperation would already exist. The question is not merely why to cooperate, but why cooperation has not already happened despite clear scientific warnings. Ahmed et al. (2026) identify this as a core preparedness gap, rooted not in data scarcity but in excessive bureaucratic framework and fragmentation of institutional responsibility and a weak feedback loop between science and policy. Research remains often unpublished, inaccessible, or not linked to disaster risk governance frameworks. The barrier, then, is not simply the failure of science or absence of political will, but a systemic institutional failure to translate science into policy.
A stronger argument, and one more consistent with state behavior, is that cooperation constitutes a rational response to shared vulnerability under uncertainty but requires effective boundary institutions that create structures of techno-scientific complex interdependence in the region. Cryosphere hazards respect no borders. They emerge from coupled atmospheric and glacial processes that are measurable but not perfectly predictable. In such systems, unilateral risk management is structurally inefficient because key variables lie upstream and across borders. Cooperation reduces epistemic uncertainty, thereby reducing both disaster losses and the likelihood of post-disaster misinterpretation. Technical collaboration forces repeated contact, verification, and shared problem definitions. It rewards transparency because warnings perform better when fed by better data, and it produces tangible benefits visible to border communities. The scientific literature on rising exposure for millions to GLOF impacts, coupled with empirical events like Rasuwagadhi, suggests that the costs of noncooperation are no longer theoretical.
Conclusion
The Third Pole of the HKH is undergoing rapid transformation, and the Himalayas are entering an era in which cryosphere-driven hazards increasingly intersect with dense downstream exposure, expanding infrastructure corridors, and high stakes for water and energy security. The science is clear that glacial lakes are expanding globally and in High Mountain Asia, that recorded GLOFs have increased across many regions, and that even small, newly formed lakes can trigger severe floods. Recent events in Nepal and along the Nepal-China border illustrate the transboundary nature of these hazards and the speed with which they become systemic shocks.
In this setting, regional cooperation is best understood as an evidence-based adaptation strategy that simultaneously serves disaster risk reduction and long-term stability. Building on existing hydrological data-sharing precedents, expanding cooperation into cryosphere monitoring and trigger-aware early warning, and leveraging regional platforms such as ICIMOD and WMO Third Pole climate services would produce immediate mutual gains of longer warning lead times, better attribution, reduced infrastructure losses, and improved protection of mountain communities. Over time, these practical collaborations can also build durable trust, precisely because they are rooted in verifiable science and shared human security. The Himalayas have historically connected civilizations through ecology, culture, and trade. In a warming world, they can also connect states through a new realism of cooperative risk governance.
REFERENCES
Ahmed, R., Bhardwaj, A., Sam, L., & Van Tricht, L. (2026). Ice-rock avalanches in a warming Himalaya indicate pathways toward effective preparedness. Communications Earth & Environment, 7(1), 217. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-026-03352-y
Allen, S. K., Sattar, A., King, O., Zhang, G., Bhattacharya, A., Yao, T., & Bolch, T. (2022). Glacial lake outburst flood hazard under current and future conditions: Worst-case scenarios in a transboundary Himalayan basin. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 22(11), 3765-3785. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-3765-2022
Canyon, D. (2022). India leading international HADR cooperation in South Asia. Daniel K. Inouye Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies. https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep33789
Dubey, S., & Goyal, M. K. (2020). Glacial lake outburst flood hazard, downstream impact, and risk over the Indian Himalayas. Water Resources Research, 56(4), e2019WR026533. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026533
Gong, L. (2025). HADR as a diplomatic tool in Southeast Asia-China relations amid changing security dynamics. In Can Asians Think of Peace? Essays on Managing Conflict in the Asian Century (pp. 221-223). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-5666-0_50
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2019). Chapter 2: High mountain areas. In Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate. https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/chapter-2/
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2021). Regional fact sheet – mountains (Working Group I – The Physical Science Basis). https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/factsheets/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Regional_Fact_Sheet_Mountains.pdf
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. (2019). Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment. https://www.icimod.org/hkhassessment/
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. (2025). ICIMOD-NSFC cooperation. https://www.icimod.org/china-partners-and-supports/icimod-nsfc-cooperation/
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. (2026a). The Hindu Kush Himalaya. https://www.icimod.org/who-we-are/the-hindu-kush-himalaya/
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. (2026b). River Basins and Cryosphere. https://www.icimod.org/regional-programme/river-basins-and-cryosphere/
International Year of Glaciers’ Preservation. (2025). Official launch event – 21 January 2025. https://www.un-glaciers.org/en/official-launch-event
Krishnan, R., Shrestha, A. B., Ren, G., Rajbhandari, R., Saeed, S., Sanjay, J., ... & Ren, Y. (2019). Unravelling climate change in the Hindu Kush Himalaya: rapid warming in the mountains and increasing extremes. In The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment: Mountains, Climate Change, Sustainability and People (pp. 57-97). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92288-1_3
Maharjan, S. B., Sherpa, T. C., & Shrestha, A. B. (2025). Thame Valley glacial lake outburst flood 2024: Causes, impacts and future risks (ICIMOD technical publication). International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. https://www.preventionweb.net/publication/documents-and-publications/thame-valley-glacial-lake-outburst-flood-2024-causes-impacts?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. (2013). Memorandum of Understanding between the Ministry of Water Resources, the Republic of India and the Ministry of Water Resources, the People’s Republic of China on Strengthening Cooperation on Trans-Border Rivers. https://mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/22368
Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. (2025). Question no-3287 concerns over construction of Yarlung Tsangpo dam in China. https://www.mea.gov.in/rajya-sabha.htm?dtl/40031/QUESTION_NO3287_CONCERNS_OVER_CONSTRUCTION_OF_YARLUNG_TSANGPO_DAM_IN_CHINA
Nandy, D., & Naha, A. (2022). India’s disaster diplomacy in South Asian region. In Gender and the Politics of Disaster Recovery (pp. 54-75). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003290148
National Disaster Management Authority. (2020). Guidelines on management of glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs). Government of India. https://ndma.gov.in/sites/default/files/PDF/Guidelines/Guidelines-on-Management-of-GLOFs.pdf
Sattar, A., Cook, K. L., Rai, S. K., Berthier, E., Allen, S., Rinzin, S., ... & Bhat, S. Y. (2025b). The Sikkim flood of October 2023: Drivers, causes, and impacts of a multihazard cascade. Science, 387(6740), eads2659. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ads2659
Sattar, A., Emmer, A., Lhazom, T., Rai, S. K., & Azam, M. F. (2025a). Flood risk from small mountain lakes. Communications Earth & Environment, 6(1), 785. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-025-02758-4
Sharma, G. (2025a). Dozens missing after floods on Nepal-China border. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/dozens-missing-after-floods-nepal-china-border-2025-07-08/
Sharma, G. (2025b). Tibetan glacial lake drainage triggered deadly flood in Nepal, climate body says. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/tibetan-glacial-lake-drainage-triggered-deadly-flood-nepal-climate-body-says-2025-07-10/
The GlaMBIE Team. (2025). Community estimate of global glacier mass changes from 2000 to 2023. Nature, 639, 382-388. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08545-z
Tweed, F. S., & Russell, A. J. (1999). Controls on the formation and sudden drainage of glacier-impounded lakes: Implications for jökulhlaup characteristics. Progress in Physical Geography, 23(1), 79-110. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913339902300104
Veh, G., Wang, B. G., Zirzow, A., Schmidt, C., Lützow, N., Steppat, F., ... & Korup, O. (2025). Progressively smaller glacier lake outburst floods despite worldwide growth in lake area. Nature Water, 3(3), 271-283. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44221-025-00388-w
Walder, J. S., & Costa, J. E. (1996). Outburst floods from glacier‐dammed lakes: The effect of mode of lake drainage on flood magnitude. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 21(8), 701-723. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9837(199608)21:8%3C701::AID-ESP615%3E3.0.CO;2-2
Wang, W., Zhang, T., Yao, T., & An, B. (2022). Monitoring and early warning system of Cirenmaco glacial lake in the central Himalayas. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 73, 102914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.102914
Wang, X., Chen, W., Zhang, G., Emmer, A., Frey, H., Taylor, C., ... & Mergili, M. (2025). Mitigating future glacial lake outburst floods in the Himalaya. Science Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scib.2025.11.024
Wang, X., Guo, X., Yang, C., Liu, Q., Wei, J., Zhang, Y., ... & Tang, Z. (2020). Glacial lake inventory of High Mountain Asia (1990–2018) derived from Landsat images. Earth System Science Data Discussions, 2020, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2169-2020
Westoby, M. J., Glasser, N. F., Brasington, J., Hambrey, M. J., Quincey, D. J., & Reynolds, J. M. (2014). Modelling outburst floods from moraine-dammed glacial lakes. Earth-Science Reviews, 134, 137-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2014.03.009
World Meteorological Organization. (2024). Inaugural session of the Third Pole Climate Forum (TPCF 1) and meeting of Third Pole Regional Climate Centre Network (TPRCC-Network) Task Team. https://community.wmo.int/events/inaugural-session-of-third-pole-climate-forum-tpcf-1-and-meeting-of-third-pole-regional-climate
Zhang, G., Carrivick, J. L., Emmer, A., Shugar, D. H., Veh, G., Wang, X., ... & Lützow, N. (2024). Characteristics and changes of glacial lakes and outburst floods. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 5(6), 447-462. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-024-00554-w
Zhang, G., Yao, T., Huss, M., Carrivick, J. L., Bolch, T., Li, X., ... & Ali, F. (2025). A monitoring network for mitigating Himalayan glacial lake outburst floods. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 106(12), E2579-E2597. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-24-0290.1
About the Author: Dmitry Erokhin, PhD is a Research Scholar in the Cooperation and Transformative Governance Research Group of the Advancing Systems Analysis Program at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.