Measurements, models, management and uncertainty: The future of hydrological science

IAHS-AISH Publication

Volumn , Issue 323, 2008, Pages 139-147

  Beven, Keith ^a,b  

^a LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Hydrology; Management and uncertainty; Measurements; Models

Indexed keywords

CATCHMENTS; EARTH SCIENCES; MANAGEMENT; MEASUREMENTS; PROBLEM SOLVING; REMOTE SENSING; RIVERS; RUNOFF; SPACE OPTICS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WATER; WATER CONTENT; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER QUALITY; WATER SUPPLY; WATERSHEDS;

ACTUAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATIONS; DECISION MAKING UNDER UNCERTAINTIES; HYDROLOGICAL MODELS; HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES; INFORMATION CONTENTS; LEARNING PROCESSES; MANAGEMENT DECISIONS; MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES; SMALL SCALES; SYSTEM RESPONSES; TESTING MODELS; UNGAUGED CATCHMENTS;

HYDRAULIC MODELS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; MODEL TEST; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WATER MANAGEMENT;

EID: 55849095132     PISSN: 01447815     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (39)

1. Andréassian, V., Lerat, J., Loumagne, C., Mathevet, T., Michel, C., Oudin, L. & Perrin, C. (2007) What is really undermining hydrologic science today? Hydro!. Processes 21(20), 2819-2822.
2. Beven, K. J. (1989) Changing ideas in hydrology: the case of physically based models. J. Hydrol. 105, 157-172.
3. Beven, K. J. (2001) How far can we go in distributed hydrological modelling? Hydrol. Earth System Sci. 5, 1-12.
4. Beven, K. J. (2002) Towards a coherent philosophy for environmental modelling, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 458, 2465-2484.
5. Beven, K. J. (2004a) Surface runoff at the Horton Hydrologie Laboratory (or not?) J. Hydrol. 293, 219-234.
6. Beven, K. J. (2004b) Robert Horton's perceptual model of infiltration. Hydrol. Processes 18, 3447-3460.
7. Beven, K. J. (2004c) Robert Horton and abrupt rises of groundwater. Hydrol. Processes 18, 3687-3696.
8. Beven, K. J. (2006a) On undermining the science? Hydrol. Processes (HPToday) 20, 3141-3146.
9. Beven, K. J. (2006b) A manifesto for the equifinality thesis. J. Hydrol. 320, 18-36.
10. Beven, K. J. (2006c) Benchmark Papers in Hydrology: Surface Runoff Generation. IAHS Press, Wallingford, UK
11. t = H(S←R←)A as closure. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 10, 609-618.
12. Beven, K. J. (2007) Working towards integrated environmental models of everywhere: uncertainty, data, and modelling as a learning process. Hydrol. Earth System Sci. 11(1), 460-467.
13. Beven, K. J. (2008) Environmental Modelling: An Uncertain Future? Routledge, London, UK.
14. Beven, K. J. & Binley, A. M. (1992) The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrol. Processes 6, 279-298.
15. Beven, K. J., Smith, P. J. & Freer, J. (2008) So just why would a modeller choose to be incoherent? J. Hydrol. (in press).
16. Brazier, R. E., Beven, K. J., Freer, J. & Rowan, J. S. (2000) Equifinality and uncertainty in physically-based soil erosion models: application of the GLUE methodology to WEPP, the Water Erosion Prediction Project - for sites in the UK and USA. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 25, 825-845.
17. Choi, H. -T. & Beven, K. J. (2007) Multi-period and multi-criteria model conditioning to reduce prediction uncertainty in distributed rainfall-runoff modelling within GLUE framework. J. Hydrol. 332, 216-336.
18. Feyen, L., Vrugt, J. A., O Nuallain, B., van der Knijff, J. & De Roo, A. (2007) Parameter optimisation and uncertainty assessment for large-scale streamflow simulation with the LISFLOOD model. J. Hydrol. (submitted).
19. Freeze, R. A., James, B., Massmann, J., Sperling, T. & Smith, L. (1992) Hydrogeological decision analysis: 4. The concept of data worth and its use in the development of site investigation strategies. Ground Water 30, 574-588.
20. Gupta, V. K. & Sorooshian, S. (1986) The influence of data length, information content, and noise characteristics on model calibration. In: Multivariate Analysis of Hydrologic Processes (ed. by H. W. Shen et al.) 434-449. Colorado State University Press, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
21. Gupta, H. V., Sorooshian, S. & Yapo, P. O. (1998) Towards improved calibration of hydrologic models: multiple and incommensurable measures of information. Water Resour. Res. 34, 751-763.
22. Hall, J., O'Connell, E. & Ewen, J. (2007) On not undermining the science: Discussion of invited commentary by Keith Beven, Hydrol. Processes 20, 3141-3146 (2006).
23. Hydrol. Processes 21(7), 985-988.
24. Henriksen, H. J., Troldborg, L., Nyegaard, P., Sonnenborg, T. O., Refsgaard, J. C. & Madsen, B. (2003) Methodology for construction, calibration and validation of a national hydrological model for Denmark. J. Hydrol. 280, 52-71.
25. Kavetski, D., Kuczera, G. & Franks, S. W. (2005) Bayesian analysis of input uncertainty in hydrological modeling: 2. Application. Water Resour. Res. 42, W03408, doi: 10.1029/2005WR004376.
26. Kuczera, G. & Parent, E. (1998) Monte Carlo assessment of parameter uncertainty in conceptual catchment models: the Metropolis algorithm. J. Hydrol. 211, 69-85.
27. Kuczera, G., Kasvetski, D., Franks, S. & Thyer, M. (2006) Towards a Bayesian total error analysis of conceptual rainfall-runoff models: characterising model error using storm-dependent parameters. J. Hydrol. 331, 161-177.
28. Mantovan, P. & Todini, E. (2006) Hydrological forecasting uncertainty assessment: incoherence of the GLUE methodology. J. Hydrol. 330, 368-381.
29. Morton, A. (1993) Mathematical models: questions of trustworthiness. Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 44, 659-674.
30. O'Hagan, A. & Oakley, A. E. (2004) Probability is perfect but we can't elicit it perfectly. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 85, 239-248.
31. Page, T., Beven, K. J., Freer, J. & Jenkins, A. (2003) Investigating the uncertainty in predicting responses to atmospheric deposition using the Model of Acidification of Groundwater in Catchments (MAGIC) within a Generalised Likelihood Uncertainty Estimation (GLUE) framework. Water, Air, Soil Pollution 142, 71-94.
32. Pappenberger, F. & Beven, K. J. (2006) Ignorance is bliss: 7 reasons not to use uncertainty analysis. Water Resour. Res. 42, W05302, doi:10.1029/2005WR004820.
33. Pappenberger, F., Beven, K. J., Frodsham, K., Romanovicz, R. & Matgen, P. (2007) Grasping the unavoidable subjectivity in calibration of flood inundation models: a vulnerability weighted approach. J. Hydrol. 333, 275-287.
34. Romanowicz, R., Beven, K. J. & Tawn, J. (1998) Evaluation of predictive uncertainty in non-linear hydrological models using a Bayesian approach. In: Statistics for the Environment II. Water Related Issues (ed. by V. Barnett & K. F. Turkman), 297-317. Wiley, Chichester, UK.
35. Romanowicz, R., Beven, K. J. & Tawn, J. (1996) Bayesian calibration of flood inundation models. In: Floodplain Processes (ed. by M. G. Anderson, D. E. Walling & P. D. Bates), 333-360. Wiley, Chichester, UK.
36. Romanowicz, R., Young, P. C. & Beven, K.J. (2006) Data assimilation and adaptive forecasting of water levels in the River Severn catchment, UK. Water Resour. Res. 42, W06407, doi:10.1029/2005WR004373.
37. Smith, P., Beven, K. & Tawn, J. (2008) Informal performance measures in model assessment: Theoretic Development and Investigation. Adv. Water Resour. (submitted).
38. Thiemann, M., Trosset, M., Gupta, H. & Sorooshian, S. (2001) Bayesian recursive parameter estimation for hydrologic models, Water Resour. Res. 37(10), 2521-2535.
39. Todini, E. & Mantovan, P. (2007) Comment on: "On undermining the science?" by Keith Beven. Hydrol. Processes 21(12), 1633-1638.