Prediction in a socio-hydrological world

Hydrological Sciences Journal

Volumn 62, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 338-345

  Srinivasan, V ^a   Sanderson, M ^b   Garcia, M ^c   Konar, M ^d   Bloschl G ^e   Sivapalan, M ^d,f  

^a ASHOKA TRUST FOR RESEARCH IN ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT   (India)

^b KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Tufts University   (United States)

^d United States of America   (United States)

^e VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Austria)

^f UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

modelling; prediction; safe operating; socio hydrology; trajectories; water resources

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; FORECASTING; HYDROLOGY; INVESTMENTS; MODELS; TRAJECTORIES; WATER MANAGEMENT;

FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES; HYDROLOGICAL MODELS; HYDROLOGICAL SYSTEM; LONG RANGE PREDICTION; PUBLIC INVESTMENTS; SAFE OPERATING; STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION; WATERRESOURCE MANAGEMENT;

WATER RESOURCES;

HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; PREDICTION; SAFETY; STAKEHOLDER; TRAJECTORY; WATER RESOURCE;

EID: 85004190386     PISSN: 02626667     EISSN: 21503435     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02626667.2016.1253844     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Arnell, N.W., 2004. Climate change and global water resources:SRES emissions and socio-economic scenarios. Global Environmental Change, 14 (1), 31–52. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.006
2. Bai, X., et al., 2016. Plausible and desirable futures in the Anthropocene:A new research agenda. Global Environmental Change, 39, 351–362. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.09.017
3. Blair, P., and Buytaert, W., 2016. Socio-hydrological modelling:a review asking “why, what and how?”. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 20, 443–478. doi:10.5194/hess-20-443-2016
4. Buytaert, W., et al., 2014. Citizen science in hydrology and water resources:opportunities for knowledge generation, ecosystem service management, and sustainable development. Frontiers in Earth Sciences, 2, 1–21.
5. Caldas, M.M., et al., 2015. Opinion:endogenizing culture in sustainability science research and policy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112 (27), 8157–8159. doi:10.1073/pnas.1510010112
6. Ceola, S., et al., 2016. Adaptation of water resources systems to changing society and environment:a statement by the International Association of Hydrological Sciences. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 61, 2803–2817. doi:10.1080/02626667.2016.1230674
7. Christensen, N.S., et al., 2004. The effects of climate change on the hydrology and water resources of the Colorado River basin. Climatic Change, 62 (1–3), 337–363. doi:10.1023/B:CLIM.0000013684.13621.1f
8. Dalin, C., et al., 2014. Water resources transfers through Chinese interprovincial and foreign food trade. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111 (27), 9774–9779. doi:10.1073/pnas.1404749111
9. Dang, Q., et al., 2016. A theoretical model of water and trade. Advances in Water Resources, 89, 32–41. doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2015.12.016
10. Dang, Q., Lin, X., and Konar, M., 2015. Agricultural virtual water flows within the United States. Water Resources Research, 51 (2), 973–986. doi:10.1002/2014WR015919
11. Di Baldassarre, G., Brandimarte, L., and Beven, K., 2016. The seventh facet of uncertainty:wrong assumptions, unknowns and surprises in the dynamics of human-water systems. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 61 (9), 1748–1758. doi:10.1080/02626667.2015.1091460
12. Di Baldassarre, G., et al., 2015. Debates—Perspectives on socio‐hydrology:capturing feedbacks between physical and social processes. Water Resources Research, 51 (6), 4770–4781. doi:10.1002/2014WR016416
13. Dilling, L., and Lemos, M.C., 2011. Creating usable science:opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy. Global Environmental Change, 21 (2), 680–689. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.11.006
14. Elshafei, Y., et al., 2014. A prototype framework for models of socio-hydrology:identification of key feedback loops and parameterisation approach. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 18 (6), 2141–2166. doi:10.5194/hess-18-2141-2014
15. Elshafei, Y., et al., 2016. Sensitivity of emergent sociohydrologic dynamics to internal system properties and external sociopolitical factors:implications for water management. Water Resources Research, 52, 4944–4966. doi:10.1002/2015WR017944
16. Falkenmark, M., Lundqvist, J., and Widstrand, C., 1989, November. Macro‐scale water scarcity requires micro‐scale approaches. Natural Resources Forum, 13 (4), 258–267. doi:10.1111/narf.1989.13.issue-4
17. Feldman, D.L., and Ingram, H.M., 2009. Making science useful to decision makers:climate forecasts, water management, and knowledge networks. Weather, Climate and Society, 1 (1), 9–21. doi:10.1175/2009WCAS1007.1
18. Fiseha, B.M., et al., 2014. Impact of climate change on the hydrology of upper Tiber River Basin using bias corrected regional climate model. Water Resources Management, 28 (5), 1327–1343. doi:10.1007/s11269-014-0546-x
19. Garcia, M., Portney, K., and Islam, S., 2016. A question driven socio-hydrological modeling process. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 20 (1), 73–92. doi:10.5194/hess-20-73-2016
20. Gleick, P.H., 2003. Global freshwater resources:soft-path solutions for the 21st century. Science, 302 (5650), 1524–1528. doi:10.1126/science.1089967
21. Gober, P., and Wheater, H.S., 2015. Debates—perspectives on socio‐hydrology:modeling flood risk as a public policy problem. Water Resources Research, 51 (6), 4782–4788. doi:10.1002/2015WR016945
22. Guldan, S.J., et al., 2013. Collaborative community hydrology research in Northern New Mexico. Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education, 152 (1), 49–54. doi:10.1111/jcwr.2013.152.issue-1
23. Harou, J.J., et al., 2009. Hydro-economic models:concepts, design, applications, and future prospects. Journal of Hydrology, 375 (3–4), 627–643. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.06.037
24. Ingram, H.M., et al., 1984. Guidelines for improved institutional analysis in water resources planning. Water Resources Research, 20 (3), 323–334. doi:10.1029/WR020i003p00323
25. Jackson, S., and Barber, M., 2013. Recognition of indigenous water values in Australia’s Northern Territory:current progress and ongoing challenges for social justice in water planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 14 (4), 435–454. doi:10.1080/14649357.2013.845684
26. Kandasamy, J., et al., 2014. Socio-hydrologic drivers of the pendulum swing between agricultural development and environmental health:a case study from Murrumbidgee River basin, Australia. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 18 (3), 1027–1041. doi:10.5194/hess-18-1027-2014
27. Konar, M., et al., 2011. Water for food:the global virtual water trade network. Water Resources Research, 47 (5), W05520. doi:10.1029/2010WR010307
28. Konar, M., et al., 2016. Water resources sustainability in a globalizing world:who uses the water? Hydrological Processes, 30, 3330–3336. doi:10.1002/hyp.10843
29. Lane, S.N., 2014. Acting, predicting and intervening in a socio-hydrological world. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 18 (3), 927–952. doi:10.5194/hess-18-927-2014
30. Liu, Y., et al., 2014. Socio-hydrologic perspectives of the co-evolution of humans and water in the Tarim River basin, Western China:the Taiji–Tire model. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 18 (4), 1289–1303. doi:10.5194/hess-18-1289-2014
31. Maass, A., et al., 1962. Design of water resource system:new techniques for relating economic objectives, engineering analysis, and governmental planning. Cambridge:Harvard University Press, 620.
32. Marston, L., et al., 2015. Virtual groundwater transfers from overexploited aquifers in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112 (28), 8561–8566. doi:10.1073/pnas.1500457112
33. McMillan, H., et al., 2016. PantaRhei 2013–2015:global perspectives on hydrology, society and change. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 61 (7), 1174–1191. doi:10.1080/02626667.2016.1159308
34. Merz, B., et al., 2015. Charting unknown waters—On the role of surprise in flood risk assessment and management. Water Resources Research, 51 (8), 6399–6416. doi:10.1002/2015WR017464
35. Molle, F., Mollinga, P.P., and Wester, P., 2009. Hydraulic bureaucracies:flows of water, flows of power. Water Alternatives, 2 (3), 328–349.
36. Ostrom, E., 2011. Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Studies Journal, 39 (1), 7–27. doi:10.1111/psj.2011.39.issue-1
37. Pahl-Wostl, C., et al., 2010. Analyzing complex water governance regimes:the management and transition framework. Environmental Science & Policy, 13 (7), 571–581. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2010.08.006
38. Palazzoli, I., et al., 2015. Impact of prospective climate change on water resources and crop yields in the Indrawati basin, Nepal. Agricultural Systems, 133, 143–157. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2014.10.016
39. Patrick, M.J., 2014. The cycles and spirals of justice in water-allocation decision making. Water International, 39 (1), 63–80. doi:10.1080/02508060.2013.863646
40. Rockström, J., et al., 2014. Water resilience for human prosperity. New York:Cambridge University Press.
41. Rockström, J., et al., 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461 (7263), 472–475. doi:10.1038/461472a
42. Rushforth, R.R., and Ruddell, B.L., 2016. The vulnerability and resilience of a city’s water footprint:the case of Flagstaff, Arizona, USA. Water Resources Research, 52 (4), 2698–2714. doi:10.1002/2015WR018006
43. Sanderson, M.R., and Frey., R.S., 2014. From desert to breadbasket to desert again? a metabolic rift in the High Plains Aquifer. Journal of Political Ecology, 21, 516–532.
44. Scheffer, M., et al., 2009. Early-warning signals for critical transitions. Nature, 461 (7260), 53–59. doi:10.1038/nature08227
45. Scott, C.A., et al., 2014. Irrigation efficiency and water-policy implications for river basin resilience. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 18 (4), 1339–1348. doi:10.5194/hess-18-1339-2014
46. Sivapalan, M., and Blöschl, G., 2015. Time scale interactions and the coevolution of humans and water. Water Resources Research, 51 (9), 6988–7022. doi:10.1002/2015WR017896
47. Sivapalan, M., et al., 2014. Socio‐hydrology:use‐inspired water sustainability science for the Anthropocene. Earth’s Future, 2 (4), 225–230. doi:10.1002/2013EF000164
48. Sivapalan, M., Savenije, H.H.G., and Blöschl, G., 2012. Socio‐hydrology:A new science of people and water. Hydrological Processes, 26 (8), 1270–1276. doi:10.1002/hyp.8426
49. Srinivasan, V., et al., 2012. The nature and causes of the global water crisis:syndromes from a meta‐analysis of coupled human‐water studies. Water Resources Research, 48 (10), W10516. doi:10.1029/2011WR011087
50. Srinivasan, V., et al., 2015. Why is the Arkavathy River drying? A multiple-hypothesis approach in a data-scarce region. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 19 (4), 1905–1917. doi:10.5194/hess-19-1905-2015
51. Swyngedouw, E., 2007. Technonatural revolutions:the scalar politics of Franco’s hydro‐social dream for Spain, 1939–1975. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 32 (1), 9–28. doi:10.1111/j.1475-5661.2007.00233.x
52. Taleb, N.N., 2007. The black swan:the impact of the highly improbable. New York:Random House, 366.
53. Thompson, S.E., et al., 2013. Developing predictive insight into changing water systems:use-inspired hydrologic science for the Anthropocene. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 17 (12), 5013–5039. doi:10.5194/hess-17-5013-2013
54. Troy, T.J., et al., 2015a. Moving sociohydrology forward:a synthesis across studies. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 19 (8), 3667–3679. doi:10.5194/hess-19-3667-2015
55. Troy, T.J., Pavao‐Zuckerman, M., and Evans, T.P., 2015b. Debates—perspectives on socio‐hydrology:Socio‐hydrologic modeling:tradeoffs, hypothesis testing, and validation. Water Resources Research, 51 (6), 4806–4814. doi:10.1002/2015WR017046
56. Voinov, A., et al., 2016. Modelling with stakeholders–Next generation. Environmental Modelling & Software, 77, 196–220. doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.11.016
57. Walker, W.E., Loucks, D.P., and Carr, G., 2015. Social responses to water management decisions. Environmental Processes, 2 (3), 485–509. doi:10.1007/s40710-015-0083-5
58. White, D.D., et al., 2010. Credibility, salience, and legitimacy of boundary objects:water managers’ assessment of a simulation model in an immersive decision theater. Science and Public Policy, 37 (3), 219–232. doi:10.3152/030234210X497726