IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v163y2020i3d10.1007_s10584-020-02930-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does a successful comprehensive evaluation increase confidence in a hydrological model intended for climate impact assessment?

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Gelfan

    (Water Problems Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences
    Lomonosov Moscow State University)

  • Andrey Kalugin

    (Water Problems Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences)

  • Inna Krylenko

    (Water Problems Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences
    Lomonosov Moscow State University)

  • Olga Nasonova

    (Water Problems Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences)

  • Yeugeniy Gusev

    (Water Problems Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences)

  • Evgeny Kovalev

    (Water Problems Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences)

Abstract

The objective of the study is to verify a hypothesis that a hydrological model, which successfully passed a comprehensive evaluation test (CE-test), is more suitable for climate impact study than that which failed the test. In our study, the CE-test is a specially designed model evaluation procedure, including a set of enhanced tests of model performance and robustness. The hypothesis verification is carried out with two models, ECOMAG and SWAP, which are applied for the Lena and Mackenzie River basins. The following three versions of every model are compared: (1) version A with a priori assigned parameters (without any calibration); (2) version B calibrated against streamflow observations at the basin outlets only, and (3) version C calibrated against streamflow observations at several gauges within the basins. We found that the B and C versions were successful in passing the CE-test, while the A versions failed the test. The C versions performed better than the B versions, especially at the monthly time scale. Then, all model versions were forced by global climate model (GCM) ensemble data to simulate flow projections for the twenty-first century and assess the projection uncertainty. Summarizing the results, we found that the differences in projections (in terms of mean annual changes in discharge and their uncertainties) between A version and two other versions were nearly three times larger than the differences between the B and C versions. Thus, the CE-test results together with the estimated differences in projections give us reason to conclude that the successful comprehensive evaluation of a model increases its confidence and suitability for impact assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Gelfan & Andrey Kalugin & Inna Krylenko & Olga Nasonova & Yeugeniy Gusev & Evgeny Kovalev, 2020. "Does a successful comprehensive evaluation increase confidence in a hydrological model intended for climate impact assessment?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1165-1185, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:163:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-020-02930-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-020-02930-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-020-02930-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-020-02930-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shaochun Huang & Rohini Kumar & Martina Flörke & Tao Yang & Yeshewatesfa Hundecha & Philipp Kraft & Chao Gao & Alexander Gelfan & Stefan Liersch & Anastasia Lobanova & Michael Strauch & Floris van Ogt, 2017. "Erratum to: Evaluation of an ensemble of regional hydrological models in 12 large-scale river basins worldwide," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 399-400, April.
    2. Alexander Gelfan & David Gustafsson & Yury Motovilov & Berit Arheimer & Andrey Kalugin & Inna Krylenko & Alexander Lavrenov, 2017. "Climate change impact on the water regime of two great Arctic rivers: modeling and uncertainty issues," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 499-515, April.
    3. Shaochun Huang & Rohini Kumar & Martina Flörke & Tao Yang & Yeshewatesfa Hundecha & Philipp Kraft & Chao Gao & Alexander Gelfan & Stefan Liersch & Anastasia Lobanova & Michael Strauch & Floris Ogtrop , 2017. "Evaluation of an ensemble of regional hydrological models in 12 large-scale river basins worldwide," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 381-397, April.
    4. Dereje Birhanu & Hyeonjun Kim & Cheolhee Jang & Sanghyun Park, 2018. "Does the Complexity of Evapotranspiration and Hydrological Models Enhance Robustness?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-34, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhao, Xiaohu & Huang, Guohe & Li, Yongping & Lu, Chen, 2023. "Responses of hydroelectricity generation to streamflow drought under climate change," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    2. Valentina Krysanova & Jamal Zaherpour & Iulii Didovets & Simon N. Gosling & Dieter Gerten & Naota Hanasaki & Hannes Müller Schmied & Yadu Pokhrel & Yusuke Satoh & Qiuhong Tang & Yoshihide Wada, 2020. "How evaluation of global hydrological models can help to improve credibility of river discharge projections under climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1353-1377, December.
    3. Shanshan Wen & Buda Su & Yanjun Wang & Jianqing Zhai & Hemin Sun & Ziyan Chen & Jinlong Huang & Anqian Wang & Tong Jiang, 2020. "Comprehensive evaluation of hydrological models for climate change impact assessment in the Upper Yangtze River Basin, China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1207-1226, December.
    4. Naim Haie & Rui M. Pereira & Haw Yen, 2018. "An Introduction to the Hyperspace of Hargreaves-Samani Reference Evapotranspiration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, November.
    5. Nikolay I. Didenko & Yuri S. Klochkov & Djamilia F. Skripnuk, 2018. "Ecological Criteria for Comparing Linear and Circular Economies," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-17, August.
    6. Shaochun Huang & Harsh Shah & Bibi S. Naz & Narayan Shrestha & Vimal Mishra & Prasad Daggupati & Uttam Ghimire & Tobias Vetter, 2020. "Impacts of hydrological model calibration on projected hydrological changes under climate change—a multi-model assessment in three large river basins," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1143-1164, December.
    7. Dongmei Feng & Edward Beighley & Roozbeh Raoufi & John Melack & Yuanhao Zhao & Sam Iacobellis & Daniel Cayan, 2019. "Propagation of future climate conditions into hydrologic response from coastal southern California watersheds," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 199-218, March.
    8. Georgy Ayzel, 2023. "Runoff for Russia (RFR v1.0): The Large-Sample Dataset of Simulated Runoff and Its Characteristics," Data, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-13, January.
    9. Alexander Gelfan & Andrey Kalugin & Inna Krylenko, 2023. "Detection, attribution, and specifying mechanisms of hydrological changes in geographically different river basins," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(9), pages 1-21, September.
    10. Mayara Maria Arruda Gomes & Lívia Fragoso Melo Verçosa & José Almir Cirilo, 2021. "Hydrologic models coupled with 2D hydrodynamic model for high-resolution urban flood simulation," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 108(3), pages 3121-3157, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:163:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-020-02930-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.