Performance evaluation of global hydrological models in six large Pan-Arctic watersheds

Global Water Models (GWMs), which include Global Hydrological, Land Surface, and Dynamic Global Vegetation Models, present valuable tools for quantifying climate change impacts on hydrological processes in the data scarce high latitudes. Here we performed a systematic model performance evaluation in six major Pan-Arctic watersheds for different hydrological indicators (monthly and seasonal discharge, extremes, trends (or lack of), and snow water equivalent (SWE)) via a novel Aggregated Performance Index (API) that is based on commonly used statistical evaluation metrics. The machine learning Boruta feature selection algorithm was used to evaluate the explanatory power of the API attributes. Our results show that the majority of the nine GWMs included in the study exhibit considerable difficulties in realistically representing Pan-Arctic hydrological processes. Average APIdischarge (monthly and seasonal discharge) over nine GWMs is > 50% only in the Kolyma basin (55%), as low as 30% in the Yukon basin and averaged over all watersheds APIdischarge is 43%. WATERGAP2 and MATSIRO present the highest (APIdischarge > 55%) while ORCHIDEE and JULES-W1 the lowest (APIdischarge ≤ 25%) performing GWMs over all watersheds. For the high and low flows, average APIextreme is 35% and 26%, respectively, and over six GWMs APISWE is 57%. The Boruta algorithm suggests that using different observation-based climate data sets does not influence the total score of the APIs in all watersheds. Ultimately, only satisfactory to good performing GWMs that effectively represent cold-region hydrological processes (including snow-related processes, permafrost) should be included in multi-model climate change impact assessments in Pan-Arctic watersheds. © 2020, The Author(s)

A Simplified Water Accounting Procedure to Assess Climate Change Impact on Water Resources for Agriculture across Different European River Basins

[EN] European agriculture and water policies require accurate information on climate change impacts on available water resources. Water accounting, that is a standardized documentation of data on water resources, is a useful tool to provide this information. Pan-European data on climate impacts do not recognize local anthropogenic interventions in the water cycle. Most European river basins have a specific toolset that is understood and used by local experts and stakeholders. However, these local tools are not versatile. Thus, there is a need for a common approach that can be understood by multi-fold users to quantify impact indicators based on local data and that can be used to synthesize information at the European level. Then, policies can be designed with the confidence that underlying data are backed-up by local context and expert knowledge. This work presents a simplified water accounting framework that allows for a standardized examination of climate impacts on water resource availability and use across multiple basins. The framework is applied to five different river basins across Europe. Several indicators are extracted that explicitly describe green water fluxes versus blue water fluxes and impacts on agriculture. The examples show that a simplified water accounting framework can be used to synthesize basin-level information on climate change impacts which can support policymaking on climate adaptation, water resources and agriculture.This research was funded by Horizon 2020 IMPREX project, grant number 641811Hunink, J.; Simons, G.; Suárez-Almiñana, S.; Solera Solera, A.; Andreu Álvarez, J.; Giuliani, M.; Zamberletti, P.... (2019). A Simplified Water Accounting Procedure to Assess Climate Change Impact on Water Resources for Agriculture across Different European River Basins. Water. 11(10):1-29. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11101976S1291110Jacob, D., Kotova, L., Teichmann, C., Sobolowski, S. P., Vautard, R., Donnelly, C., … van Vliet, M. T. H. (2018). Climate Impacts in Europe Under +1.5°C Global Warming. Earth’s Future, 6(2), 264-285. doi:10.1002/2017ef000710Koutroulis, A. G., Grillakis, M. G., Daliakopoulos, I. N., Tsanis, I. K., & Jacob, D. (2016). Cross sectoral impacts on water availability at +2 °C and +3 °C for east Mediterranean island states: The case of Crete. Journal of Hydrology, 532, 16-28. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.11.015Dezsi, Ş., Mîndrescu, M., Petrea, D., Rai, P. K., Hamann, A., & Nistor, M.-M. (2018). High-resolution projections of evapotranspiration and water availability for Europe under climate change. International Journal of Climatology, 38(10), 3832-3841. doi:10.1002/joc.5537Forzieri, G., Feyen, L., Russo, S., Vousdoukas, M., Alfieri, L., Outten, S., … Cid, A. (2016). Multi-hazard assessment in Europe under climate change. Climatic Change, 137(1-2), 105-119. doi:10.1007/s10584-016-1661-xRuosteenoja, K., Markkanen, T., Venäläinen, A., Räisänen, P., & Peltola, H. (2017). Seasonal soil moisture and drought occurrence in Europe in CMIP5 projections for the 21st century. Climate Dynamics, 50(3-4), 1177-1192. doi:10.1007/s00382-017-3671-4Stahl, K., Kohn, I., Blauhut, V., Urquijo, J., De Stefano, L., Acacio, V., … Van Lanen, H. A. J. (2015). Impacts of European drought events: insights from an international database of text-based reports. doi:10.5194/nhessd-3-5453-2015Van Lanen, H. A. J., Laaha, G., Kingston, D. G., Gauster, T., Ionita, M., Vidal, J., … Van Loon, A. F. (2016). Hydrology needed to manage droughts: the 2015 European case. Hydrological Processes, 30(17), 3097-3104. doi:10.1002/hyp.10838Moore, F. C., & Lobell, D. B. (2014). Adaptation potential of European agriculture in response to climate change. Nature Climate Change, 4(7), 610-614. doi:10.1038/nclimate2228Iglesias, A., & Garrote, L. (2015). Adaptation strategies for agricultural water management under climate change in Europe. Agricultural Water Management, 155, 113-124. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2015.03.014Llop, M., & Ponce-Alifonso, X. (2016). Water and Agriculture in a Mediterranean Region: The Search for a Sustainable Water Policy Strategy. Water, 8(2), 66. doi:10.3390/w8020066Escribano Francés, G., Quevauviller, P., San Martín González, E., & Vargas Amelin, E. (2017). Climate change policy and water resources in the EU and Spain. A closer look into the Water Framework Directive. Environmental Science & Policy, 69, 1-12. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2016.12.006Bastiaanssen, W. G. M., & Steduto, P. (2017). The water productivity score (WPS) at global and regional level: Methodology and first results from remote sensing measurements of wheat, rice and maize. Science of The Total Environment, 575, 595-611. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.032Simons, G. W. H. (Gijs), Bastiaanssen, W. G. M. (Wim), & Immerzeel, W. W. (Walter). (2015). Water reuse in river basins with multiple users: A literature review. Journal of Hydrology, 522, 558-571. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.01.016Lavrnić, S., Zapater-Pereyra, M., & Mancini, M. L. (2017). Water Scarcity and Wastewater Reuse Standards in Southern Europe: Focus on Agriculture. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 228(7). doi:10.1007/s11270-017-3425-2Ricart, S., & Rico, A. M. (2019). Assessing technical and social driving factors of water reuse in agriculture: A review on risks, regulation and the yuck factor. Agricultural Water Management, 217, 426-439. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2019.03.017Hoekstra, A., Chapagain, A., & van Oel, P. (2017). Advancing Water Footprint Assessment Research: Challenges in Monitoring Progress towards Sustainable Development Goal 6. Water, 9(6), 438. doi:10.3390/w9060438Roudier, P., Andersson, J. C. M., Donnelly, C., Feyen, L., Greuell, W., & Ludwig, F. (2015). Projections of future floods and hydrological droughts in Europe under a +2°C global warming. Climatic Change, 135(2), 341-355. doi:10.1007/s10584-015-1570-4Samaniego, L., Thober, S., Kumar, R., Wanders, N., Rakovec, O., Pan, M., … Marx, A. (2018). Anthropogenic warming exacerbates European soil moisture droughts. Nature Climate Change, 8(5), 421-426. doi:10.1038/s41558-018-0138-5Panagopoulos, Y., Stefanidis, K., Faneca Sanchez, M., Sperna Weiland, F., Van Beek, R., Venohr, M., … Birk, S. (2019). Pan-European Calculation of Hydrologic Stress Metrics in Rivers: A First Assessment with Potential Connections to Ecological Status. Water, 11(4), 703. doi:10.3390/w11040703Macknick, J., Newmark, R., Heath, G., & Hallett, K. C. (2012). Operational water consumption and withdrawal factors for electricity generating technologies: a review of existing literature. Environmental Research Letters, 7(4), 045802. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/045802Koutroulis, A. G., Papadimitriou, L. V., Grillakis, M. G., Tsanis, I. K., Wyser, K., & Betts, R. A. (2018). Freshwater vulnerability under high end climate change. A pan-European assessment. Science of The Total Environment, 613-614, 271-286. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.074Lobanova, A., Liersch, S., Nunes, J. P., Didovets, I., Stagl, J., Huang, S., … Krysanova, V. (2018). Hydrological impacts of moderate and high-end climate change across European river basins. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies, 18, 15-30. doi:10.1016/j.ejrh.2018.05.003Beck, H. E., Vergopolan, N., Pan, M., Levizzani, V., van Dijk, A. I. J. M., Weedon, G. P., … Wood, E. F. (2017). Global-scale evaluation of 22 precipitation datasets using gauge observations and hydrological modeling. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 21(12), 6201-6217. doi:10.5194/hess-21-6201-2017Naz, B. S., Kurtz, W., Montzka, C., Sharples, W., Goergen, K., Keune, J., … Kollet, S. (2019). Improving soil moisture and runoff simulations at 3 km over Europe using land surface data assimilation. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 23(1), 277-301. doi:10.5194/hess-23-277-2019Haro, D., Solera, A., Paredes, J., & Andreu, J. (2014). Methodology for Drought Risk Assessment in Within-year Regulated Reservoir Systems. Application to the Orbigo River System (Spain). Water Resources Management, 28(11), 3801-3814. doi:10.1007/s11269-014-0710-3Zaniolo, M., Giuliani, M., Castelletti, A. F., & Pulido-Velazquez, M. (2018). Automatic design of basin-specific drought indexes for highly regulated water systems. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 22(4), 2409-2424. doi:10.5194/hess-22-2409-2018Koutroulis, A. G., Tsanis, I. K., Daliakopoulos, I. N., & Jacob, D. (2013). Impact of climate change on water resources status: A case study for Crete Island, Greece. Journal of Hydrology, 479, 146-158. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.11.055Vargas-Amelin, E., & Pindado, P. (2014). The challenge of climate change in Spain: Water resources, agriculture and land. Journal of Hydrology, 518, 243-249. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.11.035Giuliani, M., Li, Y., Castelletti, A., & Gandolfi, C. (2016). A coupled human-natural systems analysis of irrigated agriculture under changing climate. Water Resources Research, 52(9), 6928-6947. doi:10.1002/2016wr019363Giuliani, M., & Castelletti, A. (2016). Is robustness really robust? How different definitions of robustness impact decision-making under climate change. Climatic Change, 135(3-4), 409-424. doi:10.1007/s10584-015-1586-9Grindlay, A. L., Zamorano, M., Rodríguez, M. I., Molero, E., & Urrea, M. A. (2011). Implementation of the European Water Framework Directive: Integration of hydrological and regional planning at the Segura River Basin, southeast Spain. Land Use Policy, 28(1), 242-256. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.06.005Quevauviller, P., Barceló, D., Beniston, M., Djordjevic, S., Harding, R. J., Iglesias, A., … Werner, M. (2012). Integration of research advances in modelling and monitoring in support of WFD river basin management planning in the context of climate change. Science of The Total Environment, 440, 167-177. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.07.055Edens, B., & Graveland, C. (2014). Experimental valuation of Dutch water resources according to SNA and SEEA. Water Resources and Economics, 7, 66-81. doi:10.1016/j.wre.2014.10.003Pedro-Monzonís, M., Jiménez-Fernández, P., Solera, A., & Jiménez-Gavilán, P. (2016). The use of AQUATOOL DSS applied to the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water (SEEAW). Journal of Hydrology, 533, 1-14. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.11.034Gouveia, C. M., Trigo, R. M., Beguería, S., & Vicente-Serrano, S. M. (2017). Drought impacts on vegetation activity in the Mediterranean region: An assessment using remote sensing data and multi-scale drought indicators. Global and Planetary Change, 151, 15-27. doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2016.06.011Borrego-Marín, M., Gutiérrez-Martín, C., & Berbel, J. (2016). Water Productivity under Drought Conditions Estimated Using SEEA-Water. Water, 8(4), 138. doi:10.3390/w8040138Vardon, M., Lenzen, M., Peevor, S., & Creaser, M. (2007). Water accounting in Australia. Ecological Economics, 61(4), 650-659. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.033Pedro-Monzonís, M., del Longo, M., Solera, A., Pecora, S., & Andreu, J. (2016). Water Accounting in the Po River Basin Applied to Climate Change Scenarios. Procedia Engineering, 162, 246-253. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.051Momblanch, A., Andreu, J., Paredes-Arquiola, J., Solera, A., & Pedro-Monzonís, M. (2014). Adapting water accounting for integrated water resource management. The Júcar Water Resource System (Spain). Journal of Hydrology, 519, 3369-3385. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.10.002Karimi, P., Bastiaanssen, W. G. M., & Molden, D. (2012). Water Accounting Plus (WA+) – a water accounting procedure for complex river basins based on satellite measurements. doi:10.5194/hessd-9-12879-2012Karimi, P., Bastiaanssen, W. G. M., Molden, D., & Cheema, M. J. M. (2013). Basin-wide water accounting based on remote sensing data: an application for the Indus Basin. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 17(7), 2473-2486. doi:10.5194/hess-17-2473-2013Orth, R., & Destouni, G. (2018). Drought reduces blue-water fluxes more strongly than green-water fluxes in Europe. Nature Communications, 9(1). doi:10.1038/s41467-018-06013-7Van den Hurk, B., Hirschi, M., Schär, C., Lenderink, G., van Meijgaard, E., van Ulden, A., … Jones, R. (2005). Soil Control on Runoff Response to Climate Change in Regional Climate Model Simulations. Journal of Climate, 18(17), 3536-3551. doi:10.1175/jcli3471.1Bergström, S., Carlsson, B., Gardelin, M., Lindström, G., Pettersson, A., & Rummukainen, M. (2001). Climate change impacts on runoff in Sweden-assessments by global climate models, dynamical downscaling and hydrological modelling. Climate Research, 16, 101-112. doi:10.3354/cr016101Arnell, N. W. (1999). The effect of climate change on hydrological regimes in Europe: a continental perspective. Global Environmental Change, 9(1), 5-23. doi:10.1016/s0959-3780(98)00015-6Teuling, A. J., Van Loon, A. F., Seneviratne, S. I., Lehner, I., Aubinet, M., Heinesch, B., … Spank, U. (2013). Evapotranspiration amplifies European summer drought. Geophysical Research Letters, 40(10), 2071-2075. doi:10.1002/grl.50495Destouni, G., & Prieto, C. (2018). Robust Assessment of Uncertain Freshwater Changes: The Case of Greece with Large Irrigation—and Climate-Driven Runoff Decrease. Water, 10(11), 1645. doi:10.3390/w10111645Suárez-Almiñana, S., Pedro-Monzonís, M., Paredes-Arquiola, J., Andreu, J., & Solera, A. (2017). Linking Pan-European data to the local scale for decision making for global change and water scarcity within water resources planning and management. Science of The Total Environment, 603-604, 126-139. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.259Huang, Z., Hejazi, M., Tang, Q., Vernon, C. R., Liu, Y., Chen, M., & Calvin, K. (2019). Global agricultural green and blue water consumption under future climate and land use changes. Journal of Hydrology, 574, 242-256. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.04.046Kahil, M. T., Connor, J. D., & Albiac, J. (2015). Efficient water management policies for irrigation adaptation to climate change in Southern Europe. Ecological Economics, 120, 226-233. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.11.004Velasco-Muñoz, J., Aznar-Sánchez, J., Belmonte-Ureña, L., & López-Serrano, M. (2018). Advances in Water Use Efficiency in Agriculture: A Bibliometric Analysis. Water, 10(4), 377. doi:10.3390/w10040377Berbel, J., & Mateos, L. (2014). Does investment in irrigation technology necessarily generate rebound effects? A simulation analysis based on an agro-economic model. Agricultural Systems, 128, 25-34. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2014.04.002Pedro-Monzonís, M., Ferrer, J., Solera, A., Estrela, T., & Paredes-Arquiola, J. (2014). Water Accounts and Water Stress Indexes in the European Context of Water Planning: The Jucar River Basin. Procedia Engineering, 89, 1470-1477. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2014.11.431Vanham, D., Hoekstra, A. Y., Wada, Y., Bouraoui, F., de Roo, A., Mekonnen, M. M., … Bidoglio, G. (2018). Physical water scarcity metrics for monitoring progress towards SDG target 6.4: An evaluation of indicator 6.4.2 «Level of water stress». Science of The Total Environment, 613-614, 218-232. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.056Liu, J., Yang, H., Gosling, S. N., Kummu, M., Flörke, M., Pfister, S., … Oki, T. (2017). Water scarcity assessments in the past, present, and future. Earth’s Future, 5(6), 545-559. doi:10.1002/2016ef000518Wada, Y., van Beek, L. P. H., Viviroli, D., Dürr, H. H., Weingartner, R., & Bierkens, M. F. P. (2011). Global monthly water stress: 2. Water demand and severity of water stress. Water Resources Research, 47(7). doi:10.1029/2010wr009792Eekhout, J. P. C., Hunink, J. E., Terink, W., & de Vente, J. (2018). Why increased extreme precipitation under climate change negatively affects water security. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 22(11), 5935-5946. doi:10.5194/hess-22-5935-2018Pellicer-Martínez, F., & Martínez-Paz, J. M. (2018). Climate change effects on the hydrology of the headwaters of the Tagus River: implications for the management of the Tagus–Segura transfer. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 22(12), 6473-6491. doi:10.5194/hess-22-6473-2018Navarro, T. (2018). Water reuse and desalination in Spain – challenges and opportunities. Journal of Water Reuse and Desalination, 8(2), 153-168. doi:10.2166/wrd.2018.043García-Rubio, M. A., & Guardiola, J. (2012). Desalination in Spain: A Growing Alternative for Water Supply. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 28(1), 171-186. doi:10.1080/07900627.2012.642245Andreu, J., Capilla, J., & Sanchís, E. (1996). AQUATOOL, a generalized decision-support system for water-resources planning and operational management. Journal of Hydrology, 177(3-4), 269-291. doi:10.1016/0022-1694(95)02963-

Functional relationships reveal differences in the water cycle representation of global water models

Global water models are widely used for policy-making and in scientific studies, but substantial inter-model differences highlight the need for additional evaluation. Here we evaluate global water models by assessing so-called functional relationships between system forcing and response variables. The more widely used comparisons between observed and simulated fluxes provide insight into model behavior for the representative area of an observation, and can therefore potentially improve the model for that area. Functional relationships, by contrast, aim to capture how system forcing and response variables co-vary across large scales, and thus offer the potential for model improvement over large areas. Using 30-year annual averages from 8 global water models, we quantify such functional relationships by calculating correlations between key forcing variables (precipitation, net radiation) and water fluxes (actual evapotranspiration, groundwater recharge, total runoff). We find strong disagreement for groundwater recharge, some disagreement for total runoff, and the best agreement for evapotranspiration. Observation- and theory-derived functional relationships show varying agreements with models, indicating where model representations and our process understanding are particularly uncertain. Overall, our results suggest that model improvement is most important for the representation of energy balance processes, recharge processes, and generally for model behavior in dry and cold regions. We argue that advancing our ability to simulate global hydrology requires a better perceptual understanding of the global water cycle. To evaluate if our models match that understanding, we should explore alternative evaluation strategies, such as the use of functional relationships

The challenge of unprecedented floods and droughts in risk management

Risk management has reduced vulnerability to floods and droughts globally1,2, yet their impacts are still increasing3. An improved understanding of the causes of changing impacts is therefore needed, but has been hampered by a lack of empirical data4,5. On the basis of a global dataset of 45 pairs of events that occurred within the same area, we show that risk management generally reduces the impacts of floods and droughts but faces difficulties in reducing the impacts of unprecedented events of a magnitude not previously experienced. If the second event was much more hazardous than the first, its impact was almost always higher. This is because management was not designed to deal with such extreme events: for example, they exceeded the design levels of levees and reservoirs. In two success stories, the impact of the second, more hazardous, event was lower, as a result of improved risk management governance and high investment in integrated management. The observed difficulty of managing unprecedented events is alarming, given that more extreme hydrological events are projected owing to climate change3

Understanding each other's models: a standard representation of global water models to support improvement, intercomparison, and communication

Global water models (GWMs) simulate the terrestrial water cycle, on the global scale, and are used to assess the impacts of climate change on freshwater systems. GWMs are developed within different modeling frameworks and consider different underlying hydrological processes, leading to varied model structures. Furthermore, the equations used to describe various processes take different forms and are generally accessible only from within the individual model codes. These factors have hindered a holistic and detailed understanding of how different models operate, yet such an understanding is crucial for explaining the results of model evaluation studies, understanding inter-model differences in their simulations, and identifying areas for future model development. This study provides a comprehensive overview of how state-of-the-art GWMs are designed. We analyze water storage compartments, water flows, and human water use sectors included in 16 GWMs that provide simulations for the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project phase 2b (ISIMIP2b). We develop a standard writing style for the model equations to further enhance model improvement, intercomparison, and communication. In this study, WaterGAP2 used the highest number of water storage compartments, 11, and CWatM used 10 compartments. Seven models used six compartments, while three models (JULES-W1, Mac-PDM.20, and VIC) used the lowest number, three compartments. WaterGAP2 simulates five human water use sectors, while four models (CLM4.5, CLM5.0, LPJmL, and MPI-HM) simulate only water used by humans for the irrigation sector. We conclude that even though hydrologic processes are often based on similar equations, in the end, these equations have been adjusted or have used different values for specific parameters or specific variables. Our results highlight that the predictive uncertainty of GWMs can be reduced through improvements of the existing hydrologic processes, implementation of new processes in the models, and high-quality input data