On inclusion of water resource management in Earth system models – Part 2: Representation of water supply and allocation and opportunities for improved modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Human water use has significantly increased during the recent past. Water withdrawals from surface and groundwater sources have altered terrestrial discharge and storage, with large variability in time and space. These withdrawals are driven by sectoral demands for water, but are commonly subject to supply constraints, which determine water allocation. Water supply and allocation, therefore, should be considered together with water demand and appropriately included in Earth system models to address various large-scale effects with or without considering possible climate interactions. In a companion paper, we review the modeling of demand in large-scale models. Here, we review the algorithms developed to represent the elements of water supply and allocation in land surface and global hydrologic models. We note that some potentially important online implications, such as the effects of large reservoirs on land–atmospheric feedbacks, have not yet been fully investigated. Regarding offline implications, we find that there are important elements, such as groundwater availability and withdrawals, and the representation of large reservoirs, which should be improved. We identify major sources of uncertainty in current simulations due to limitations in data support, water allocation algorithms, host large-scale models as well as propagation of various biases across the integrated modeling system. Considering these findings with those highlighted in our companion paper, we note that advancements in computation and coupling techniques as well as improvements in natural and anthropogenic process representation and parameterization in host large-scale models, in conjunction with remote sensing and data assimilation can facilitate inclusion of water resource management at larger scales. Nonetheless, various modeling options should be carefully considered, diagnosed and intercompared. We propose a modular framework to develop integrated models based on multiple hypotheses for data support, water resource management algorithms and host models in a unified uncertainty assessment framework. A key to this development is the availability of regional-scale data for model development, diagnosis and validation. We argue that the time is right for a global initiative, based on regional case studies, to move this agenda forward.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".