TY - JOUR
T1 - Use of expert elicitation to assign weights to climate and hydrological models in climate impact studies
AU - Sebok, Eva
AU - Henriksen, Hans Jørgen
AU - Pastén-Zapata, Ernesto
AU - Berg, Peter
AU - Thirel, Guillaume
AU - Lemoine, Anthony
AU - Lira-Loarca, Andrea
AU - Photiadou, Christiana
AU - Pimentel, Rafael
AU - Royer-Gaspard, Paul
AU - Kjellström, Erik
AU - Christensen, Jens Hesselbjerg
AU - Vidal, Jean Philippe
AU - Lucas-Picher, Philippe
AU - Donat, Markus G.
AU - Besio, Giovanni
AU - Polo, María José
AU - Stisen, Simon
AU - Caballero, Yvan
AU - Pechlivanidis, Ilias G.
AU - Troldborg, Lars
AU - Refsgaard, Jens Christian
N1 - Funding Information:
This research has been supported by the European Commission, Horizon 2020 (ERA4CS (grant no. 690462)).
Funding Information:
This work was funded by the project AQUACLEW, which is part of ERA4CS (European Research Area for Climate Services), an ERA-NET (European Research Area Network) initiated by JPI Climate (Joint Programming Initiative) and funded by Formas (Sweden); German Aerospace Center (DLR, Germany); Ministry of Education, Science and Research (BMBWF, Austria); Innovation Fund Denmark; Ministry of Economic Affairs and Digital Transformation (MINECO, Spain); and French National Research Agency with co-funding by the European Commission (grant no. 69046). The contribution of Philippe Lucas-Picher was supported by the French National Research Agency (future investment programme no. ANR-18-MPGA-0005). Rafael Pimentel acknowledges funding by the Modality 5.2 of the Programa Propio 2018 of the University of Córdoba and the Juan de la Cierva Incorporación programme of the Ministry of Science and Innovation (grant no. IJC2018-038093-I). Rafael Pimentel and María J. Polo are members of DAUCO (Unit of Excellence reference no. CEX2019-000968-M), with financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation and the Spanish State Research Agency, through the Severo Ochoa Centre of Excellence and María de Maeztu Unit of Excellence in research and development (R&D).
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2022 Eva Sebok et al.
PY - 2022/11/9
Y1 - 2022/11/9
N2 - Various methods are available for assessing uncertainties in climate impact studies. Among such methods, model weighting by expert elicitation is a practical way to provide a weighted ensemble of models for specific real-world impacts. The aim is to decrease the influence of improbable models in the results and easing the decision-making process. In this study both climate and hydrological models are analysed, and the result of a research experiment is presented using model weighting with the participation of six climate model experts and six hydrological model experts. For the experiment, seven climate models are a priori selected from a larger EURO-CORDEX (Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment - European Domain) ensemble of climate models, and three different hydrological models are chosen for each of the three European river basins. The model weighting is based on qualitative evaluation by the experts for each of the selected models based on a training material that describes the overall model structure and literature about climate models and the performance of hydrological models for the present period. The expert elicitation process follows a three-stage approach, with two individual rounds of elicitation of probabilities and a final group consensus, where the experts are separated into two different community groups: a climate and a hydrological modeller group. The dialogue reveals that under the conditions of the study, most climate modellers prefer the equal weighting of ensemble members, whereas hydrological-impact modellers in general are more open for assigning weights to different models in a multi-model ensemble, based on model performance and model structure. Climate experts are more open to exclude models, if obviously flawed, than to put weights on selected models in a relatively small ensemble. The study shows that expert elicitation can be an efficient way to assign weights to different hydrological models and thereby reduce the uncertainty in climate impact. However, for the climate model ensemble, comprising seven models, the elicitation in the format of this study could only re-establish a uniform weight between climate models.
AB - Various methods are available for assessing uncertainties in climate impact studies. Among such methods, model weighting by expert elicitation is a practical way to provide a weighted ensemble of models for specific real-world impacts. The aim is to decrease the influence of improbable models in the results and easing the decision-making process. In this study both climate and hydrological models are analysed, and the result of a research experiment is presented using model weighting with the participation of six climate model experts and six hydrological model experts. For the experiment, seven climate models are a priori selected from a larger EURO-CORDEX (Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment - European Domain) ensemble of climate models, and three different hydrological models are chosen for each of the three European river basins. The model weighting is based on qualitative evaluation by the experts for each of the selected models based on a training material that describes the overall model structure and literature about climate models and the performance of hydrological models for the present period. The expert elicitation process follows a three-stage approach, with two individual rounds of elicitation of probabilities and a final group consensus, where the experts are separated into two different community groups: a climate and a hydrological modeller group. The dialogue reveals that under the conditions of the study, most climate modellers prefer the equal weighting of ensemble members, whereas hydrological-impact modellers in general are more open for assigning weights to different models in a multi-model ensemble, based on model performance and model structure. Climate experts are more open to exclude models, if obviously flawed, than to put weights on selected models in a relatively small ensemble. The study shows that expert elicitation can be an efficient way to assign weights to different hydrological models and thereby reduce the uncertainty in climate impact. However, for the climate model ensemble, comprising seven models, the elicitation in the format of this study could only re-establish a uniform weight between climate models.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85143404270&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5194/hess-26-5605-2022
DO - 10.5194/hess-26-5605-2022
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85143404270
SN - 1027-5606
VL - 26
SP - 5605
EP - 5625
JO - Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
JF - Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
IS - 21
ER -