Articles | Volume 26, issue 8
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2301–2317, 2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
02 May 2022
Review article | 02 May 2022
To which extent are socio-hydrology studies truly integrative? The case of natural hazards and disaster research
Franciele Maria Vanelli et al.
No articles found.
Samuel Rufat, Mariana Madruga de Brito, Alexander Fekete, Emeline Comby, Peter J. Robinson, Iuliana Armaș, Wouter J. W. Botzen, and Christian Kuhlicke
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss.,
Revised manuscript accepted for NHESSShort summary
It remains unclear why people fail to act adaptively to reduce future losses, even when there is ever richer information available. To improve the ability of researchers to build cumulative knowledge, we conducted an international survey – the Risk Perception and Behaviour Survey of Surveyors (Risk-SoS). We find that most studies are exploratory and often overlook theoretical efforts that would enable the accumulation of evidence. We offer several recommendations for future studies.
Luana Lavagnoli Moreira, Mariana Madruga de Brito, and Masato Kobiyama
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 1513–1530,Short summary
The review of flood vulnerability indices revealed that (1) temporal dynamic aspects were often disregarded, (2) coping and adaptive capacity indicators were frequently ignored, as obtaining these data demand time and effort, and (3) most studies neither applied sensitivity (90.5 %) or uncertainty analyses (96.8 %) nor validated the results (86.3 %). The study highlights the importance of addressing these gaps to produce scientifically rigorous and comparable research.
Sofia Melo Vasconcellos, Masato Kobiyama, and Aline de Almeida Mota
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss.,
Revised manuscript not acceptedShort summary
The objective of the present study was to determine the spatial behaviour of the Soil Water Index (SWI) by applying a distributed version of the Tank Model (D-Tank Model) to verify its reliability through the comparison to soil moisture estimated with the measured water-tension values and the water retention curve. The comparison between the spatially distributed values of the SWI and soil moisture confirmed the high potential of the SWI for predictions related to hydrological sciences.
Mariana Madruga de Brito and Mariele Evers
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 1019–1033,Short summary
This study presents a systematic review of 128 papers that apply multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) tools to flood problems, aiming to provide an overall picture of what has motivated researchers in 37 different countries over the past 2 decades. A wide range of applications were identified, highlighting the utility of MCDM as a decision support tool in all stages of the flood management process.
Related subject area
Subject: Water Resources Management | Techniques and Approaches: Theory developmentPower and empowerment in transdisciplinary research: a negotiated approach for peri-urban groundwater problems in the Ganges DeltaA socio-hydrological framework for understanding conflict and cooperation with respect to transboundary riversA review of the applicability of the motivations and abilities (MOTA) framework for assessing the implementation success of water resources management plans and policiesSocial dilemmas and poor water quality in household water systemsThe limits to large-scale supply augmentation: exploring the crossroads of conflicting urban water system development pathwaysStructural gaps of water resources knowledge in global river basinsWater sharing policies conditioned on hydrologic variability to inform reservoir operationsCharacteristics of droughts in Argentina's core crop regionQuantifying the impacts of compound extremes on agricultureComparison of published palaeoclimate records suitable for reconstructing annual to sub-decadal hydroclimatic variability in eastern Australia: implications for water resource management and planningUnraveling intractable water conflicts: the entanglement of science and politics in decision-making on large hydraulic infrastructureA Water-Energy-Food Nexus approach for conducting trade-off analysis: Morocco's phosphate industry in the Khouribga regionA watershed classification approach that looks beyond hydrology: application to a semi-arid, agricultural region in CanadaRole-play simulations as an aid to achieve complex learning outcomes in hydrological scienceUsing a coupled agent-based modeling approach to analyze the role of risk perception in water management decisionsGeostatistical interpolation by quantile krigingFlooded by jargon: how the interpretation of water-related terms differs between hydrology experts and the general audienceChallenges to implementing bottom-up flood risk decision analysis frameworks: how strong are social networks of flooding professionals?Socio-hydrological spaces in the Jamuna River floodplain in BangladeshAn improved method for calculating the regional crop water footprint based on a hydrological process analysisHow downstream sub-basins depend on upstream inflows to avoid scarcity: typology and global analysis of transboundary riversAn alternative approach for socio-hydrology: case study researchHESS Opinions: A conceptual framework for assessing socio-hydrological resilience under changeSocio-hydrological perspectives of the co-evolution of humans and groundwater in Cangzhou, North China PlainTowards systematic planning of small-scale hydrological intervention-based researchGeoscience on television: a review of science communication literature in the context of geosciencesA "mental models" approach to the communication of subsurface hydrology and hazardsReview and classification of indicators of green water availability and scarcitySocio-hydrological water balance for water allocation between human and environmental purposes in catchmentsLong-term monitoring of nitrate transport to drainage from three agricultural clayey till fieldsComplex network theory, streamflow, and hydrometric monitoring system designHydrological drought types in cold climates: quantitative analysis of causing factors and qualitative survey of impactsLinked hydrologic and social systems that support resilience of traditional irrigation communitiesAssessing blue and green water utilisation in wheat production of China from the perspectives of water footprint and total water useA new framework for resolving conflicts over transboundary rivers using bankruptcy methodsQuantifying the human impact on water resources: a critical review of the water footprint conceptEndogenous change: on cooperation and water availability in two ancient societiesSocio-hydrology and the science–policy interface: a case study of the Saskatchewan River basinRelationships between environmental governance and water quality in a growing metropolitan area of the Pacific Northwest, USAA journey of a thousand miles begins with one small step – human agency, hydrological processes and time in socio-hydrologySocio-hydrologic perspectives of the co-evolution of humans and water in the Tarim River basin, Western China: the Taiji–Tire modelActing, predicting and intervening in a socio-hydrological worldEvolving water science in the AnthropoceneHard paths, soft paths or no paths? Cross-cultural perceptions of water solutionsReconstructing the duty of water: a study of emergent norms in socio-hydrologyWater consumption from hydropower plants – review of published estimates and an assessment of the conceptWater Accounting Plus (WA+) – a water accounting procedure for complex river basins based on satellite measurementsCyanobacterial and microcystins dynamics following the application of hydrogen peroxide to waste stabilisation pondsA regional and multi-faceted approach to postgraduate water education – the WaterNet experience in Southern AfricaReframing hydrology education to solve coupled human and environmental problems
Leon M. Hermans, Vishal Narain, Remi Kempers, Sharlene L. Gomes, Poulomi Banerjee, Rezaul Hasan, Mashfiqus Salehin, Shah Alam Khan, A. T. M. Zakir Hossain, Kazi Faisal Islam, Sheikh Nazmul Huda, Partha Sarathi Banerjee, Binoy Majumder, Soma Majumder, and Wil A. H. Thissen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2201–2219,Short summary
Transdisciplinary water research involves the co-creation of knowledge between various stakeholders to advance science and resolve complex societal problems. In this paper, we describe challenges and responses to address power and politics as part of transdisciplinary research. This is done based on a project that combined known principles for transdisciplinary research with a negotiated approach to support groundwater management in peri-urban villages in India and Bangladesh.
Yongping Wei, Jing Wei, Gen Li, Shuanglei Wu, David Yu, Mohammad Ghoreishi, You Lu, Felipe Augusto Arguello Souza, Murugesu Sivapalan, and Fuqiang Tian
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2131–2146,Short summary
There is increasing tension among the riparian countries of transboundary rivers. This article proposes a socio-hydrological framework that incorporates the slow and less visible societal processes into existing hydro-economic models, revealing the slow and hidden feedbacks between societal and hydrological processes. This framework will contribute to process-based understanding of the complex mechanism that drives conflict and cooperation in transboundary river management.
John Conallin, Nathan Ning, Jennifer Bond, Nicholas Pawsey, Lee J. Baumgartner, Dwi Atminarso, Hannah McPherson, Wayne Robinson, and Garry Thorncraft
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 1357–1370,Short summary
Implementation failure is well known to be a major barrier to the success of water resource plans and policies. The motivations and abilities (MOTA) approach attempts to address this barrier, by providing a multi-stakeholder, multilevel tool to assess triggers, motivations and abilities supporting the implementation feasibility of plans. We review existing MOTA applications in various water management contexts and propose several complementary add-in applications to complement the approach.
Gopal Penny, Diogo Bolster, and Marc F. Müller
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 1187–1202,Short summary
In residential areas with a high housing density, septic contamination of private wells raises multiple health concerns. Often, few regulations exist to ensure good water quality in such systems, and water quality is often left to the homeowner. To address the potential obstacles to effective management, we identify situations where misplaced economic incentives hinder effective policy to support water quality in such systems.
Jonatan Godinez Madrigal, Nora Van Cauwenbergh, Jaime Hoogesteger, Pamela Claure Gutierrez, and Pieter van der Zaag
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 885–902,Short summary
Urban water systems are facing an increasing pressure on their water resources to guarantee safe and sufficient water access. Water managers often use tried and tested strategies like large supply augmentation infrastructure to address water problems. However, these projects do not address key problems and cause water conflicts. We conducted transdisciplinary research to show how water conflicts can change the development pathway of urban water systems by implementing alternative solutions.
Shuanglei Wu, Yongping Wei, and Xuemei Wang
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5381–5398,Short summary
Using publications indexed in the Web of Science, we investigated water resources knowledge development at the river basin scale since 1900 and found that legacy-driven knowledge structures, increasingly homogenized management issues, and largely static cross-disciplinary collaborations dominated highly researched river basins. A structural shift of water resources knowledge development to cope with the rapidly changing hydrological systems and associated management issues is urgently needed.
Guang Yang and Paul Block
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 3617–3634,Short summary
There is a clear trade-off between reservoir hydropower generation and the variability in reservoir water release, which can be used to derive water-sharing policies and provide critical insights during riparian negotiations regarding downstream flows supplementing during drought conditions. This type of water-sharing policy can effectively mitigate the water use conflicts between upstream and downstream countries, especially during drought periods.
Leandro Carlos Sgroi, Miguel Angel Lovino, Ernesto Hugo Berbery, and Gabriela Viviana Müller
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 2475–2490,Short summary
This study advances the understanding and impacts of drought on wheat, corn, and soybean yields over Argentina's main crop region, where crop production is more intense and represents the main contribution to the country's gross domestic product. Our analysis focuses on drought properties, including the magnitude, frequency at different timescales, duration, and severity. This new approach can be helpful for regional decision-making and planning by water managers and in agricultural contexts.
Iman Haqiqi, Danielle S. Grogan, Thomas W. Hertel, and Wolfram Schlenker
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 551–564,Short summary
This study combines a fine-scale weather product with outputs of a hydrological model to construct functional metrics of individual and compound hydroclimatic extremes for agriculture. Then, a yield response function is estimated with individual and compound metrics focusing on corn in the United States during the 1981–2015 period. The findings suggest that metrics of compound hydroclimatic extremes are better predictors of corn yield variations than metrics of individual extremes.
Anna L. Flack, Anthony S. Kiem, Tessa R. Vance, Carly R. Tozer, and Jason L. Roberts
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 5699–5712,Short summary
Palaeoclimate information was analysed for eastern Australia to determine when (and where) there was agreement about the timing of wet and dry epochs in the pre-instrumental period (1000–1899). The results show that instrumental records (~1900–present) underestimate the full range of rainfall variability that has occurred. When coupled with projected impacts of climate change and growing demands, these results highlight major challenges for water resource management and infrastructure.
Jonatan Godinez-Madrigal, Nora Van Cauwenbergh, and Pieter van der Zaag
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 4903–4921,Short summary
Our research studies whether science depoliticizes water conflicts or instead conflicts politicize science–policy processes. We analyze a water conflict due to the development of large infrastructure. We interviewed key actors in the conflict and replicated the results of water resources models developed to solve the conflict. We found that knowledge produced in isolation has no positive effect in transforming the conflict; instead, its potential could be enhanced if produced collaboratively.
Sang-Hyun Lee, Amjad T. Assi, Bassel Daher, Fatima E. Mengoub, and Rabi H. Mohtar
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 4727–4741,Short summary
Proper water availability for the right place and time in a changing climate requires analysis of complex scientific, technical, socioeconomic, regulatory, and political issues. A Water-Energy-Food Nexus Phosphate (WEF-P) Tool, based on integrating supply chain processes, transportation, and water–energy footprints could assess the various scenarios to offer an effective means of ensuring sustainable management of limited resources to both agricultural areas and the phosphate industry.
Jared D. Wolfe, Kevin R. Shook, Chris Spence, and Colin J. Whitfield
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 3945–3967,Short summary
Watershed classification can identify regions expected to respond similarly to disturbance. Methods should extend beyond hydrology to include other environmental questions, such as ecology and water quality. We developed a classification for the Canadian Prairie and identified seven classes defined by watershed characteristics, including elevation, climate, wetland density, and surficial geology. Results provide a basis for evaluating watershed response to land management and climate condition.
Arvid Bring and Steve W. Lyon
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2369–2378,Short summary
Hydrology education strives to teach students both quantitative ability and complex professional skills. Our research shows that role-play simulations are useful to make students able to integrate various analytical skills in complicated settings while not interfering with traditional teaching that fosters their ability to solve mathematical problems. Despite this there are several potential challenging areas in using role-plays, and we therefore suggest ways around these potential roadblocks.
Jin-Young Hyun, Shih-Yu Huang, Yi-Chen Ethan Yang, Vincent Tidwell, and Jordan Macknick
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2261–2278,Short summary
This study applies a two-way coupled agent-based model (ABM) with a river-reservoir management model (RiverWare) to analyze the role of risk perception in water management decisions using the Bayesian inference mapping joined with the cost–loss model. The calibration results capture the dynamics of historical irrigated area and streamflow changes and suggest that the proposed framework improves the representation of human decision-making processes compared to conventional rule-based ABMs.
Henning Lebrenz and András Bárdossy
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 1633–1648,Short summary
Many variables, e.g., in hydrology, geology, and social sciences, are only observed at a few distinct measurement locations, and their actual distribution in the entire space remains unknown. We introduce the new geostatistical interpolation method of
quantile kriging, providing an improved estimator and associated uncertainty. It can also host variables, which would not fulfill the implicit presumptions of the traditional geostatistical interpolation methods.
Gemma J. Venhuizen, Rolf Hut, Casper Albers, Cathelijne R. Stoof, and Ionica Smeets
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 393–403,Short summary
Do experts attach the same meaning as laypeople to terms often used in hydrology such as "river", "flooding" and "downstream"? In this study a survey was completed by 34 experts and 119 laypeople to answer this question. We found that there are some profound differences between experts and laypeople: words like "river" and "river basin" turn out to have a different interpretation between the two groups. However, when using pictures there is much more agreement between the groups.
James O. Knighton, Osamu Tsuda, Rebecca Elliott, and M. Todd Walter
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 5657–5673,Short summary
Decision-making for flood risk management is often the collective effort of professionals within government, NGOs, private practice, and advocacy groups. Our research investigates differences among flood experts within Tompkins County, New York (USA). We explore how they differ in their perceptions of flooding risk, desired project outcomes, and knowledge. We observe substantial differences among experts, and recommend formally acknowledging these perceptions when engaging in flood management.
Md Ruknul Ferdous, Anna Wesselink, Luigia Brandimarte, Kymo Slager, Margreet Zwarteveen, and Giuliano Di Baldassarre
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 5159–5173,Short summary
Socio-hydrological space (SHS) is a concept that enriches the study of socio-hydrology because it helps understand the detailed human–water interactions in a specific location. The concept suggests that the interactions between society and water are place-bound because of differences in social processes and river dynamics. This would be useful for developing interventions under disaster management, but also other development goals. SHS provides a new way of looking at socio-hydrological systems.
Xiao-Bo Luan, Ya-Li Yin, Pu-Te Wu, Shi-Kun Sun, Yu-Bao Wang, Xue-Rui Gao, and Jing Liu
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 5111–5123,Short summary
At present, the water footprint calculated by the quantitative method of crop production water footprint is only a field-scale water footprint, which does not contain all the water consumption of the crop growth process, so its calculated crop production water footprint is incomplete. In this study, the hydrological model SWAT was used to analyze the real water consumption in the course of crop growth, so that the actual water consumption of the crops could be more accurately reflected.
Hafsa Ahmed Munia, Joseph H. A. Guillaume, Naho Mirumachi, Yoshihide Wada, and Matti Kummu
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2795–2809,Short summary
An analytical framework is developed drawing on ideas of regime shifts from resilience literature to understand the transition between cases where water scarcity is or is not experienced depending on whether water from upstream is or is not available. The analysis shows 386 million people dependent on upstream water to avoid possible stress and 306 million people dependent on upstream water to avoid possible shortage. This provides insights into implications for negotiations between sub-basins.
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 317–329,Short summary
This paper argues for an alternative approach for socio‒hydrology: detailed case study research. Detailed case study research can increase understanding of how society interacts with hydrology, offers more levers for management than coupled modelling, and facilitates interdisciplinary cooperation. The paper presents a case study of the Dommel Basin in the Netherlands and Belgium and compares this with a published model of the Kissimmee Basin in Florida.
Feng Mao, Julian Clark, Timothy Karpouzoglou, Art Dewulf, Wouter Buytaert, and David Hannah
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3655–3670,Short summary
The paper aims to propose a conceptual framework that supports nuanced understanding and analytical assessment of resilience in socio-hydrological contexts. We identify three framings of resilience for different human–water couplings, which have distinct application fields and are used for different water management challenges. To assess and improve socio-hydrological resilience in each type, we introduce a
resilience canvasas a heuristic tool to design bespoke management strategies.
Songjun Han, Fuqiang Tian, Ye Liu, and Xianhui Duan
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3619–3633,Short summary
The history of the co-evolution of the coupled human–groundwater system in Cangzhou (a region with the most serious depression cone in the North China Plain) is analyzed with a particular focus on how the groundwater crisis unfolded and how people attempted to settle the crisis. The evolution of the system was substantially impacted by two droughts. Further restoration of groundwater environment could be anticipated, but the occurrence of drought still remains an undetermined external forcing.
Kharis Erasta Reza Pramana and Maurits Willem Ertsen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 4093–4115,Short summary
The effects of human actions in small-scale water development initiatives and the associated hydrological research activities are basically unspecified. We argue that more explicit attention helps to design more appropriate answers to the challenges faced in field studies. A more systematic approach is proposed that would be useful when designing field projects: two sets of questions on (1) dealing with surprises and (2) cost–benefits of data gathering.
Rolf Hut, Anne M. Land-Zandstra, Ionica Smeets, and Cathelijne R. Stoof
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2507–2518,Short summary
To help geo-scientists prepare for TV appearances, we review the scientific literature on effective science communication related to TV. We identify six main themes: scientist motivation, target audience, narratives and storytelling, jargon and information transfer, relationship between scientists and journalists, and stereotypes of scientists on TV. We provide a detailed case study as illustration for each theme.
Hazel Gibson, Iain S. Stewart, Sabine Pahl, and Alison Stokes
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 1737–1749,Short summary
This paper provides empirical evidence for the value of using a psychology-based approach to communication of hydrology and hazards. It demonstrates the use of the "mental models" approach to risk assessment used in a regional geoscience context to explore the conceptions of the geological subsurface between experts and non-experts, and how that impacts on communication.
J. F. Schyns, A. Y. Hoekstra, and M. J. Booij
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 4581–4608,Short summary
The paper draws attention to the fact that green water (soil moisture returning to the atmosphere through evaporation) is a scarce resource, because its availability is limited and there are competing demands for green water. Around 80 indicators of green water availability and scarcity are reviewed and classified based on their scope and purpose of measurement. This is useful in order to properly include limitations in green water availability in water scarcity assessments.
S. Zhou, Y. Huang, Y. Wei, and G. Wang
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 3715–3726,
V. Ernstsen, P. Olsen, and A. E. Rosenbom
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 3475–3488,
M. J. Halverson and S. W. Fleming
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 3301–3318,
A. F. Van Loon, S. W. Ploum, J. Parajka, A. K. Fleig, E. Garnier, G. Laaha, and H. A. J. Van Lanen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 1993–2016,Short summary
Hydrological drought types in cold climates have complex causing factors and impacts. In Austria and Norway, a lack of snowmelt is mainly related to below-normal winter precipitation, and a lack of glaciermelt is mainly related to below-normal summer temperature. These and other hydrological drought types impacted hydropower production, water supply, and agriculture in Europe and the US in the recent and far past. For selected drought events in Norway impacts could be coupled to causing factors.
A. Fernald, S. Guldan, K. Boykin, A. Cibils, M. Gonzales, B. Hurd, S. Lopez, C. Ochoa, M. Ortiz, J. Rivera, S. Rodriguez, and C. Steele
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 293–307,
X. C. Cao, P. T. Wu, Y. B. Wang, and X. N. Zhao
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 3165–3178,
K. Madani, M. Zarezadeh, and S. Morid
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 3055–3068,
J. Chenoweth, M. Hadjikakou, and C. Zoumides
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2325–2342,
S. Pande and M. Ertsen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 1745–1760,
P. Gober and H. S. Wheater
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 1413–1422,
H. Chang, P. Thiers, N. R. Netusil, J. A. Yeakley, G. Rollwagen-Bollens, S. M. Bollens, and S. Singh
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 1383–1395,
M. W. Ertsen, J. T. Murphy, L. E. Purdue, and T. Zhu
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 1369–1382,
Y. Liu, F. Tian, H. Hu, and M. Sivapalan
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 1289–1303,
S. N. Lane
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 927–952,
H. H. G. Savenije, A. Y. Hoekstra, and P. van der Zaag
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 319–332,
A. Wutich, A. C. White, D. D. White, K. L. Larson, A. Brewis, and C. Roberts
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 109–120,
J. L. Jr. Wescoat
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 4759–4768,
T. H. Bakken, Å. Killingtveit, K. Engeland, K. Alfredsen, and A. Harby
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 3983–4000,
P. Karimi, W. G. M. Bastiaanssen, and D. Molden
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 2459–2472,
D. J. Barrington, A. Ghadouani, and G. N. Ivey
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 2097–2105,
L. Jonker, P. van der Zaag, B. Gumbo, J. Rockström, D. Love, and H. H. G. Savenije
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 4225–4232,
E. G. King, F. C. O'Donnell, and K. K. Caylor
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 4023–4031,
Abadie, L. M., Markandya, A., and Neumann, M. B.: Accounting for economic factors in socio-hydrology: Optimization under uncertainty and climate change, Water-Sui., 11, 1–17, https://doi.org/10.3390/w11102073, 2019.
Adger, W. N., Arnell, N. W., and Tompkins, E. L.: Successful adaptation to climate change across scales, Global Environ. Chang., 15, 77–86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.12.005, 2005.
AghaKouchak, A., Huning, L. S., Chiang, F., Sadegh, M., Vahedifard, F., Mazdiyasni, O., Moftakhari, H., and Mallakpour, I.: How do natural hazards cascade to cause disasters?, Nature, 561, 458–460, https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-06783-6, 2018.
AghaKouchak, A., Chiang, F., Huning, L. S., Love, C. A., Mallakpour, I., Mazdiyasni, O., Moftakhari, H., Papalexiou, S. M., Ragno, E., and Sadegh, M.: Climate Extremes and Compound Hazards in a Warming World, Annu. Rev. Earth Pl. Sc., 48, 519–548, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-071719-055228, 2020.
Albertini, C., Mazzoleni, M., Totaro, V., Iacobellis, V., and Di Baldassarre, G.: Socio-Hydrological Modelling: The Influence of Reservoir Management and Societal Responses on Flood Impacts, Water, 12, 1384, https://doi.org/10.3390/w12051384, 2020.
Baeza, A., Bojorquez-Tapia, L. A., Janssen, M. A., and Eakin, H.: Operationalizing the feedback between institutional decision-making, socio-political infrastructure, and environmental risk in urban vulnerability analysis, J. Environ. Manage., 241, 407–417, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.138, 2019.
Di Baldassarre, G., Viglione, A., Carr, G., Kuil, L., Salinas, J. L., and Blöschl, G.: Socio-hydrology: conceptualising human-flood interactions, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 3295–3303, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3295-2013, 2013.
Di Baldassarre, G., Viglione, A., Carr, G., Kuil, L., Yan, K., Brandimarte, L., and Blöschl, G.: Debates – Perspectives on socio-hydrology: Capturing feedbacks between physical and social processes, Water Resour. Res., 51, 4770–4781, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR016416, 2015.
Di Baldassarre, G., Saccà, S., Aronica, G. T., Grimaldi, S., Ciullo, A., and Crisci, M.: Human-flood interactions in Rome over the past 150 years, Adv. Geosci., 44, 9–13, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-44-9-2017, 2017.
Di Baldassarre, G., Nohrstedt, D., Mård, J., Burchardt, S., Albin, C., Bondesson, S., Breinl, K., Deegan, F. M., Fuentes, D., Lopez, M. G., Granberg, M., Nyberg, L., Nyman, M. R., Rhodes, E., Troll, V., Young, S., Walch, C., and Parker, C. F.: An Integrative Research Framework to Unravel the Interplay of Natural Hazards and Vulnerabilities, Earth's Future, 6, 305–310, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000764, 2018.
Di Baldassarre, G., Sivapalan, M., Rusca, M., Cudennec, C., Garcia, M., Kreibich, H., Konar, M., Mondino, E., Mård, J., Pande, S., Sanderson, M. R., Tian, F., Viglione, A., Wei, J., Wei, Y., Yu, D. J., Srinivasan, V., and Blöschl, G.: Sociohydrology: Scientific Challenges in Addressing the Sustainable Development Goals, Water Resour. Res., 55, 6327–6355, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR023901, 2019.
Di Baldassarre, G., Cloke, H., Lindersson, S., Mazzoleni, M., Mondino, E., Mård, J., Odongo, V., Raffetti, E., Ridolfi, E., Rusca, M., Savelli, E., and Tootoonchi, F.: Integrating Multiple Research Methods to Unravel the Complexity of Human-Water Systems, AGU Adv., 2, 1–6, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021av000473, 2021.
Basel, B., Hernández Quiroz, N., Velasco Herrera, R., Santiago Alonso, C., and Hoogesteger, J.: Bee mietii rak rkabni nis (The people know how to seed water): A Zapotec experience in adapting to water scarcity and drought, Clim. Dev., 13, 792–806, https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2020.1855100, 2020.
Birkmann, J. and von Teichman, K.: Integrating disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation: Key challenges-scales, knowledge, and norms, Sustain. Sci., 5, 171–184, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-010-0108-y, 2010.
Borga, M., Comiti, F., Ruin, I., and Marra, F.: Forensic analysis of flash flood response, WIREs Water, 6, 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1338, 2019.
de Brito, M. M.: Compound and cascading drought impacts do not happen by chance: A proposal to quantify their relationships, Sci. Total Environ., 778, 146236, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146236, 2021.
de Brito, M. M., Evers, M., and Höllermann, B.: Prioritization of flood vulnerability, coping capacity and exposure indicators through the Delphi technique: A case study in Taquari-Antas basin, Brazil, Int. J. Disast. Risk Re., 24, 119–128, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.05.027, 2017.
de Brito, M. M., Evers, M., and Almoradie, A. D. S.: Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 373–390, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-373-2018, 2018.
de Brito, M. M., Kuhlicke, C., and Marx, A.: Near-real-time drought impact assessment: A text mining approach on the 2018/19 drought in Germany, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 1040a9, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aba4ca, 2020.
Brunner, M. I., Slater, L., Tallaksen, L. M., and Clark, M.: Challenges in modeling and predicting floods and droughts: A review, WIREs Water, 8, e1520, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1520, 2021.
Bryman, A.: Barriers to Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, J. Mix. Methods Res., 1, 8–22, https://doi.org/10.1177/2345678906290531, 2007.
Buarque, A. C. S., Bhattacharya-Mis, N., Fava, M. C., de Souza, F. A. A., and Mendiondo, E. M.: Using historical source data to understand urban flood risk: a socio-hydrological modelling application at Gregório Creek, Brazil, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 65, 1075–1083, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2020.1740705, 2020.
Carr, G., Barendrecht, M. H., Debevec, L., Kuil, L., and Blöschl, G.: People and water: Understanding integrated systems needs integrated approaches, J. Water Supply Res. T., 69, 819–832, https://doi.org/10.2166/aqua.2020.055, 2020.
Chen, X., Wang, D., Tian, F., and Sivapalan, M.: From channelization to restoration: Sociohydrologic modeling with changing community preferences in the Kissimmee River Basin, Florida, Water Resour. Res., 52, 1227–1244, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR018194, 2016.
Ciullo, A., Viglione, A., Castellarin, A., Crisci, M., and Di Baldassarre, G.: Socio-hydrological modelling of flood-risk dynamics: comparing the resilience of green and technological systems, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 62, 880–891, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2016.1273527, 2017.
Creswell, J.: Educational research: planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, 4th ed., edited by: Pearson, Boston, ISBN-10 0-13-136739-0, ISBN-13 978-0-13-136739-5, 2012.
EM-Dat: The Emergency Events Database, https://public.emdat.be/, last access: November 2021.
Eriksen, C., Gill, N., and Bradstock, R.: Trial by fire: Natural hazards, mixed-methods and cultural research, Aust. Geogr., 42, 19–40, https://doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2011.546317, 2011.
Evers, M., Almoradie, A., and de Brito, M. M.: Enhancing Flood Resilience Through Collaborative Modelling and Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), in: Urban Disaster Resilience and Security, The Urban Book Series, edited by: Fekete, A. and Fiedrich, F., Springer, Cham, 221–236, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68606-6_14, 2018.
Falkenmark, M.: Water and Mankind: A Complex System of Mutual Interaction, Ambio, 6, 3–9, 1977.
Falkenmark, M.: Main Problems of Water Use and Transfer of Technology, GeoJournal, 3, 435–443, 1979.
Ferdous, M. R., Wesselink, A., Brandimarte, L., Slager, K., Zwarteveen, M., and Di Baldassarre, G.: Socio-hydrological spaces in the Jamuna River floodplain in Bangladesh, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 5159–5173, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-5159-2018, 2018.
Ferdous, M. R., Di Baldassarre, G., Brandimarte, L., and Wesselink, A.: The interplay between structural flood protection, population density, and flood mortality along the Jamuna River, Bangladesh, Reg. Environ. Chang., 20, 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-020-01600-1, 2020.
Fischer, A., Miller, J. A., Nottingham, E., Wiederstein, T., Krueger, L. J., Perez-Quesada, G., Hutchinson, S. L., and Sanderson, M. R.: A Systematic Review of Spatial-Temporal Scale Issues in Sociohydrology, Front. Water, 3, 1–19, https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2021.730169, 2021.
Flint, C. G., Jones, A. S., and Horsburgh, J. S.: Data Management Dimensions of Social Water Science: The iUTAH Experience, J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 53, 988–996, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12568, 2017.
Ford, J. D., Pearce, T., McDowell, G., Berrang-Ford, L., Sayles, J. S., and Belfer, E.: Vulnerability and its discontents: the past, present, and future of climate change vulnerability research, Clim. Change, 151, 189–203, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2304-1, 2018.
Garcia, M., Portney, K., and Islam, S.: A question driven socio-hydrological modeling process, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 73–92, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-73-2016, 2016.
Gober, P. and Wheater, H. S.: Debates – Perspectives on socio-hydrology: Modeling flood risk as a public policy problem, Water Resour. Res., 51, 4782–4788, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR016945, 2015.
Gonzales, P. and Ajami, N.: Social and Structural Patterns of Drought-Related Water Conservation and Rebound, Water Resour. Res., 53, 10619–10634, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021852, 2017.
Gotham, K. F. and Campanella, R.: Coupled vulnerability and resilience: The dynamics of cross-scale interactions in post-Katrina new Orleans, Ecol. Soc., 16, 25, https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04292-160312, 2011.
Grames, J., Grass, D., Kort, P. M., and Prskawetz, A.: Optimal investment and location decisions of a firm in a flood risk area using impulse control theory, Cent. Eur. J. Oper. Res., 27, 1051–1077, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-018-0532-0, 2019.
Haddaway, N. R., Macura, B., Whaley, P., and Pullin, A. S.: ROSES Reporting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses: Pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps, Environ. Evid., 7, 7, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-018-0121-7, 2018.
Hagenlocher, M., Meza, I., Anderson, C. C., Min, A., Renaud, F. G., Walz, Y., Siebert, S., and Sebesvari, Z.: Drought vulnerability and risk assessments: State of the art, persistent gaps, and research agenda, Environ. Res. Lett., 14, 083002, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab225d, 2019.
Han, S., Tian, F., Liu, Y., and Duan, X.: Socio-hydrological perspectives of the co-evolution of humans and groundwater in Cangzhou, North China Plain, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3619–3633, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3619-2017, 2017.
Han, Y., Huang, Q., He, C., Fang, Y., Wen, J., Gao, J., and Du, S.: The growth mode of built-up land in floodplains and its impacts on flood vulnerability, Sci. Total Environ., 700, 134462, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134462, 2020.
Herrera-Franco, G., Carrión-Mero, P., Aguilar-Aguilar, M., Morante-Carballo, F., Jaya-Montalvo, M., and Morillo-Balsera, M. C.: Groundwater resilience assessment in a communal coastal aquifer system. The case of manglaralto in Santa Elena, Ecuador, Sustain., 12, 8290, https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198290, 2020.
Horn, F. and Elagib, N. A.: Building socio-hydrological resilient cities against flash floods: Key challenges and a practical plan for arid regions, J. Hydrol., 564, 125–132, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.07.001, 2018.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Assessment Report 6 Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/, last access: December 2021.
Ivanova, D., Barrett, J., Wiedenhofer, D., Macura, B., Callaghan, M., and Creutzig, F.: Quantifying the potential for climate change mitigation of consumption options, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 093001, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab8589, 2020.
Jick, T. D.: Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action, Adm. Sci. Q., 24, 602, https://doi.org/10.2307/2392366, 1979.
Johnson, R. B. and Onwuegbuzie, A. J.: Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come, Educ. Res., 33, 14–26, https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014, 2004.
Kappes, M. S., Keiler, M., von Elverfeldt, K., and Glade, T.: Challenges of analyzing multi-hazard risk: A review, Nat. Hazards, 64, 1925–1958, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0294-2, 2012.
Klenk, N. L., Meehan, K., Pinel, S. L., Mendez, F., Lima, P. T., and Kammen, D. M.: Stakeholders in climate science: Beyond lip service?, Science, 350, 743–744, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab1495, 2015.
Kounadi, O. and Leitner, M.: Why does geoprivacy matter? The scientific publication of confidential data presented on maps, J. Empir. Res. Hum. Res., 9, 34–45, https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264614544103, 2014.
Koutiva, I., Lykou, A., Pantazis, C., and Makropoulos, C.: Investigating decision mechanisms of statutory stakeholders in flood risk strategy formation: A computational experiments approach, Water-Sui., 12, 2716, https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102716, 2020.
Kuil, L., Carr, G., Viglione, A., Prskawetz, A., and Blöschl, G.: Conceptualizing socio-hydrological drought processes: The case of the Maya collapse, Water Resour. Res., 52, 6222–6242, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1969.tb04897.x, 2016.
Kuil, L., Carr, G., Prskawetz, A., Salinas, J. L., Viglione, A., and Blöschl, G.: Learning from the Ancient Maya: Exploring the Impact of Drought on Population Dynamics, Ecol. Econ., 157, 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.10.018, 2019.
Lele, S.: Watershed services of tropical forests: from hydrology to economic valuation to integrated analysis, Curr. Opin. Sust., 1, 148–155, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2009.10.007, 2009.
Leong, C.: The Role of Narratives in Sociohydrological Models of Flood Behaviors, Water Resour. Res., 54, 3100–3121, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR022036, 2018.
Lerner, A. M., Eakin, H. C., Tellman, E., Bausch, J. C., and Hernández Aguilar, B.: Governing the gaps in water governance and land-use planning in a megacity: The example of hydrological risk in Mexico City, Cities, 83, 61–70, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.06.009, 2018.
Madani, K. and Shafiee-Jood, M.: Socio-hydrology: A new understanding to unite or a new science to divide?, Water, 12, 1–26, https://doi.org/10.3390/w12071941, 2020.
Maghsood, F. F., Moradi, H., Berndtsson, R., Panahi, M., Daneshi, A., Hashemi, H., and Bavani, A. R. M.: Social acceptability of flood management strategies under climate change using contingent valuation method (CVM), Sustain., 11, 5053, https://doi.org/10.3390/su11185053, 2019.
McClain, M. E., Chícharo, L., Fohrer, N., Gaviño Novillo, M., Windhorst, W., and Zalewski, M.: Training hydrologists to be ecohydrologists and play a leading role in environmental problem solving, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 1685–1696, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-1685-2012, 2012.
Medeiros, P. and Sivapalan, M.: From hard-path to soft-path solutions: slow–fast dynamics of human adaptation to droughts in a water scarce environment, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 65, 1803–1814, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2020.1770258, 2020.
Michaelis, T., Brandimarte, L., and Mazzoleni, M.: Capturing flood-risk dynamics with a coupled agent-based and hydraulic modelling framework, Hydrol. Sci. J., 65, 1458–1473, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2020.1750617, 2020.
Mohorjy, A. M.: Multidisciplinary Planning and Managing of Water Reuse, JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 25, 433–442, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1989.tb03080.x, 1989.
Mondino, E., Scolobig, A., Borga, M., Albrecht, F., Mård, J., Weyrich, P., and Di Baldassarre, G.: Exploring changes in hydrogeological risk awareness and preparedness over time: a case study in northeastern Italy, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 65, 1049–1059, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2020.1729361, 2020a.
Mondino, E., Scolobig, A., Borga, M., and Di Baldassarre, G.: The role of experience and different sources of knowledge in shaping flood risk awareness, Water-Sui., 12, 2130, https://doi.org/10.3390/W12082130, 2020b.
Montanari, A., Young, G., Savenije, H. H. G., Hughes, D., Wagener, T., Ren, L. L., Koutsoyiannis, D., Cudennec, C., Toth, E., Grimaldi, S., Bloeschl, G., Sivapalan, M., Beven, K., Gupta, H., Hipsey, M., Schaefli, B., Arheimer, B., Boegh, E., Schymanski, S. J., Di Baldassarre, G., Yu, B., Hubert, P., Huang, Y., Schumann, A., Post, D. A., Srinivasan, V., Harman, C., Thompson, S., Rogger, M., Viglione, A., McMillan, H., Characklis, G., Pang, Z., and Belyaev, V.: “Panta Rhei-Everything Flows”: Change in hydrology and society-The IAHS Scientific Decade 2013-2022, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 58, 1256–1275, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2013.809088, 2013.
Moreira, L. L., de Brito, M. M., and Kobiyama, M.: Review article: A systematic review and future prospects of flood vulnerability indices, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 1513–1530, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1513-2021, 2021.
Munafò, M. R. and Davey Smith, G.: Robust research needs many lines of evidence, Nature, 553, 399–401, https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-01023-3, 2018.
Nakamura, S. and Oki, T.: Paradigm Shifts on Flood Risk Management in Japan: Detecting Triggers of Design Flood Revisions in the Modern Era, Water Resour. Res., 54, 5504–5515, https://doi.org/10.1029/2017WR022509, 2018.
Nelson, G. C., Bennett, E., Berhe, A. A., Cassman, K., DeFries, R., Dietz, T., Dobermann, A., Dobson, A., Janetos, A., Levy, M., Marco, D., Nakicenovic, N., O'Neill, B., Norgaard, R., Petschel-Held, G., Ojima, D., Pingali, P., Watson, R., and Zurek, M.: Anthropogenic drivers of ecosystem change: An overview, Ecol. Soc., 11, 29, https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-01826-110229, 2006.
Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., Breckler, S. J., Buck, S., Chambers, C. D., Chin, G., Christensen, G., Contestabile, M., Dafoe, A., Eich, E., Freese, J., Glennerster, R., Goroff, D., Green, D. P., Hesse, B., Humphreys, M., Ishiyama, J., Karlan, D., Kraut, A., Lupia, A., Mabry, P., Madon, T. A., Malhotra, N., Mayo-Wilson, E., McNutt, M., Miguel, E., Paluck, E. L., Simonsohn, U., Soderberg, C., Spellman, B. A., Turitto, J., VandenBos, G., Vazire, S., Wagenmakers, E. J., Wilson, R., and Yarkoni, T.: Promoting an open research culture, Science, 348, 1422–1425, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab2374, 2015.
Nüst, D. and Pebesma, E.: Practical Reproducibility in Geography and Geosciences, Ann. Am. Assoc. Geogr., 111, 1300–1310, https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2020.1806028, 2021.
O'Cathain, A., Murphy, E., and Nicholl, J.: Three techniques for integrating data in mixed methods studies, BMJ, 341, 1147–1150, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c4587, 2010.
Pande, S. and Sivapalan, M.: Progress in socio-hydrology: a meta-analysis of challenges and opportunities, Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water, 4, e1193, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1193, 2017.
Peters, D. P. C., Pielke, R. a, Bestelmeyer, B. T., Allen, C. D., Munson-mcgee, S., and Havstad, K. M.: Cross-scale interactions, nonlinearities, and forecasting catastrophic events, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 101, 15130–15135, 2004.
Rai, P. and Khawas, V.: Traditional knowledge system in disaster risk reduction: Exploration, acknowledgement and proposition, Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 11, a484, https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v11i1.484, 2019.
Rangecroft, S., Rohse, M., Banks, E. W., Day, R., Di Baldassarre, G., Frommen, T., Hayashi, Y., Höllermann, B., Lebek, K., Mondino, E., Rusca, M., Wens, M., and Van Loon, A. F.: Guiding principles for hydrologists conducting interdisciplinary research and fieldwork with participants, Hydrol. Sci. J., 66, 214–225, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2020.1852241, 2021.
Räsänen, A.: Cross-scale interactions in flood risk management: A case study from Rovaniemi, Finland, Int. J. Disaster Risk Re., 57, 102185, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102185, 2021.
Robertson, R.: Globalisation or glocalisation?, J. Int. Commun., 1, 33–52, https://doi.org/10.1080/13216597.2012.709925, 1994.
Sanderson, M. R., Bergtold, J. S., Heier Stamm, J. L., Caldas, M. M., and Ramsey, S. M.: Bringing the “social” into sociohydrology: Conservation policy support in the Central Great Plains of Kansas, USA, Water Resour. Res., 53, 6725–6743, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR020659, 2017.
Sapountzaki, K. and Daskalakis, I.: Transboundary resilience: the case of social-hydrological systems facing water scarcity or drought, J. Risk Res., 19, 829–846, https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2015.1057202, 2016.
Sapountzaki, K. and Daskalakis, I.: Expansionary Adaptive Transformations of Socio-Hydrological Systems (SHSs): The Case of Drought in Messara Plain, Crete, Greece, Environ. Manage., 61, 819–833, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-018-1012-y, 2018.
Sawada, Y. and Hanazaki, R.: Socio-hydrological data assimilation: analyzing human–flood interactions by model–data integration, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 4777–4791, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4777-2020, 2020.
Seidl, R. and Barthel, R.: Linking scientific disciplines: Hydrology and social sciences, J. Hydrol., 550, 441–452, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.05.008, 2017.
Shelton, R. E., Baeza, A., Janssen, M. A., and Eakin, H.: Managing household socio-hydrological risk in Mexico city: A game to communicate and validate computational modeling with stakeholders, J. Environ. Manage., 227, 200–208, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.08.094, 2018.
Sivapalan, M. and Blöschl, G.: Time scale interactions and the coevolution of humans and water, Water Resour. Res., 51, 6988–7022, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017896, 2015.
Sivapalan, M., Savenije, H. H. G., and Blöschl, G.: Socio-hydrology: A new science of people and water, Hydrol. Process., 26, 1270–1276, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8426, 2012.
Sivapalan, M., Konar, M., Srinivasan, V., Chhatre, A., Wutich, A., Scott, C. A., and Wescoat, J. L.: Socio-hydrology: Use-inspired water sustainability science for the Anthropocene, Earth’s Future, 2, 225–230, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013EF000164, 2014.
Slater, K. and Robinson, J.: Social learning and transdisciplinary co-production: A social practice approach, Sustain., 12, 1–17, https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187511, 2020.
Soranno, P. A., Cheruvelil, K. S., Bissell, E. G., Bremigan, M. T., Downing, J. A., Fergus, C. E., Filstrup, C. T., Henry, E. N., Lottig, N. R., Stanley, E. H., Stow, C. A., Tan, P. N., Wagner, T., and Webster, K. E.: Cross-scale interactions: Quantifying multi-scaled cause-effect relationships in macrosystems, Front. Ecol. Environ., 12, 65–73, https://doi.org/10.1890/120366, 2014.
Srinivasan, V., Sanderson, M., Garcia, M., Konar, M., Blöschl, G., and Sivapalan, M.: Prediction in a socio-hydrological world, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 62, 338–345, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2016.1253844, 2017.
Sung, K., Jeong, H., Sangwan, N., and Yu, D. J.: Effects of Flood Control Strategies on Flood Resilience Under Sociohydrological Disturbances, Water Resour. Res., 54, 2661–2680, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021440, 2018.
Swyngedouw, E.: Globalisation or “glocalisation”? Networks, territories and rescaling, Camb. Rev. Int. Aff., 17, 25–48, https://doi.org/10.1080/0955757042000203632, 2004.
Thaler, T.: Social justice in socio-hydrology – how we can integrate the two different perspectives, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 66, 1503–1512, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2021.1950916, 2021.
United Nations for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR): Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, Geneva, Switzerland, https://www.preventionweb.net/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf (last access: November 2021), 2015.
United Nations for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) and Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED): Human Cost of Disasters. An overview of last 20 years 2000–2019, UNDRR, Geneva, 29 pp., https://www.preventionweb.net/files/74124_humancostofdisasters20002019reportu.pdf (last access: November 2021), 2020.
Vanelli, F. M. and Kobiyama, M.: How can socio-hydrology contribute to natural disaster risk reduction?, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 66, 1758–1766, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2021.1967356, 2021.
van Emmerik, T. H. M., Li, Z., Sivapalan, M., Pande, S., Kandasamy, J., Savenije, H. H. G., Chanan, A., and Vigneswaran, S.: Socio-hydrologic modeling to understand and mediate the competition for water between agriculture development and environmental health: Murrumbidgee River basin, Australia, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 4239–4259, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-4239-2014, 2014.
Viglione, A., Di Baldassarre, G., Brandimarte, L., Kuil, L., Carr, G., Salinas, J. L., Scolobig, A., and Blöschl, G.: Insights from socio-hydrology modelling on dealing with flood risk – Roles of collective memory, risk-taking attitude and trust, J. Hydrol., 518, 71–82, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.01.018, 2014.
Wallington, K. and Cai, X.: Feedback Between Reservoir Operation and Floodplain Development: Implications for Reservoir Benefits and Beneficiaries, Water Resour. Res., 56, 1–20, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026610, 2020.
Wang, G., Hu, Z., Liu, Y., Zhang, G., Liu, J., Lyu, Y., Gu, Y., Huang, X., Zhang, Q., Tong, Z., Hong, C., and Liu, L.: Impact of expansion pattern of built-up land in floodplains on flood vulnerability: A case study in the North China plain area, Remote Sens., 12, 1–29, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12193172, 2020.
Wens, M., Johnson, J. M., Zagaria, C., and Veldkamp, T. I. E.: Integrating human behavior dynamics into drought risk assessment – A sociohydrologic, agent-based approach, Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water, 6, e1345, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1345, 2019.
Westerberg, I. K., Di Baldassarre, G., Beven, K. J., Coxon, G., and Krueger, T.: Perceptual models of uncertainty for socio-hydrological systems: a flood risk change example, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 62, 1705–1713, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2017.1356926, 2017.
Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, Ij. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., Blomberg, N., Boiten, J. W., da Silva Santos, L. B., Bourne, P. E., Bouwman, J., Brookes, A. J., Clark, T., Crosas, M., Dillo, I., Dumon, O., Edmunds, S., Evelo, C. T., Finkers, R., Gonzalez-Beltran, A., Gray, A. J. G., Groth, P., Goble, C., Grethe, J. S., Heringa, J., t Hoen, P. A. C., Hooft, R., Kuhn, T., Kok, R., Kok, J., Lusher, S. J., Martone, M. E., Mons, A., Packer, A. L., Persson, B., Rocca-Serra, P., Roos, M., van Schaik, R., Sansone, S. A., Schultes, E., Sengstag, T., Slater, T., Strawn, G., Swertz, M. A., Thompson, M., Van Der Lei, J., Van Mulligen, E., Velterop, J., Waagmeester, A., Wittenburg, P., Wolstencroft, K., Zhao, J., and Mons, B.: The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship, Sci. Data, 3, 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18, 2016.
Wilson, N. J., Todd Walter, M., and Waterhouse, J.: Indigenous knowledge of hydrologic change in the Yukon river basin: A case study of Ruby, Alaska, Arctic, 68, 93–106, https://doi.org/10.14430/arctic4459, 2015.
Xu, L., Gober, P., Wheater, H. S., and Kajikawa, Y.: Reframing socio-hydrological research to include a social science perspective, J. Hydrol., 563, 76–83, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.05.061, 2018.
York, A. M., Sullivan, A., and Bausch, J. C.: Cross-scale interactions of socio-hydrological subsystems: Examining the frontier of common pool resource governance in Arizona, Environ. Res. Lett., 14, 125019, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab51be, 2019.
Yu, D. J., Sangwan, N., Sung, K., Chen, X., and Merwade, V.: Incorporating institutions and collective action into a sociohydrological model of flood resilience, Water Resour. Res., 53, 1336–1353, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR019746, 2017.
Zipper, S. C., Stack Whitney, K., Deines, J. M., Befus, K. M., Bhatia, U., Albers, S. J., Beecher, J., Brelsford, C., Garcia, M., Gleeson, T., O'Donnell, F., Resnik, D., and Schlager, E.: Balancing Open Science and Data Privacy in the Water Sciences, Water Resour. Res., 55, 5202–5211, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR025080, 2019.
We conducted a systematic literature review of socio-hydrological studies applied to natural hazards and disaster research. Results indicate that there is a wide range of understanding of what
socialmeans in socio-hydrology, and monodisciplinary studies prevail. We expect to encourage socio-hydrologists to investigate different disasters using a more integrative approach that combines natural and social sciences tools by involving stakeholders and broadening the use of mixed methods.
We conducted a systematic literature review of socio-hydrological studies applied to natural...