Articles | Volume 26, issue 21
Research article
09 Nov 2022
Research article |  | 09 Nov 2022

Use of expert elicitation to assign weights to climate and hydrological models in climate impact studies

Eva Sebok, Hans Jørgen Henriksen, Ernesto Pastén-Zapata, Peter Berg, Guillaume Thirel, Anthony Lemoine, Andrea Lira-Loarca, Christiana Photiadou, Rafael Pimentel, Paul Royer-Gaspard, Erik Kjellström, Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen, Jean Philippe Vidal, Philippe Lucas-Picher, Markus G. Donat, Giovanni Besio, María José Polo, Simon Stisen, Yvan Caballero, Ilias G. Pechlivanidis, Lars Troldborg, and Jens Christian Refsgaard


Interactive discussion

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on hess-2021-597', Anonymous Referee #1, 06 Jan 2022
  • EC1: 'Comment on hess-2021-597', Lelys Bravo de Guenni, 03 Jun 2022
  • RC2: 'Comment on hess-2021-597', Anonymous Referee #2, 19 Jul 2022
  • EC2: 'Comment on hess-2021-597', Lelys Bravo de Guenni, 21 Jul 2022

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (further review by editor) (19 Sep 2022) by Lelys Bravo de Guenni
AR by Eva Sebok on behalf of the Authors (29 Sep 2022)  Author's response    Author's tracked changes    Manuscript
ED: Publish as is (11 Oct 2022) by Lelys Bravo de Guenni
AR by Eva Sebok on behalf of the Authors (18 Oct 2022)  Author's response    Manuscript
Short summary
Hydrological models projecting the impact of changing climate carry a lot of uncertainty. Thus, these models usually have a multitude of simulations using different future climate data. This study used the subjective opinion of experts to assess which climate and hydrological models are the most likely to correctly predict climate impacts, thereby easing the computational burden. The experts could select more likely hydrological models, while the climate models were deemed equally probable.