Articles | Volume 27, issue 20
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3663-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3663-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
19 Oct 2023
Research article |
| 19 Oct 2023
| 19 Oct 2023
Improving the quantification of climate change hazards by hydrological models: a simple ensemble approach for considering the uncertain effect of vegetation response to climate change on potential evapotranspiration
Thedini Asali Peiris
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Institute of Physical Geography, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Petra Döll
Institute of Physical Geography, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (SBiK-F), Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Related authors
Hannes Müller Schmied, Tim Trautmann, Sebastian Ackermann, Denise Cáceres, Martina Flörke, Helena Gerdener, Ellen Kynast, Thedini Asali Peiris, Leonie Schiebener, Maike Schumacher, and Petra Döll
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8817–8852, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8817-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8817-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Assessing water availability and water use at the global scale is challenging but essential for a range of purposes. We describe the newest version of the global hydrological model WaterGAP, which has been used for numerous water resource assessments since 1996. We show the effects of new model features, as well as model evaluations, against water abstraction statistics and observed streamflow and water storage anomalies. The publicly available model output for several variants is described.
Hannes Müller Schmied, Denise Cáceres, Stephanie Eisner, Martina Flörke, Claudia Herbert, Christoph Niemann, Thedini Asali Peiris, Eklavyya Popat, Felix Theodor Portmann, Robert Reinecke, Maike Schumacher, Somayeh Shadkam, Camelia-Eliza Telteu, Tim Trautmann, and Petra Döll
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1037–1079, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1037-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1037-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In a globalized world with large flows of virtual water between river basins and international responsibilities for the sustainable development of the Earth system and its inhabitants, quantitative estimates of water flows and storages and of water demand by humans are required. Global hydrological models such as WaterGAP are developed to provide this information. Here we present a thorough description, evaluation and application examples of the most recent model version, WaterGAP v2.2d.
Emmanuel Nyenah, Petra Döll, Martina Flörke, Leon Mühlenbruch, Lasse Nissen, and Robert Reinecke
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 5635–5653, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5635-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5635-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We reprogrammed the latest WaterGAP model (2.2e) to create a sustainable global hydrological model. By utilizing best software practices like modular design, version control, and clear documentation, the new WaterGAP supports collaboration across teams. It can be easily understood, applied, and enhanced by both novice and experienced modellers. Additionally, we share the reprogramming process to assist in the reprogramming of other large geoscientific research software.
Seyed-Mohammad Hosseini-Moghari and Petra Döll
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 4073–4092, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-4073-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-4073-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Modeling reservoir outflow and storage is challenging due to limited publicly available data and human decision-making. For 100 reservoirs in the US, we examined how calibrating reservoir algorithms against outflow and storage-related variables affects performance. We found that calibration notably improves storage simulations, while outflow simulations are more influenced by the quality of inflow data. We recommend using remotely sensed storage anomalies to calibrate reservoir algorithms.
Howlader Mohammad Mehedi Hasan, Petra Döll, Seyed-Mohammad Hosseini-Moghari, Fabrice Papa, and Andreas Güntner
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 567–596, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-567-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-567-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We calibrate a global hydrological model using multiple observations to analyse the benefits and trade-offs of multi-variable calibration. We found such an approach to be very important for understanding the real-world system. However, some observations are very essential to the system, in particular, streamflow. We also showed uncertainties in the calibration results, which are often useful for making informed decisions. We emphasize considering observation uncertainty in model calibration.
Hannes Müller Schmied, Tim Trautmann, Sebastian Ackermann, Denise Cáceres, Martina Flörke, Helena Gerdener, Ellen Kynast, Thedini Asali Peiris, Leonie Schiebener, Maike Schumacher, and Petra Döll
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8817–8852, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8817-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8817-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Assessing water availability and water use at the global scale is challenging but essential for a range of purposes. We describe the newest version of the global hydrological model WaterGAP, which has been used for numerous water resource assessments since 1996. We show the effects of new model features, as well as model evaluations, against water abstraction statistics and observed streamflow and water storage anomalies. The publicly available model output for several variants is described.
Emmanuel Nyenah, Petra Döll, Daniel S. Katz, and Robert Reinecke
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8593–8611, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8593-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8593-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Research software is vital for scientific progress but is often developed by scientists with limited skills, time, and funding, leading to challenges in usability and maintenance. Our study across 10 sectors shows strengths in version control, open-source licensing, and documentation while emphasizing the need for containerization and code quality. We recommend workshops; code quality metrics; funding; and following the findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR) standards.
Petra Döll, Howlader Mohammad Mehedi Hasan, Kerstin Schulze, Helena Gerdener, Lara Börger, Somayeh Shadkam, Sebastian Ackermann, Seyed-Mohammad Hosseini-Moghari, Hannes Müller Schmied, Andreas Güntner, and Jürgen Kusche
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 2259–2295, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2259-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2259-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Currently, global hydrological models do not benefit from observations of model output variables to reduce and quantify model output uncertainty. For the Mississippi River basin, we explored three approaches for using both streamflow and total water storage anomaly observations to adjust the parameter sets in a global hydrological model. We developed a method for considering the observation uncertainties to quantify the uncertainty of model output and provide recommendations.
Laura Müller and Petra Döll
Geosci. Commun., 7, 121–144, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-7-121-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-7-121-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
To be able to adapt to climate change, stakeholders need to be informed about future uncertain climate change hazards. Using freely available output of global hydrological models, we quantified future local changes in water resources and their uncertainty. To communicate these in participatory processes, we propose using "percentile boxes" to support the development of flexible strategies for climate risk management worldwide, involving stakeholders and scientists.
Claudia Herbert and Petra Döll
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2111–2131, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-2111-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-2111-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a new method for selecting streamflow drought hazard indicators for monitoring drought hazard for human water supply and river ecosystems in large-scale drought early warning systems. Indicators are classified by their inherent assumptions about the habituation of people and ecosystems to the streamflow regime and their level of drought characterization, namely drought magnitude (water deficit at a certain point in time) and severity (cumulated magnitude since drought onset).
Martin Horwath, Benjamin D. Gutknecht, Anny Cazenave, Hindumathi Kulaiappan Palanisamy, Florence Marti, Ben Marzeion, Frank Paul, Raymond Le Bris, Anna E. Hogg, Inès Otosaka, Andrew Shepherd, Petra Döll, Denise Cáceres, Hannes Müller Schmied, Johnny A. Johannessen, Jan Even Øie Nilsen, Roshin P. Raj, René Forsberg, Louise Sandberg Sørensen, Valentina R. Barletta, Sebastian B. Simonsen, Per Knudsen, Ole Baltazar Andersen, Heidi Ranndal, Stine K. Rose, Christopher J. Merchant, Claire R. Macintosh, Karina von Schuckmann, Kristin Novotny, Andreas Groh, Marco Restano, and Jérôme Benveniste
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 411–447, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-411-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-411-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Global mean sea-level change observed from 1993 to 2016 (mean rate of 3.05 mm yr−1) matches the combined effect of changes in water density (thermal expansion) and ocean mass. Ocean-mass change has been assessed through the contributions from glaciers, ice sheets, and land water storage or directly from satellite data since 2003. Our budget assessments of linear trends and monthly anomalies utilise new datasets and uncertainty characterisations developed within ESA's Climate Change Initiative.
Tom Gleeson, Thorsten Wagener, Petra Döll, Samuel C. Zipper, Charles West, Yoshihide Wada, Richard Taylor, Bridget Scanlon, Rafael Rosolem, Shams Rahman, Nurudeen Oshinlaja, Reed Maxwell, Min-Hui Lo, Hyungjun Kim, Mary Hill, Andreas Hartmann, Graham Fogg, James S. Famiglietti, Agnès Ducharne, Inge de Graaf, Mark Cuthbert, Laura Condon, Etienne Bresciani, and Marc F. P. Bierkens
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 7545–7571, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7545-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7545-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Groundwater is increasingly being included in large-scale (continental to global) land surface and hydrologic simulations. However, it is challenging to evaluate these simulations because groundwater is
hiddenunderground and thus hard to measure. We suggest using multiple complementary strategies to assess the performance of a model (
model evaluation).
Camelia-Eliza Telteu, Hannes Müller Schmied, Wim Thiery, Guoyong Leng, Peter Burek, Xingcai Liu, Julien Eric Stanislas Boulange, Lauren Seaby Andersen, Manolis Grillakis, Simon Newland Gosling, Yusuke Satoh, Oldrich Rakovec, Tobias Stacke, Jinfeng Chang, Niko Wanders, Harsh Lovekumar Shah, Tim Trautmann, Ganquan Mao, Naota Hanasaki, Aristeidis Koutroulis, Yadu Pokhrel, Luis Samaniego, Yoshihide Wada, Vimal Mishra, Junguo Liu, Petra Döll, Fang Zhao, Anne Gädeke, Sam S. Rabin, and Florian Herz
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3843–3878, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3843-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3843-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We analyse water storage compartments, water flows, and human water use sectors included in 16 global water models that provide simulations for the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project phase 2b. We develop a standard writing style for the model equations. We conclude that even though hydrologic processes are often based on similar equations, in the end these equations have been adjusted, or the models have used different values for specific parameters or specific variables.
Eklavyya Popat and Petra Döll
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 1337–1354, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1337-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1337-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Two drought hazard indices are presented that combine drought deficit and anomaly aspects: one for soil moisture drought (SMDAI) where we simplified the DSI and the other for streamflow drought (QDAI), which is to our knowledge the first ever deficit anomaly drought index including surface water demand. Both indices are tested at the global scale with WaterGAP 2.2d outputs, providing more differentiated spatial and temporal patterns distinguishing the actual degree of respective drought hazard.
Hannes Müller Schmied, Denise Cáceres, Stephanie Eisner, Martina Flörke, Claudia Herbert, Christoph Niemann, Thedini Asali Peiris, Eklavyya Popat, Felix Theodor Portmann, Robert Reinecke, Maike Schumacher, Somayeh Shadkam, Camelia-Eliza Telteu, Tim Trautmann, and Petra Döll
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1037–1079, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1037-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1037-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In a globalized world with large flows of virtual water between river basins and international responsibilities for the sustainable development of the Earth system and its inhabitants, quantitative estimates of water flows and storages and of water demand by humans are required. Global hydrological models such as WaterGAP are developed to provide this information. Here we present a thorough description, evaluation and application examples of the most recent model version, WaterGAP v2.2d.
Robert Reinecke, Hannes Müller Schmied, Tim Trautmann, Lauren Seaby Andersen, Peter Burek, Martina Flörke, Simon N. Gosling, Manolis Grillakis, Naota Hanasaki, Aristeidis Koutroulis, Yadu Pokhrel, Wim Thiery, Yoshihide Wada, Satoh Yusuke, and Petra Döll
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 787–810, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-787-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-787-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Billions of people rely on groundwater as an accessible source of drinking water and for irrigation, especially in times of drought. Groundwater recharge is the primary process of regenerating groundwater resources. We find that groundwater recharge will increase in northern Europe by about 19 % and decrease by 10 % in the Amazon with 3 °C global warming. In the Mediterranean, a 2 °C warming has already lead to a reduction in recharge by 38 %. However, these model predictions are uncertain.
Denise Cáceres, Ben Marzeion, Jan Hendrik Malles, Benjamin Daniel Gutknecht, Hannes Müller Schmied, and Petra Döll
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 4831–4851, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4831-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4831-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We analysed how and to which extent changes in water storage on continents had an effect on global ocean mass over the period 1948–2016. Continents lost water to oceans at an accelerated rate, inducing sea level rise. Shrinking glaciers explain 81 % of the long-term continental water mass loss, while declining groundwater levels, mainly due to sustained groundwater pumping for irrigation, is the second major driver. This long-term decline was partly offset by the impoundment of water in dams.
Cited articles
Atwell, B. J., Kriedemann, P. E., & Turnbull, C. G.: Plants in action: adaptation in nature, performance in cultivation: Chapter2, Macmillan Education AU, Australia, https://books.google.de/books?id=chWs4ewSzpEC&pg=PA21-IA7&dq=C3+plants (last access: April 2022), 1999. a
Berg, A. and Sheffield, J.: Evapotranspiration Partitioning in CMIP5 Models Uncertainties and Future Projections, J. Climate, 32, 2653–2671, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0583.s1, 2019. a, b
Cramer, W., Bondeau, A., Woodward, F. I., Prentice, I. C., Betts, R. A., Brovkin, V., Cox, P. M., Fisher, V., Foley, J. A., Friend, A. D., Kucharik, C., Lomas, M. R., Ramankutty, N., Sitch, S., Smith, B., White, A., and Young-Molling, C.: Global response of terrestrial ecosystem structure and function to CO2 and climate change: Results from six dynamic global vegetation models, Glob. Change Biol., 7, 357–373, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2001.00383.x, 2001. a, b
Davie, J. C. S., Falloon, P. D., Kahana, R., Dankers, R., Betts, R., Portmann, F. T., Wisser, D., Clark, D. B., Ito, A., Masaki, Y., Nishina, K., Fekete, B., Tessler, Z., Wada, Y., Liu, X., Tang, Q., Hagemann, S., Stacke, T., Pavlick, R., Schaphoff, S., Gosling, S. N., Franssen, W., and Arnell, N.: Comparing projections of future changes in runoff from hydrological and biome models in ISI-MIP, Earth Syst. Dynam., 4, 359–374, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-4-359-2013, 2013. a, b, c, d
Frieler, K., Lange, S., Piontek, F., Reyer, C. P. O., Schewe, J., Warszawski, L., Zhao, F., Chini, L., Denvil, S., Emanuel, K., Geiger, T., Halladay, K., Hurtt, G., Mengel, M., Murakami, D., Ostberg, S., Popp, A., Riva, R., Stevanovic, M., Suzuki, T., Volkholz, J., Burke, E., Ciais, P., Ebi, K., Eddy, T. D., Elliott, J., Galbraith, E., Gosling, S. N., Hattermann, F., Hickler, T., Hinkel, J., Hof, C., Huber, V., Jägermeyr, J., Krysanova, V., Marcé, R., Müller Schmied, H., Mouratiadou, I., Pierson, D., Tittensor, D. P., Vautard, R., van Vliet, M., Biber, M. F., Betts, R. A., Bodirsky, B. L., Deryng, D., Frolking, S., Jones, C. D., Lotze, H. K., Lotze-Campen, H., Sahajpal, R., Thonicke, K., Tian, H., and Yamagata, Y.: Assessing the impacts of 1.5 ∘C global warming – simulation protocol of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2b), Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4321–4345, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4321-2017, 2017. a, b, c
Gerten, D., Betts, R., and Döll, P.:: Cross-chapter box on the active role of vegetation in altering water flows under climate change, in: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Field, C. B., Barros, V. R., Dokken, V. R., Mach, K. J., Mastrandrea, M. D., Bilir, T. E., Chatterjee, M., Ebi, K. L., Estrada, Y. O., Genova, R. C., Girma, B., Kissel, E. S., Levy, A. N., MacCracken, S., Mastrandrea, P. R., and White, L. L., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 157–161, 2014. a, b, c
Humlum, O., Stordahl, K., and Solheim, J.-E.: The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature, Global Planet. Change, 100, 51–69, 2013. a
Jones, C. D., Hughes, J. K., Bellouin, N., Hardiman, S. C., Jones, G. S., Knight, J., Liddicoat, S., O'Connor, F. M., Andres, R. J., Bell, C., Boo, K.-O., Bozzo, A., Butchart, N., Cadule, P., Corbin, K. D., Doutriaux-Boucher, M., Friedlingstein, P., Gornall, J., Gray, L., Halloran, P. R., Hurtt, G., Ingram, W. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Law, R. M., Meinshausen, M., Osprey, S., Palin, E. J., Parsons Chini, L., Raddatz, T., Sanderson, M. G., Sellar, A. A., Schurer, A., Valdes, P., Wood, N., Woodward, S., Yoshioka, M., and Zerroukat, M.: The HadGEM2-ES implementation of CMIP5 centennial simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 543–570, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-543-2011, 2011. a
Kingston, D. G., Todd, M. C., Taylor, R. G., Thompson, J. R., and Arnell, N. W.: Uncertainty in the estimation of potential evapotranspiration under climate change, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L20403, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL040267, 2009. a, b
Koster, R. D. and Mahanama, S. P.: Land surface controls on hydroclimatic means and variability, J. Hydrometeorol., 13, 1604–1620, 2012. a
Lange, S.: EartH2Observe, WFDEI and ERA-Interim data Merged and Bias-corrected for ISIMIP (EWEMBI), GFZ Data Services [data set], https://doi.org/10.5880/pik.2016.004, 2016. a
Müller Schmied, H., Eisner, S., Franz, D., Wattenbach, M., Portmann, F. T., Flörke, M., and Döll, P.: Sensitivity of simulated global-scale freshwater fluxes and storages to input data, hydrological model structure, human water use and calibration, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 3511–3538, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3511-2014, 2014. a
Müller Schmied, H., Müller, R., Sanchez-Lorenzo, A., Ahrens, B., and Wild, M.: Evaluation of radiation components in a global freshwater model with station-based observations, Water, 8, 450, https://doi.org/10.3390/w8100450, 2016. a, b
Müller Schmied, H., Cáceres, D., Eisner, S., Flörke, M., Herbert, C., Niemann, C., Peiris, T. A., Popat, E., Portmann, F. T., Reinecke, R., Schumacher, M., Shadkam, S., Telteu, C.-E., Trautmann, T., and Döll, P.: The global water resources and use model WaterGAP v2.2d: model description and evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1037–1079, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1037-2021, 2021. a, b, c, d, e
Peiris, T. A. and Döll, P.: WaterGAP2.2d model derived Potential evapotranspiration and Renewable water resources variables with standard and modified PET calculation methods (Version v1), Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6593136, 2022. a
Purcell, C., Batke, S. P., Yiotis, C., Caballero, R., Soh, W. K., Murray, M., and McElwain, J. C.: Increasing stomatal conductance in response to rising atmospheric CO2, Annals of Botany, 121, 1137–1149, 2018. a
Rajib, A., Merwade, V., and Yu, Z.: Rationale and efficacy of assimilating remotely sensed potential evapotranspiration for reduced uncertainty of hydrologic models, Water Resour. Res., 54, 4615–4637, 2018. a
Randall, D. A., Wood, R. A., Bony, S., Colman, R., Fichefet, T., Fyfe, J., Kattsov, V., Pitman, A., Shukla, J., Srinivasan, J., et al.: Climate models and their evaluation, in: Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC (FAR), Cambridge University Press, 589–662, 2007. a, b
Reinecke, R., Müller Schmied, H., Trautmann, T., Andersen, L. S., Burek, P., Flörke, M., Gosling, S. N., Grillakis, M., Hanasaki, N., Koutroulis, A., Pokhrel, Y., Thiery, W., Wada, Y., Yusuke, S., and Döll, P.: Uncertainty of simulated groundwater recharge at different global warming levels: a global-scale multi-model ensemble study, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 787–810, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-787-2021, 2021. a, b, c, d, e, f, g
Sepulchre, P., Caubel, A., Ladant, J.-B., Bopp, L., Boucher, O., Braconnot, P., Brockmann, P., Cozic, A., Donnadieu, Y., Dufresne, J.-L., Estella-Perez, V., Ethé, C., Fluteau, F., Foujols, M.-A., Gastineau, G., Ghattas, J., Hauglustaine, D., Hourdin, F., Kageyama, M., Khodri, M., Marti, O., Meurdesoif, Y., Mignot, J., Sarr, A.-C., Servonnat, J., Swingedouw, D., Szopa, S., and Tardif, D.: IPSL-CM5A2 – an Earth system model designed for multi-millennial climate simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3011–3053, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3011-2020, 2020. a
Shuttleworth, W.: Evaporation, in: Handbook of Hydrology, edited by: Maidment, D., McGraw-Hill, New York, 4.1–4.47, 1993. a
Telteu, C.-E., Müller Schmied, H., Thiery, W., Leng, G., Burek, P., Liu, X., Boulange, J. E. S., Andersen, L. S., Grillakis, M., Gosling, S. N., Satoh, Y., Rakovec, O., Stacke, T., Chang, J., Wanders, N., Shah, H. L., Trautmann, T., Mao, G., Hanasaki, N., Koutroulis, A., Pokhrel, Y., Samaniego, L., Wada, Y., Mishra, V., Liu, J., Döll, P., Zhao, F., Gädeke, A., Rabin, S. S., and Herz, F.: Understanding each other's models: an introduction and a standard representation of 16 global water models to support intercomparison, improvement, and communication, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3843–3878, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3843-2021, 2021. a
Thonicke, K., Venevsky, S., Sitch, S., and Cramer, W.: The role of fire disturbance for global vegetation dynamics: coupling fire into a Dynamic Global Vegetation Model, Global Ecol. Biogeogr., 10, 661–677, 2001. a
Watanabe, M., Suzuki, T., O'ishi, R., Komuro, Y., Watanabe, S., Emori, S., Takemura, T., Chikira, M., Ogura, T., Sekiguchi, M., Takata, K., Yamazaki, D., Yokohata, T., Nozawa, T., Hasumi, H., Tatebe, H., and Kimoto, M.: Improved Climate Simulation by MIROC5: Mean States, Variability, and Climate Sensitivity, J. Climate, 23, 6312–6335, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JCLI3679.1, 2010. a
Weiß, M. and Menzel, L.: A global comparison of four potential evapotranspiration equations and their relevance to stream flow modelling in semi-arid environments, Adv. Geosci., 18, 15–23, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-18-15-2008, 2008. a
Short summary
Hydrological models often overlook vegetation's response to CO2 and climate, impairing their ability to forecast impacts on evapotranspiration and water resources. To address this, we suggest involving two model variants: (1) the standard method and (2) a modified approach (proposed here) based on the Priestley–Taylor equation (PT-MA). While not universally applicable, a dual approach helps consider uncertainties related to vegetation responses to climate change, enhancing model representation.
Hydrological models often overlook vegetation's response to CO2 and climate, impairing their...
