6University of Washington,
Seattle, WA 98195, USA. 7NOAA Geophysical Fluid
Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA.
*Author for correspondence. E-mail: cmilly@usgs.gov.
An uncertain future challenges water planners.
Published by AAAS
on July 12, 201
1
www.sciencemag.or
g
Downloaded from
1 FEBRUARY 2008 VOL 319 SCIENCE www.sciencemag.org574
POLICYFORUM
combined with opera-
tions
/media/loftslag/Milly_etal-2008-Stationarity-dead-Science.pdf
van Apeldoorn et al. 2011,
van Lieshout et al. 2011) and two with governance
(Mandemaker et al. 2011, van der Veen and Tagel
2011). The papers show the application of a wide
variety of methods, thus also spawning multiple
disciplines and theoretical starting points. Methods
range from model development and application and
a statistical empirical analysis to semistructured
interviews. The case
/media/loftslag/Kok_and_Veldkamp_editorial_ES-2011-4160.pdf
judgment and statistical analysis of a body of evidence (e.g. observations
or model results), then the following likelihood ranges are used to express the assessed probability of occurrence: virtually certain >99%;
extremely likely >95%; very likely >90%; likely >66%; more likely than not > 50%; about as likely as not 33% to 66%; unlikely <33%; very
unlikely <10%; extremely unlikely <5
/media/loftslag/IPPC-2007-ar4_syr.pdf
model-simulated climate changes and observed global mean temperature changes are
used to extrapolate past observations forward in time, to make them representative of present
or future climate conditions. By using this method, we estimate the probability distributions
that characterize the interannual variability of temperature and precipitation in the present
(year 2010) climate and later
/media/ces/CES_D2.4_task1.pdf
in the models, while on the other
hand, models require quantitative information on a wealth of
parameters that is often difficult to extract from storylines. In other
words, there is a mismatch between storylines and model
parameters (Steps 3–4 in Fig. 1), as well as between model output
and revised stories (Steps 5–6). In practice, particularly the
translation of stories into quantified model/media/loftslag/Kok_JGEC658_2009.pdf
Improving groundwater representation and
the parameterization of glacial melting and
evapotranspiration in applications of the
WaSiM hydrological model within Iceland
Bergur Einarsson
Sveinbjörn Jónsson
VÍ 2010-017
Report
Improving groundwater representation and
the parameterization of glacial melting and
evapotranspiration in applications of the
WaSiM hydrological model within
/media/ces/2010_017.pdf
ea
th
,
th
e
m
et
ho
d
u
se
d
at
th
is
st
ag
e
fo
r
th
es
e
st
ak
eh
o
ld
er
typ
es
is
sp
ec
ied
.Sh
oul
d
ther
e
be
tw
o
o
r
mor
e
model
sbein
g
develope
d
in
th
e
process
,the
n
th
e
typ
e
o
fmode
lt
o
whic
h
th
e
metho
d
wa
s
applie
d
is
show
n
in
parentheses
.O
T
re
fe
rs
to
th
e
co
m
po
si
tio
n
o
ft
he
o
rg
an
iz
in
g
te
am
.
Fo
r
o
rg
an
iz
in
g
te
am
in
vo
lve
m
en
t
in
di
ffe
re
n
t
pa
rt
/media/loftslag/Hare-2011-ParticipatoryModelling.pdf
in flooding were evaluated at 67 sites in Finland with var-
iable sizes of runoff areas using a conceptual hydrological model and 20 climate scenarios from both glo-
bal and regional climate models with the delta change approach. Floods with a 100-year return period
were estimated with frequency analysis using the Gumbel distribution. At four study sites depicting dif-
ferent watershed types
/media/ces/Journal_of_Hydrology_Veijalainen_etal.pdf