Abstract
Abstract. From an outsider's perspective, hydrology combines field work with modelling, but mostly ignores the potential for gaining understanding and conceiving new hypotheses from controlled laboratory experiments. Sivapalan (2009) pleaded for a question- and hypothesis-driven hydrology where data analysis and top-down modelling approaches lead to general explanations and understanding of general trends and patterns. We discuss why and how such understanding is gained very effectively from controlled experimentation in comparison to field work and modelling. We argue that many major issues in hydrology are open to experimental investigations. Though experiments may have scale problems, these are of similar gravity as the well-known problems of fieldwork and modelling and have not impeded spectacular progress through experimentation in other geosciences.
Highlights
Viewed from the outsider’s perspective of planetary science, or geomorphology, or meteorology, the science of hydrology uses but a subset of the tools for exploring nature as available to all geosciences
Much effort is put in field measurement and in physics-based modelling, wherein hydrological phenomena are reduced to the laws of physics following the optimistic agenda set by Freeze and Harlan (1969)
Kleinhans (m.kleinhans@geo.uu.nl) underdetermination of model parameters, and underdetermination of predictions by ambiguity about the required level of simplification of physics-based relations in the model. The gravity of these problems, the parameter problem, is attested by the fact that it was given a new name in hydrology: equifinality, but similar problems abound in the other geosciences
Summary
“What remains for the hydrologist to do if we take away from him the curve fitting, model calibration, the chasing of systems responses, correlations, finite elements, kriging, etc.?”, as Klemes (1986) asked. Scientists in the first place want to understand nature This is not to deprecate the relevance of applications for human interventions and predictions with benefit for human society. The objective of this paper is to discuss why and how controlled experimentation can lead to new insights and is complementary to fieldwork and modelling. First we discuss basic characteristics, benefits and problems of field data and modelling and, in more detail, experimentation. Limitations, such as due to scaling problems, are extensively discussed and we will argue how these problems are not more grave than basic problems of fieldwork and modelling as discussed extensively in hydrological literature. We will argue that more explanatory modelling and experimentation in hydrology will lead to better understanding of its major questions
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
