Search

Scientific knowledge about floods and droughts, that is, hydrological extremes, provides essential input for policy and decision-making processes in water management, climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction (AghaKouchak et al., 2021; Kundzewicz et al., 2014; Montanari et al., 2013; Takeuchi, 2004; Ward et al., 2020). Hydrologists are often challenged by a range of policy-relevant questions in relation to floods and droughts, including: How are they affected by anthropogenic activities and/or global warming? What will be their frequency, severity and spatial distribution in the coming decades? What are the best strategies to reduce vulnerability and alleviate their negative impacts? Hydrologists alone cannot address these questions. Thus, a very long history of collaboration has evolved across disciplines dealing with water-related issues. Scholars engaged in water resources systems, which started with the Harvard Water Program in the 1960s, provided well-established examples of such inter-disciplinary collaborations (Brown et al., 2015). Over the past decade, more and more hydrologists have argued for further engagement with social scientists, including political ecologists and behavioral econo-has uncovered the major role played by politics and power relations in shaping the complex dynamics of human-water systems (Swyngedouw, 1999). Behavioral economists have demonstrated how cognitive heuristics and biases (Slovic, 1987; Tversky & Kahneman, 1974) influence human behavior and attitude, as well as the way in which people and decision makers think about hydrological risks (Aerts et al., 2018). As such, accounting for both power relations and cognitive heuristics is key to unravel the interplay of floods, droughts and human societies. In this commentary, we first discuss the challenge of predicting floods and droughts in today's human dominated world, and then propose the integration of multiple research methods as a way to cope Abstract Predicting floods and droughts is essential to inform the development of policy in water management, climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Yet, hydrological predictions are highly uncertain, while the frequency, severity and spatial distribution of extreme events are further complicated by the increasing impact of human activities on the water cycle. In this commentary, we argue that four main aspects characterizing the complexity of human-water systems should be explicitly addressed: feedbacks, scales, tradeoffs and inequalities. We propose the integration of multiple research methods as a way to cope with complexity and develop policy-relevant science. Plain Language Summary Several governments today claim to be following the science in addressing crises caused by the occurrence of extreme events, such as floods and droughts, or the emergence of global threats, such as climate change and COVID-19. In this commentary, we show that there are no universal answers to apparently simple questions such as: Do levees reduce flood risk? Do reservoirs alleviate droughts? We argue that the best science we have consists of a plurality of legitimate interpretations and a range of foresights, which can be enriched by integrating multiple disciplines and research methods. DI BALDASSARRE ET AL. Key Points: • Accounting for both power relations and cognitive heuristics is key to unravel the interplay of floods, droughts and human societies • Flood and drought predictions are complicated by the increasing impact of human activities on the water cycle • We propose the integration of multiple research methods as a way to cope with uncertainty and develop policy-relevant science Supporting Information: Supporting Information may be found in the online version of this article. Mård, J., et al. (2021). Integrating multiple research methods to unravel the complexity of human-water systems. AGU Advances, 2, e2021AV000473. https://doi.