Next Article in Journal
A Comparison of Preference Handling Techniques in Multi-Objective Optimisation for Water Distribution Systems
Next Article in Special Issue
Urban Estuarine Beaches and Urban Water Cycle Seepage: The Influence of Temporal Scales
Previous Article in Journal
An NDVI-Based Statistical ET Downscaling Method
Previous Article in Special Issue
Water Experts’ Perception of Risk for New and Unfamiliar Water Projects
Article Menu
Issue 12 (December) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Water 2017, 9(12), 983; https://doi.org/10.3390/w9120983

Use and Utility: Exploring the Diversity and Design of Water Models at the Science-Policy Interface

1
Laboratoire Eau Environnement et Systèmes Urbains (LEESU), École Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées, University of Paris East, 6-8 Avenue Blaise Pascal, 77455 Champs-sur-Marne, France
2
Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science & Technology (Eawag), Überlandstrasse 133, 8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland
3
Institute of Environmental Engineering, ETH Zürich, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland
4
Monash Infrastructure, Department of Civil Engineering, 23 College Walk, Monash University, Clayton VIC 3800, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 31 October 2017 / Revised: 24 November 2017 / Accepted: 4 December 2017 / Published: 19 December 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Urban Water Cycle Modelling and Management)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [746 KB, uploaded 20 December 2017]   |  

Abstract

Effort to narrow the gap between the production and use of scientific knowledge for environmental decision-making is gaining traction, yet in practice, supply and demand remains largely unbalanced. A qualitative study based on empirical analysis offers a novel approach to exploring key factors, focussing on seven water models in the context of two organisations at the science-policy interface: the PIREN-Seine in France and the CRC for Water Sensitive Cities in Australia. Tentative linkages drawn from these examples identify: (1) objective and expertise; (2) knowledge and tools; and (3) support structures as main drivers influencing the production of scientific knowledge which, in turn, affect the use and utility of modelling tools. Further insight is gained by highlighting the wide spectrum of uses and utilities existing in practice, suggesting that such ‘boundary organisations’ facilitate interactions and exchanges that give added value to scientific knowledge. Coordinated strategies that integrate inter-, extra-, and intra-boundary activities, framed through collaborative scenario building and the use of interactive modelling platforms, may offer ways to enhance the use and utility of scientific knowledge (and its tools) to better support water resources management, policy and planning decisions, thus promoting a more cohesive relationship between science and policy. View Full-Text
Keywords: boundary organisation; environmental decision-making; integrated modelling; knowledge brokering; model usability; strategic planning boundary organisation; environmental decision-making; integrated modelling; knowledge brokering; model usability; strategic planning
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Chong, N.; Bach, P.M.; Moilleron, R.; Bonhomme, C.; Deroubaix, J.-F. Use and Utility: Exploring the Diversity and Design of Water Models at the Science-Policy Interface. Water 2017, 9, 983.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top