Calibration and Reliability in Groundwater
Modelling: Credibility of Modelling
(Proceedings of ModelCARE 2007 Conference, held in
Denmark, September 2007). IAHS Publ. 320, 2008, 101-107.
Model peer reviews
and modeller–manager dialogues as an avenue to improved model credibility
H. J. Henriksen & A. L. H¿jberg
Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland,
GEUS, ¯ster Voldgade 10, DK-1350 Copenhagen K, Denmark
Abstract Rigorous validation tests against
independent data and uncertainty assessment are of principal importance in
modelling, but these tests mainly increase the reliability of the model, not
necessarily the credibility perceived by water managers and stakeholders.
Credibility, as opposed to reliability, is much more connected to, and a result
of, the manager–modeller dialogue with its speech and interaction process
face-to-face at model review sessions with peer reviews. However, the manager–modeller
dialogue is also influenced by how water managers and different stakeholders
cohere or differ in their framing of the environmental dispute which the
modelling project is part of. Thus multiple frames can here influence how
credibility and uncertainty issues are perceived by the water managers and
stakeholders. We suggest that simply focusing on eliminating uncertainty and
testing reliability is not enough. Instead, we recommend a broader focus in the
modelling process in order to explicitly take notion of and evaluate the
perceived credibility. The modeller–manager dialogues must care more
about how issues of incomplete knowledge, unpredictability, and multiple
knowledge frames are explored and perceived by stakeholders. Experiences from
Denmark with reference to the national water resource model (DK-model) and
regional model projects are presented and discussed, including tools for
facilitating dialogue drawing on social-science and natural-science toolboxes.
Key words credibility; dialogue; model peer review; reliability; uncertainty; validation