View article

The modelling of human-modified basins that are inadequately measured constitutes a challenge for hydrological science. Often, models for such systems are detailed and hydraulics-based for only one part of the system while for other parts oversimplified models or rough assumptions are used. This is typically a bottom-up approach, which seeks to exploit knowledge of hydrological processes at the micro-scale at some components of the system. Also, it is a monomeric approach in two ways: first, essential interactions among system components may be poorly represented or even omitted; second, differences in the level of detail of process representation can lead to uncontrolled errors. Additionally, the calibration procedure merely accounts for the reproduction of the observed responses using typical fitting criteria. The paper aims to raise some critical issues, regarding the entire modelling approach for such hydrosystems. For this, two alternative modelling strategies are examined that reflect two modelling approaches or philosophies: a dominant bottom-up approach, which is also monomeric and, very often, based on output information, and a top-down and holistic approach based on generalized information. Critical options are examined, which codify the differences between the two strategies: the representation of surface, groundwater and water management processes, the schematization and parameterization concepts and the parameter estimation methodology. The first strategy is based on stand-alone models for surface and groundwater processes and for water management, which are employed sequentially. For each model, a different …