4.7 Editorial Material

DebatesPerspectives on socio-hydrology: Changing water systems and the tyranny of small problemsSocio-hydrology

期刊

WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH
卷 51, 期 6, 页码 4795-4805

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2015WR017080

关键词

socio-hydrology; modeling; coupled human-water systems; long-term dynamics; predictions and predictability

资金

  1. Direct For Biological Sciences
  2. Div Of Biological Infrastructure [1052875] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  3. Div Of Biological Infrastructure
  4. Direct For Biological Sciences [GRANTS:13818770, 1639145] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We are well and truly in the Anthropocene. Humans can no longer be considered as mere external drivers or boundary conditions in the hydrologic systems we study. The interactions and feedbacks between human actions and water cycle dynamics on the planet, combined with the evolution of human norms/values in relation to water, are throwing up a range of emergent big problems. Understanding and offering sustainable solutions to these big problems require a broadening of hydrologic science to embrace the perspectives of both social and natural scientists. The new science of socio-hydrology was introduced with this in mind, yet faces major challenges due to the wide gulf that separates the knowledge foundations and methodologies of natural and social sciences. Yet, the benefits of working together are enormous, including through adoption of natural science methods for social science problems, and vice versa. Bringing together the perspectives of both social and natural scientists dealing with water is good for hydrologic science, having the salutary effect of revitalizing it as use-inspired basic science. It is good for management too, in that the broader, holistic perspectives provided by socio-hydrology can help recognize potential big problems that may otherwise be unforeseen and, equally, identify potential alternative solutions to otherwise intractable problems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据