TY - JOUR
T1 - Perceived barriers and advances in integrating earth observations with water resources modeling
AU - Kumar, Saurav
AU - Imen, Sanaz
AU - Sridharan, Vamsi Krishna
AU - Gupta, Abhinav
AU - McDonald, Walter
AU - Ramirez-Avila, John J.
AU - Abdul-Aziz, Omar I.
AU - Talchabhadel, Rocky
AU - Gao, Huilin
AU - Quinn, Nigel W.T.
AU - Weiss, W. Josh
AU - Poulose, Thomas
AU - Palmate, Santosh S.
AU - Lee, Christine M.
AU - Baskaran, Latha
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors
PY - 2024/1
Y1 - 2024/1
N2 - Advances in computing, collection, and sharing of Earth Observations (EOs) have significantly improved the potential for integrating EO and water resources models. Inadequate observational data for the systems simulated have been a persistent limitation in developing robust water resources models. Although various EO datasets have been available for decades, they have been under-utilized for water resources modeling. This can be due to sensor and product limitations, including spatial, spectral, and temporal resolutions, and the reluctance of the water resources community to adopt the state-of-art quickly. Motivated by the dual agenda of engaging the water resources community on various aspects of integrating EOs with water resources modeling and understanding the likely factors that limit a deeper integration of EOs in water resources management, we investigated the communities' perception of water resources modeling and EO integration. This paper summarizes the findings of a web-based survey conducted at the annual ASCE-EWRI (American Society of Civil Engineers-Environmental Water Resources Institute) International Water Congress in 2022. The analysis of responses (n = 74) identified limited spatial resolution, atmospheric and cloud interference, and lack of in-situ validation data as the highest perceived barriers to integrating EOs with water resources modeling and management. Perceptions among different groups of participants and even within the groups were different. For example, the perceived barriers often differed between researchers and non-researchers (e.g., policymakers and practitioners). There were differences in perception among the remote-sensing and water resources researchers within the research community. Even among water resources communities, disparities existed between the perceptions of respondents who also identified as knowledgeable about remote sensing and those who didn't. These observations highlighted the need to intentionally develop a convergent group and domain to integrate the disciplines involved and capitalize on the advancements that have improved the EO for water resources management.
AB - Advances in computing, collection, and sharing of Earth Observations (EOs) have significantly improved the potential for integrating EO and water resources models. Inadequate observational data for the systems simulated have been a persistent limitation in developing robust water resources models. Although various EO datasets have been available for decades, they have been under-utilized for water resources modeling. This can be due to sensor and product limitations, including spatial, spectral, and temporal resolutions, and the reluctance of the water resources community to adopt the state-of-art quickly. Motivated by the dual agenda of engaging the water resources community on various aspects of integrating EOs with water resources modeling and understanding the likely factors that limit a deeper integration of EOs in water resources management, we investigated the communities' perception of water resources modeling and EO integration. This paper summarizes the findings of a web-based survey conducted at the annual ASCE-EWRI (American Society of Civil Engineers-Environmental Water Resources Institute) International Water Congress in 2022. The analysis of responses (n = 74) identified limited spatial resolution, atmospheric and cloud interference, and lack of in-situ validation data as the highest perceived barriers to integrating EOs with water resources modeling and management. Perceptions among different groups of participants and even within the groups were different. For example, the perceived barriers often differed between researchers and non-researchers (e.g., policymakers and practitioners). There were differences in perception among the remote-sensing and water resources researchers within the research community. Even among water resources communities, disparities existed between the perceptions of respondents who also identified as knowledgeable about remote sensing and those who didn't. These observations highlighted the need to intentionally develop a convergent group and domain to integrate the disciplines involved and capitalize on the advancements that have improved the EO for water resources management.
KW - Earth observation
KW - Remote sensing
KW - Survey
KW - Water quality modeling
KW - Water resources modeling
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85179918211&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85179918211&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.rsase.2023.101119
DO - 10.1016/j.rsase.2023.101119
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85179918211
SN - 2352-9385
VL - 33
JO - Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment
JF - Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment
M1 - 101119
ER -