HESS Opinions: Reflecting and acting on the social aspects of modeling

Abstract. Hydrological models are generally acknowledged as subjective and uncertain, yet they are often still perceived as neutral, meaning they are seen as not taking sides. This notion of neutrality has several, potentially harmful, consequences. One is the marginalization of certain stakeholders: failing to acknowledge or incorporate alternative perspectives on the issue, which might have warranted a different (modeling) approach. In the critical social sciences, the non-neutrality in methods and research results is an established topic of debate. We propose that in order to deal with it in hydrological modeling, the hydrological modeling network (from commissioner to modeler to end-user) can learn from, and with, critical social sciences. This is a call for responsible modeling – modeling that is accountable, transparent, power-sensitive, situated and reproducible and this responsibility is carried by all actors related to the modeling study. To support our proposition, we structure our argument around four key pillars: (1) the social dimensions of and within hydrological modeling, (2) insights from the critical social sciences, (3) building bridges between disciplines, and (4) reflecting on what the hydrological modeling network can learn. The main take-away, from our perspective, is that responsible modeling is a collective responsibility, shared by all actors in the modeling network. We provide several actionable recommendations for individual actors to increase their share in facilitating responsible modeling.