[1] In the absence of model deficiencies, simulation results at the correct parameter values lead to an unbiased description of observed data with remaining deviations due to observation errors only. However, this ideal cannot be reached in the practice of environmental modeling, because the required simplified representation of the complex reality by the model and errors in model input lead to errors that are reflected in biased model output. This leads to two related problems: First, ignoring bias of output in the statistical model description leads to bias in parameter estimates, model predictions and, in particular, in the quantification of their uncertainty. Second, as there is no objective choice of how much bias to accept in which output variable, it is not possible to design an ''objective'' model calibration procedure. The first of these problems has been addressed by introducing a statistical (Bayesian) description of bias, the second by suggesting the use of multiobjective calibration techniques that cannot easily be used for uncertainty analysis. We merge the ideas of these two approaches by using the prior of the statistical bias description to quantify the importance of multiple calibration objectives. This leads to probabilistic inference and prediction while still taking multiple calibration objectives into account. The ideas and technical details of the suggested approach are outlined and a didactical example as well as an application to environmental data are provided to demonstrate its practical feasibility and computational efficiency.Citation: Reichert, P., and N. Schuwirth (2012), Linking statistical bias description to multiobjective model calibration, Water Resour.

Environmental decision support intends to use the best available scientific knowledge to help decision makers find and evaluate management alternatives. The goal of this process is to achieve the best fulfillment of societal objectives. This requires a careful analysis of (i) how scientific knowledge can be represented and quantified, (ii) how societal preferences can be described and elicited, and (iii) how these concepts can best be used to support communication with authorities, politicians, and the public in environmental management. The goal of this paper is to discuss key requirements for a conceptual framework to address these issues and to suggest how these can best be met. We argue that a combination of probability theory and scenario planning with multi-attribute utility theory fulfills these requirements, and discuss adaptations and extensions of these theories to improve their application for supporting environmental decision making. With respect to (i) we suggest the use of intersubjective probabilities, if required extended to imprecise probabilities, to describe the current state of scientific knowledge. To address (ii), we emphasize the importance of value functions, in addition to utilities, to support decisions under risk. We discuss the need for testing "non-standard" value aggregation techniques, the usefulness of flexibility of value functions regarding attribute data availability, the elicitation of value functions for sub-objectives from experts, and the consideration of uncertainty in value and utility elicitation. With respect to (iii), we outline a well-structured procedure for transparent environmental decision support that is based on a clear separation of scientific prediction and societal valuation. We illustrate aspects of the suggested methodology by its application to river management in general and with a small, didactical case study on spatial river rehabilitation prioritization.

Monitoring anthropogenic impacts is essential for managing and conserving ecosystems, yet current biomonitoring approaches lack the tools required to deal with the effects of stressors on species and their interactions in complex natural systems.Ecological networks (trophic or mutualistic) can offer new insights into ecosystem degradation, adding value to current taxonomically constrained schemes. We highlight some examples to show how new network approaches can be used to interpret ecological responses.Synthesis and applications. Augmenting routine biomonitoring data with interaction data derived from the literature, complemented with ground-truthed data from direct observations where feasible, allows us to begin to characterise large numbers of ecological networks across environmental gradients. This process can be accelerated by adopting emerging technologies and novel analytical approaches, enabling biomonitoring to move beyond simple pass/fail schemes and to address the many ecological responses that can only be understood from a network-based perspective.

We present a novel approach for practically tackling uncertainty in preference elicitation and predictive modeling to support complex multi-criteria decisions based on multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT). A simplified two-step elicitation procedure consisting of an online survey and face-to-face interviews is followed by an extensive uncertainty analysis. This covers uncertainty of the preference components (marginal value and utility functions, hierarchical aggregation functions, aggregation parameters) and the attribute predictions. Context uncertainties about future socioeconomic developments are captured by combining MAUT with scenario planning. We perform a global sensitivity analysis (GSA) to assess the contribution of single uncertain preference parameters to the uncertainty of the ranking of alternatives. This is exemplified for sustainable water infrastructure planning in a case study in Switzerland. We compare eleven water supply alternatives ranging from conventional water supply systems to novel technologies and management schemes regarding 44 objectives. Their performance is assessed for four future scenarios and ten stakeholders from different backgrounds and decision-making levels. Despite uncertainty in the ranking of alternatives, potential best and worst solutions could be identified. We demonstrate that a priori assumptions such as linear value functions or additive aggregation can result in misleading recommendations, unless thoroughly checked during preference elicitation and modeling. We suggest GSA to focus elicitation on most sensitive preference parameters. Our GSA results indicate that output uncertainty can be considerably reduced by additional elicitation of few parameters, e.g. the overall risk attitude and aggregation functions at higher-level nodes. Here, rough value function elicitation was sufficient, thereby substantially reducing elicitation time.

No abstract