Research papersInfluence of three common calibration metrics on the diagnosis of climate change impacts on water resources

- Calibration metrics affect analysis of climate change impacts on water resources.
- Some hydrological models are more robust to the objective function selection.
- Low flows simulations and projections are highly dependent on model selection.
- Results illustrate the need to carefully adapt objective functions to the targeted hydrological change indicators.
- Evaluation only based on relative changes can hide large absolute discrepancies, potentially critical for decision support.

Uncertainties associated to the evaluation of the impacts of climate change on water resources are broad, from multiple sources, and lead to diagnoses sometimes difficult to interpret. Quantification of these uncertainties is a key element to yield confidence in the analyses and to provide water managers with valuable information. This work specifically evaluates the influence of hydrological modeling calibration metrics on future water resources projections, on thirty-seven watersheds in the Province of Québec, Canada. Twelve lumped hydrologic models, representing a wide range of operational options, are calibrated with three common objective functions derived from the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency. The hydrologic models are forced with climate simulations corresponding to two RCP, twenty-nine GCM from CMIP5 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5) and two post-treatment techniques, leading to future projections in the 2041-2070 period. Results show that the diagnosis of the impacts of climate change on water resources are quite affected by the hydrologic models selection and calibration metrics. Indeed, for the four selected hydrological indicators, dedicated to water management, parameters from the three objective functions can provide different interpretations in terms of absolute and relative changes, as well as projected changes direction and climatic ensemble consensus. The GR4J model and a multimodel approach offer the best modeling options, based on calibration performance and robustness. Overall, these results illustrate the need to provide water managers with detailed information on relative changes analysis, but also absolute change values, especially for hydrological indicators acting as security policy thresholds.