From controversial tools to models for just water transformations

Reflection, Research blog  · 

From 30 September to 10 October, we were hosted by MAK’it in the context of the Constructive Advanced Thinking (CAT) programme. MAK’it was the third Institute of Advanced Studies that hosted us, after Uppsala and Paris. Taking time to think is somewhat rare in the rat-race that science can be sometimes [1]. The CAT programme is offering us time away from the day-to-day distractions, as well as inspiring connections within, and especially outside our own fields of research.

We are four early career scholars, Rossella Alba (IRI THESys, Berlin), Jonatan Godinez Madrigal (IHE Delft), Bich Tran (IHE Delft), and Rozemarijn ter Horst (WUR, Wageningen). In our CAT project, ‘Water models as controversial tools’, we research how water modelling has influence on the way people think, act with, and govern water, and subsequently what this could mean for modelling water.

Group photo at SCAS
Group photo at SCAS

The first stop in our CAT project was the Swedish Collegium for Advanced Studies in October 2023. We started with sharing our different experiences with doing and researching modelling waters, from a focus on dealing with uncertainty in models (Bich), collective modelling practices (Rossella), modelling at the science-policy interface (Rozemarijn), and to counter-modelling in local water conflicts (Jonatan). Inspired by Casper Bruun Jensen’s ecology of models [2] and Carl Linneaus’ taxonomy of plants and animals, we thought through what an ecology and a taxonomy of models would look like. What happens if we see models as evolving creatures? How would models ‘behave’ and propagate, and what impacts could they have in influencing socio-techno-natural-political systems?

A cyborg thinking
A cyborg thinking

Based on the discussion in Uppsala, we hosted an open online discussion on the Water Alternatives Forum [3]. In this Water Dissensus, we posited models as controversial tools as they are often used in a way that replaces or forecloses thinking. We invited people to think with us on how we can use models as thinking tools instead of exclusively as intellectual tools devoid of values and meanings. What is the potentiality of models (all possible ways they can be used), and their affordance (the restrictions inherent in how they are used)? Our message was well received by some, while seen by others as criticisms of models, and science and technology in general. The solution that seemed most accredited in the discussion was, still, to do business-as-usual but with better data, better fine-tuning methods, or better computers. We thought more structural change is needed to ensure models are used for thinking [4][5][6].

Our insights from the Water Dissensus were the starting point for the conversations with fellows during our second CAT research stay at the Institut d’Etudes Avancées (IEA) in Paris in March 2024. At IEA, we were encouraged to concretize our call for modelling differently by scholars and practitioners who were working and thinking on quantitative models both in water research and other fields, from economics to data science. We were strongly reminded that language and framing matters greatly in how we communicate with different actors, as we were often seen as criticising modelling unconstructively. Therefore, we started to think about building on thinking of models as controversial tools, to proposing ways of modelling towards just water transformations, and by doing so providing a clear end- goal to imagine a different approach to modelling. Ultimately, our proposal is to set the aim to model for just water transformations, and to identify how we can achieve this goal in different contexts, from the (computer) laboratory to the field.

Group photo at MAK’IT
Group photo at MAK’IT

During our last meeting in Montpellier, hosted by the Montpellier Advanced Knowledge Institute on Transitions (MAK’IT), we focused our discussion on how to model for Just Water Transformations. MAK’IT facilitated connections with G-EAU, where over 160 researchers work on water, from different disciplinary perspectives. In a seminar at G-EAU, we presented our ideas on reflexive and situated modelling, and how to design the modelling process with the modellers, funders, commissioners and communities while considering power dynamics between these actors. We feel much welcomed by the supportive and constructive feedback from modellers, social scientists, and those working interdisciplinarily at G-EAU. Fueled by this cross-fertilization and enthusiasm, we strategised about how to turn our insights and ideas into comprehensive research proposal(s) and to establish a long-term research agenda for modelling for just water transformations in our lines of work.

We are looking forward to our final meeting in Amsterdam, to build on the progress made, and to keep on learning from other disciplines.