The WFDEI meteorological forcing data set has been generated using the same methodology as the widely used WATCH Forcing Data (WFD) by making use of the ERA-Interim reanalysis data. We discuss the specifics of how changes in the reanalysis and processing have led to improvement over the WFD. We attribute improvements in precipitation and wind speed to the latest reanalysis basis data and improved downward shortwave fluxes to the changes in the aerosol corrections. Covering 1979-2012, the WFDEI will allow more thorough comparisons of hydrological and Earth System model outputs with hydrologically and phenologically relevant satellite products than using the WFD.

The Water and Global Change (WATCH) project evaluation of the terrestrial water cycle involves using land surface models and general hydrological models to assess hydrologically important variables including evaporation, soil moisture, and runoff. Such models require meteorological forcing data, and this paper describes the creation of the WATCH Forcing Data for 1958–2001 based on the 40-yr ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-40) and for 1901–57 based on reordered reanalysis data. It also discusses and analyses model-independent estimates of reference crop evaporation. Global average annual cumulative reference crop evaporation was selected as a widely adopted measure of potential evapotranspiration. It exhibits no significant trend from 1979 to 2001 although there are significant long-term increases in global average vapor pressure deficit and concurrent significant decreases in global average net radiation and wind speed. The near-constant global average of annual reference crop evaporation in the late twentieth century masks significant decreases in some regions (e.g., the Murray–Darling basin) with significant increases in others.

No abstract

Six land surface models and five global hydrological models participate in a model intercomparison project [Water Model Intercomparison Project (WaterMIP)], which for the first time compares simulation results of these different classes of models in a consistent way. In this paper, the simulation setup is described and aspects of the multimodel global terrestrial water balance are presented. All models were run at 0.58 spatial resolution for the global land areas for a 15-yr period (1985-99) using a newly developed global meteorological dataset. Simulated global terrestrial evapotranspiration, excluding Greenland and Antarctica, ranges from 415 to 586 mm yr 21 (from 60 000 to 85 000 km 3 yr 21 ), and simulated runoff ranges from 290 to 457 mm yr 21 (from 42 000 to 66 000 km 3 yr 21 ). Both the mean and median runoff fractions for the land surface models are lower than those of the global hydrological models, although the range is wider. Significant simulation differences between land surface and global hydrological models are found to be caused by the snow scheme employed. The physically based energy balance approach used by land surface models generally results in lower snow water equivalent values than the conceptual degreeday approach used by global hydrological models. Some differences in simulated runoff and evapotranspiration are explained by model parameterizations, although the processes included and parameterizations used are not distinct to either land surface models or global hydrological models. The results show that differences between models are a major source of uncertainty. Climate change impact studies thus need to use not only multiple climate models but also some other measure of uncertainty (e.g., multiple impact models).

Abstract. We undertook a comprehensive evaluation of 22 gridded (quasi-)global (sub-)daily precipitation (P ) datasets for the period 2000-2016. Thirteen non-gauge-corrected P datasets were evaluated using daily P gauge observations from 76 086 gauges worldwide. Another nine gaugecorrected datasets were evaluated using hydrological modeling, by calibrating the HBV conceptual model against streamflow records for each of 9053 small to mediumsized ( < 50 000 km 2 ) catchments worldwide, and comparing the resulting performance. Marked differences in spatiotemporal patterns and accuracy were found among the datasets. Among the uncorrected P datasets, the satellite-and reanalysis-based MSWEP-ng V1.2 and V2.0 datasets generally showed the best temporal correlations with the gauge observations, followed by the reanalyses (ERA-Interim, JRA-55, and NCEP-CFSR) and the satellite-and reanalysis-based CHIRP V2.0 dataset, the estimates based primarily on passive microwave remote sensing of rainfall (CMORPH V1.0, GSMaP V5/6, and TMPA 3B42RT V7) or near-surface soil moisture (SM2RAIN-ASCAT), and finally, estimates based primarily on thermal infrared imagery (GridSat V1.0, PER-SIANN, and PERSIANN-CCS). Two of the three reanalyses (ERA-Interim and JRA-55) unexpectedly obtained lower trend errors than the satellite datasets. Among the corrected P datasets, the ones directly incorporating daily gauge data (CPC Unified, and MSWEP V1.2 and V2.0) generally provided the best calibration scores, although the good performance of the fully gauge-based CPC Unified is unlikely to translate to sparsely or ungauged regions. Next best results were obtained with P estimates directly incorporating temporally coarser gauge data (CHIRPS V2.0, GPCP-1DD V1.2, TMPA 3B42 V7, and WFDEI-CRU), which in turn outperformed the one indirectly incorporating gauge data through another multi-source dataset (PERSIANN-CDR V1R1). Our results highlight large differences in estimation accuracy, and hence the importance of P dataset selection in both research and operational applications. The good performance of MSWEP emphasizes that careful data merging can exploit the complementary strengths of gauge-, satellite-, and reanalysis-based P estimates.