Navigating the complexities of global and local water resources challenges requires collaboration and mutual learning among diverse knowledge systems and disciplines. However, Western philosophical approaches to generating knowledge have prevailed in water management and hydrology, often overlooking community priorities, practices and perspectives, and power asymmetries - including gender inequalities, racism, and colonial injustices. In this perspective paper, we explore the co-creation of water knowledge (CCWK) concept to value multiple and diverse forms of knowledge. We identify four overarching principles (inclusivity, openness, legitimacy, and actionability), highlighting the importance of establishing relationships and collaborative leadership, adopting key tools and techniques, and integrating knowledge for water resources management. Furthermore, we argue that prioritizing epistemic justice is essential for effective CCWK. To address these, we advocate for more interdisciplinary and reflexive research practices that challenge and disrupt Western scientific traditions shaped by functionalist and colonial legacies.

A growing scholarship suggests hydrological models have political power as they embed and reinforce specific understandings of water and society relations which, in turn, shape future visions of how and for whom water is to be managed. In this commentary, we explore how the power of models can be explicitly and constructively engaged with, thereby expanding their potential to support transformations to water justice and sustainability. To achieve this, we suggest understanding, analyzing, and doing hydrological modeling as a situated knowledge practice. We take inspiration from feminist scholarship that emphasizes that all forms of knowledge are inherently partial, situated within specific contexts, experiences, and circumstances, and shaped by power relations. Situating hydrological modeling, we argue, requires opening up modeling processes to ask where, how, for whom, and by whom models are developed and used, and how outcomes influence water distributions and conditions of access for different social groups. Situating also opens opportunities to explore what it would take for hydrological modeling to explicitly pursue justice and sustainability goals in context-specific and tangible ways. We present initial insights and invite further experimentation towards making models active agents of a more inclusive, transparent, and transformative water management.

Open-access remote sensing products provide data for transboundary water management. This study presents a comprehensive overview of the applications, uncertainties and implications of these remote sensing data products in the context of transboundary water management. Focusing on different stages within the transboundary cooperation continuum, we delineate the potential role and application of remote sensing data at the various stages of this cooperation. Despite the uncertainties and capacity requirements for data acquisition, processing and interpretation, we argue that remote sensing broadens opportunities to monitor, assess, forecast, track or validate compliance in transboundary basins, thereby challenging traditional notions of water data exclusivity.

Satellite remote sensing (RS) data are increasingly being used to estimate total evaporation, often referred to as evapotranspiration (ET), over large regions. Since RS-based ET (RS-ET) estimation inherits uncertainties from several sources, many available studies have assessed these uncertainties using different methods. However, the suitability of methods and reference data subsequently affects the validity of these evaluations. This study summarizes the status of the various methods applied for uncertainty assessment of RS-ET estimates, discusses the advances and caveats of these methods, identifies assessment gaps, and provides recommendations for future studies. We systematically reviewed 676 research papers published from 2011 to 2021 that assessed the uncertainty or accuracy of RS-ET estimates. We categorized and classified them based on (i) the methods used to assess uncertainties, (ii) the context where uncertainties were evaluated, and (iii) the metrics used to report uncertainties. Our quantitative synthesis shows that the uncertainty assessments of RS-ET estimates are not consistent and comparable in terms of methodology, reference data, geographical distribution, and uncertainty presentation. Most studies used validation methods using eddy-covariance (EC)-based ET estimates as a reference. However, in many regions such as Africa and the Middle East, other references are often used due to the lack of EC stations. The accuracy and uncertainty of RS-ET estimates are most often described by root-mean-squared errors (RMSEs). When validating against EC-based estimates, the RMSE of daily RS-ET varies greatly among different locations and levels of temporal support, ranging from 0.01 to 6.65 mm d−1, with a mean of 1.18 mm d−1. We conclude that future studies need to report the context of validation, the uncertainty of the reference datasets, the mismatch in the temporal and spatial scales of reference datasets to those of the RS-ET estimates, and multiple performance metrics with their variation in different conditions and their statistical significance to provide a comprehensive interpretation to assist potential users. We provide specific recommendations in this regard. Furthermore, extending the application of RS-ET to regions that lack validation will require obtaining additional ground-based data and combining different methods for uncertainty assessment.

Evapotranspiration (ET), a key variable in both water and energy cycles. It is very challenging to measure or estimate in large regions. Among many approaches to estimate ET indirectly (e.g. through hydrological modelling), models that are based on satellite remote sensing data (RS) are increasingly being used. However, the RS-based models inherit uncertainty from many sources, such as the model’s algorithm and parameters, input satellite data, and processing techniques. It is challenging to assess this uncertainty due to limitations of validation data, high volume and high dimensionality of RS data. Many studies have evaluated uncertainty in RS-based estimation of ET using different methods and reference data. The suitability of methods and reference data subsequently affect the validity of these evaluations. Therefore, it is necessary to have an overview of different evaluation methods and their uses. This study aimed to systematically review original research papers that assessed uncertainty or accuracy of RS-ET model or data products. We categorized these papers and quantified based on (i) spatial and temporal scale of ET estimation, (ii) types of uncertainty, and (iii) methods used to assess uncertainty. Studies have been geographically concentrated in North Asia, North America, and Europe. Most studies used the validation method, which quantifies the discrepancy between pixel-based ET estimation with an in-situ estimation. Although a standardized validation approach for satellite-based ET estimates is not yet ready, most validation studies employed Eddy Covariance (EC) flux towers for reference estimation at field-scale. In regions where in-situ measurements are limited, many studies use the residual of the water balance as reference. However, few studies considered uncertainty in the reference estimation and mismatch of spatial and temporal scales. For monitoring agricultural fields, most RS-ET methods have been reported with high accuracy. When applying these methods to larger extent, additional assessments are required to better inform data users of the quality of RS-ET estimation. These include cross-validation, sensitivity, and uncertainty analyses. Overall, this review showed the progress in evapotranspiration estimation using satellite data in terms of uncertainty assessment.