Understanding black boxes: Deconstructing and contextualising models used for transboundary water governance

In decision making over water, models are an important part of the toolbox of a water manager. However, how hydrological models have influence is underresearched. A strong division between natural and social sciences in the water sector, excluding or mainstreaming power in analysis of models and technology, as well as models that become technologically more complex, all contribute to rendering understanding models and modelling processes more difficult. This contributes to creating or maintaining the model as black box, limiting accountability. The question is subsequently whether model makers, users and those impacted are able to recognise where the ‘sites of politics’ are, and how they function. The sites of politics are defined in this research as the moments and places where decisions on who gets what, when and how, are being shaped and taken. They are non-static nodes in a network of people and technology which connects people around a specific issue. Identifying the sites of politics related to a model and understand how they function and shape one another, is expected provide insights in the different ways a model has influence. The key question addressed in this research is: ‘How do stakeholders (modellers, policy makers, and others) shape and, engage with the different sites of politics related to water allocation modelling in the context of transboundary water governance, and what are the direct and indirect consequences of the modelling process for the stakeholders?’. To identify and unpack the relevant sites of politics I take a power-critical stance.