This paper is the outcome of a community initiative to identify major unsolved scientific problems in hydrology motivated by a need for stronger harmonisation of research efforts. The procedure involved a public consultation through on-line media, followed by two workshops through which a large number of potential science questions were collated, prioritised, and synthesised. In spite of the diversity of the participants (230 scientists in total), the process revealed much about community priorities and the state of our science: a preference for continuity in research questions rather than radical departures or redirections from past and current work. Questions remain focussed on process-based understanding of hydrological variability and causality at all space and time scales. Increased attention to environmental change drives a new emphasis on understanding how change propagates across interfaces within the hydrological system and across disciplinary boundaries. In particular, the expansion of the human footprint raises a new set of questions related to human interactions with nature and water cycle feedbacks in the context of complex water management problems. We hope that this reflection and synthesis of the 23 unsolved problems in hydrology will help guide research efforts for some years to come.

Over history, humankind has tended to settle near streams because of the role of rivers as transportation corridors and the fertility of riparian areas. However, human settlements in floodplains have been threatened by the risk of flooding. Possible responses have been to resettle away and/or modify the river system by building flood control structures. This has led to a complex web of interactions and feedback mechanisms between hydrological and social processes in settled floodplains. This paper is an attempt to conceptualise these interplays for hypothetical human-flood systems. We develop a simple, dynamic model to represent the interactions and feedback loops between hydrological and social processes. The model is then used to explore the dynamics of the human-flood system and the effect of changing individual characteristics, including external forcing such as technological development. The results show that the conceptual model is able to reproduce reciprocal effects between floods and people as well as the emergence of typical patterns. For instance, when levees are built or raised to protect floodplain areas, their presence not only reduces the frequency of flooding, but also exacerbates high water levels. Then, because of this exacerbation, higher flood protection levels are required by society. As a result, more and more flooding events are avoided, but rare and catastrophic events take place.

In flood risk assessment, there remains a lack of analytical frameworks capturing the dynamics emerging from two‐way feedbacks between physical and social processes, such as adaptation and levee effect. The former, “adaptation effect”, relates to the observation that the occurrence of more frequent flooding is often associated with decreasing vulnerability. The latter, “levee effect”, relates to the observation that the non‐occurrence of frequent flooding (possibly caused by flood protection structures, e.g. levees) is often associated to increasing vulnerability. As current analytical frameworks do not capture these dynamics, projections of future flood risk are not realistic. In this paper, we develop a new approach whereby the mutual interactions and continuous feedbacks between floods and societies are explicitly accounted for. Moreover, we show an application of this approach by using a socio‐hydrological model to simulate the behavior of two main prototypes of societies: green societies, which cope with flooding by resettling out of flood‐prone areas; and technological societies, which deal with flooding also by building levees or dikes. This application shows that the proposed approach is able to capture and explain the aforementioned dynamics (i.e. adaptation and levee effect) and therefore contribute to a better understanding of changes in flood risk, within an iterative process of theory development and empirical research.