Graham Jewitt

Graham Jewitt

Auto-generated profile, based on publicly available information

Graham Jewitt

IHE Delft Institute for Water Education, P.O. Box 3015, 2601 DA Delft, the Netherlands

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
8 February 2019 in Frontiers in Environmental Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GSGareth B. Simpson
Gareth B. Simpson
GJGraham P. W. Jewitt
Graham P. W. Jewitt
This paper presents a study of the evolution of the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus since its rise to prominence in policy and development discourses in 2011. Drawing from an extensive review of published literature, the paper presents various interpretations of the concept while also considering the novelty of the WEF nexus. The challenge of integrating and optimising the components of this multi-centric nexus is examined, with four case studies being presented. Various criticisms levelled at the WEF nexus, such as the neglect of livelihoods and the environment in assessments, are noted, together with governance considerations associated with this framework. Finally, the potential of the WEF nexus to contribute to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals is reviewed.

1 January 2014 in Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SKSamuel Kusangaya
Samuel Kusangaya
MWMichele L. Warburton
Michele L. Warburton
EGEmma Archer van Garderen
Emma Archer van Garderen
GJGraham P.W. Jewitt
Graham P.W. Jewitt

1 June 2015 in Ecosystem Services
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RMRebecka Malinga
Rebecka Malinga
LGLine J. Gordon
Line J. Gordon
GJGraham Jewitt
Graham Jewitt
RLRegina Lindborg
Regina Lindborg

1 January 2007 in Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GWG. de Winnaar
G. de Winnaar
GJG.P.W. Jewitt
G.P.W. Jewitt
MHM. Horan
M. Horan

1 June 2018 in Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JNJean Nepomuscene Namugize
Jean Nepomuscene Namugize
GJGraham Jewitt
Graham Jewitt
MGMark Graham
Mark Graham

20 December 2023 in Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BTBich Ngoc Tran
Bich Ngoc Tran
JKJohannes van der Kwast
Johannes van der Kwast
SSSolomon Seyoum
Solomon Seyoum
RURemko Uijlenhoet
Remko Uijlenhoet
GJGraham Jewitt
Graham Jewitt
MMMarloes Mul
Marloes Mul
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.