EXTENDED ABSTRACT

The Bayesian Total Error Analysis methodology (BATEA) provides the opportunity to directly address all sources of uncertainty (input, model and response error) in the calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff (CRR) models. BATEA has the potential to overcome the parameter biases introduced by poor conceptualisations of these sources of errors and enhance regionalisation capabilities of hydrological models. This study is a preliminary evaluation of the robustness of the parameter estimates and the robustness in validation of the BATEA framework using multi-site catchment rainfall data. The aim was to compare how BATEA performed when provided with “degraded ” rainfall from a single site compared to average rainfall from the entire catchment. The methodology used was to calibrate the same model to streamflow from the same catchment using six different rainfall time series; catchment average from the SILO gridded rainfall product, four individual gauges and the average of these four gauges. The catchment chosen was the Horton catchment, located west of the Grea