2.1 Outline of DIAS

The Data Integration and Analysis System (DIAS) was launched in Japan in 2006 with the goals of collecting and storing Earth observation data; analyzing these data in combination with socio-economic data; and applying the results to guide decision- and policy-making (DIAS, 2017; Kawasaki et al., 2017). Since its planning phase, the DIAS was intended to be an advanced e-infrastructure system capable of efficiently handling Big Data. Its prototyping phase, completed in 2010, established a unique platform to provide scientific information based on integrated Earth observation data and model outputs. Starting in 2011, the second phase of the DIAS further applied the DIAS as a tool for social and public infrastructure, significantly expanded its research and development community, and promoted interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches. Currently, the third phase aims to exploit Big Data in various domains with the intention of serving a wider range of users, including researchers, practitioners, decision-makers, and policy-makers. Furthermore, DIAS usage is expected to expand into the industrial sector.

The CMIP5 Data Analysis System (Kawasaki et al., 2017) is a publicly available tool that comprises a set of dedicated functions that allow users to access, browse, visualize, analyze, subset, and download data from the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5), which is a standard experimental protocol for studying the output of coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation models (coupled GCMs) (Meehl et al., 2000). The third and fifth phases of CMIP (CMIP3 and CMIP5, respectively) (Meehl et al., 2007; Taylor et al., 2012) delivered comprehensive and coordinated data sets including future climate projections, which were used to prepare the fourth and fifth Assessment Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007; IPCC, 2013). Koike et al. (2015) described the methodology for using CMIP3 and CMIP5 data to assess the impact of climate change on hydrological regimes and water budgets in river basins; this is an important step in developing sustainable water-management solutions. Pilot studies (Koike et al., 2015) and broader national studies on planning future water resources (Jaranilla-Sanchez et al., 2013; JICA Final Report, 2013) were carried out using the proposed methodology, thus demonstrating the efficiency of the DIAS CMIP tools in exploiting large CMIP data sets.

2.2 Motivation

After the completion of the aforementioned pilot studies, we considered activities for promoting the use of the DIAS and other relevant tools for addressing water-related issues under the impact of changing climate. This resulted in multiple demonstrations of DIAS functions during lecture-type sessions. These demonstrations helped increase awareness of the DIAS and its potential but did not enhance its actual usage to a greater extent. We also organized several two- and three-day training courses on the use of the CMIP3 data to assess the effects of climate change on water resources. These training modules consisted primarily of hands-on sessions in which participants worked with the CMIP3 tool and obtained relevant data from the GCM output for past and future climate. However, due to time constraints, the exercises were limited to the use of the tool; participants did not apply the obtained data in further analyses or integrate the obtained data with other data and information.

2.3 Aims of the program

Based on the aforementioned experience, we proposed an international summer program in the format of an intensive two-week course. The primary aims of the short course were to (1) train participants in the effective use of Big Data (particularly CMIP5 data) and relevant e-infrastructure (the DIAS) to solve problems in water-resource management and (2) ensure that participants gain knowledge and practical skills to successfully use the introduced tools in their future research and/or work. The desired outcomes for the participants are described as follows. The participants should know what Big Data is and be aware that working with Big Data is inevitable for sustainable water management. They should be able to acquire and analyze data from various sources and synthesize them into factual evidence relevant for solving problems. They should understand the interdisciplinary nature of water resources and be able to approach problems from various viewpoints. In addition, they should be aware of the transdisciplinary dimension of water-resource management and be able to incorporate societal and policy aspects when solving problems. During the short course, participants should learn to work in international, multidisciplinary teams and confront, explain, and discuss their views with collaborators. The participants should enjoy their training, feel that it was worthy of their investments of time and money, and have good memories of Japan and the organizing institutions.

3.1 Challenges and academic design

In consideration of the aims mentioned above, we identified two main challenges associated with the short duration of the course: (1) ensuring that the training has a long-lasting effect (i.e., the participants will be able to utilize the gained skills and knowledge in their future study and work) and (2) developing a proper curriculum that covers all key subjects, supports interdisciplinary synthesis, and is comprehensible to participants with diverse backgrounds. Our approaches to addressing these challenges are described as follows.

Regarding the first challenge, it is important that the participants are able to put the knowledge gained in context, connect it to their focus area, and feel confident in applying it. Abundant evidence in the literature suggests that experiential learning (learning that supports students in applying their knowledge and conceptual understanding to real-world problems or situations in which the instructor directs and facilitates the learning) is beneficial in this regard (Wurdinger and Carlson, 2010; Thiry et al., 2011). Therefore, we built the Program around real problems that the participants were charged with solving using knowledge and skills acquired through the program. The participants were required to obtain necessary data, propose a solution, and defend that solution. To solve the given problems the mixed method approach was adopted that combines a quantitative analysis and a synthesis of qualitative data with the quantitative analysis results.

Thus, participants processed, analyzed, and integrated data to support problem solutions during individual hands-on sessions. Each participant was required to submit a report that summarized his or her results and interpretation of the data in the context of the given problem; the participant was then provided with written feedback within a few hours. These individual reports ensured that the participants were able to apply the introduced tools and process the required data. After obtaining the data, and analyzing and interpreting it into relevant evidence, the participants worked in teams to synthesize the evidence with information from lectures and propose a solution. The teams were assembled to include participants of different nationalities, backgrounds, and career levels. Thus, the participants had to communicate and work with people from different disciplines, sectors, and positions along with different ages, life experiences, and views. Such teamwork imitated the real-world problem-solving process and hence enhanced the benefits of experiential learning. In addition, peer interactions and teamwork is instrumental in developing interpersonal competence and cognitive complexity (Kuh, 1995). The diverse team compositions also helped the participants to address the interdisciplinary nature of the problems.

It was important to maintain balance between the individual and the team work in order to provide adequate opportunities for the participants to attain the targeted skills and knowledge. From the personal experiences, we were aware that it is important that students work individually when learning to use a new tool or methodology to assure they personally proceed with all the steps and fully understand them. When working in groups or even in pairs, there is a high probability that some students will – more or less – only observe rather than to carry out each task by themselves and therefore their acquired skills may not be fully sufficient for independent usage of the tool/method in future. Since the participants’ ability to meaningfully use the DIAS tools in their future work was one of the primary aims of the Program, the relevant hands-on exercises and ensuing assignment were designed as individual work. On the other hand, the synthesis part of the problem solving benefits from multiple views and in the real world – as mentioned above – involves multiple experts from various disciplines. Therefore the synthesis of the obtained data and information and the solution presentations were carried out in teams. The breakdown between the individual and team work also corresponds to the respective scopes of the quantitative analysis (individual work) and the qualitative synthesis (team work).

To address the challenge of a suitable curriculum, we tried to optimize the combination of expert lectures and hands-on exercises by identifying the topic areas essential for solving the given problems and limiting the expert lectures to these essential subjects. The lectures were designed to provide required knowledge on the subject and to also put this knowledge in the context of the given problems. We invited leading experts in their fields who had experience in interdisciplinary teaching to deliver the lectures. We also allocated sufficient time for debate at the end of each lecture; thus, the participants had the opportunity to obtain additional clarification if necessary. In 2015, when we organized the Program for the first time, we allocated more time to the expert lectures than to the hands-on exercises (37% vs. 21% of the total time, Table 1) with the intention to provide the participants with a sufficient scope of knowledge for addressing the interdisciplinarity of the given problems. However, we learned from the participants that the scope of lectures felt too extensive and parts of the provided information were not much relevant to the solving of the given problems. At the same time, the participants voiced that more time dedicated to hands-on exercises would be welcome to ensure adequate practice of the trained skills. Considering these suggestions, we revised the curriculum and reduced the number of the expert lectures, while allocating more time to the hands-on exercises. In 2016, the expert lectures accounted for 25% of the total time (Table 1) and approximately one-third of the total time was devoted to hands-on sessions, which allowed for sufficient explanation of the methodologies and training on the usage of DIAS and other tools. The analysis of the participant surveys from 2015 and 2016, which is provided in Section 4, confirmed that this curriculum revision was appropriate.

The Program was also enriched by two excursions to successful realization of water-management structures in Japan, namely a multipurpose reservoir and an underground flood protection tunnel. During the excursions, facility managers gave presentations, and plenty of time was allotted for questions and answers. The presentations introduced the technical and operational details along with information on historic economic aspects and the planning process, including negotiations with local communities (or lack thereof). These experiences helped the participants without hydrology and water-resource backgrounds to connect the information from lectures to reality, thus improving their understanding of water management issues.

The teamwork sessions occupied approximately 17% of the Program. Successful team collaboration depends on trust and connectivity among individuals (Renzl, 2008); however, building such connectivity within a multidisciplinary team is challenging because of communication difficulties and differences in world views and priorities among people from different disciplines (Mills, 2011). Blöschl et al. (2012) recognized the benefits of informal social gatherings for developing relationships, connectivity, and trust. Our Program dedicated approximately 10% of the time to social events, including a welcome party, a barbecue event during one of the excursions, and an optional one-day hiking trip. The approximate breakdown of the Program’s time according to session type is shown in Table 1. For illustration, the Program’s schedule in 2016 is provided in Table 2.

3.2 The Program’s content

As mentioned earlier, the central component of the Program was case-study problems that focused on issues in water resources and water-related disasters under the changing climate, particularly (i) water and food security, (ii) poverty alleviation through flood-disaster risk reduction, and (iii) integrated water resources management considering community life and the environment. Real problems in two Asian river basins (the Pampanga River basin in the Philippines and the Bago River basin in Myanmar) that are components of recent or current larger-scale projects were selected. The Pampanga River basin problem in the Program was inspired by the “The Study of Water Security Master Plan for Metro Manila and its Adjoining Areas,” particularly the part that focused on climate change impact assessment and hydrological simulations, which were undertaken as part of a project of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA, 2013). In our Program, the Pampanga problem focused on developing water resources to assure a stable water supply for Metro Manila in the future in consideration of climate change impacts. The Bago River basin problem was based on the current science and technology project of the Official Development Assistance (ODA) in Japan (SATREPS, 2017), which aims to reduce poverty and flood risk in the basin in consideration of climate change (Htut et al., 2014; Win et al., 2015).

On the first day of the Program, the participants were provided with a brief introduction of the case-study basins, and the target problems were stated. The first teamwork session was then scheduled, and the participants were asked to propose an initial solution for a problem based on their existing knowledge and limited information provided during the introduction to the problem. This allowed the final proposed solutions based on the knowledge and skills acquired through the Program to be compared with the initial solutions. Figure 1 shows the framework used to guide participants’ work on the given problems. The major tasks included (i) acquiring evidence, (ii) synthesizing the evidence with information provided through the experts’ lectures and background knowledge, (iii) proposing a solution to the given problem based on the gathered and synthesized evidence, and (iv) presenting and defending the proposed solution.

The experts’ lectures covered hydrology and climatology, data and information technology science, the DIAS, water resources management, disaster management, and the economic evaluation of disasters. The Big Data and DIAS lectures took place at the Institute of Industrial Science of UTokyo, where the core hardware system of the DIAS is located. The participants were given a demonstration of the DIAS and visited the server room to assuring that they went away with an accurate understanding of the system and its complexity. The participants were able to see the large server room in person and meet members of the DIAS team; this experience imparted a better understanding of the DIAS compared to experiencing it only through the online use of its services.

The evidence for the problem’s solution was acquired through individual work during the hands-on sessions. These sessions focused on the appropriate use of various observational data, model outputs, and data integration functions available on the DIAS along with geospatial technologies such as GIS. The exercises introduced:

1. The DIAS CMIP5 tool, with a focus on model output selection, bias correction, and the downloading of precipitation data from past simulations and future projections for assessing the impact of climate change on water resources in the given river basins.
2. The ArcGIS software, particularly the functions for spatial interpolation and map preparation that targets the spatial analysis of precipitation in the given basins.
3. The Integrated Flood Analysis System (IFAS) developed at ICHARM to simulate river flows using precipitation data obtained from the CMIP5 tool. The IFAS streamflow outputs and the corrected precipitation were then used as a basis to propose solutions to the given problems.

Special attention was paid to developing a proper understanding and interpretation of the data along with the ability to draw proper conclusions from the results. To ensure that participants truly mastered the use of the tools and understood the data they were working with, each participant was asked to draft a report summarizing their work and results and submit it no later than one day before the end of the Program. Each report contained the following components (the key skills demonstrated by the different components are provided in parentheses):

1. A brief introduction to a basin and its climatology (finding relevant information through Internet search);
2. A description of using the CMIP5 tool to obtain suitable GCM outputs for further analysis (understanding of GCM output and the appropriate use of the CMIP5 tool);
3. An analysis of rainfall data to identify future changes in total annual rainfall, climatology, and extremes (understanding the rainfall data and its analysis and interpreting changes in rainfall patterns for water resources and water-related disasters);
4. A spatial distribution analysis of extreme rainfall (ability to practically use GIS software, particularly functions for spatial interpolation and map creation, and understand the possibilities and limitations of spatial interpolation related to rainfall); and
5. A brief conclusion that summarizes the findings into implications for future water resources management in the given basin (ability to interpret the results and synthesize the obtained information, including material from the lectures).

These individual reports were reviewed, and feedback in the form of corrections and comments was returned to participants prior to their final presentation preparation session. In case of IFAS training, the participants worked in teams and were asked to run the model for several wet and dry years in the past and future using at least two model outputs; they then analyzed the resulting hydrographs at the basin outlets. The teams presented the results and their interpretations of the results at the end of the IFAS training session (before preparing the final presentations) and received feedback from the lecturer.

The excursions provided a welcome diversion from the intensive study program while also giving participants additional information on water resources management solutions. The operations staff of the visited facilities introduced the technical and operational details along with information on historic economic aspects and the planning process, including negotiations with local communities (or lack thereof). The participants were able to utilize the knowledge gathered during the excursions in their proposed solutions.

After the complete set of lectures and exercises, the participants completed three sessions of teamwork to synthesize the gathered evidence with information from the lectures and excursions along with their own preexisting knowledge. We provided the participants with some instructions on how to conceive their proposals and prepare presentations. These instructions were rather general and left ample space for the participants to incorporate their own ideas. We requested that the final proposals contained the following components:

• Statement of the main problem to be solved;
• Hydrological assessment that considers climate change impacts (to the extent of the content of the course);
• Possible water resources management solutions;
• Economic aspects (investment vs. reducing loss, improving economy); and
• Consensus building among stakeholders, including local citizens.

Obviously, the two-week course was not long enough to produce in-depth and fully comprehensive analyses and solutions. Rather, we asked the participants to elaborate their proposals within the extent of the Program’s contents and to incorporate their own views and knowledge based on their backgrounds. The formats of the final presentations were not limited to the usual oral presentation of slides; instead, the participants were encouraged to be creative and consider different performance types (e.g., one team performed a skit). The final presentations were evaluated by a committee that consisted of the Program lecturers based on five criteria: focus on the main goal, innovation, feasibility, presentation, and capability to answer questions. To make the session more attractive and imitate the real process of evaluating water management plans from multiple perspectives, the committee members were asked to play the roles of high-level representatives of various ministries, United Nations organizations, and ODA agencies and consider the presented proposals from the viewpoint of their organization. Thus, the participants faced a wide spectrum of questions and gained an understanding of the complexity of decisions related to water management. At the end of the Program, the participants received a Certificate of Completion, and awards were given for the two best team presentations and the best individual assignment.

Snapshots from different sessions of the Program are shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3 presents group photos from excursions. A short video was produced from both events in 2015 and 2016 (see ref.: Summer Program, 2015 and 2016, respectively). More information on the Summer Program, including a summary of reports, is available from the UTokyo Water Cycle Integrator Unit’s website: http://wci.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/summer/.

5.1 Benefits

The participants gained the skills to use the introduced Big Data tools at a level sufficient to use them individually in the future. They also learned how to practically apply the tools in specific problems related to water resources management. Some of the benefits of the Program are related to its interdisciplinary nature; the participants expanded their knowledge beyond their area of study/research/work and interacted with students and professionals from different disciplines and at different career stages. When working on the case-study problems, the participants exercised various skills to synthesize information, including aggregating data, analyzing patterns and trends, combining knowledge from various disciplines, and combining different measures to address water-management problems. The team sessions trained the participants in collaborative work skills, including communicating with colleagues, resolving conflicts to reach a consensus, and sharing the workload. They also practiced skills related to presenting and defending their work. Finally, the participants gained some cross-cultural experience by working in international teams.

The Program also had benefits for the DIAS team and organizing institutions, including an expansion of the DIAS system and the IFAS user community. The course also fostered interest in the application of Big Data to sustainable water management. Some participants also showed an interest in further collaboration with UTokyo and ICHARM.

5.2 Lessons learned

Based on the two occasions of the Program, we have learned some lessons that may be useful for others planning a similar short course. Some of the difficulties we identified in 2015 were addressed in the design of the 2016 Program, and the improved participant evaluations indicated that the changes were effective. The lessons learned from the 2015 and 2016 Programs are summarized as follows.

• An experiential learning approach based on solving case-study problems was effective at motivating participants and keeping them actively engaged in the work throughout the course. Having the participants use the new tools and data to solve real case-study problems was effective at demonstrating the potential of these tools/data.
• It is important to provide a balanced mixture of lectures and hands-on exercises; it is especially important to refrain from too many lectures. Considering the time constraints, the spectrum of subjects taught should be narrowed down to those that are essential for solving the case-study problems. The lectures should be prepared for a multidisciplinary audience and with consideration of the participants’ different career stages.
• Although perceived as demanding, the individual assignments were instrumental in getting participants to combine and apply their new skills related to using tools, analyzing data, and interpreting data since everyone had to complete the assignments individually.
• Teamwork proved effective for synthesis part of problem solving (i.e., integrating hydrological data with other data, information from the lectures and participants’ preexisting knowledge) and was appreciated and enjoyed by the participants. Participants felt that the diversity of the participants within teams was beneficial and contributed to interdisciplinary solutions to the problems.
• Asking the participants to propose initial solutions to the given problems at the beginning of the course provided a basis from which to evaluate improvement in the participants’ skills. Requiring the participants to prepare presentations helped them to consolidate the acquired knowledge.
• Although it is critical to provide some instruction on how to solve case-study problems, it is also important to encourage participants to think creativity when developing solutions.
• Excursions to the DIAS and water management facilities helped the participants connect the contents of lectures and case problems to reality. The excursions were also a welcome break from the typical classroom setting and provided an excellent opportunity to foster the development of relationships and trust among participants. Informal gatherings, including the welcome reception and the hiking trip were also instrumental for the development of relationships.
• Obtaining feedback and assessing the Program are essential, and surveys of participant opinion have been instrumental in improving the Program.