World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
59
Citations
13235
World Ranking
3085
National Ranking
1197

Engineering and Technology

D-Index
57
Citations
12169
World Ranking
2647
National Ranking
808

Jay R. Lund publication distribution in Engineering and Technology in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Engineering and Technology in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Jay R. Lund sits on this spectrum.

38–47 publications: 20 scientists 48–57 publications: 35 scientists 58–67 publications: 96 scientists 68–77 publications: 135 scientists 78–87 publications: 190 scientists 88–97 publications: 259 scientists 98–107 publications: 283 scientists 108–117 publications: 369 scientists 118–127 publications: 341 scientists 128–137 publications: 386 scientists 138–147 publications: 372 scientists 148–157 publications: 457 scientists 158–167 publications: 415 scientists 168–177 publications: 407 scientists 178–187 publications: 421 scientists 188–197 publications: 378 scientists 198–207 publications: 403 scientists 208–217 publications: 317 scientists 218–227 publications: 346 scientists 228–237 publications: 321 scientists 238–247 publications: 260 scientists 248–257 publications: 280 scientists 258–267 publications: 240 scientists 268–277 publications: 214 scientists 278–287 publications: 242 scientists 288–297 publications: 203 scientists 298–307 publications: 166 scientists 308–317 publications: 154 scientists 318–327 publications: 175 scientists 328–337 publications: 159 scientists 338–347 publications: 99 scientists 348–357 publications: 131 scientists 358–367 publications: 106 scientists 368–377 publications: 118 scientists 378–387 publications: 97 scientists 388–397 publications: 108 scientists 398–407 publications: 82 scientists 408–417 publications: 71 scientists 418–427 publications: 64 scientists 428–437 publications: 55 scientists 438–447 publications: 54 scientists 448–457 publications: 60 scientists 458–467 publications: 47 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 30 scientists 488–497 publications: 29 scientists 498–507 publications: 38 scientists 508–517 publications: 40 scientists 518–527 publications: 32 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 28 scientists 548–557 publications: 23 scientists 558–567 publications: 19 scientists 568–577 publications: 16 scientists 578–587 publications: 17 scientists 588–597 publications: 18 scientists 598–607 publications: 22 scientists 608–617 publications: 15 scientists 618–627 publications: 9 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 21 scientists 648–657 publications: 12 scientists 658–667 publications: 9 scientists 668–677 publications: 11 scientists 678–687 publications: 9 scientists 688–697 publications: 6 scientists 698–707 publications: 14 scientists 708–717 publications: 7 scientists 718–727 publications: 8 scientists 728–737 publications: 10 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 5 scientists 758–767 publications: 5 scientists 768–777 publications: 11 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 2 scientists 798–803 publications: 4 scientists 804+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 804+

This scientist: 321 publications — 79th percentile

79% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 804 publications or more.

Jay R. Lund D-index placement in Engineering and Technology in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Engineering and Technology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Jay R. Lund sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 59 scientists 31 D-Index: 114 scientists 32 D-Index: 129 scientists 33 D-Index: 189 scientists 34 D-Index: 200 scientists 35 D-Index: 262 scientists 36 D-Index: 311 scientists 37 D-Index: 312 scientists 38 D-Index: 350 scientists 39 D-Index: 385 scientists 40 D-Index: 348 scientists 41 D-Index: 362 scientists 42 D-Index: 426 scientists 43 D-Index: 380 scientists 44 D-Index: 310 scientists 45 D-Index: 341 scientists 46 D-Index: 301 scientists 47 D-Index: 306 scientists 48 D-Index: 271 scientists 49 D-Index: 246 scientists 50 D-Index: 210 scientists 51 D-Index: 253 scientists 52 D-Index: 213 scientists 53 D-Index: 221 scientists 54 D-Index: 195 scientists 55 D-Index: 186 scientists 56 D-Index: 170 scientists 57 D-Index: 167 scientists 58 D-Index: 166 scientists 59 D-Index: 144 scientists 60 D-Index: 152 scientists 61 D-Index: 141 scientists 62 D-Index: 138 scientists 63 D-Index: 131 scientists 64 D-Index: 118 scientists 65 D-Index: 114 scientists 66 D-Index: 119 scientists 67 D-Index: 95 scientists 68 D-Index: 87 scientists 69 D-Index: 77 scientists 70 D-Index: 89 scientists 71 D-Index: 69 scientists 72 D-Index: 54 scientists 73 D-Index: 46 scientists 74 D-Index: 55 scientists 75 D-Index: 54 scientists 76 D-Index: 49 scientists 77 D-Index: 53 scientists 78 D-Index: 46 scientists 79 D-Index: 28 scientists 80 D-Index: 39 scientists 81 D-Index: 36 scientists 82 D-Index: 24 scientists 83 D-Index: 26 scientists 84 D-Index: 36 scientists 85 D-Index: 18 scientists 86 D-Index: 25 scientists 87 D-Index: 19 scientists 88 D-Index: 26 scientists 89 D-Index: 27 scientists 90 D-Index: 23 scientists 91 D-Index: 15 scientists 92 D-Index: 12 scientists 93 D-Index: 9 scientists 94 D-Index: 15 scientists 95 D-Index: 10 scientists 96 D-Index: 13 scientists 97 D-Index: 13 scientists 98 D-Index: 9 scientists 99 D-Index: 7 scientists 100 D-Index: 7 scientists 101 D-Index: 8 scientists 102 D-Index: 7 scientists 103 D-Index: 7 scientists 104 D-Index: 9 scientists 105 D-Index: 6 scientists 106 D-Index: 9 scientists 107+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 107+

This scientist: 57 D-Index — 74th percentile

74% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 107 D-Index or more.

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2018 - Member of the National Academy of Engineering For analysis of water and environmental policy issues leading to integrated water resources planning and management.

Overview

Jay R. Lund is affiliated with the University of California, Davis in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of Environmental Science and Engineering, with a focus on topics related to water resources management and optimization.

The main topics covered in their work include:

  • Water resources management and optimization
  • Water-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
  • Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
  • Flood Risk Assessment and Management
  • Hydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
  • Hydrology and Drought Analysis
  • Reservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods

They have contributed to subfields such as Ocean Engineering, Water Science and Technology, Global and Planetary Change, Electrical and Electronic Engineering, and Finance.

Frequent coauthors in Jay R. Lund's research include:

  • Josué Medellín-Azuara
  • Ximing Cai
  • Benxi Liu
  • Shengli Liao
  • Mustafa Sahin Dogan

Jay R. Lund has published extensively in a range of venues with multiple contributions to:

  • Water
  • Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
  • Water Resources Research
  • Water Resources Management
  • SSRN Electronic Journal

Selected recent papers authored include:

  • "Optimal power peak shaving using hydropower to complement wind and solar power uncertainty" (2020), Energy Conversion and Management
  • "Restoring Rivers and Floodplains for Habitat and Flood Risk Reduction: Experiences in Multi-Benefit Floodplain Management From California and Germany" (2022), Frontiers in Environmental Science
  • "Peak Shaving Model for Coordinated Hydro-Wind-Solar System Serving Local and Multiple Receiving Power Grids via HVDC Transmission Lines" (2020), IEEE Access
  • "Pareto Optimality and Compromise for Environmental Water Management" (2021), Water Resources Research
  • "Planning for groundwater sustainability accounting for uncertainty and costs: An application to California's Central Valley" (2020), Journal of Environmental Management

In 2018, Jay R. Lund was recognized as a Member of the National Academy of Engineering for their work on analysis of water and environmental policy issues leading to integrated water resources planning and management.

Best Publications

  • Hydro-economic models: concepts, design, applications, and future prospects.

    Julien J. Harou;Manuel Pulido-Velazquez;David E. Rosenberg;Josué Medellín-Azuara

  • Economic-engineering optimization for California water management

    Andrew J. Draper;Marion W. Jenkins;Kenneth W. Kirby;Jay R. Lund

  • Water and climate: Recognize anthropogenic drought.

    Amir AghaKouchak;David Feldman;Martin Hoerling;Travis Huxman

  • The future of water resources systems analysis: Toward a scientific framework for sustainable water management

    Casey M. Brown;Jay R. Lund;Ximing Cai;Patrick M. Reed

  • Climate warming and water management adaptation for California

    Stacy K. Tanaka;Tingju Zhu;Jay R. Lund;Richard E. Howitt

  • Optimal Hedging and Carryover Storage Value

    Andrew J. Draper;Jay R. Lund

  • Derived Operating Rules for Reservoirs in Series or in Parallel

    Jay R. Lund;Joel Guzman

  • Lessons from California’s 2012–2016 Drought

    Jay Lund;Josue Medellin-Azuara;John Durand;Kathleen Stone

  • LINEAR PROGRAMMING FOR FLOOD CONTROL IN THE IOWA AND DES MOINES RIVERS

    Jason T. Needham;David W. Watkins;Jay R. Lund;S. K. Nanda

  • Optimization of California's Water Supply System: Results and Insights

    Marion W. Jenkins;Jay R. Lund;Richard E. Howitt;Andrew J. Draper

  • Hydro-economic Modeling in River Basin Management: Implications and Applications for the European Water Framework Directive

    I. Heinz;M. Pulido-Velazquez;J. R. Lund;J. Andreu

  • Adaptability and adaptations of California's water supply system to dry climate warming

    Josué Medellín-Azuara;Julien J. Harou;Marcelo A. Olivares;Kaveh Madani

  • Calibrating disaggregate economic models of agricultural production and water management

    Richard E. Howitt;Josué MedellíN-Azuara;Duncan Macewan;Jay R. Lund

  • A Monte-Carlo game theoretic approach for Multi-Criteria Decision Making under uncertainty

    Kaveh Madani;Jay R. Lund

  • Envisioning Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta

    Ellen Hanak;William Fleenor;Jay Lund

  • Adapting California’s water management to climate change

    Ellen Hanak;Jay R. Lund

  • Operating Rule Optimization for Missouri River Reservoir System

    Jay R. Lund;Inês Ferreira

  • Recent California Water Transfers: Implications For Water Management

    Morris Israel;Jay R. Lund

  • Optimal power peak shaving using hydropower to complement wind and solar power uncertainty

    Benxi Liu;Jay R. Lund;Shengli Liao;Xiaoyu Jin

  • Restoring Rivers and Floodplains for Habitat and Flood Risk Reduction: Experiences in Multi-Benefit Floodplain Management From California and Germany

    Unknown

  • Ending groundwater overdraft in hydrologic-economic systems

    Julien J. Harou;Jay R. Lund

  • Comparing Futures for the Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta

    Jay Lund;Ellen Hanak;William Fleenor;Willaim Bennett

Frequent Co-Authors

Richard E. Howitt
Richard E. Howitt University of California, Davis
Kaveh Madani
Kaveh Madani Yale University
Peter B. Moyle
Peter B. Moyle University of California, Davis
Jeffrey F. Mount
Jeffrey F. Mount University of California, Davis
Chuntian Cheng
Chuntian Cheng Dalian University of Technology
Joshua H. Viers
Joshua H. Viers University of California, Merced
Andrea Castelletti
Andrea Castelletti Polytechnic University of Milan
Thomas Harter
Thomas Harter University of California, Davis
Jianlin Hu
Jianlin Hu Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology
Michael J. Kleeman
Michael J. Kleeman University of California, Davis

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

The landscape of Engineering and Technology education in the USA is evolving rapidly, with flexible online options catering to diverse needs. Many universities now offer 6 months masters degree online programs, allowing students and professionals to gain advanced qualifications in a short time frame without putting their lives on hold.

For those interested in faster entry into the workforce, there are 4-6 week certification programs that can supplement technical skills or kickstart a new career. These short courses are ideal for upskilling or transitioning into high-demand technical roles.

Employment outcomes are a key concern, and many are turning to high paying certificate jobs in technology fields that prioritize specialized skills and industry-recognized certifications over traditional four-year degrees.

Online education also offers great flexibility for non-traditional students. Programs designed as best degrees for stay at home moms make it possible to balance learning with personal responsibilities, opening doors to rewarding engineering and technology careers from home.

Best Scientists Citing Jay R. Lund

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles