World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Award Badge
Environmental Sciences
Canada
2023

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
84
Citations
26800
World Ranking
789
National Ranking
66

Jim Freer publication distribution in Environmental Sciences in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Environmental Sciences in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Jim Freer sits on this spectrum.

41–50 publications: 21 scientists 51–60 publications: 62 scientists 61–70 publications: 133 scientists 71–80 publications: 257 scientists 81–90 publications: 361 scientists 91–100 publications: 440 scientists 101–110 publications: 492 scientists 111–120 publications: 541 scientists 121–130 publications: 617 scientists 131–140 publications: 544 scientists 141–150 publications: 541 scientists 151–160 publications: 539 scientists 161–170 publications: 444 scientists 171–180 publications: 444 scientists 181–190 publications: 400 scientists 191–200 publications: 377 scientists 201–210 publications: 318 scientists 211–220 publications: 283 scientists 221–230 publications: 263 scientists 231–240 publications: 220 scientists 241–250 publications: 217 scientists 251–260 publications: 180 scientists 261–270 publications: 181 scientists 271–280 publications: 155 scientists 281–290 publications: 130 scientists 291–300 publications: 127 scientists 301–310 publications: 130 scientists 311–320 publications: 85 scientists 321–330 publications: 106 scientists 331–340 publications: 80 scientists 341–350 publications: 83 scientists 351–360 publications: 75 scientists 361–370 publications: 69 scientists 371–380 publications: 52 scientists 381–390 publications: 54 scientists 391–400 publications: 56 scientists 401–410 publications: 44 scientists 411–420 publications: 40 scientists 421–430 publications: 36 scientists 431–440 publications: 25 scientists 441–450 publications: 25 scientists 451–460 publications: 32 scientists 461–470 publications: 29 scientists 471–480 publications: 21 scientists 481–490 publications: 26 scientists 491–500 publications: 25 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 18 scientists 521–530 publications: 15 scientists 531–540 publications: 22 scientists 541–550 publications: 12 scientists 551–560 publications: 15 scientists 561–570 publications: 11 scientists 571–580 publications: 19 scientists 581–590 publications: 9 scientists 591–600 publications: 9 scientists 601–610 publications: 7 scientists 611–620 publications: 11 scientists 621–630 publications: 5 scientists 631–640 publications: 5 scientists 641–650 publications: 6 scientists 651–660 publications: 3 scientists 661–670 publications: 3 scientists 671–680 publications: 4 scientists 681–686 publications: 3 scientists 687+ publications: 100 scientists
41 publications 687+

This scientist: 343 publications — 90th percentile

90% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 687 publications or more.

Jim Freer D-index placement in Environmental Sciences in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Environmental Sciences scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Jim Freer sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 12 scientists 31 D-Index: 26 scientists 32 D-Index: 51 scientists 33 D-Index: 88 scientists 34 D-Index: 123 scientists 35 D-Index: 163 scientists 36 D-Index: 206 scientists 37 D-Index: 267 scientists 38 D-Index: 265 scientists 39 D-Index: 275 scientists 40 D-Index: 321 scientists 41 D-Index: 343 scientists 42 D-Index: 305 scientists 43 D-Index: 336 scientists 44 D-Index: 330 scientists 45 D-Index: 348 scientists 46 D-Index: 291 scientists 47 D-Index: 275 scientists 48 D-Index: 272 scientists 49 D-Index: 273 scientists 50 D-Index: 263 scientists 51 D-Index: 232 scientists 52 D-Index: 266 scientists 53 D-Index: 217 scientists 54 D-Index: 199 scientists 55 D-Index: 177 scientists 56 D-Index: 202 scientists 57 D-Index: 204 scientists 58 D-Index: 166 scientists 59 D-Index: 177 scientists 60 D-Index: 166 scientists 61 D-Index: 152 scientists 62 D-Index: 143 scientists 63 D-Index: 150 scientists 64 D-Index: 124 scientists 65 D-Index: 119 scientists 66 D-Index: 120 scientists 67 D-Index: 118 scientists 68 D-Index: 82 scientists 69 D-Index: 98 scientists 70 D-Index: 94 scientists 71 D-Index: 105 scientists 72 D-Index: 74 scientists 73 D-Index: 84 scientists 74 D-Index: 70 scientists 75 D-Index: 67 scientists 76 D-Index: 78 scientists 77 D-Index: 60 scientists 78 D-Index: 59 scientists 79 D-Index: 52 scientists 80 D-Index: 47 scientists 81 D-Index: 38 scientists 82 D-Index: 48 scientists 83 D-Index: 42 scientists 84 D-Index: 42 scientists 85 D-Index: 43 scientists 86 D-Index: 29 scientists 87 D-Index: 37 scientists 88 D-Index: 29 scientists 89 D-Index: 30 scientists 90 D-Index: 34 scientists 91 D-Index: 20 scientists 92 D-Index: 22 scientists 93 D-Index: 17 scientists 94 D-Index: 19 scientists 95 D-Index: 24 scientists 96 D-Index: 21 scientists 97 D-Index: 20 scientists 98 D-Index: 24 scientists 99 D-Index: 17 scientists 100 D-Index: 17 scientists 101 D-Index: 21 scientists 102 D-Index: 25 scientists 103 D-Index: 18 scientists 104 D-Index: 26 scientists 105 D-Index: 19 scientists 106 D-Index: 15 scientists 107 D-Index: 10 scientists 108 D-Index: 13 scientists 109 D-Index: 15 scientists 110 D-Index: 12 scientists 111 D-Index: 8 scientists 112 D-Index: 7 scientists 113 D-Index: 9 scientists 114 D-Index: 6 scientists 115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116 D-Index: 7 scientists 117 D-Index: 8 scientists 118 D-Index: 3 scientists 119 D-Index: 5 scientists 120 D-Index: 7 scientists 121 D-Index: 2 scientists 122 D-Index: 4 scientists 123 D-Index: 8 scientists 124 D-Index: 7 scientists 125+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 125+

This scientist: 84 D-Index — 92nd percentile

92% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 125 D-Index or more.

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2023 - Research.com Environmental Sciences in Canada Leader Award

Overview

Jim Freer is affiliated with the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom and specializes in environmental science, with a focus on hydrology and watershed management studies. Their research encompasses several subfields including global and planetary change, water science and technology, environmental engineering, ecology, and atmospheric science.

The scientist's recent publications cover a range of topics related to flood risk, drought analysis, and hydrological processes. Notable papers include:

  • The challenge of unprecedented floods and droughts in risk management, 2022, published in Nature
  • The Abuse of Popular Performance Metrics in Hydrologic Modeling, 2021, Water Resources Research
  • CAMELS-GB: hydrometeorological time series and landscape attributes for 671 catchments in Great Britain, 2020, Earth system science data
  • A Brief Analysis of Conceptual Model Structure Uncertainty Using 36 Models and 559 Catchments, 2020, Water Resources Research
  • A history of TOPMODEL, 2021, Hydrology and earth system sciences

Freer frequently collaborates with a group of researchers including Gemma Coxon, Thorsten Wagener, Wouter Knoben, Martyn Clark, and Shervan Gharari. These co-authors contribute to advancing the study of hydrology and associated environmental sciences.

Publications by Freer appear predominantly in scientific outlets such as:

  • Hydrology and earth system sciences
  • Water Resources Research
  • Hydrological Processes
  • Earth system science data
  • Earth Surface Processes and Landforms

Freer's research topics emphasize multiple aspects of hydrology including:

  • Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
  • Flood Risk Assessment and Management
  • Hydrology and Drought Analysis
  • Hydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
  • Groundwater flow and contamination studies
  • Cryospheric studies and observations
  • Hydrological Forecasting Using AI

Best Publications

  • Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modelling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology

    Keith Beven;Jim Freer

  • Sensitivity analysis of environmental models

    Francesca Pianosi;Keith Beven;Jim Freer;Jim W. Hall

  • A decade of Predictions in Ungauged Basins (PUB)—a review

    M. Hrachowitz;H. H. G. Savenije;G. Blöschl;J. J. Mcdonnell

  • Technical note: Inherent benchmark or not? Comparing Nash-Sutcliffe and Kling-Gupta efficiency scores

    Wouter J. M. Knoben;Wouter J. M. Knoben;Jim E. Freer;Ross A. Woods

  • Bayesian Estimation of Uncertainty in Runoff Prediction and the Value of Data: An Application of the GLUE Approach

    Jim Freer;Keith J. Beven;Bruno Ambroise

  • A high‐resolution global flood hazard model

    Christopher C. Sampson;Andrew M. Smith;Paul D. Bates;Jeffrey C. Neal

  • Benchmarking observational uncertainties for hydrology: rainfall, river discharge and water quality

    Hilary Mcmillan;Tobias Krueger;Jim E Freer

  • A unified approach for process-based hydrologic modeling: 1. Modeling concept

    Martyn P. Clark;Bart Nijssen;Jessica D. Lundquist;Dmitri Kavetski

  • A dynamic TOPMODEL

    Keith Beven;Jim Freer

  • Toward a generalization of the TOPMODEL concepts:Topographic indices of hydrological similarity

    Bruno Ambroise;Keith J. Beven;Jim Freer

  • Quantifying contributions to storm runoff through end-member mixing analysis and hydrologic measurements at the Panola Mountain Research Watershed (Georgia, USA).

    Douglas A. Burns;Jeffrey J. Mcdonnell;Richard P. Hooper;Norman E. Peters

  • The role of bedrock topography on subsurface storm flow

    Jim Freer;Jeffery J. McDonnell;K.J. Beven;N.E. Peters

  • So just why would a modeller choose to be incoherent

    Keith J. Beven;Paul J. Smith;Jim E. Freer

  • Using hysteresis analysis of high-resolution water quality monitoring data, including uncertainty, to infer controls on nutrient and sediment transfer in catchments

    Charlotte E M Lloyd;Jim E Freer;Penny J Johnes;A. L. Collins

  • Flood-plain mapping: a critical discussion of deterministic and probabilistic approaches

    Giuliano Di Baldassarre;Guy Schumann;Paul D. Bates;Jim E. Freer

  • Impacts of uncertain river flow data on rainfall‐runoff model calibration and discharge predictions

    Hilary McMillan;Jim Freer;Florian Pappenberger;Tobias Krueger

  • Calibration of hydrological models using flow-duration curves

    Ida Westerberg;José-Luis Guerrero;P. M. Younger;Keith Beven;Keith Beven

  • The abuse of popular performance metrics in hydrologic modeling

    Martyn P. Clark;Richard M. Vogel;Jonathan R. Lamontagne;Naoki Mizukami

  • Equifinality and uncertainty in physically based soil erosion models: application of the GLUE methodology to WEPP–the Water Erosion Prediction Project–for sites in the UK and USA

    Richard E. Brazier;Keith J. Beven;Jim Freer;John S. Rowan

  • Constraining dynamic TOPMODEL responses for imprecise water table information using fuzzy rule based performance measures

    J.E. Freer;H. McMillan;J.J. McDonnell;K.J. Beven

  • CAMELS-GB: hydrometeorological time series and landscape attributes for 671 catchments in Great Britain

    Gemma Coxon;Nans Addor;Nans Addor;John P. Bloomfield;Jim Freer;Jim Freer

  • Geophysical Research Abstracts

    Charlotte E M Lloyd;Jim E Freer;Penny J Johnes;A Collins

  • Sensitivity Analysis of Environmental Models: A Systematic Review with Practical Workflow

    F. Pianosi;T. Wagener;J. Rougier;J. Hall

Frequent Co-Authors

Keith Beven
Keith Beven Lancaster University
Thorsten Wagener
Thorsten Wagener University of Potsdam
Ross Woods
Ross Woods University of Bristol
Paul D Bates
Paul D Bates University of Bristol
Penny J Johnes
Penny J Johnes University of Bristol
Adrian L. Collins
Adrian L. Collins Rothamsted Research
Philip M. Haygarth
Philip M. Haygarth Lancaster University
Hannah Cloke
Hannah Cloke University of Reading
John N. Quinton
John N. Quinton Lancaster University
Dawei Han
Dawei Han University of Bristol

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

For students interested in broadening their expertise beyond Environmental Sciences, exploring related online degrees can open up diverse career opportunities. Many institutions now offer flexible programs, such as the online eds to edd bridge program, which allows educators to advance into leadership roles while balancing their schedules.

Social work is another growing field that intersects with environmental advocacy. Pursuing the cheapest dsw program available online can provide affordable access to advanced social work careers, emphasizing community and environmental well-being.

For those seeking broad foundational knowledge applicable across many sectors, an online general studies degree affordable program can be a strategic choice, combining interdisciplinary courses with cost-effectiveness.

Additionally, learners aiming to complete their education swiftly may consider some of the easy bachelor degrees available online. These programs often focus on practical skills and streamlined curricula, supporting quicker entry into the workforce.

Best Scientists Citing Jim Freer

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles