The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Vulnerability to the impact of climate change on renewable groundwater resources: a global-scale assessment
Open accessAbstract
Climate change will lead to significant changes of groundwater recharge and thus renewable groundwater resources. Using the global water resources and use model WaterGAP, the impact of climate change on groundwater recharge and the number of affected people was computed for four climate scenarios by two climate models. Vulnerability of humans to decreased groundwater resources depends on both the degree of decrease and the sensitivity of the human system to the decrease. For each grid cell, a sensitivity index composed of a water scarcity indicator, an indicator for dependence of water supply on groundwater and the Human Development Index was quantified. Combining per cent groundwater recharge decrease with the sensitivity index, global maps of vulnerability to the impact of decreased groundwater recharge in the 2050s were derived. In the A2 (B2) emissions scenario, 18.4–19.3% (16.1–18.1%) of the global population of 10.7 (9.1) billion would be affected by groundwater recharge decreases of at least 10%, and 4.8–5.7% (3.8–3.8%) of the global population would be in the two highest vulnerability classes. The highest vulnerabilities are found at the North African rim of the Mediterranean Sea, in southwestern Africa, in northeastern Brazil and in the central Andes, which are areas of moderate to high sensitivity. For most of the areas with high population density and high sensitivity, model results indicate that groundwater recharge is unlikely to decrease by more than 10% until the 2050s. However, a fifth to a third of the population may be affected by a groundwater recharge increase of more than 10%, with negative impacts in the case of shallow water tables. The spatial distribution of vulnerability, even at the continental scale, differs more strongly between the two climate models than between the two emissions scenarios.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Siebert, S., & Döll, P. (2010) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.07.031 · Cited by 874
Self-citation
Cited by
Water balance of global aquifers revealed by groundwater footprint
Gleeson, T., Wada, Y., Bierkens, M. F. P., & van Beek, L. P. H. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11295 · Cited by 1,677
Kummu, M., de Moel, H., Porkka, M., Siebert, S., Varis, O., & Ward, P. J. (2012) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.08.092 · Cited by 1,300
Climate change impacts in Sub-Saharan Africa: from physical changes to their social repercussions
Serdeczny, O., Adams, S., Baarsch, F., Coumou, D., Robinson, A., Hare, W., Schaeffer, M., Perrette, M., & Reinhardt, J. (2017) · Regional Environmental Change · doi:10.1007/s10113-015-0910-2 · Cited by 1,037
Wada, Y., Wisser, D., & Bierkens, M. F. P. (2014) · Earth System Dynamics · doi:10.5194/esd-5-15-2014 · Cited by 873
Global-scale analysis of river flow alterations due to water withdrawals and reservoirs
(2009) · doi:10.5194/hess-13-2413-2009 · Cited by 581
Metadata
- Authors
- Döll, P.
- Venue
- Environmental Research Letters
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2009-07
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 035006
- ISSN
- 1748-9326 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1984828310
- Cited by
- 507
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 34.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Vulnerability to the impact of climate change on renewable groundwater resources: a global-scale assessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/1748-9326/4/3/035006
- The paper
- Döll, P. (2009). Vulnerability to the impact of climate change on renewable groundwater resources: a global-scale assessment. Environmental Research Letters. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/4/3/035006
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.