Checking for non-preferred file/folder path names (may take a long time depending on the number of files/folders) ...
This resource contains some files/folders that have non-preferred characters in their name. Show non-conforming files/folders.
This resource contains content types with files that need to be updated to match with metadata changes. Show content type files that need updating.
| Authors: |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Owners: |
|
This resource does not have an owner who is an active HydroShare user. Contact CUAHSI (help@cuahsi.org) to determine if accessing this resource is possible. |
| Type: | Resource | |
| Storage: | The size of this resource is 16.0 GB | |
| Created: | Oct 11, 2025 at 9:23 p.m. (UTC) | |
| Last updated: | Dec 10, 2025 at 4:25 p.m. (UTC) | |
| Citation: | See how to cite this resource |
| Sharing Status: | Private (Accessible via direct link sharing) |
|---|---|
| Views: | 264 |
| Downloads: | 18 |
| +1 Votes: | Be the first one to this. |
| Comments: | No comments (yet) |
Abstract
This dataset provides long-term groundwater recharge (GWR) estimates under current land cover (S0) and five land cover transformation scenarios (S1–S5), spanning extreme and moderate deforestation as well as low, moderate, and extreme afforestation. All GWR datasets represent the average annual period from 1991 to 2020. GWR was calculated using a long-term water balance approach, which combines Budyko-based actual evapotranspiration estimates with water yield calculations and the GWR coefficient dataset. In addition, GWR sensitivity and elasticity with respect to changes in the Budyko parameter (ω*) were derived by averaging the analytical derivatives of the Turc–Pike and Fu equations. These metrics provide insight into how land cover and hydrogeological characteristics influence the responsiveness of GWR. Sensitivity and elasticity quantify the absolute and proportional change in recharge resulting from land cover-induced variations in ω*. These datasets are suitable for identifying recharge hotspots, assessing GWR vulnerability, and examining recharge behavior under alternative land cover and environmental conditions/scenarios. Cells classified as “water” in the land cover dataset were excluded from GWR calculations. All files are delivered in GeoTIFF (float32) format at a spatial resolution of 100 × 100 m. The dataset uses the ETRS89 / LAEA Europe projection (EPSG: 3035).
● The data repository includes a README.pdf file that describes the dataset collection and lists all raster (GeoTIFF) products.
● Further methodological details are provided in Nabaei et al. (2026) and in the Appendices of the associated publication.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
● How to cite:
Nabaei, S., Ali, A.M., & Teuling, A.J. (2026). Impact of Forest Cover on Groundwater Recharge: A High-Resolution Scenario Analysis for Europe. Global Environmental Change, XX, XXXXXX. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2026.XXXXXX
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Subject Keywords
Coverage
Spatial
Temporal
| Start Date: | |
|---|---|
| End Date: |
Content
Related Resources
| The content of this resource is derived from | Pan-European Actual Evapotranspiration (100 m): http://www.hydroshare.org/resource/46b4461418cf4dd08f65c71db7bae9a8 |
| The content of this resource is derived from | Pan-European Land Cover Scenarios (100 m): http://www.hydroshare.org/resource/125d6d07001a45d69a23f9550d593f13 |
How to Cite
This resource is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoCommercial CC BY-NC.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Comments
There are currently no comments
New Comment