ArticleHydrogeology journal2026
What is groundwater?
Article in Hydrogeology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Groundwater may be the most important substance on Earth that most people have never heard of, yet it has quietly influenced the evolution of human culture since its earliest beginnings. The predominant physicalist ontology of modernity has created such a powerful conceptual representation of groundwater, that seemingly incredible benefits have accrued to society globally via our ability to understand and relate to it in this mode. However, this modern ontological lens goes unnoticed and unannounced in most groundwater research. This study aims to broaden existing narratives about what groundwater was, is and could be, by exploring how groundwater has come to be perceived, understood and defined by WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialised, rich, democratic) societies in which the author is embedded. By considering the co-evolution of four fields of human-groundwater development, namely - behaviour, systems, psychology, and culture - this paper explores how originally participatory ways of perceiving and knowing groundwater gave way to increasingly abstracted propositional modes of knowledge. Eventually many humans came to believe that the abstract symbols and modelled quantities which they used to represent reality were actually reality itself. Thus 'modern groundwater' is now commonly defined and related to as a resource, a 'thing' devoid of inherent meaning or value, separate from ourselves, which can be manipulated to our own ends. Greater epistemic reflectivity, and a pivot to working metaphysically with groundwater as a relational process, may lead to more effective responses to some of the global predicaments we currently face. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-026-03056-9.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.