Assessing the Impact of Urban Expansion on Groundwater Recharge Potential Using GIS-based Multi-criteria Analysis: A Case Study of Kahramanmaras¸,Türkiye (2000–2025)
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2026
Assessing the Impact of Urban Expansion on Groundwater Recharge Potential Using GIS-based Multi-criteria Analysis: A Case Study of Kahramanmaras¸,Türkiye (2000–2025)
Urban expansion threatens groundwater sustainability, yet regional-scale assessments can mask localized impacts. This study presents a GIS-based multi-criteria framework to quantify this ‘paradox of scale’, assessing the conflict between urban growth and the potential of groundwater recharge at Kahramanmaras¸, Türkiye, during the period 2000–2025. Using open-source datasets (GHSL, CHIRPS and SoilGrids), natural recharge potential was modelled, and annual loss attributable to urbanization was quantified. Although the regional mean groundwater recharge potential index (GRPI) declined only marginally (0.449→0.447) during this period, spatial analysis revealed a disproportionate, effectively irreversible loss within the most critical recharge zones. In total, 10.7 km² (3.55%) of top-priority ‘hotspot’ areas were converted to urban land, with losses unevenly distributed; the faster-urbanizing district forfeited a larger share of its hotspots. These findings indicate that reliance on regional averages is inadequate for sustainable planning. The resulting hotspot map provides a decision-ready tool to prioritize conservation of strategic recharge zones and strengthen long-term water security in rapidly urbanizing regions.
AhmedA. A., AlrajhiA., & AlquwaizanyA. (2021). Identification of groundwater potential recharge zones in the Flinders Ranges, South Australia using remote sensing, GIS, and MIF techniques. Water, 13(18), 2571. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13182571
2.
AmpeE., VanhamelI., SalvadoreE., DamsJ., BashirI., DemarchiL., ChanJ., SahliH., CantersF., & BatelaanO. (2012). Impact of urban land-cover classification on groundwater recharge uncertainty. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 5, 1859–1867. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2012.2206573
3.
Ávila-CarrascoJ. R., Hernández-HernándezM. A., HerreraG. S., & Hernández-GarcíaG. D. J. (2023). Urbanization effects on the groundwater potential recharge of the aquifers in the southern part of the Basin of Mexico. Hydrology Research, 54(5), 663–685. https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2023.103
4.
BhuniaG. (2020). An approach to demarcate groundwater recharge potential zone using geospatial technology. Applied Water Science, 10, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-020-01231-1
5.
DobleR., CrosbieR., SmerdonB., PeetersL., & CookF. (2012). Groundwater recharge from overbank floods. Water Resources Research, 48(9). https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011441
6.
ESA (European Space Agency). (2021). Copernicus DEM GLO-30. OpenTopography. https://doi.org/10.5069/G9028PQB
7.
European Commission. (2023). GHSL data package. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/098587
8.
FunkC., PetersonP., LandsfeldM., PedrerosD., VerdinJ., ShuklaS., HusakG., RowlandJ., HarrisonL., HoellA., & MichaelsenJ. (2015). The climate hazards infrared precipitation with stations: A new environmental record for monitoring extremes. Scientific Data, 2(1), 1–21.
9.
HenglT., De JesusJ. M., HeuvelinkG. B. M., GonzalezM. R., KilibardaM., BlagotićA., ShangguanW., WrightM. N., GengX., Bauer-MarschallingerB., GuevaraM. A., VargasR., MacMillanR. A., BatjesN. H., LeenaarsJ. G. B., RibeiroE., WheelerI., MantelS., & KempenB. (2017). SoilGrids250m: Global gridded soil information based on machine learning. PLoS One, 12(2), e0169748.
10.
JasechkoS., BirksS. J., GleesonT., WadaY., FawcettP., SharpZ., McDonnellJ., & WelkerJ. (2014). The pronounced seasonality of global groundwater recharge. Water Resources Research, 50, 8845–8867. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR015809
11.
LiR., ZhuG., LuS., SangL., MengG., ChenL., JiaoY., & WangQ. (2023). Effects of urbanization on the water cycle in the Shiyang River basin: Based on a stable isotope method. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 27, 4437–4452. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-4437-2023
12.
LindsayJ. B. (2016). Whitebox GAT: A case study in geomorphometric analysis. Computers & Geosciences, 95, 75-84.
13.
MacDonaldA., LarkR., TaylorR., AbiyeT., FallasH., FavreauG., GoniI., KebedeS., ScanlonB., SorensenJ., TijaniM., UptonK., & WestC. (2021). Mapping groundwater recharge in Africa from ground observations and implications for water security. Environmental Research Letters, 16(3), 034012. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abd661
14.
MannaF., MurrayS., AbbeyD., MartinP., CherryJ., & ParkerB. (2019). Spatial and temporal variability of groundwater recharge in a sandstone aquifer in a semiarid region. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 23(4), 2187–2205. https://doi.org/10.5194/HESS-23-2187-2019
15.
MaqsoomA., AslamB., KhalidN., UllahF., AnyszH., AlmalikiA., AlmalikiA. A., & HusseinE. E. (2022). Delineating groundwater recharge potential through remote sensing and geographical information systems. Water, 14(11), 1824. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14111824
16.
MohammedS. H., MohammedM. A. A., KarimH., Al-ManmiD., AzizB. Q., MustafaA. I., & SzűcsP. (2025). Integrating geospatial, hydrogeological, and geophysical data to identify groundwater recharge potential zones in the Sulaymaniyah basin, NE of Iraq. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 9920. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-94603-z
17.
MohanC., WesternA., WeiY., & SaftM. (2017). Predicting groundwater recharge for varying land cover and climate conditions: A global meta-study. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 22, 2689–2703. https://doi.org/10.5194/HESS-22-2689-2018
18.
NavaneV. S., & SahooS. (2020). Identification of groundwater recharge sites in Latur district of Maharashtra in India based on remote sensing, GIS and multi‐criteria decision tools. Water and Environment Journal, 35(2), 544–559. https://doi.org/10.1111/wej.12650
19.
NolanB., BaehrA., & KauffmanL. J. (2003). Spatial variability of groundwater recharge and its effect on shallow groundwater quality in southern New Jersey. Vadose Zone Journal, 2, 677–691. https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2003.6770
20.
PasquierU., VahmaniP., & JonesA. (2022). Quantifying the city-scale impacts of impervious surfaces on groundwater recharge potential: An urban application of WRF–Hydro. Water, 14(19), 3143. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14193143
21.
SalemA., AbduljaleelY., Dezsȍ, J., & DénesL. (2023). Integrated assessment of the impact of land use changes on groundwater recharge and groundwater level in the Drava floodplain, Hungary. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 5061. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21259-4
22.
SarafA., ChoudhuryP., RoyB., SarmaB., VijayS., & ChoudhuryS. (2004). GIS-based surface hydrological modelling in identification of groundwater recharge zones. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 25, 5759–5770. https://doi.org/10.1080/0143116042000274096
23.
TiwariV., KumarA., & MukherjeeM. (2024). GIS and AHP-based groundwater recharge potential zones in urban region: A study of Ajmer City, Rajasthan, India. Urban Climate, 54, 101840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2024.101840
WangL., & LiuH. (2006). An efficient method for identifying and filling surface depressions in digital elevation models for hydrologic analysis and modelling. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 20(2), 193–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658810500433453
