Using managed aquifer recharge to address land subsidence: Insights from a global literature review

• Land subsidence mitigation is rarely stated an explicit aim of MAR schemes. • MAR-LS schemes’ technology use is significantly different to other MAR schemes, but not size, management, and success. • Lack of robust subsidence benefit quantification complicates determining unique economic characteristics of MAR-LS. • MAR-LS scheme effectiveness is limited by economic-legal barriers and spatial misalignment with groundwater overextraction. • MAR can be effective in reducing over-extraction; could play an increasing role for future land subsidence mitigation. Managed aquifer recharge (MAR) – through mitigating groundwater over-extraction – has been used as a tool to mitigate land subsidence in many regions around the world. However, given that to date, MAR has not been used to its full potential as a water resource management tool, then subsequently MAR for land subsidence mitigation (MAR-LS) is also underutilized. This paper reviews the MAR and MAR-LS literature using three approaches. Firstly, we review a global case study database of 314 MAR schemes from 172 studies to examine whether non-trial MAR-LS schemes are different to other MAR schemes in technology, management, and effectiveness. To explore socio-economic and other influences on MAR-LS effectiveness, we complement this with a comparison of economic assessments of MAR and MAR-LS schemes to explore potential unique economic and financial characteristics and how they influence effectiveness. And finally, we undertake a detailed case study review of the effectiveness and issues with MAR-LS schemes in Shanghai, Las Vegas, and Mexico City, shedding light on aspects not captured by the previous two assessments. A range of relevant MAR insights and findings are provided to foster future successful MAR-LS implementation.