Editorial review demonstrates geotechnical responses to anthropogenic and environmental disturbances in soils and rock masses, highlighting strategies for resilient infrastructure design.
One of the enduring challenges in geotechnical engineering is that the ground rarely remains in its natural state. Whether through excavation, tunnelling, cyclic loading, groundwater manipulation, seismic action or climatic effects, engineers routinely alter the stress, hydraulic and mechanical conditions of the subsurface. Predicting how soils and rock masses respond to these disturbances remains fundamental to the safe and sustainable delivery of infrastructure.Several papers in this issue highlight the consequences of anthropogenic disturbance on ground behaviour. Cheng et al. (2026) investigate the reactivation of ancient landslides triggered by highway excavation and subsequent rainfall infiltration, demonstrating how pre-existing geological conditions can interact with construction activities to generate complex instability mechanisms. Lu et al. (2026) present a valuable field investigation of tunnel excavation adjacent to a 300-year-old pagoda founded in deep soft soil, revealing both immediate construction effects and important delayed responses associated with excess pore pressure dissipation and consolidation.A second theme concerns the response of soils to transient and cyclic loading. Huang et al. (2026) examine the development of deformation and excess pore water pressure in clay subjected to intermittent cyclic loading representative of railway operations, while Jin et al. (2026) investigate pore pressure dissipation mechanisms in saturated sand under impact loading. Together, these studies emphasise that geotechnical performance is often governed by cumulative and time-dependent processes rather than by peak loading conditions alone.The interaction between geotechnical infrastructure and the surrounding ground is another prominent topic. Dh and Chatterjee (2026) propose a new framework for evaluating seismic active earth pressures on battered retaining walls, providing improved understanding of seismic soil–structure interaction. Li et al. (2026) address the influence of construction disturbance on pile vibration behaviour in transversely isotropic soils, while Guo et al. (2026) introduce a physics-informed extreme learning machine approach for analysing tunnelling-induced soil–pile interaction. These contributions illustrate the continuing need for robust analytical and computational tools capable of addressing increasingly complex underground environments.This issue also demonstrates the growing integration of monitoring, experimentation and digital technologies. Xi et al. (2026) investigate particle-scale sensing techniques for railway ballast, advancing our ability to directly observe the movement of individual particles and improve asset-condition assessment. Meanwhile, the work of Guo et al. (2026) highlights the potential of combining engineering mechanics with machine learning techniques to support real-time decision making and future intelligent monitoring systems.Practical engineering challenges remain strongly represented. Roberts et al. (2026) provide an important review of pumped groundwater-control methods and their applicability across different hydrogeological conditions, offering guidance that is directly relevant to excavation, shaft and tunnelling projects. Wu et al. (2026) examine the influence of freeze–thaw cycles on compacted loess, contributing knowledge that is increasingly important as infrastructure systems are required to remain resilient under changing environmental conditions.Collectively, the papers in this issue demonstrate the breadth of modern geotechnical engineering while sharing a common objective: improving our understanding of how the ground responds to disturbance. From landslides and seismic loading to tunnelling, groundwater management and emerging data-driven methods, the research presented here contributes to a profession that is increasingly focused on predicting, monitoring and managing geotechnical behaviour throughout the asset life cycle. As our infrastructure systems become more complex and our performance expectations continue to rise, such advances will be essential in supporting safe, resilient and sustainable development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Su Jiang (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: