Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Comparison of Groundwater Ownership Regimes in Ten Jurisdictions Across Five Continents

Bibliographic Data

ID17819341
AuthorsGabriel Eckstein (0000-0002-9393-2362, Mitchell Institute, corresponding author), Theo Buchler (Clinical Research Consultants (United States)), Caleb Cook, Heping Dang (0000-0001-5794-4051, Chinese University of Hong Kong), Robyn Stein (Clinical Research Consultants (United States)), Stefano Burchi, Gabriela Cuadrado Quesada (IHE Delft Institute for Water Education), Juan Pablo Galeano (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), Eric L Garner (0000-0002-8508-9686, Building Engineering and Science Talent), Amy Hardberger (Texas Tech University), I A Ibrahim (0000-0002-3794-2187, University of Twente), Oudi Kgomongwe (Water Research Commission)
Year2026
Volume15
Issue1
Pages63-90
Publication date2026-01-29
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueTransnational Environmental Law (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2047-1025 • E-ISSN: 2047-1033
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s2047102525100149
OpenAlexW7126067878
LanguageEN

The regulation of groundwater remains underdeveloped globally and often lags behind the domestic governance of surface water. As a result, groundwater is often subject to unfettered extraction, uses, and contamination. A clear understanding of ownership is central to the success of domestic regulations. However, the types of ownership regime in place in nations around the world are poorly documented in the academic literature. This study addresses that gap through a comparative analysis of domestic groundwater ownership regimes across ten jurisdictions in nine countries spanning five continents. It identifies three dominant models of groundwater ownership: private ownership, public ownership, and non-ownership with public oversight. It then examines how these ownership doctrines impact key dimensions of groundwater governance, including the nature and transferability of the ownership right, the level of government at which regulation takes place, implications for rights of use, and interactions with customary and Indigenous rights. Doing so offers unique insight into how nations with different legal traditions, governance structures, and customary practices address the ownership of groundwater resources. It also suggests that different ownership (and non-ownership) models can have distinct implications for other aspects of groundwater governance

Corporate governance · Groundwater · Indigenous · Public ownership · Transferability · Environmental law and policy · Transboundary Water Resource Management · Water Governance and Infrastructure

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae