ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK 2025 65 3 0 1 0 1 6 6 1 8 5 1 7 7 9 ISSN 1581-6613 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA • GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK • 65-3 • 2025 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK 65-3 • 2025 Contents SPECIAL ISSUE – The importance of common lands’ management for sustaining ecosystem services POSEBNA IZDAJA – Pomen upravljanja skupnih zemljišč za zagotavljanje ekosistemskih storitev Daniela RIBEIRO, Mateja ŠMID HRIBAR, Conor KRETSCH Common lands, shared futures: The importance of ecosystem services, justice, and sustainability through community land management 9 Sai-Leung NG, Nien-Ming HONG, Yin-Jen CHEN The nexus of common lands and ecosystem services: A systematic review and thematic insights 19 Nevenka BOGATAJ, Peter FRANTAR Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land: The case of the Primorska region in Slovenia 37 Pedro GOMES, Daniela RIBEIRO, Domingos LOPES Assessing the contribution of communal lands to ecosystem services: A quantification of carbon sequestration in a case study from Portugal 55 Mateja ŠMID HRIBAR, Daniela RIBEIRO, Miguel VILLOSLADA The contribution of common lands to carbon sequestration: A case study from Triglav National Park in Slovenia 75 naslovnica 65-3_naslovnica 49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:31 Page 1 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK 2025 65 3 0 1 0 1 6 6 1 8 5 1 7 7 9 ISSN 1581-6613 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA • GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK • 65-3 • 2025 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK 65-3 • 2025 Contents SPECIAL ISSUE – The importance of common lands’ management for sustaining ecosystem services POSEBNA IZDAJA – Pomen upravljanja skupnih zemljišč za zagotavljanje ekosistemskih storitev Daniela RIBEIRO, Mateja ŠMID HRIBAR, Conor KRETSCH Common lands, shared futures: The importance of ecosystem services, justice, and sustainability through community land management 9 Sai-Leung NG, Nien-Ming HONG, Yin-Jen CHEN The nexus of common lands and ecosystem services: A systematic review and thematic insights 19 Nevenka BOGATAJ, Peter FRANTAR Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land: The case of the Primorska region in Slovenia 37 Pedro GOMES, Daniela RIBEIRO, Domingos LOPES Assessing the contribution of communal lands to ecosystem services: A quantification of carbon sequestration in a case study from Portugal 55 Mateja ŠMID HRIBAR, Daniela RIBEIRO, Miguel VILLOSLADA The contribution of common lands to carbon sequestration: A case study from Triglav National Park in Slovenia 75 naslovnica 65-3_naslovnica 49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:31 Page 1 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA 65-3 2025 ISSN: 1581-6613 UDC: 91 2025, ZRC SAZU, Geografski inštitut Antona Melika International editorial board/mednarodni uredniški odbor: Zoltán Bátori (Hungary), David Bole (Slovenia), Marco Bontje (the Netherlands), Mateja Breg Valjavec (Slovenia), Michael Bründl (Switzerland), Rok Ciglič (Slovenia), Špela Čonč (Slovenia), Lóránt Dénes Dávid (Hungary), Mateja Ferk (Slovenia), Matej Gabrovec (Slovenia), Matjaž Geršič (Slovenia), Maruša Goluža (Slovenia), Mauro Hrvatin (Slovenia), Ioan Ianos (Romania), Peter Jordan (Austria), Drago Kladnik (Slovenia), Blaž Komac (Slovenia), Jani Kozina (Slovenia), Matej Lipar (Slovenia), Dénes Lóczy (Hungary), Simon McCarthy (United Kingdom), Slobodan B. Marković (Serbia), Janez Nared (Slovenia), Cecilia Pasquinelli (Italy), Drago Perko (Slovenia), Florentina Popescu (Romania), Garri Raagmaa (Estonia), Ivan Radevski (North Macedonia), Marjan Ravbar (Slovenia), Aleš Smrekar (Slovenia), Vanya Stamenova (Bulgaria), Annett Steinführer (Germany), Mateja Šmid Hribar (Slovenia), Jure Tičar (Slovenia), Jernej Tiran (Slovenia), Radislav Tošić (Bosnia and Herzegovina), Mimi Urbanc (Slovenia), Matija Zorn (Slovenia), Zbigniew Zwolinski (Poland) Editors-in-Chief/glavna urednika: Rok Ciglič, Blaž Komac (ZRC SAZU, Slovenia) Executive editor/odgovorni urednik: Drago Perko (ZRC SAZU, Slovenia) Chief editors/področni urednik (ZRC SAZU, Slovenia): • physical geography/fizična geografija: Mateja Ferk, Matej Lipar, Matija Zorn • human geography/humana geografija: Jani Kozina, Mateja Šmid Hribar, Mimi Urbanc • regional geography/regionalna geografija: Matej Gabrovec, Matjaž Geršič, Mauro Hrvatin • regional planning/regionalno planiranje: David Bole, Maruša Goluža, Janez Nared • environmental protection/varstvo okolja: Mateja Breg Valjavec, Aleš Smrekar, Jernej Tiran Editorial assistants/uredniška pomočnika: Špela Čonč, Jernej Tiran (ZRC SAZU, Slovenia) Journal editorial system manager/upravnik uredniškega sistema revije: Jure Tičar (ZRC SAZU, Slovenia) Issued by/izdajatelj: Geografski inštitut Antona Melika ZRC SAZU Published by/založnik: Založba ZRC Co-published by/sozaložnik: Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti Address/naslov: Geografski inštitut Antona Melika ZRC SAZU, Gosposka ulica 13, p. p. 306, SI – 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija; ags@zrc-sazu.si The articles are available on-line/prispevki so dostopni na medmrežju: http://ags.zrc-sazu.si (ISSN: 1581–8314) This work is licensed under the/delo je dostopno pod pogoji: Creative Commons CC BY-SA 4.0 Ordering/naročanje: Založba ZRC, Novi trg 2, p. p. 306, SI – 1001 Ljubljana, Slovenija; zalozba@zrc-sazu.si Annual subscription/letna naročnina: 20 € Single issue/cena posamezne številke: 12 € Cartography/kartografija: Geografski inštitut Antona Melika ZRC SAZU Translations/prevodi: DEKS, d. o. o., Živa Malovrh DTP/prelom: SYNCOMP , d. o. o. Printed by/tiskarna: Cicero Begunje d. o. o. Print run/naklada: 250 copies/izvodov The journal is subsidized by the Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency (B6-7614) and is issued in the framework of the Geography of Slovenia core research programme (P6-0101)/Revija izhaja s podporo Javne agencije za znanstvenoraziskovalno in inovacijsko dejavnost Republike Slovenije (B6-7614) in nastaja v okviru raziskovalnega programa Geografija Slovenije (P6-0101). The journal is indexed also in/revija je vključena tudi v: Clarivate Web of Science (SCIE – Science Citation Index Expanded; JCR – Journal Citation Report/Science Edition), Scopus, ERIH PLUS, GEOBASE Journals, Current geographical publications, EBSCOhost, Georef, FRANCIS, SJR (SCImago Journal & Country Rank), OCLC WorldCat, Google Scholar, CrossRef, and DOAJ. Design by/Oblikovanje: Matjaž Vipotnik Front cover photography: Vezeira, the traditional migration of livestock, from the village of Pincães (Montalegre, Portugal) to high-altitude pastures is a community event organized to revive pastoral traditions and involve younger generations (photograph: Joana Nogueira). Fotografija na naslovnici: Vezeira, tradicionalna selitev živine iz vasi Pincães na Portugalskem na visokogorske pašnike, ki jo izvaja lokalna skupnost, je namenjena oživitvi pašnih tradicij in vključevanju mlajših generacij (fotografija: Joana Nogueira). 65-3-uvod_uvod49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:31 Page 4 Acta geographica Slovenica, 65-3, 2025, 37–53 GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AS A BASIS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ON COMMON LAND: THE CASE OF THE PRIMORSKA REGION IN SLOVENIA Nevenka Bogataj, Peter Frantar The storm brings precipitation. A view of Nanos. M A R J E T A M A R IN Č IČ 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 37 Nevenka Bogataj, Peter Frantar, Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land … DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS.14319 UDC: 556.32:502.131.1(497.472)”1972/2023” Creative Commons CC BY-SA 4.0 Nevenka Bogataj 1 , Peter Frantar 2 Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land: The case of the Primorska region in Slovenia ABSTRACT: The objective of this analysis is to assess groundwater ecosystem services and collect avail- able data, with a particular focus on the supply side of their provision in common lands. The assessment of the state and trends of its recharge is conducted using the water balance model mGROW A. The study focuses on the period from 1972 to 2023 and the Primorska region due to the availability of both, spatial and temporal data for groundwater recharge and for forests on common lands. Based on the findings, we propose to recognise and support agrarian communities as large land proprietors practising the sustain- able management of natural resources, underpinned by a benefit-sharing paradigm as stakeholders in groundwater management. KEYWORDS: common lands, ecosystem services, groundwater, hydrology, Slovenia, Primorska region, drinking water Napajanje podzemne vode kot osnova za ugotavljanje ekosistemskih storitev na skupnih zemljiščih: primer Primorske v Sloveniji POVZETEK: Cilj te analize je opredeliti ekosistemske storitve podzemne vode in zbrati dostopne podatke s poudarkom na njenem zagotavljanju na zemljiščih, ki jih posedujejo agrarne skupnosti. Obseg in dinamika polnjenja podzemne vode sta ocenjena z modelom mGROW A. Spričo razpoložljivosti novejših prostorskih podatkov in trendov napajanja podzemne vode ter gospodarjenja z gozdovi smo se osredotočili na Primorsko in na obdobje med letoma 1972 in 2023. Na podlagi ugotovitev predlagamo, da se agrarne skupnosti kot lastnike velikih zemljišč z delujočo lokalno tradicijo njihovega trajnostnega upravljanja, ki temelji na paradigmi deljenih skupnih virov, upošteva kot deležnike v upravljanju s podzemno vodo. KLJUČNE BESEDE: agrarne skupnosti, ekosistemske storitve, podzemna voda, hidrologija, Slovenija, Primorska, pitna voda The article was submitted for publication on February 3rd, 2025. Uredništvo je prejelo prispevek 3. februarja 2025. 38 1 Slovenian Institute for Adult Education, Ljubljana, Slovenia nevenka.bogataj@acs.si (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1997-3526) 2 Slovenian Environment Agency, Ljubljana, Slovenia; Faculty of Environmental Protection, Velenje, Slovenia peter.frantar@gov.si; peter.frantar@fvo.si (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0501-4930) 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 38 1 Introduction Ecosystem services (ES) represent the relationship between human wellfare and ecosystems. The latest ver- sion of the internationally agreed categorization, European Union Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES), was provided by Haines-Y oung and Potshin (2018) who generally define ES as arising from living structures and processes, but acknowledging abiotic ecosystem outputs to stress their non-biomass base, and recognition of hydrological cycle as driven by geo-physical processes (see also MEA 2005, TEEB 2010). As we focus on groundwater as a basis for ecosystem services, we acknowledge the CICES definition, primarily classifying groundwater as a provisioning abiotic service used for drink- ing (4.2.2.1), non-drinking (4.2.2.2) or energy (4.2.2.3) purposes, as the regulation and maintenance of the biotic service (2.2.1.3) or the cultural biotic service (3.1.1.1) when it enables interactions with living systems (e.g., in wetlands or biodiversity). The conceptualization of groundwater ES, just recently edited by Iliopoulos and Damigos (2024), contributed to more nuanced understanding of the role groundwater plays in societies. The inherent value of these ES is inextricably linked to the quantity of groundwater, in addition to the ecological and social benefits that defy straightforward economic quantification. Groundwater is formed by precipitation, is found beneath the land surface and is a part of the hydro- logical cycle, e.g., mitigating the impact of drought. As a resource it is characterised by availability which decreases with use (Ostrom 1990). Therefore, its management is challenging (Ehrman 2020). Based pre- cisely on the case of water supply, Ostrom (1990) identified self-regulated institutions as an effective governance model. As demonstrated in the works of van Laerhoven et al. (2020) and Romanelli and Boschi (2019), numerous authors have examined and built upon Ostrom’s contributions to the field and much of the international literature on collective groundwater management is based on Ostrom works, for instance local adaptations due to balancing of interests (Doneo and Conrad 2024) and local consideration of the social and cultural roles of groundwater (Smith 2002) without displacement of weaker stakeholders (e.g., farmers) where groundwater is considered a commodity. Solutions for sustainable groundwater manage- ment were sought in river basins in India and China (Shang et al. 2024; Vora 2024) and by analysing international agreements on water and other resources (Soliev and Thesfeld 2017). A shift from negotia- tion between conflicting actors to the identification of options for maximising co-benefits was suggested (Soliev and Thesfeld 2017) which is the way local collectives manage resources, including water. Italian constitutional law grants collective landowners rights on the basis that they have preserved natural resources despite having used them for centuries. Despite the absence of explicit mention of groundwater in this law, it can be presumed that it was meant as a natural resource. The interdependence of groundwater with soils and surface ecosystems is a particularly sensitive issue in karst areas with water-permeable carbonate substrate. The Slovenian region of Primorska combines both, karst bedrock and climate regimes of the Alps and the Sub-Mediterranean region to which local collec- tive resource management institutionally adapted. This typically represents small-scale benefit sharing local collectives that regularly monitor resources, and incorporate feedback into their utilisation. The funda- mental reason for such an organization is the (eventual) scarcity of resources that might lead to tensions, conflicts and – in the case of water – the potential jeopardy of survival. In light of the interconnection between droughts and climate change, groundwater recharge and dynamic served as a motive for our analysis, draw- ing upon the reports of Vertačnik (2023) and European Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (European Commission … 2020). In Slovenia, groundwater is owned by the state and according to the Act on water published in 2004 regarded a public good. The governance of water supply and water protection areas is overseen by the Water Directorate, while the management of local groundwater use falls under the responsibility of municipal- ities. In the Primorska region groundwater is also the subject of transboundary cooperation. Access to groundwater cannot be prevented and depends on the consent of the landowners on whose land bore- holes and wells are located, and water may be abstracted for personal needs. Primorska is an informal region in Slovenia, which includes two statistical regions, called Goriška and Obalno-kraška. The local water management culture of this region is described in the context of the Karst area (Crnko et al. 2015) exhibiting adaptations to occasional droughts by collective approach amongst its inhabitants. Furthermore, the significance of alterations in land cover has been recently documented for two main river catchments in the area, namely Rižana and Unica (Ravbar et al. 2023; Ravbar et al. 2024). There was a decline in effective precipitation of 49% in the Rižana catchment, attributable to climate change, Acta geographica Slovenica, 65-3, 2025 39 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 39 Nevenka Bogataj, Peter Frantar, Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land … and an increase in forest cover of 30% between 1965 and 2018 (Ravbar et al. 2023). Opposite, a 5% rise in effective precipitation has been documented for the Unica catchment, attributable to the combination of climate change and large-scale forest damage during the period 2014–2016 (Ravbar et al. 2024). These analy- ses do not take into account the management of land. Groundwater on common lands has not been addressed so far, although recently Pipan et al. (2023) presented water cooperatives (Lazarević et al. 2023). They have a different conception, history, purpose and functioning of collective management than agrarian communities (AC) as long-term land owners of common lands, documented as active and effective (Bogataj and Krč 2023). However, the intermedi- ary role of AC is unclear and marginalized and it would appear that there is a dichotomy between private ownership of the land and state ownership (and management) of groundwater. Moreover, the issue is becom- ing increasingly important due to the climate change (European Commission … 2020; Vertačnik 2023) and changes in land cover. The simultaneous consideration of spatial and temporal variability in ground- water may, therefore, contribute to informed and consensual decision-making by all stakeholders regarding aquifers when considering any of the groundwater ES. 1.1 The national literature review on land commons related to groundwater The concept of common pool resources was first introduced in Slovenia by Rodela (2012) and compara- tively studied by Šmid Hribar et al. (2018), who also established the first link between common lands and ES in the country (Šmid Hribar et al. 2023). Dominated by forests and pastures (Kozorog and Leban 2023; Šmid Hribar et al. 2023), common lands are managed by self-regulated local institutions officially enti- tled AC and defined in 2015 by Agrarian Communities Act. Decade ago, AC owned 3.7% of Slovenia’s surface area (Premrl 2013), but there is an overall lack of data on this issue, with the exception of Primorska, where they own four times more, 12% (Kozorog and Leban 2023), and Triglav National Park, where according to preliminary information approximately 20% of the land is under AC ownership. The legal protection of AC was established after the denationalisation of the land by the Act on reestab- lishment of agricultural communities and restitution of their property and rights (sl. Zakon o ponovni vzpostavitvi agrarnih skupnosti ter vrnitvi njihovega premoženja in pravic) from 1994 and the Act on agrarian communities (sl. Zakon o agrarnih skupnostih) from 2015, and was characterised by numerous amend- ments, demanding procedures and costs. Their forest management is systematically monitored and rewarded by the Slovenian Forest Service (Zavod za gozdove Slovenije, SFS), which is the sole state institution that regularly selects AC for models of active sustainable management. Slovenian authors have considered AC from a variety of perspectives, including legal aspects (Hafner 2011; Cerar et al. 2016), historical devel- opment (Meden 2019; Kocijančič 2022), geographical characteristics (Šmid Hribar et al. 2023) and anthropology (Hrobat Virloget 2023; Beltrametti 2024). As Bavec and Bogataj (2021) demonstrate in pub- lication with AC self-presentations, they are particularly active in Primorska in comparison to other regions, as a high proportion of cases from there (one third) are documented. Šmid Hribar et al. (2023) conducted a study on commons from the perspective of their ES provision, but however, the eventual groundwater-related roles of AC were not addressed by the study. It is intrigu- ing to note that an example of efficient response to natural extremes has been documented in the context of AC, e.g., fast and focused activation (Bogataj and Krč 2023). Groundwater recharge on common lands of AC in Primorska is a subject of contemporary concern due to a number of remarkable meteorological deviations there, including a particularly hot summer in 2003, several dry springs, followed by dry sum- mers and an increased risk of fire, as well as an extreme fire event (Sandrin 2022) and unfavourable future projections (Vertačnik 2023). 1.2 Aims and scope The scope of the paper is to identify groundwater recharge on common lands in the Primorska region as a potential source for the provision of groundwater ES as defined by Haines-Y oung and Potshin in CICES (2018) by codes 4.2.2.1, 4.2.2.2 and 4.2.2.3 and listed by Iliopoulos and Damigos (2024). 40 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 40 The following research questions were the subject of our analysis: which ES are provided by ground- water, at least in theory? What is the amount and dynamics of groundwater recharge as a basis for groundwater ES on common lands in the Primorska region? Are there any spatial differences in groundwater ES poten- tial between Alpine and Sub-Mediterranean common lands? The primary objective of this study is not to categorise or score services, but rather to establish a foun- dation for their future evaluation by focusing on the supply side of groundwater ES and unveiling the complex interactions between groundwater dynamics, climate and collective land use and management (Ostrom 1990; Meinzen-Dick and Bruns 2024) by examining numerical data (Booth et al. 2016; Shang et al. 2024). This approach aligns with contemporary research emphasizing the use of continuous data for nuanced interpretations of spatial and temporal trends while respecting landscape heterogeneity and avoiding poten- tial oversimplifications (Smith 2002; Vora 2024). 2 Methods A comprehensive review of the literature on groundwater ES was conducted, with a particular emphasis on the bibliography of Slovenian karst groundwater recharge in relation to the dominant land cover and the characteristics of AC management. Iliopoulos and Damigos (2024) provided a detailed list of groundwater ES that are useful for the pur- pose of our analysis: • provisioning final ES (drinkable water, irrigation water, livestock water, water for industrial use); • intermediate provisioning ES in case of strategic water resources, storage capacity; • regulating intermediate services ES for water purification, seawater intrusion control, flood control, sub- sidence control, carbon dioxide storage, hydraulic conductivity, maintenance or microclimate mitigation; • fundamental or supporting intermediate ES for groundwater-dependent ecosystems, water cycle support and • cultural ES (naturalist leisure activities, aesthetic enjoyment, spiritual well-being, education and research). Their precise and consensually built classification and categorisation frame groundwater not only as a provisioning ES, but also as a regulating and cultural ES. The estimation of groundwater recharge was conducted utilising the water balance model mGROW A (ger. montatliches Großräumiges Wasserhaushaltsmodell) for the period from 1991 to 2020 (Frantar et al. 2023) and comparison was made between the Alpine and Sub-Mediterranean group of common lands. An interdisciplinary approach was adopted to establish a comparison between the geographic data of the AC lands and the results obtained from the water balance model. The Primorska region was selected for analysis due to the largest amount of common lands there, their recent mapping and forest management analysis (Kozorog and Leban 2023), and the evidence of strict local rules regarding the use of resources (Kocijančič 2022; Juriševič and Medeot 2024) which may align with eventual risk perception (Ravbar and Kovačič 2010). Contrary to the general absence of data, these data enable diverse comparisons and a step towards complex analysis of groundwater ES. A measure of forest management intensity is an average cut- ting over the period from 2013 to 2023 (Kozorog and Leban 2023). In the context of comparisons between common lands and other spatial features, full correspondence is defined by 100% spatial correspondence, while substantial correspondence from 50% to 99%. 2.1 Study area Kozorog and Leban (2023) described and mapped the AC of the Primorska region according to phyto- geographical characteristics as a primary factor in the formation of two distinct groups: an Alpine and a Sub-Mediterranean group of common lands. Both groups face potential drinking water scarcity, because in the Sub-Mediterranean region karst bedrock prevents surface water courses, while the steep Alpine slopes cause rapid runoff. The Alpine group of common lands is located in the area of the Julian Alps and the high Dinaric Alps, while the Sub-Mediterranean part consists of coastal Koper area, the Brkini hills and the Karst region including a few lands of the Nanos area, despite them being part of the high Dinaric range. The total grid area of all common land units is 32.708 ha. Acta geographica Slovenica, 65-3, 2025 41 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 41 Nevenka Bogataj, Peter Frantar, Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land … 42 Common lands Alpine part Sub-Mediterranean part Watershed delineation Cartography: Peter Frantar Source: Kozorog 2024 Basemap: GURS 2025 0 10 20 km Figure 1: Common land grouped into Alpine and Sub-Mediterranean (Kozorog 2024). 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 42 2.2 Data sources 2.2.1 Agrarian Communities (AC) An agrarian communities’ layer is a polygon dataset representing lands defined and used as common lands owned by the AC. The geocoded data layer on AC was obtained from the SFS (Kozorog 2024) and analysed by Kozorog and Leban (2023) for their forest management. The layer includes merged polygons of 93 AC divided into the Alpine group in the north, and the Sub-Mediterranean group in the south. 2.2.2 The CORINE land cover layer We used data from Coordination of Information on the Environment (CORINE). CORINE Land Cover (CLC) is general land cover layer in vector format. The coverage, definition and nomenclature of land cover classes are standardised (Bossard et al. 2000; Copernicus 2024). The mGROW A model used the CLC2006 layer to analyse the water balance across different land cover types. The main CLC categories are com- bined with hydro-pedological characteristics and soil water modelling. All that provides the model basis for the impact of land cover on the water balance. This also influences runoff and groundwater recharge. The model assumes constant land cover throughout the period 1991–2020, based on the CLC2006 layer. 2.2.3 Water protection zones A water protection zone is defined as a designated area established to safeguard a water body used for or intended for public drinking water supply. There are two major water protection zone designations, namely of the state and of the municipality. Both have been joined into one layer and used as an indicator of land protection for groundwater ES. The data layer of water protection zones (version 2024) was provided by the Slovenian Water Agency. Acta geographica Slovenica, 65-3, 2025 43 Te m p e r a t u r e Reference evapotranspiration Precipitation Land use To p o g r a p h y Percentage imperviousness Depth to the water table Hydrogeological units and hydraulic permeability Artificial drainage systems Waterlogging tendency Snow statistics: • Number of days in which snowpack is present Drought statistics: Number of days with high soil moisture deficit • Crop-specific irrigation need Separation into runoff components and groundwater recharge Direct runoff components: Interflow Drainage runoff Runoff from urban areas • • • Runoff from snowpack Groundwater recharge Rule-based computations Simulation of runoff formation Climate & site conditions Capillary rise from groundwater Soil moisture distribution in the root zone Snowpack Total runoff Evapotranspiration Snowfall Soil profiles and soil hydraulic parameters Figure 2: Model flowchart of the mGROWA water balance model. 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 43 Nevenka Bogataj, Peter Frantar, Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land … 2.2.4 The mGROW A water balance model The mGROW A model (see Figure 2) is a deterministic raster water balance model. It is based on the German mGROW A model, which has been adapted and upgraded for Slovenia. The water balance elements in the model are calculated on the basis of static and dynamic input data and simplified hydrological processes for each 100 × 100 m model cell at a daily time step with outputs available at different time scales. The model is based on geographical data derived from the landscape, the pedological and hydro-geo- logical characteristics. The model analyses the water cycle in 100 m cells with the use of dynamic climate data on precipitation, potential evaporation and air temperature (Herrmann et al. 2013; Herrmann et al. 2015). The model calculates the soil-water and the snow-water separately. The output of the soil and snow mod- ules is evaporation and total runoff. The total runoff is structured into various types of runoffs, the most significant of which is groundwater recharge. The latter can be equated to baseflow values (Frantar et al. 2023). We analysed groundwater recharge, which is calculated in the »Qrn« layer of the mGROW A model. Groundwater recharge is approximately equivalent to the total recoverable groundwater volume. Due to the dynamics of recharge, data are aggregated on a monthly basis (Frantar et al. 2023). The mGROW A model is continuously upgraded in collaboration with the Slovenian Environment Agency (sl. Agencija Republike Slovenije za okolje, ARSO) and the Jülich Research Centre (ger. Forschungszentrum Jülich, FZJ). The groundwater recharge layers that were the subject of this analysis derived from the r158 model run at Slovenian Environment Agency in August 2024. In the mGROW A model, baseflow is equated to groundwater recharge, which ensures flow stability during droughts and serves as a key parameter for determining ecologically acceptable flows (Herrmann et al. 2015; Frantar 2022), maintaining the natural water balance and enabling sustainable management of water resources (Herrmann et al. 2015; Andjelov et al. 2016). 2.3 The geospatial join of spatial and groundwater recharge data The basis for groundwater data is constituted by the results of the mGROW A r158 model run – annual grids for the hydrological years from 1972 to 2023. The mGROW A grid layers were intersected with a joined raster of common lands and land cover CLC2006. This cross-section identified land use in each AC area. Based on that the »Zonal Statistics« were computed from all the groundwater recharge grids for the mod- elled data from year 1972 to 2023. The output was a table of recharge values for each individual AC unit that was joined with a table of area and other basic geospatial statistics. Groundwater recharge data and basic entity parameters were merged into a new table for geostatisti- cal analysis by a part of Primorska (the Alpine or Sub-Mediterranean group of common lands) and land cover type (CLC). The analysis considered annual values from hydrological years 1972–2023, with the 30- year period 1991–2020 as the climatological reference for climate comparisons (WMO 2017). In addition, we linked water protection zones to the AC (intersected in GIS) to test eventual ground- water potential for ES provision. 3 Results and discussion 3.1 Groundwater as ES Groundwater ES and evaluation of its benefits stem out of a complex mechanism of water recharge. Recent research findings on the groundwater recharge of two karst river catchments of the Primorska region have indicated that precipitation and land use changes are not the only factors influencing the availability of groundwater of ES, such as drinking water (Ravbar et al. 2023; Ravbar et al. 2024), but there are also sev- eral other factors. Forests play a pivotal role, and as such, their management is worth being analysed and, therefore, acknowledged in following sections. 3.2 The amount and dynamic of groundwater recharge on dominant land uses According to mGROW A model both, the Alpine and Sub-Mediterranean group of common lands in Primorska are dominated by CLC Class »forests and semi-natural areas«, with the Alpine group exhibiting a forest cover 44 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 44 Acta geographica Slovenica, 65-3, 2025 45 of 168.5km² (97%) and the Sub-Mediterranean group of common lands displaying a forest cover of 133.3km² (87%). Consistently forest (CLC classes 311, 312, 313) in both groups of common lands cover almost iden- tical share of area (67%). Forests infiltrate less water than grassland (CLC classes 231, 321) as seen in Table 2 respectively. It is evident that the Sub-Mediterranean group has significantly lower groundwater recharge than the Alpine group of common lands. The average groundwater recharge for all land uses in the Alpine group of common lands for the 1991–2020 period is 845 mm, annually ranging from 504.7 mm in 1989 to 1,461.6 mm in 2001 (Table 1, Figure 3). As expected, the CLC class 300 (»forests and semi-natural areas«) have almost identical recharge (845 mm) as this CLC main class is dominant of this land category. On forested land, the recharge aver- ages 779mm, ranging from 444mm in 1989 to 1379mm in 2001. On grassland the recharge averages 972mm, ranging from 548 mm in 2003 to 1686 mm in 2001. In the Sub-Mediterranean group of common lands, the average groundwater recharge for the 1991–2020 period is 289 mm. On forested land, recharge averages 274 mm, ranging from 106 mm in 2012 to 466 mm in 2001. On grassland the recharge averages 313 mm, ranging from 126 mm in 2012 to 521 mm in 2010 (Table 2). Table 1: Annual groundwater recharge of CLC class »forest and semi natural area« for the period 1991–2020 (in mm) and indication of extreme year. Groundwater recharge (mm) in CLC class 300 Alpine group Sub-Mediterranean group (forest and seminatural areas) Average 845 287 Minimum (extreme year) 504.5 113.2 (1989) (2012) Maximum (extreme year) 1461.6 483.1 (2001) (1977) 01 0 02 0 03 0 04 0 05 0 0 600 700 800 900 1000 Submediterranean part of Primorska region Alpine part of Primorska region Forests Agricultural land Figure 3: Average annual groundwater recharge (in mm) on dominant land uses in the Alpine and Sub-Mediterranean group of common lands. 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 45 Nevenka Bogataj, Peter Frantar, Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land … These data provide evidence of a more significant impact of dry periods in the Sub-Mediterranean group of common lands, affecting vegetation, especially the dominant forest. The amount of infiltration depends not solely on precipitation amount and distribution, but also on hydro-pedological characteristics and land cover water requirements. Forests, for instance, require greater quantities of water than meadows (Madani et al. 2018). This can be seen also from model mGROW A through land use specific evapotranspiration factors, i.e., for CLC class 321 »natural grassland« the factors in spring and summer months are from 1.00–1.06; for CLC class 312 »coniferous forest« factors are from 1.18–1.27. This indicates higher water demand of forests (Herrmann et al. 2015; Frantar 2022). Therefore, the ground- water recharge is also smaller in forest as compared to grassland. Given the same soil moisture levels, forests experience less infiltration compared to grasslands with easier percolation of water. Consequently, drought conditions may develop earlier in forests than in grasslands, leading to differences in infiltration data between these vegetation types. Overview of relative annual variations (Figure 4) shows that the inter-annual variations can be from –60% to +70%. It also shows that after 2000 an increasing number of drier years with lower recharge is observed. The driest years for groundwater recharge were 1989, 2002, 2003, 2012 and 2022, with the largest relative negative variations in the Sub-Mediterranean group of common lands. A comparison of the two subregional groups reveals greater recharge variability in the Sub-Mediterranean, with 28 of 52 years showing negative deviations and 24 positive deviations. In contrast, the Alpine group of common lands exhibits the opposite, with 25 negative and 27 positive years. Given the lower recharge in the Sub-Mediterranean group, the management and protection of com- mon lands are disproportionately more critical and require greater attention than in the Alpine group. The total average recharge rate in AC in the Alpine group is 4.65 m³/s but only 1.41 m³/s in the Sub- Mediterranean group. In the latter, annual declines of up to 50% can reduce recharge to just 700 l/s in dry years (Figure 4), with even more pronounced seasonal fluctuations. The importance of groundwater as ES is, therefore, substantially higher on the Sub-Mediterranean common lands (the lower recharge means greater sensitivity of ES to its variation) than on the Alpine common lands, exposed to eventu- al floods due to the increased variability in annual recharge in recent decades. In the Alpine group, there was an increase in annual recharge from 17% (1972–2000) to 24% (2001–2023), while in the Sub- Mediterranean region the absolute variation rose from 18% (1972–2000) to 27% (2001–2023). This trend reflects growing hydrological extremes, with some years experiencing greater aridity and reduced recharge that impact ES. 3.3 The correspondence between groundwater and common lands Spatial correspondence of groundwater recharge and forest management on common lands, analysed by Kozorog and Leban (2023), inform future assessments of groundwater ES at least for Primorska where com- mon lands cover twelve percent of land, which is predominantly forested, and exhibit lower levels of management intensity compared to other private forest properties within the same region. For instance, between the years 2013 and 2022, in the Alpine area, more than half of AC (53.8%) cut less than other private forest owners. This proportion is even higher (71.7%) in the Sub-Mediterranean region. Generally 46 Table 2: Annual groundwater recharge of forest and grassland in the Alpine group of common lands for the period 1991–2020 (in mm). Groundwater recharge (mm) Forest Grassland average min max average min max Alpine 779 444 1379 972 548 1686 Sub-Mediterranean 274 106 466 313 126 521 Figure 4: Relative deviation of annual groundwater recharge from the reference period 1991–2020 in %.p p. 47 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 46 Acta geographica Slovenica, 65-3, 2025 47 –80 –60 –40 –20 0 20 40 60 80 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Alpine Group Sub–Mediteranean Group 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 47 Nevenka Bogataj, Peter Frantar, Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land … 48 Watershed delineation W W 0 10 20 km Common lands WSPA – local legislation WSPA – national legislation Cartography: Peter Frantar Source: Kozorog 2024; Ministrstvo ... 2024 Basemap: GURS 2025 Figure 5: Water source protection areas (WSPA) in Slovenia and on common lands in Primorska. 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 48 low management intensity of forests has positive implications for quantity and quality of groundwater and ES derived from it. Furthermore, common lands, being relatively large in size, are likely to make a substantial contribution to groundwater stability when compared to fragmented individual private forest properties. Therefore, high correspondence of legally protected groundwater areas is not a surprise. In the Alpine group, 18% (2553 ha) of the common lands fall within water protection zones, whereas in the Sub-Mediterranean group, this figure reaches 78% (9749 ha in total) (Figure 5). The Alpine group includes 35.7% of AC (namely 15 out of 42) with at least some land in a water pro- tection zone. Among them, 5 AC have less than 5% of their area protected, while one (2.3%) is entirely within the water protection area. In the Sub-Mediterranean group, 58% (54 AC out of 93) have land within water protection zones, with only one having less than 5% protected. Remarkably, 34 AC (36.5%) are entirely in water protection areas. 3.4 Groundwater and land management Groundwater ES, although classified by CICES (Haines-Y oung and Potshin 2018) and Iliopoulos and Damigos (2024), are largely understudied. We focused on the supply side of groundwater ES as a basis for future assessments and evaluations. Despite data scarcity, we were able to identify a region that possessed numer- ical data on the spatial and temporal dynamics of groundwater recharge on common lands already analysed from the perspective of forest management (Kozorog and Leban 2023). Data availability and spatial cor- respondence of data sources are the key added values of this analysis. However, the Primorska region was selected also due to the prevalence of common lands at the national level and regular reports of the SFS on model management practices of AC in this region which corresponds with literature on the local cul- ture of self-limiting resource use (Crnko et al. 2015) and the accent on care for water (Bogataj and Rupnik Vec 2024). CORINE data and the water balance mGROW A model provides precise numerical informa- tion and incorporates a certain degree of complexity regarding land uses. The results indicate significant variability with regard to both geographical location and by land cover type. Natural grasslands exhibit higher infiltration rates in comparison to forested areas as found by other authors (Owour et al. 2016). An average annual groundwater recharge in Slovenia for the reference peri- od 1991–2020 is estimated at 313 mm, while Alpine group of common land units with 845 mm is high above this average. Sub-Mediterranean group with 287 mm is slightly below this average. Deviation of annual groundwater recharge from the long-term reference period was found: an increase in the number of dry years after 2000 and more pronounced fluctuations. The 52-year record reveals substantial variability and a higher frequency of negative deviations. In the Sub-Mediterranean region at least, groundwater ES are exposed not only to eventual shortages, but also to significant risk of large-scale forest cover changes (Kozorog and Leban 2023; Ravbar et al. 2023; Ravbar et al. 2024). Moreover, in areas where forests are predominant, as is Primorska region, low management intensity reported for common land may be of critical impor- tance for groundwater ES, irrespective of the underlying reason, such as marginal productivity on poor soils, inaccessibility of slopes, or inactive AC. Additionally, relatively large properties of common lands and their extensive use contribute to groundwater recharge comparatively more than fragmented individual properties. This suggests a significant positive potential impact on the provisioning of groundwater ecosys- tem services, with implications in both the short and long term. Moreover, it is important to note that local balancing of interests (Doneo and Conrad 2024) is a fundamental characteristic of AC which may be the key in provision of quantity and quality of groundwater ES (Juriševič and Medeot 2024) in the face of cli- mate changes both regionally and beyond (Soliev and Thesfeld 2017; Bogataj and Krč 2023; Pagot et al. 2025). Finally, the SFS’s recognition of AC’s practice of sustainable forest management indicates impor- tant implications for groundwater ecosystem services, as evidenced by the considerable overlap between common lands and officially designated water protection zones. A full correspondence was found for 34 of the Sub-Mediterranean cases and one AC in the Alpine group of common lands. Substantial corre- spondence (50–99%) was noted for additional eight Sub-Mediterranean and two Alpine cases respectively. Together the substantial and full correspondence accounts for 10% of cases (14% of AC area) in the Alpine and 65% of cases (72% of AC area) in the Sub-Mediterranean group. This emphasizes the importance of land management within AC areas to protect drinking water resources and sustaining groundwater ecosys- tem services. Acta geographica Slovenica, 65-3, 2025 49 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 49 Nevenka Bogataj, Peter Frantar, Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land … 4 Conclusion The aim of our work was not to conduct a monetary evaluation of groundwater ES, but rather to empha- sise their variation and significance across different units along interdisciplinary understanding of a fragile karst socio-ecological system of Primorska, increasingly characterised with shortages of water. Rather than estimating the groundwater ES itself, our analysis provides an insight into their supply side and the complex interplay of the climate change and land-use factors (Leins et al. 2025). The mGROW A model regards both factors, consequently the present study revealed key spatial and temporal patterns for the period of five decades. In order to quantify groundwater ES, the following should be taken into consideration: firstly, com- parable circumstances to our own case should be sought; secondly, the presence of karst bedrock and land cover dynamic should be taken into account as well as the productivity of forests; and finally, management intensity and fragmentation of properties along gradual or sudden changes in land cover should be taken into account. The common lands within the observation area largely overlap with water protection zones. Therefore, this relationship warrants further investigation to assess whether the preservation of groundwater quality is influenced by the specific land-use regulations or by adherence to conservation criteria in the manage- ment of these areas. AC manage resources (e.g., water, forest) with regard to uncertainty of their provision (Ahn et al. 2024; Rendla 2024), so a risk of losing AC, as experienced in periods of suppressive adminis- trations is not justified. Moreover, AC should be included into the decision-making process on groundwater ES as both, theory (Ostrom 2012; Ahn et al. 2024; Meinzen-Dick and Bruns 2024) and domestic knowl- edge on large-scale natural disturbances, reinforce the role of local inhabitants and their organization into AC (Bogataj and Krč 2023; Ravbar et al. 2023). It is on this basis that we argue that not only groundwater ES, but also the common lands manage- ment approach deserves recognition, protection and support, aligned with international nature conservation accents (Secretariat of the … 2011; Bassi 2022; Manzoni 2024). It is imperative to prioritise the AC land management in both, in the Alpine group with higher potential of flash floods, and in the Sub-Mediterranean group due to the expected increase of droughts (Sušnik et al. 2025) and the overlapping of 78% common lands with designated water protection zones. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The authors would like to thank Edo Kozorog and Florjan Leban for provid- ing information and the map of agrarian communities in the Primorska region. RESEARCH DATA: For information on the availability of research data related to the study, please visit the article webpage: https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS.14319. 5 References Ahn, M., Baldwin, E., Girone, D. 2024: Caution as a response to scientific uncertainty: A groundwater game experiment. International Journal of the Commons 18-1. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1347 Andjelov, M., Frantar, P ., Mikulič, Z., Pavlič, U., Savić, V ., Souvent, P ., Uhan, J. 2016: Ocena količinskega stanja podzemnih voda za Načrt upravljanja voda 2015–2021 v Sloveniji. Geologija 59-2. https:/ /doi.org/ 10.5474/geologija.2016.012 Bassi, M. 2022: Territories of life in Europe: Towards a classification of the rural commons for biodiversity conservation. Antropologia Pubblica 8-2. Bavec, J., Bogataj, N. (eds.) 2021: Slovenske srenje kot izročilo in priložnost. Ministrstvo za kmetijstvo, gozdarstvo in prehrano. Beltrametti, G. 2024: Collective management of environmental resources: Historica-anthropological insights from the Slovenian Karst (19 th century to post-socialism). Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie 44-2. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfrs-2024-2007 Bogataj, N., Krč, J. 2023: Towards the efficient response of forest owners to large-scale forest damage: An example of forest commons. Acta geographica Slovenica 63-3. https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS.11084 50 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 50 Bogataj, N., Rupnik Vec, T. 2024: Samoocena odziva učinkovitosti na sušo – pilotna analiza izobraževalcev odraslih za izboljšanje odziva na posledice ekstremnega vremena. In: Suše v zgodovini in njihov vpliv na okolje, družbo in prebivalstvo: povzetki. Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino. Booth, E. G., Zipper, S. C., Loheide II, S. P . Kucharik, C. J. 2016: Is groundwater recharge always serving us well? Water supply provisioning, crop production, and flood attenuation in conflict in Wisconsin, USA. Bossard, M., Feranec, J., Othanel, J. 2000: CORINE land cover technical guide – Addendum 2000. Technical report. European Environment Agency. Cerar, G., Premrl, T., Hafner, A. 2016: Priročnik za uporabo Zakona o agrarnih skupnostih. Guide. commons: The influence of historical legacy on modern perceptions in Slovenia as a transitional Copernicus 2024: CORINE Land Cover. Dataset. Crnko, T., Rubinić, J., Malečkar, F. 2015: Relationship between man and water throughout history. In: Life and Water on Karst: Monitoring of Transboundary Water Resources of Northern Istria. Založba ZRC. Doneo, A., Conrad, E. 2024: Managing groundwater from the ground up: An ex-ante assessment of the potential for collective action. International Journal of the Commons 18-1. https:/ /doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1258 Ecosystem Services 21, Part A. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.08.007 Ehrman, M. 2020: Application of natural resources property theory to hidden resources. International Journal of the Commons 14-1. https:/ /doi.org/10.5334/ijc.982 Frantar, P . 2022: Vpliv družbe na količinsko stan- je podzemne vode v Sloveniji. In: Zbornik referatov simpozija V odni dnevi 2022 z mednarodno udeležbo. Slovensko društvo za zaščito voda. European Commission, Joint Research Centre 2020: Mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services – An EU wide ecosystem assessment in support of the EU biodiversity strategy. Report. https://doi.org/10.2760/757183 Frantar, P ., Andjelov, M., Herrmann, F., Wendland, F. 2023: Razvoj vodnobilančnega modela mGROW A v Sloveniji. In: Tretji slovenski kongres o vodah 2023: zbornik. Društvo vodarjev Slovenije. Hafner, A. 2011: (Ne)upravljanje s premoženjem agrarnih skupnosti. Pravna praksa 30-12. Haines-Y oung, R., Potshin, M. 2018: Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1 and guidance on the application of the revised structure. Guidance. Fabis Consulting. Herrmann, F., Chen, S., Heidt, L., Elbracht, J., Engel, N., Kunkel, R., Müller, U. et al. 2013: Zeitlich und räumlich hochaufgelöste flächendifferenzierte Simulation des Landschaftswasserhaushalts in Niedersachsen mit dem Model mGROW A. Hydrologie und Wasserbewirtschaftung 57-5. Herrmann, F., Keller, L., Kunkel, R., Vereecken, H., Wendland, F. 2015: Determination of spatially differ- entiated water balance components including groundwater recharge on the federal state level: A case study using the mGROW A model in North Rhine-W estphalia (Germany). Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 4B. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2015.06.018 Hrobath Virloget, K. 2023: Who owns common heritage? About the anthropological research and »rebels« in the socialist system in Slovenia. In: International conference of the European Rural History Organisation 2023: Conference program and abstracts of all panels and papers. Babeş-Bolyai University and the Transylvanian Museum of Ethnography. Iliopoulos, V . G., Damigos, D. 2024: Groundwater ecosystem services: Redefining and operationalizing the concept. Resources 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources13010013 Juriševič, K., Medeot, M. 2024: The valorisation of cultural and natural heritage of Čičarija through sus- tainable tourism. 5th International Scientific Symposium of ICOMOS Slovenia: Book of abstracts. ICOMOS Slovenia. Kocijančič, V . 2022: Poznane neznanke: srenje – jusi – komunele. Založništvo tržaškega tiska ZTT-EST. Kozorog, E. 2024: Digitalni sloj poligonov agrarnih zemljišč na Primorskem. Dataset. Kozorog, E., Leban, F. 2023: Odtis agrarnih skupnosti v kulturni krajini Primorske. In: Krhka ravnotežja: podnebne spremembe in odziv nanje v primorskih agrarnih skupnostih. Andragoški center Slovenije. Lazarević, Ž., Rendla, M., Sedlaček, J. 2023: Zgodovina zadružništva v Sloveniji (1856–1992). Zadružna zveza Slovenije. Leins, T., Scheller, M., Özdemir Çalli, K., Ravbar, N., Mayaud, C., Petrič, M., Liu, Y ., Hartmann, A. 2025: A new process-based approach for defining karst aquifer vulnerability to contamination risks under global changes. Science of the Total Environment 966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.178561 Acta geographica Slovenica, 65-3, 2025 51 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 51 Nevenka Bogataj, Peter Frantar, Groundwater recharge as a basis for the assessment of ecosystem services on common land … Madani, E. M., Jansson, P . E., Babelon, I. 2018: Differences in water balance between grassland and forest watersheds using long-term data, derived using the CoupModel. Hydrology Research 49-1. https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2017.154 Manzoni, A. 2024: The food commons: An unexplored approach for a more sustainable design for our food systems. In: The Food Commons Approach in the EU Agri-food Law. LITES – Legal Issues in Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies 3. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-64565-5_2 MEA – Millenium Ecosystem Assessment 2005: Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Island Press. Meden, N. 2019: Srenjska zemlja v sodobnem mednarodnem zgodovinopisju: aktualna vprašanja. Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino 59-3. Meinzen-Dick, R., Bruns, B. 2024: Crafting combinations to govern groundwater: Knowledge, motivation, and agency. International Journal of the Commons 18-1. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1473 Ministrstvo za naravne vire in prostor, Direkcija Republike Slovenije za vode 2024: Zbirka podatkov varstvenih območij. Dataset. Ostrom, E. 1990: The governing of commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807763 Ostrom, E. 2012: The future of the commons: Beyond market failure and government regulation. In: The Future of the Commons: Beyond Market Failure and Government Regulation. IEA. https:/ /doi.org/10.2139/ ssrn.3916843 Owour, S. O., Butterbach-Bahl, K., Guzha, A. C., Rufino, M. C., Pelster, D. E., Díaz-Pinés, E., Breuer, L. 2016: Groundwater recharge rates and surface runoff response to land use and land cover changes in semi-arid environments. Ecological Processes 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-016-0060-6 Pagot, G., Šmid Hribar, M., Rail, L. F ., Walters, G., Hymas O., Liechti, K., Haller, T. et al. 2025: Territories of commons: A review of common land organizations and institutions in the European Alps. Environmental Research Letters 20. IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/add1f4 Pipan, P ., Šmid Hribar, M., Urbanc, M. 2023: Motivation, robustness and benefits of water commons: Insights from small drinking water supply systems. Acta geographica Slovenica 63-3. https:/ /doi.org/10.3986/AGS.11592 Premrl, T. 2013: Analiza stanja agrarnih skupnosti v  Sloveniji na podlagi podatkov upravnih enot. Technical report. Gozdarski inštitut Slovenije. Ravbar N., Kovačič, G. 2010: Characterisation of karst areas using multiple geo-science techniques, a case study from SW Slovenia. Acta Carsologica 39-1. https://doi.org/10.3986/ac.v39i1.112 Ravbar N., Petrič, M., Kovačič, G. 2023: Vpliv okoljskih sprememb na napajanje in pretočne vrednosti kraških izvirov. In: Tretji slovenski kongres o vodah. Društvo vodarjev Slovenije. Ravbar, N., Barborič, B., Kovačič, G. 2024: Multi-decadal changes in vegetation and land use inferred from different data sources: Two case studies at the regional scale in the Slovenian karst. Land Degradation & Development 35-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.5250 Rendla, M. 2024: Suše v osemdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja: napoved preloma z značilnostmi suš v pretek- losti. In: Suše v zgodovini in njihov vpliv na okolje, družbo in prebivalstvo: povzetki. Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino. Rodela, R. 2012: Dva primera iz prakse v Tržaški pokrajini: jusarska skupnost Opčine in srenjska skup- nost Boljunec. In: Soupravljanje naravnih virov: vaške skupnosti in sorodne oblike skupne lastnine in skupnega upravljanja. Wageningen University and Research Centre. Romanelli, J. P ., Boschi, R. S. 2019: The legacy of Elinor Ostrom on common forests research assessed through bibliometric analysis. CERNE 25-4. https://doi.org/10.1590/01047760201925042658 Sandrin, G. 2022: Kras 2022 – Spomini na požar. Carso 2022 – Memoria di un incendio. Mladinska knjiga. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2011: Convention on Biological Diversity: Text and Annexes. Convention. Shang, S., Wang, L., Guo, W ., Zhang, L., Wang, Y ., Su, X., Li, L., Chen, Y . 2024: Developing collaborative management strategies for flood control and drainage across administrative regions using game theory. Water 16-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16172510 Šmid Hribar, M. Kozina, J., Bole, D., Urbanc, M. 2018: Public goods, common-pool resources, and the Šmid Hribar, M., Urbanc, M., Zorn, M. 2023: Commons and their contribution to sustaining Slovenian cultural landscapes. Acta geographica Slovenica 63-3. https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS.11591 Smith Z. A. 2002: Groundwater collective management systems: the United States experience. In: Intensive use of ground water: challenges and opportunities. A. A. Balkema. 52 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 52 society. Urbani izziv 29-1. https://doi.org/10.5379/urbani-izziv-en-2018-29-01-004 Soliev, I., Thesfeld, I. 2017: Reframing for sustainability: Exploring transformative power of benefit sharing. Sustainability 9-8. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081486 Sušnik, A., Blažič P ., Žun, M., Puškarić M. 2025: Suša – včeraj, danes jutri. Suše v zgodovini in njihov vpliv na okolje, družbo in prebivalstvo. Vpogledi 28. Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino. TEEB 2010: Mainstreaming the economics of nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. Report. van Laerhoven, F., Schoon M., Villamayor-Tomas S. 2020: Celebrating the 30th anniversary of Ostrom’s governing the commons: Traditions and trends in the study of the commons, revisited. International Journal of the Commons 14-1. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1030 Vertačnik, G. 2023: Kazalniki podnebnih sprememb v zadnjem desetletju glede na večdesetletna pretekla obdobja. In: Krhka ravnotežja. Andragoški center Slovenije. Vora, S. 2024: Learning together for groundwater management: A case of the Devnadi Basin, Nashik, Maharashtra, India. International Journal of the Commons 18-1. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1323 WMO – World Meteorological Organisation 2017: WMO guidelines on the calculation of climate normals: 2017 edition. Guidelines. Acta geographica Slovenica, 65-3, 2025 53 65-3_acta49-1.qxd 8.12.2025 13:32 Page 53