The research area is located in the Brantas-Metro Groundwater Basin, East Java Province, Indonesia, based on the Directorate of Environmental Geology (1984) (Figure 1). This basin, which includes the Malang Region, is under considerable stress from excessive groundwater extraction (Santoso and Nurumudin, 2020). This pressure results from the reduction of water catchment areas, which occurs when green areas such as forests and plantations are converted into recreational spaces for tourism or residential development (Atasa et al., 2022).

The heavy stress of groundwater resources caused by the increasing population highlights a vital requirement of researching the interaction between human activities and groundwater systems. Observation results indicate that community reliance on well water leads to a reduction in its availability. Wells are no longer used because they have relatively little water available (Figure 2). Consequently, the community has to seek other sources by subscribing to water from government-owned or local community-owned water distribution networks. Water networks owned by local community organizations generally involve establishing pipe distribution channels originating from springs, especially in villages located on the slopes of Kawi Volcano (Figure 3). Village communities in lowland areas near industrial and service zones generally switch to government-owned water distribution networks. To obtain this water, residents are required to pay a certain tariff. This is certainly different from using water from their own groundwater wells, which does not incur any cost. This condition impacts the increase in water costs for every household. Furthermore, the high-water demand has led to the drying up of several springs located in the Kawi Volcano Valley (Figure 4). The defunct springs subsequently cause irrigation channels to dry up, which can disrupt agriculture, especially during the dry season (Figure 5).

Currently, the upstream (western part) of the research location is a water catchment area, protected forest, community plantations, and agriculture, while the downstream (eastern and southern part) of the research location comprises agricultural areas, settlements, and industries. The eastern and southern parts of the research area are designated for urban, residential, and industrial development based on Regional Regulation of East Java Province Number 10 of 2023 concerning Spatial Planning of East Java Province 2023–2043. This regional regulation also states that the research location falls into several spatial categories, including: National Settlement Center with Malang City as its hub, Areas Providing Protection to Other Areas in the Form of Protected Forests (in the upstream of Kawi Volcano), Industrial Areas, Water Catchment Areas (Upstream Kawi Volcano), and Cultivation Areas (including Production Forests, Community Plantation Forests, Agricultural Areas, and Settlement Areas). Based on this regulation, there is a potential for a decrease in the extent of protected areas and water catchment areas, as well as an increase in community water demand. The further impact is the disruption of groundwater availability, especially shallow groundwater, as is the current condition. This situation is further exacerbated by regulations set by local governments that mostly concern the protection of areas around springs and deep groundwater aquifers. Local government regulations, such as Malang Regent Regulation No. 8 of 2015 concerning Sustainable Water Catchment and Infiltration Management, only discuss: water catchment area conservation, land-use control, flood prevention, construction of infiltration wells, and biopores. Regulations by the Central Government of the Republic of Indonesia also focus more on deep groundwater aquifers and do not consider shallow groundwater. However, there are quite a number of shallow groundwater users, especially in the research area (Figure 6).

The groundwater problems faced by the community in the research area are crucial and threaten groundwater sustainability. Groundwater sustainability can only be achieved through groundwater conservation. Groundwater conservation is essential to sustainability, but it is not fully adopted in the community (Kustamar et al., 2010). To fill this gap, this study used socio-hydrogeological approach to investigate community perspectives on groundwater management in the Brantas-Metro Groundwater Basin, Malang Region, Indonesia. Considering that each region has its own set of socio-hydrogeological characteristics, this research will provide new insights into the integration of social factors with hydrogeological science for this context. Also, since socio-hydrogeological studies for this study area are still in their infancy, this project will generate knowledge for future groundwater management strategies.

The research instrument is prepared based on the results of field observation and literature review. Previous research has shown that social factors, such as the role of the government (Carrión-Mero et al., 2021), community involvement, stakeholders, and socioeconomic factors (Hynds et al., 2018b), have previously been used to explain hydrogeology phenomena. However, previous studies indicate that socio-hydrogeology does not explicitly use Socio-Hydrogeological approach (Eléa et al., 2021; Frommen and Moss, 2021; Re et al., 2021a). Unlike earlier studies, this research employs three variables, each consisting of multiple sub-variables as detailed in Table 1. Each variable represents the Socio-Hydrogeological aspects defined by Re (2015). The use of variables and keys will clarify the community’s comprehension of groundwater management in the study area.

This study used a questionnaire as its research instrument. A structured questionnaire was administered to survey respondents, incorporating key socio-hydrogeological considerations outlined (Re, 2015). Prior to data collection, the questionnaire underwent rigorous validity and reliability testing to ensure its validity and accuracy in measuring the intended constructs (Sugiyono, 2024). The Pearson product–moment correlation is employed to assess the validity of the instrument by examining the correlation between the score of each question item and the total score (Equation 1). In Equation 1, r_xy is the Pearson correlation coefficient between the variables x and y, while n is the sum of the sample or data pairs. Based on the number of respondents and the level of significance, the item is considered valid if the r-value of the analysis of the calculation results is higher than the r-value of the table derived from the statistical table. A comparison of the significance level and p-value can also be used for validation. The correlation is deemed significant, and the item is acceptable if the p-value (significance value) is less than the significance level (α, typically 0.05) (Sugiyono, 2024). r xy = n ( ∑ xy ) − ( ∑ x ) ( ∑ y ) [ n ( ∑ x 2 ) − ( ∑ x ) 2 ] [ n ( ∑ y 2 ) − ( ∑ y ) 2 ] (1)

The reliability of the questionnaire was tested using Alpha Cronbach. In Equation 2, the value α is the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient, the value N is the number of items, c ¯ is the average covariance value within the items, while v ¯ is the average variance value. The researcher utilized SPSS Statistics v27 to calculate the Cronbach’s Alpha value. A high degree of internal consistency among the questionnaire items, indicated by a strong correlation between items relative to their individual variances, is crucial for reliability. Cronbach’s Alpha ranges from 0 to 1, with values greater than 0.6 generally considered to indicate acceptable reliability (Taber, 2018). α = N c ¯ v ¯ + ( N − 1 ) c ¯ (2)

Population data for the study was sourced from the Central Statistics Agency of East Java Province (BPS Malang City, 2022; BPS Malang Regency, 2022). A sample of 100 respondents was selected using Proportional Stratified Random Sampling (Sugiyono, 2024). Respondents were chosen based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) residence within the research area; (2) a minimum educational attainment of a high school diploma; and (3) representation from each sub-district within the study area. The high school education requirement was implemented to ensure respondents could readily comprehend the questionnaire and because they are more likely to hold decision-making authority within their households.

The survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Principal Component Analysis (PCA). PCA, a versatile statistical technique, is employed for various purposes, including factor analysis, correlation analysis, clustering, and classification. Its strength lies in simplifying data interpretation by Rahimi-Feyzabad et al. (2022), reducing dimensionality (Wang and Zhang, 2017) and mitigating noise by eliminating less informative components (Berenschot and Grift, 2019). As explained by Chowdhury et al. (2020), PCA optimizes the input vector dimensions while minimizing reconstruction error. The method yields eigenvalues, representing the variance explained by each principal component, with higher eigenvalues indicating greater variance. Factor loadings, also generated by PCA, reveal the contribution of each variable to a given principal component; high loadings signify a substantial contribution (Wang and Zhang, 2017; Chowdhury et al., 2020). The software used in analyzing PCA is SPSS Statistics v27. The device has the ability to analyze PCA quickly and comprehensively.

A questionnaire was used to collect data for this study. Ensuring the reliability of this instrument is crucial for generating trustworthy data. Pearson’s product moment validity testing revealed that all values were less than 0.05 (at a significant level of 0.05). Consequently, the instrument was declared valid. A Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.871 was obtained, indicating strong internal consistency and thus good reliability. This level of reliability suggests the instrument could be suitable for similar research projects.

The respondents’ primary occupations included civil servants (42, or 42.7%), such as village heads, government office staff, and village support staff; private sector employees (30, or 30.3%), working in fields like digital marketing, architecture, food sales, and small and medium-sized businesses; and other professions (28, or 27.0%), including students, housewives, teachers, and farmers. Regarding education, 42 respondents (41.6%) held university degrees, while 58 (58.4%) had completed high school (both general and vocational). Most respondents (69, or 68.5%) resided in residential areas, with the remainder living near business and industrial development areas, dan agricultural area. Of the respondents, 60 (60%) used groundwater as a water source, while 40 (40%) relied on government-operated piped water networks. The groundwater users obtained water from a variety of sources, including community-owned piped networks (fed by springs), shallow drilled wells, shallow dug wells, and direct access to springs. Respondents who obtain water from government-operated piped water networks are classified as non-groundwater users.

Awareness can be defined as a human attitude or behavior formed as a result of certain consequences that lead to a positive attitude. One way to determine an individual’s level of awareness is through the cognitive component. The cognitive component is expressed as the knowledge an individual possesses about a specific situation (Ham Josip Juraj Strossmayer et al., 2015). Consequently, community awareness relates to collective human attitudes or behaviors. Prior research has demonstrated a link between insufficient community awareness and groundwater challenges, such as over-extraction and the risk of seawater intrusion, as public conditions in Baton Rouge, Louisiana (Hemmerling et al., 2024). Research in the Republic of Ireland shows that the enhancement of community awareness at both regional and local levels is the most effective strategy for groundwater management (Mooney et al., 2020). Community awareness is crucial for effective groundwater management. Increased awareness empowers communities to actively participate in such efforts.

Figure 7 presents respondent opinions regarding Community Awareness, a variable comprised of two sub-variables and 11 parameters (Table 1). Responses are categorized for all respondents, groundwater users, and non-groundwater users. Regarding the significance of groundwater management (SSP1), 32.6% of respondents strongly agreed. A larger proportion (76.4%) agreed with the importance of periodic discussions related to groundwater management (SSM1). However, a notable minority (28.1% combined) expressed disagreement (18%) or strong disagreement (10.1%) with the indicator related to knowledge of groundwater well conditions (STP1), within the sub-variable concerning knowledge of groundwater management.

Respondents were categorized as groundwater users and non-users. Both groups showed similar levels of strong agreement (33%) regarding the importance of groundwater management (SSP1). Among groundwater users, 76% agreed with the need for periodic discussions to raise community awareness (SSM1). Non-groundwater users frequently agreed (83%) with the importance of community awareness efforts regarding issues and conflict risks (STI3). Notably, groundwater users differed from non-users in their perception of conflict risks, with groundwater users less likely to consider excessive groundwater use as a significant conflict risk. This aligns with prior study indicating that groundwater extraction by well owners will not result in issues with groundwater, hence they will continue in extracting water (Bostic et al., 2023).

Increased community awareness is essential for understanding the environmental challenges associated with groundwater. Studies have shown that limited awareness can lead to future complications, as observed in Myanmar (Re et al., 2021b) and Vietnam, where a lack of groundwater management has contributed to numerous problems (Pham et al., 2023). Enhanced education is a key strategy for improving public understanding of groundwater management (Mooney et al., 2021). This aligns with broader research indicating a positive correlation between education levels and community awareness of groundwater management (Ahmed et al., 2021; Re et al., 2021b). While this study confirms the importance of community awareness, it further distinguishes between groundwater users and non-users, particularly in their perceptions of conflict risk. Potential conflict triggers include water quality changes, decreased supply, and excessive extraction.

Arnstein (1969) explained that participation constitutes a mechanism of power sharing, enabling citizens lacking authority to engage intentionally and actively in the decision-making process. Citizens have several conditions of participation, including non-participation (not involved in decision-making), Degrees of Tokenism (superficial), and Degrees of Citizen Power (active) (Arnstein, 1969). The public’s participation in water resources management is dependent upon their own factors, according to research conducted in the United Kingdom (Fritsch, 2017). Government policies, family, socioeconomic level, and possible risks are some of the factors that influence whether or not someone chooses to participate (Fritsch, 2017; Kabogo et al., 2017; Ocampo-Melgar et al., 2022; Xiaomei, 2023). Research indicates that community participation is very important and the most effective element in integrated water resources management (Ali and Kamraju, 2024). Participation may escalate when issues emerge that have extensive impacts (Barthel et al., 2017). Previous studies indicated that the participation of groundwater users surpasses that of non-users (Mooney et al., 2020). Thus, community participation can be defined as the involvement of communities without authority in the decision-making process.

Regarding community involvement (TME2), 24% of respondents (both users and non-users) strongly agreed with the need to evaluate community activity types (Figure 8). A larger proportion (71%) agreed with this evaluation (TME2) and also with the importance of identifying aims, program outcomes, and potential conflict risks within groundwater management programs (TJI2). This indicates general agreement on the value of evaluating program participation and understanding program goals, outcomes, and potential conflicts. However, a substantial minority (26%) disagreed with the need for hydrogeology expert involvement and willingness to participate in groundwater management programs (TSI3 and TSP3, respectively). This discrepancy suggests that while respondents recognize the importance of program evaluation and identification of key program elements, they are less inclined toward expert involvement and direct program participation. This finding echoes research in Maneadero Valley, Mexico, which suggests that community participation is not always sustainable, potentially due to factors like diminishing power and ineffective participation mechanisms (Villada-Canela et al., 2021).

Groundwater users most strongly agreed (22%) with the need to assess the effects of overpumping (TME2). A similar level of strong agreement was observed regarding the identification of targets, program outcomes, and conflict risks within groundwater management programs (TJI2). However, respondents expressed disagreement or strong disagreement with the involvement of hydrogeology experts (TSI3). Non-groundwater users, in contrast, strongly agreed with the need to assess community activity types (TME2) and the publication of hydrogeological investigation results (TSI1). Among groundwater users, 71% agreed with the assessment of over-pumping effects (TME3). Disagreement or strong disagreement was again noted regarding hydrogeology expert involvement and willingness to participate in management programs (TSI1 and TSP3, respectively). These findings suggest a general willingness among both user and non-user groups to evaluate management impacts and identify key program elements. In TSP3, 25% of all respondents stated they strongly disagreed with participating in the groundwater management program. In fact, 20% of groundwater users and 31% of non-groundwater users stated they strongly disagreed with participating. According to Arnstein’s degree of participation, they are classified as non-participating citizens (1969). Only 9% of groundwater users and non-groundwater users are willing to actively or fully participate (TSM1). This indicates that the willingness for full participation in groundwater management is still relatively low. This reluctance may stem from social, economic, cultural, and knowledge-based factors that influence participation (Bernacchi et al., 2020). Therefore, collaborative efforts among all stakeholders are crucial to foster genuine community participation. Developing participatory scenarios that promote mutual understanding is one such strategy (Rouillard et al., 2022). Kengganan berpartisipasi ini mirip dengan penelitian sebelumnya di (Hund et al., 2018; Oshun et al., 2021; Khadim et al., 2023).

The variable concerning the Ability to Accept and Adapt to Information, Technology, and Disaster Risks is crucial for understanding individual capacity in groundwater management. This capacity is essential for navigating various potential environmental changes, including those impacting groundwater (Lal et al., 2018). Understanding this adaptive capacity can inform the development of more effective management approaches, particularly given the current landscape of readily available information, diverse technologies, and increasing disaster risks (Hendrickson and Bruguera, 2018). Information access, often through media channels, can significantly shape community perceptions and concerns (Bernacchi et al., 2020). Informed adaptation strategies enhance community resilience to environmental changes and mitigate stress on both individuals and their environment (Elpida and Dimitrios, 2020). Effective adaptation requires comprehensive strategies involving all community stakeholders (Aida et al., 2020).

Overall, respondents strongly agreed with the “Saving/Conserving Independently Under Conditions” indicator within the “Ability to Accept and Adapt to Information, Technology, and Disaster Risks” sub-variable (MME1) (Figure 9). Regarding adaptation to changing shallow groundwater conditions (MMJ2), respondents more frequently agreed with the need for support from the government, academia, and NGOs. However, disagreement was noted concerning the “Recognition of management ineffectiveness” indicator and the “Ability to resolve organizational conflicts” indicator (MMI3). Furthermore, respondents disagreed with the “Independent information-seeking” indicator within the “Ability to accept information, technology, and disaster risks” sub-variable (MMD1).

Respondents were categorized as groundwater users and non-users. Among groundwater users, 15% strongly agreed with the “Saving/conserving independently under conditions” indicator within the “Ability to accept information, technology, and disaster risks” sub-variable (MME1), and another 15% strongly agreed with the “Developing new technology in hydrogeology” indicator within the “Ability to adapt to changes in groundwater conditions” sub-variable (MMU3). A larger proportion of groundwater users (81%) agreed with the “Saving/conserving independently under conditions” indicator (MME1). However, 26% of groundwater users disagreed with both the “Recognition of management ineffectiveness” indicator within MMI1 and the “Ability to resolve organizational conflicts” indicator within MMI3. This pattern suggests that while groundwater users are receptive to new technologies and information related to water conservation, they are less likely to support organizations they perceive as ineffective in implementing groundwater management initiatives or resolving related issues. Non-users, unlike groundwater users who prioritized independent action (MME1), more readily agreed with the need to adapt to changing groundwater conditions by seeking assistance from government, scientist/academic, and NGO entities (MMJ2 and MMJ3). In essence, groundwater users demonstrate a preference for independent conservation efforts, whereas non-users are more inclined to rely on external support.

Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used to identify the primary factors among the research variables. Communalities in PCA represent the proportion of each variable’s variance explained by the principal components (Li et al., 2023). The highest communality (0.883) was observed for the “Willingness to Participate in the Program” indicator within the “Management Program Implementation” sub-variable (TSP3). While respondents generally supported the existence of groundwater management programs, a disconnect emerged regarding participation. Many respondents, despite their support for the programs, did not perceive a need to be actively involved. Consequently, the lack of community participation may lead to sustainability challenges in groundwater management (Mooney et al., 2021). A separate study indicates that if the community is unwilling to participate, alternative options are necessary for groundwater management. The local government, as the primary administrator, can designate the communities under its authority as groundwater managers (Baran et al., 2021).

The second highest communality (0.876) was observed for the “Recognition of management ineffectiveness” indicator within the “Ability to Accept and Adapt to Information, Technology, and Disaster Risks” variable (MMI1). Most respondents disagreed with this indicator, asserting that groundwater management is not ineffective and that conflicts among stakeholders are minimal. While academic literature suggests that groundwater conflicts typically arise from diminishing water availability, declining water tables, water quality changes, and limited access to wells (Jia et al., 2019; Santos et al., 2019; Sen et al., 2020) and can even escalate to communal violence (Döring, 2020). Respondents in this study area did not perceive these conditions as problematic or conflict-inducing. This discrepancy highlights a difference in problem definition between academic theory and local experience. When faced with groundwater issues, respondents generally preferred to seek independent solutions, often consulting local experts such as well diggers. Involvement of external parties like government agencies, academics, hydrogeologists, and NGOs was typically reserved for situations beyond the community’s capacity to resolve independently (Nazari and Ahmadi, 2019; Döring, 2020). Consequently, overt conflicts related to groundwater were rare and largely unacknowledged within the community (Table 2).

The third highest communality (0.841) was associated with the “Over-pumping Impact” indicator within the “Groundwater Management Knowledge” sub-variable of the Community Awareness variable (STE1). Responses regarding the effects of excessive groundwater extraction varied considerably, indicating diverse perspectives on this issue. Declining groundwater levels in the area are a consequence of overpumping, driven by increased community demand (Mukherjee et al., 2018; Jain et al., 2021). This demand is likely to escalate with continued population growth and economic development across sectors like industry, agriculture, residential use, and drinking water consumption (Yin et al., 2017; Bierkens and Wada, 2019; Elshall et al., 2020). Existing research confirms the link between overpumping and groundwater depletion (Somaratne et al., 2013; Koïta et al., 2018; Jena et al., 2020). In this study, most respondents, both users and non-users, acknowledged the social consequences of excessive groundwater extraction and recognized the potential need to seek alternative water sources as a result of groundwater changes.

The lowest communality (0.552) was observed for the “Significance of groundwater management” indicator within the “Community Awareness Efforts” sub-variable (SSP1). Low communality values suggest that this indicator may not be strongly related to the other variables in the analysis and may not contribute significantly to the overall model (Li et al., 2023). Despite this, respondents generally agreed or strongly agreed with the importance of groundwater management. Effective groundwater management is indeed crucial for the long-term sustainability of this vital resource (Kabogo et al., 2017; Rahimi-Feyzabad et al., 2022).

Principal Component Analysis (PCA) revealed 10 components. Table 3 shows the eigenvalue of these 10 components. Overall, these 10 components collectively explain 74.605% of the total variance in the data. Based on Kaiser’s criterion (eigenvalue > 1), all 10 components qualify for retention. The first component exhibits the highest eigenvalue (8.591), indicating substantial variability within the data. This first principal component accounts for 25.269% of the total data variance and is crucial for identifying primary data patterns. The eigenvalue table is used to generate a scree plot, which is its graphical illustration (Figure 10). From the scree plot results, four main components were identified: 1, 2, and 3. These components contribute significantly to the overall variance, a characteristic often associated with eigenvalues exceeding 1 (Li et al., 2023).

The scree plot from the PCA analysis results show three main components (Figure 11). The curve’s decline slows down after Component 3, characterized by an elbow point. This indicates that components after this point have significantly less variance and may be less informative. Figure 11 also depicts the component plot. The component plot has three axes: X, Y, and Z. The X-axis represents Component 1, which accounts for the biggest variability. The Y-axis represents Component 2, derived from the remaining variability values that are uncorrelated with Component 1. The Z-axis represents Component 3, which provides additional information from the preceding components. The component plot can help identify sub-variables that tend to cluster together. Sub-variable clusters that exhibit similar variations will appear in close proximity. The component plot in this study yielded two clusters. Cluster 1 (yellow circle) shows positive values on Components 1 and 3, but negative values on Component 2. Cluster 1 includes the sub-variables STP2, STE1, STE3, STI1, STI3, SSP1, SSP2, SSM1, SSM3, TMP2, TME2, TME3, and TJI1. Cluster 1 is dominated by the variables ‘Community Awareness’ and ‘Community Participation’. Cluster 2 (red circle) shows positive values on Components 1, 2, and 3. Cluster 2 includes the sub-variables: STP1, TMP3, TSP3, TSM1, TSM3, TSI1, TSI3, MMD1, MMD2, MME1, MME3, MMI1, MMI3, MMP2, MMP3, MMJ2, MMJ3, MMU1, and MMU3. This cluster is dominated by ‘The Ability to Accept and Adapt to Information, Technology, and Disaster Risks’. Although the component plot can assist in interpreting patterns within the research sub-variables, it is not yet able to fully display the names of all sub-variables, such as SSM3, TJI2, TSI1, and TSI3.

The Component Matrix resulting from the PCA includes 10 components and their corresponding loadings. Higher loading values (approaching 1 or −1) indicate a stronger contribution of the variable to the principal component. While the first component represents the overall situation, subsequent components capture more specific variations. The variable with the highest loading on the first component is considered the dominant factor. In this case, the highest loading value (0.687) was observed for the “Groundwater information distribution” indicator within the “Community awareness efforts” sub-variable of the Community Awareness variable (SSM3). This high, positive loading signifies the variable’s substantial influence and positive correlation with socio-hydrogeology. In this study, a higher loading value suggests that effective groundwater information distribution can significantly enhance community awareness, a crucial factor for successful groundwater management (Kabogo et al., 2017; Medrano-Pérez et al., 2022). This also suggests that respondents recognize the importance of groundwater information distribution for raising public awareness. Such programs, potentially delivered in collaboration with external experts, can foster new relationships among stakeholders, facilitating knowledge exchange and open dialogue. Information distribution can also be carried out through mass media, website development, and mobile apps (Hynds et al., 2018b), making it easily accessible to a wider community. Ultimately, the goal of these programs is to empower the community to effectively manage groundwater resources (Rouillard et al., 2022).

The variable with the highest negative loading (−0.508) was the “Overpumping Impact” indicator within the “Groundwater Management Knowledge” sub-variable of the Community Awareness variable (STE1). This suggests that while respondents acknowledge the existence of overpumping impacts, their understanding of the underlying processes may be limited. Although this indicator had the third-highest communality, indicating its importance, it received less direct attention from respondents. Overpumping, a significant anthropogenic activity, is often overlooked, despite its potential for irreversible environmental damage (Ashraf et al., 2021). Such consequences include land subsidence and drought, both of which can be exacerbated by climate change (Haacker et al., 2019; Iquebal et al., 2021; Bremard, 2022; Chen et al., 2023).

The PCA correlation matrix revealed a strong positive correlation (0.784) between respondents’ willingness to participate in groundwater management programs (TSP3) and their views on the involvement of hydrogeology experts (TSI3). This suggests that a greater willingness to participate is associated with a stronger belief in the value of expert involvement. This finding supports the core principle of socio-hydrogeology, which emphasizes knowledge transfer to the community, and is consistent with prior research demonstrating the importance of integrating social considerations with hydrogeological expertise for effective groundwater management (Limaye, 2017; Re et al., 2021b).

Figure 12 depicts the key socio-hydrogeological elements identified in the study area, which should be considered in local groundwater management strategies. Notably, the assessment of the social implications of groundwater resource changes (quality and quantity) on human well-being was not identified as a significant factor by respondents, who generally did not perceive such changes as having social consequences, thus diminishing the perceived need for formal evaluation. While respondents demonstrated a good understanding of hydrogeological conditions and groundwater management approach, including the impacts of over-extraction, they exhibited a reluctance to participate in management initiatives. This reluctance aligns with their perception of ineffective groundwater management. However, these discrepancies between perceived problems and willingness to act should be addressed by stakeholders, as they can lead to future challenges (Karjalainen et al., 2013; Rahimi-Feyzabad et al., 2022; Bernat et al., 2023). Respondents did, however, support improved groundwater information dissemination and the involvement of hydrogeology experts, which could potentially increase community participation (Re et al., 2018). Critically, Groundwater Information dissemination emerged as a key factor for enhancing both community awareness of groundwater conditions and participation in management efforts. Overall, a socio-hydrogeological approach, by incorporating community perceptions, offers a promising pathway toward achieving groundwater sustainability in the study area.

This research has several limitations that may affect the generalization of its results. The data comes from a perception-based study without real groundwater monitoring therefore it reflects public opinion rather than physical conditions. The research also has a limited number of respondents and the specific coverage area in the Brantas-Metro Groundwater Basin may restrict the applicability of these results to other regions with different social and hydrogeological conditions. The analysis used (Principal Component Analysis) in this research is effective in identifying main factors but cannot directly show cause-and-effect relationships. Further studies with more extensive methods and a larger sample size are needed to strengthen these findings.