Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Quaestiones Geographicae

The Journal of Adam Mickiewicz University

4 Issues per year


CiteScore 2016: 0.43

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.258
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.359

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2081-6383
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Urban Geomorphological Heritage. An Overview

Emmanuel Reynard / Alessia Pica / Paola Coratza
Published Online: 2017-09-29 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/quageo-2017-0022

Abstract

Urbanization is a global phenomenon and currently more than half of the world’s population lives in urban areas. Studies on geomorphological heritage and the development of specific methods of investigation (assessment, inventories, cartography) are, however, relatively rare and limited. This paper first describes the relationships between urbanization and geomorphology. Secondly, it presents an overview of the main works on the urban geomorphological heritage. Then, the main methods of investigation are presented. Finally, we discuss the challenging issues concerning the protection and the promotion of the urban geomorphological heritage.

Keywords: geomorphology; geomorphological heritage; urban areas; urban geomorphology; geomorphosites

References

  • Adeli Z., Khorshiddoustb A., 2011. Application of geomorphology in urban planning: Case study in landfill site selection. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 19: 662–667, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.05.183CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Baud D., Reynard E., 2015. Géohistoire d’une trajectoire paysagère dans la plaine du Rhône valaisan. Analyse du secteur entre Riddes et Martigny (1840-1965) (Geohistory of landscape trajectory in the Rhone River plain. Analysis of the sector Riddes-Martigny (1840–1965)). Norois 237: 15–31.Google Scholar

  • Bethemont J., Bravard J.P., 2016. Pour saluer le Rhône (To greet the Rhone River). Libel, Lyon.Google Scholar

  • Billi A., De Filippis L., Poncia P.P., Sella P., Faccenna C., 2016. Hidden sinkholes and karst cavities in the travertine plateau of a highly-populated geothermal seismic territory (Tivoli, central Italy). Geomorphology 255: 63–80, doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2015.12.011CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Boivin P., Thouret J.C., 2014. The volcanic Chaîne des Puys: A unique collection of simple and compound monogenetic edifices. In: Fort M., André M.F. (eds), Landscapes and Landforms of France. Springer, Dordrecht: 81–91, doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-7022-5_9CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bondesan A., 2017. Geomorphological processes and landscape evolution of the Lagoon of Venice. In: Soldati M., Marchetti M. (eds), Landscapes and Landforms of Italy. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland: 181–191, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-26194-2_15CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Borghi A., d’Atri A., Martire L., Castelli D., Costa E., Dino G., Favero Longo S.E., Ferrando S., Gallo L.M., Giardino M., Groppo C., Piervittori R., Rolfo F., Rossetti P., Vaggelli G., 2014. Fragments of the Western Alpine chain as historic ornamental stones in Turin (Italy): enhancement of urban geological heritage through geotourism. Geoheritage 6: 41–55, doi: 10.1007/s12371-013-0091-7.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bravard J.P., 1997. Tectonique et dynamique fluviale du Würm à l’Holocène à la confluence Saône-Rhône (France) (Tectonics and fluvial dynamics from Würm to Holocene at the confluence Saône River – Rhone River, France). Géographie physique et Quaternaire 51(3): 315–326.Google Scholar

  • Brilha J., 2016. Inventory and quantitative assessment of geosites and geodiversity sites: a review. Geoheritage 8(2): 119–134.Google Scholar

  • Brown A.G., Tooth S., Bullard J.E., Thomas D.S.G., Chiverrell R.C., Plater A.J., Murton J., Thorndycraft V.R., Tarolli P., Rose J., Wainwright J., Downs P., Aalto R., 2017. The geomorphology of the Anthropocene: emergence, status and implications. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 42: 71–90, doi: 10.1002/esp.3943CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cayla N., 2014. An overview of new technologies applied to the management of geoheritage. Geoheritage 6: 91-102. doi: 10.1007/s12371-014-0113-0CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Chin A., 2006. Urban transformation of river landscapes in a global context. Geomorphology 79: 460–487.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Chin A., O’Dowd A.P., Gregory K.J., 2013. Urbanization and river channels. In: Shroder J., Wohl E.E. (eds), Treatise on Geomorphology, Vol. 9, Fluvial Geomorphology. Academic Press, San Diego: 809–827.Google Scholar

  • Clivaz M., Reynard E., 2017. How to integrate invisible geomorphosites in an inventory: A case study in the Rhone River valley (Switzerland). Geoheritage, doi:10.1007/s12371-017-0222-7.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cooke R.U., 1976. Urban geomorphology. Geographical Journal 142: 59–65.Google Scholar

  • Cooke R.U., 1984. Geomorphological hazards in Los Angeles: A study of slope and sediment problems in a metropolitan county. Allen & Unwin, London.Google Scholar

  • Cooke R.U., Brunsden D., Doornkamp J.C., Jones D.K.C., 1982. Urban geomorphology in Drylands. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Coratza P., Hobléa F., 2017. The specificities of geomorphological heritage. In: Reynard E., Brilha J. (eds), Geoheritage: Assessment, protection, and management. Elsevier, Waltham, in press.Google Scholar

  • Côté A., Joly M.C., Verner A., 2009). Géotourisme urbain. Le cas de Montréal (Urban geotourism. The case of Montreal). Téoros 28(2): 97–99.Google Scholar

  • Cousins S.A.O., 2001. Analysis of land-cover transitions based on 17th and 18th century cadastral maps and aerial photographs. Landscape Ecology 16: 41–54, doi:10.1023/A:1008108704358.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Del Lama E.A., de La Corte Bacci D., Martins L., da Glória Motta Garcia M., Kazumi Dehira L., 2015. Urban geotourism and the old centre of São Paulo City, Brazil. Geoheritage 7: 147–164, doi: 10.1007/s12371-014-0119-7.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Del Monte M., Fredi P., Pica A., Vergari F., 2013. Geosites within Rome City center (Italy): a mixture of cultural and geomorphological heritage. Geografia Fisica e Dinamica Quaternaria 36: 241–257, doi: 10.4461/GFDQ.2013.36.0.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Del Monte M., D’Orefice M., Luberti G.M., Marini R., Pica A., Vergari F., 2016. Geomorphological classification of urban landscapes: the case study of Rome (Italy). Journal of Maps 12: 178–189.Google Scholar

  • Dóniz-Páez J., Becerra-Ramírez R., 2015. Geoturismo urbano en Puerto de la Cruz (Tenerife, Canarias, España) (Urban geotourism in Puerto de la Cruz). In: Hilario A., Mendia M., Monge-Ganuzas M., Fernández E., Vegas J., Belmonte A. (eds), Patrimonio geológico y geoparques, avances de un camino para todos. Publicaciones del Instituto Geológico y Minero de España, Serie: Cuadernos Del Museo Geominero 18: 347–352.Google Scholar

  • Douglas I., 2005. The urban geomorphology of Kuala Lumpur. In: Gupta A. (ed.), The Physical Geography of South-East Asia. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 344–357.Google Scholar

  • Douglas I., James P., 2015. Urban ecology. An introduction. Routledge, London.Google Scholar

  • Douglas I., Lawson N., 2015. The human dimensions of geomorphological work in Britain. Journal of Industrial Ecology 4(2): 9–33.Google Scholar

  • Dowling R.K., Newsome D. (eds), 2006. Geotourism: sustainability, impacts and management. Elsevier, Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Ellis E.C., 2011. Anthropogenic transformation of the terrestrial biosphere. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 369: 1010–1035.Google Scholar

  • Fernandes N.F., Tupinambá M., Mello C.L., de Peixoto M.N.O., 2010. Rio de Janeiro: A metropolis between granite-gneiss massifs. In: Migoń P. (ed.), Geomorphological landscapes of the World. Springer, Dordrecht: 89–100.Google Scholar

  • Gierlinger S., Haidvogel G., Gingrich S., Krausmann F., 2013. Feeding and cleaning the city: the role of the urban waterscape in provision and disposal in Vienna during the industrial transformation. Water History 5: 219–239.Google Scholar

  • Gomez-Heras M., Smith B.J., Viles H.A., 2010. Oxford stone revisited: causes and consequences of diversity in building limestone used in the historic centre of Oxford, England. In: Přikryl R., Török Á (eds), Natural stone resources for historical monuments. The Geological Society, London, Special Publications 333: 101–110.Google Scholar

  • Gordon J.E., Barron H.F., Hansom J.D., Thomas, M.F., 2012. Engaging with geodiversity – why it matters. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 123: 1–6.Google Scholar

  • Goudie A.S., Viles H.A., 2016. Geomorphology in the Anthropocene. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar

  • Grandgirard V., 1997. Géomorphologie, protection de la nature et gestion du paysage (Geomorphology, nature protection and landscape management). PhD Thesis in Geography, University of Fribourg.Google Scholar

  • Gray M., Gordon J.E., Brown E.J., 2013. Geodiversity and the ecosystem approach – the contribution of geoscience in delivering integrated environmental management. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 124: 659–73.Google Scholar

  • Gross M., Zimmerman R., 2002. Interpretive centers. The history, design, and development of nature and visitor centers. UW-SP Foundation Press, Stevens Point.Google Scholar

  • Haidvogel G., Guthyne-Horvath M., Gierlinger S., Hohensinner S., Sonnlechner C., 2013. Urban land for a growing city at the banks of a moving river: Vienna’s spread into the Danube island Unterer Werd from the late 17th to the beginning of the 20th century. Water History 5: 195–217.Google Scholar

  • Halsall T.J., 2000. Geological constraints on the siting of fortifications: examples from medieval Britain. In: Rose E.P.F., Nathanail C.P. (eds), Geology and warfare: Examples of the influence of terrain and geologists on military operations. The Geological Society, London: 3–31.Google Scholar

  • Hohensinner S., Sonnlechner C., Schmid M., Winiwarter V., 2013a. Two steps back, one step forward: reconstructing the dynamic Danube riverscape under human influence in Vienna. Water History 5: 121–143.Google Scholar

  • Hohensinner S., Lager B., Sonnlechner C., Haidvogel G., Gierlinger S., Schmid M., Krausmann F., Winiwarter V., 2013b. Changes in water and land: the reconstructed Viennese riverscape from 1500 to the present. Water History 5: 145–172.Google Scholar

  • Hose T.A., 1995. Selling the story of Britain’s stone. Environmental Interpretation 10(2): 16–17.Google Scholar

  • Hose T.A, 2012. 3G’s for modern geotourism. Geoheritage 4: 7–24.Google Scholar

  • James L.A., Hodgson M.E., Ghoshal S., Latiolais M.M., 2012. Geomorphic change detection using historic maps and DEM differencing: The temporal dimension of geospatial analysis. Geomorphology 137: 181–198, doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.10.039.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Jamot C., 2001. Clermont-Ferrand. Mappemonde 64: 30–35.Google Scholar

  • Jordan H., Hamilton K., Lawley R., Price S.J., 2014. Anthropogenic contribution to the geological and geomorphological record: A case study from Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK. Geomorphology 253: 534–546.Google Scholar

  • Kasprzak M., Traczyk A., 2014. LiDAR and 2D Electrical Resistivity Tomography as a supplement of geomorphological investigations in urban areas: a case study from the City of Wrocław (SW Poland). Pure and Applied Geophysics 171: 835–855.Google Scholar

  • Lamich D., Marschalko M., Yilmaz I., Bednářová P., Niemiec D., Durďák J., Kubečka K., Duda R., 2016. Utilization of engineering geology in geo-tourism: few case studies of subsidence influence on historical churches in Ostrava-Karvina District (Czech Republic). Environmental Earth Sciences 75: 128, doi: 10.1007/s12665-015-4993-3CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lave R., Wilson M.W., Barron E.S., Biermann C., Carey M.A., Duvall C.S., Johnson L., Lane K.M., McClintock N., Munroe D., Pain R., Proctor J., Rhoads B.L., Robertson M.M., Rossi J., Sayre N.F., Simon G., Tadaki M., Van Dyke C., 2014. Intervention: Critical physical geography. The Canadian Geographer 58: 1–10, doi: 10.1111/cag.12061CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Li P., Qian H., Wu J., 2014. Accelerate research on land creation. Nature 510: 29-31.Google Scholar

  • Lucchesi S., Giardino M., 2015. Historical archives data for the reconstruction of geomorphological modifications in the urban area of Turin (NW Italy). In: Lollino G. et al. (eds), Engineering geology for society and territory, vol. 8. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland: 447–452, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09408-3_46.Google Scholar

  • Martin S., 2014. Interactive visual media for geomorphological heritage interpretation. Theoretical approach and examples. Geoheritage 6(2): 149–157.Google Scholar

  • Martin S., Regolini-Bissig G., Perret A., Kozlik L., 2010. Elaboration et évaluation de produits géotouristiques. Propositions méthodologiques (Elaboration and evaluation of geotouristic products. Methodological proposals). Téoros 29(2): 55–66.Google Scholar

  • Martin S., Reynard E., Pellitero Ondicol R., Ghiraldi L., 2014. Multi-scale web mapping for geoheritage visualisation and promotion. Geoheritage 6: 141–148.Google Scholar

  • Martín-Díaz J., Nofre J., Oliva M., Palma P., 2011. Geomorphological risks, suburbanisation and neoliberalisation of the urban space in post-war Sarajevo. Area 47:371–378.Google Scholar

  • McCall G.J.H., De Mulder E.F.J., Marker B.R., 1996. Urban Geoscience. Balkema, Rotterdam.Google Scholar

  • Meadows M.E., Compton J.S., 2015. Table Mountain: Wonder of nature at the foot of Africa. In: Grab S., Knight J. (eds), Landscapes and landforms of South Africa. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland: 95–102.Google Scholar

  • Migoń P., Pijet-Migoń E., 2017. Viewpoint geosites – values, conservation and management issues. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, doi:10.1016/j.pgeola.2017.05.007CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mohapatra S.N., Pani P., Sharma M., 2014. Rapid urban expansion and its implications on geomorphology: A remote sensing and GIS based study. Geography Journal 2014: ID 361459, doi: 10.1155/2014/361459.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Moscariello A., 2017. The geomorphological landscapes in the Geneva Basin. In: Reynard E. (ed.), Landscapes and Landforms of Switzerland. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, in press.Google Scholar

  • Mozzi P., Fontana A., Ferrarese F., Ninfo A., Campana S., Francese R., 2016. The Roman City of Altinum, Venice Lagoon, from remote sensing and geophysical prospection. Archaeol. Prospect. 23: 27–44, doi:10.1002/arp.1520CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Onde H., 1966. Réflexions sur quelques sites urbains (Reflections on some urban sites). Cahiers de géographie de Besançon 14: 107–113.Google Scholar

  • Ortega-Guerrero A., Rudolph D.L., Cherry J.A., 1999. Analysis of long-term land subsidence near Mexico City: Field investigations and predictive modeling. Water Resources Research 35(11): 3327–3341, doi: 10.1029/1999WR900148CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ortiz-Zamora D., Ortega-Guerrero A., 2010. Evolution of long-term land subsidence near Mexico City: Review, field investigations, and predictive simulations. Water Resources Research 46: W01513, doi: 10.1029/2008WR007398CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Panizza M., 2001. Geomorphosites: concepts, methods and example of geomorphological survey. Chinese Science Bulletin 46, Suppl. Bd: 4–6.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Palacio-Prieto J.L., 2015. Geoheritage within cities: Urban geosites in Mexico City. Geoheritage 7: 365–373, doi:10.1007/s12371-014-0136-6CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pelfini M., Bollati I., 2014. Landforms and geomorphosites ongoing changes: Concepts and implications for geoheritage promotion. Quaestiones Geographicae 33(1): 131–143.Google Scholar

  • Perez-Monserrat E.M., Buergo M.A., Gomes-Heras M., Muriel M.J.V., Gonzalez R.F., 2013. An urban geomonumental route focusing on the petrological and decay features of traditional building stones used in Madrid, Spain. Environmental Earth Sciences 69: 1071–1084.Google Scholar

  • Pica A., Vergari F., Fredi P., Del Monte M., 2016. The Aeterna Urbs geomorphological heritage (Rome, Italy). Geoheritage 8(1): 31–42, doi: 10.1007/s12371-015-0150-3CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pica A., Reynard E., Grangier L., Kaiser C., Ghiraldi L., Perotti L., Del Monte M., 2017. GeoGuides, urban geotourism offer powered by mobile application technology. Geoheritage, doi: 10.1007/s12371-017-0237-0CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pickett S.T.A., Cadenasso M.L., Grove J.M., Nilon C.H., Pouyat R.V., Zipperer W.C., Costanza R., 2001. Urban ecological systems: Linking terrestrial ecological, physical, and socioeconomic components of metropolitan areas. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 32: 127–157.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Price S.J., Ford J.R., Cooper A.H., Neal C., 2011. Humans as major geological and geomorphological agents in the Anthropocene: the significance of artificial ground in Great Britain. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 369: 1056–1084.Google Scholar

  • Přikryl R., Török Á. (eds), 2010. Natural stone resources for historical monuments. The Geological Society, London.Google Scholar

  • Reynard E., 2005a. Géomorphosites et paysage (Geomorphosites and Landscape). Géomorphologie: relief, processus, environnement 3: 181–188.Google Scholar

  • Reynard E., 2005b. Geomorphological sites, public policies and property rights. Conceptualization and examples from Switzerland. Il Quaternario 18(1): 321–330.Google Scholar

  • Reynard E., 2009. Geomorphosites: definitions and characteristics. In: Reynard E., Coratza P., Regolini-Bissig G. (eds), Geomorphosites. Pfeil Verlag, München: 9–20.Google Scholar

  • Reynard E., 2017. La géomorphologie urbaine au service du projet (Urban geomorphology at the service of the project). In: Delabarre M., Dugua B. (eds), Faire la ville par le projet. Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes, Lausanne: 185–203.Google Scholar

  • Reynard E., Coratza P., 2013. Scientific research on geomorphosites. Areview of the activities of the IAG working group on geomorphosites over the last twelve years. Geogr. Fis. Dinam. Quat. 36: 159–168.Google Scholar

  • Reynard E., Coratza P., Regolini-Bissig G. (eds.), 2009. Geomorphosites. Pfeil Verlag, München.Google Scholar

  • Reynard E., Hobléa F., Cayla N., Gauchon C., 2011. Iconic sites for Alpine geology and geomorphology. Rediscovering heritage?. Revue de Géographie Alpine | Journal of Alpine Research [on-line], 99(2), doi: 10.4000/rga.1435CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Reynard E., Kaiser C., Martin S., Regolini G., 2015. An application for Geosciences communication by smartphones and tablets. In: Lollino G. et al. (eds), Engineering geology for society and territory, vol. 8. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland: 265–268, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09408-3_46Google Scholar

  • Robinson E., 1982. A geological walk around the City of London – royal exchange to Aldgate. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 93: 225–246.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Robinson E., 1984. London: illustrated geological walks, vol. 1. Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh.Google Scholar

  • Robinson E., 1985. London: illustrated geological walks, vol. 2. Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh.Google Scholar

  • Rodrigues M.L., Machado C.R., Freire E., 2011. Geotourism routes in urban areas: a preliminary approach to the Lisbon geoheritage survey. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites 8(2): 281–294.Google Scholar

  • San-Antonio-Gómez C., Velilla C., Manzano-Agugliaro F., 2014. Urban and landscape changes through historical maps: The Real Sitio of Aranjuez (1775–2005), a case study. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 44: 47–58.Google Scholar

  • Schneider A., Fried M.A., Potere D., 2009. A new map of global urban extent from MODIS satellite data. Environmental Research Letters 4: 1–11.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sherlock R.L., 1922. Man as a geological agent: an account of his action on inanimate nature. Whitherby, London.Google Scholar

  • Shimizu, E., Fuse T., 2003. Rubber-sheeting of historical maps in GIS and its application to landscape visualization of old-time cities: focusing on Tokyo of the past. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management, 11A-3, CD-ROM.Google Scholar

  • Siles G.L., Alcérreca-Huert, J.C., López-Quiroz P., Niemeier W., 2015. Long term subsidence analysis and soil fracturing zonation based on InSAR time series modelling in Northern Zona Metropolitana del Valle de Mexico. Remote Sensing 7: 6908–6931, doi: 10.3390/rs70606908CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sivaplan M., Savenije H.H.G., Blöschl G., 2012. Socio-hydrology: A new science of people and water. Hydrological Processes 26(8): 1270–1276, doi: 10.1002/hyp.8426Google Scholar

  • Smith M., Paron P., Griffiths J., 2011. Geomorphological mapping. Methods and applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar

  • Steffen W., Grinevald J., Crutzen P., McNeill J., 2011. The Anthropocene: conceptual and historical perspectives. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 369: 842–867.Google Scholar

  • Szabó J., Dávid L., Loczy D. (eds), 2010. Anthropogenic geomorphology: A guide to Man-made landforms. Springer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar

  • Stäuble S., Martin S., Reynard E., 2008. Historical mapping for landscape reconstruction: examples from the Canton of Valais (Switzerland). In: Mountain Mapping and Visualisation. Proceedings of the 6th ICA Mountain Cartography Workshop, 11–15 February 2008, Lenk, Switzerland: 211–217.Google Scholar

  • Tarolli P., Sofia G., 2016. Human topographic signatures and derived geomorphic processes across landscapes. Geomorphology 255: 140–161.Google Scholar

  • Thornbush M., 2015. Geography, urban geomorphology and sustainability. Area 47: 350–353.Google Scholar

  • Tilden F., 1957. Interpreting our heritage. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar

  • Valette P., Carozza J.M., 2013. Toulouse face à la Garonne: emprise de l’urbanisation dans la plaine inondable et géohistoire des aménagements fluviaux (Toulouse facing the Garonne River: influence of urbanization in the floodplain and geohistory of river developments). Geographicalia 63–64: 77–203.Google Scholar

  • Wilczkiewicz M.Z., 2016. The role of artificial landscape in recreational parks – selected examples. Geomatics, Landmanagement and Landscape 1: 105–117, doi: 10.15576/GLL/2016.1.105CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Williams D.B., 2015. Too high and too steep. Reshaping Seattle’s topography. University of Washington Press, Seattle.Google Scholar

  • Winiwarter V., Schmid M., Dressel G., 2013a. Looking at half a millennium of co-existence: the Danube in Vienna as a socio-natural site. Water History 5: 101–119.Google Scholar

  • Wolman M.G., 1967. A cycle of sedimentation and erosion in urban river channels. Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography 49: 385–395.Google Scholar

  • Yamaguchi K., Nakajima I., Kawasaki M., 2008. The application of the surrounding landform to the landscape design in japanese gardens. WSEAS Transactions on Environment and Development 8(4): 655–665.Google Scholar

About the article

Received: 2017-05-08

Revised: 2017-07-10

Published Online: 2017-09-29

Published in Print: 2017-09-01


Citation Information: Quaestiones Geographicae, ISSN (Online) 2081-6383, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/quageo-2017-0022.

Export Citation

© 2017 Emmanuel Reynard et al., published by De Gruyter Open. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in