Abstract
Numerous systems of land classification have been proposed. Most have led directly to or have been driven by an author's philosophy of earth-forming processes. However, the practical need of classifying land for planning and management purposes requires that a system lead to predictions of the results of management activities.
We propose a landscape classification system composed of 11 units, from realm (a continental mass) to feature (a splash impression). The classification concerns physical aspects rather than economic or social factors; and aims to merge land inventory with dynamic processes.
Landscape units are organized using a hierarchical system so that information may be assembled and communicated at different levels of scale and abstraction. Our classification uses a geomorphic systems approach that emphasizes the geologic-geomorphic attributes of the units.
Realm, major division, province, and section are formulated by subdividing large units into smaller ones. For the larger units we have followed Fenneman's delineations, which are well established in the North American literature. Areas and districts are aggregated into regions and regions into sections. Units smaller than areas have, in practice, been subdivided into zones and smaller units if required.
We developed the theoretical framework embodied in this classification from practical applications aimed at land use planning and land management in Maryland (eastern Piedmont Province near Baltimore) and Utah (eastern Uinta Mountains).
Similar content being viewed by others
References Cited
Bloom, A. L., 1978, Geomorphology—a systematic analysis of late cenozoic landforms: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall, 510 p.
Büdel, J., 1982, Climatic geomorphology (trans, L. Fischer and D. Busche): Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 443 p.
Cleaves, E. T., 1979, Physiographic map of the White Marsh quadrangle;in E. T. Cleaves and others, White Marsh quadrangle: Geology, hydrology, and mineral resources: Maryland Geological Survey, Qd. Atlas No. 4, 3 maps.
Cleaves, E. T., W. P. Crowley, and K. R. Kuff, 1974, Towson quadrangle: Geologic and environmental atlas: Maryland Geological Survey, Qd. Atlas No. 2, 5 maps.
Cleaves, E. T., K. R. Kuff, W. P. Crowley, and J. Reinhardt, 1979, White Marsh quadrangle: Geology, hydrology, and mineral resources: Maryland Geological Survey, Qd. Atlas No. 4, 3 maps.
Davis, W. M., 1889, The rivers and valleys of Pennsylvania: National Geographic Magazine, v. 1, p. 183–253.
Dott, R. H., Jr., and J. Bourgeois, 1982, Hummocky stratification: Significance of its variable bedding sequences: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 93, p. 663–680.
Fairbridge, R. W., (ed.), 1968, The encyclopedia of geomorphology: New York, NY, Reinhold, 1295 p.
Fenneman, N. M., 1916, Physiographic divisions of the United States: Annals, Association of American Geographers, v. 6, p. 19–98.
Fenneman, N. M., 1928, Physiographic divisions of the United States: Annals, Association of American Geographers, v. 18, p. 261–353.
Garner, H. F., 1974, The origin of landscapes: New York, NY, Oxford University Press, 734 p.
Gary, M. R., R. McAfee, Jr., and C. I. Wolf (eds.), 1972, Glossary of geology: Washington, D.C., American Geological Institute, 847 p.
Godfrey, A. E., 1975, Chemical and physical erosion in the south mountain anticlinorium, Maryland: Maryland Geology Survey, Info. Cir. 19, 35 p.
Hammond, E. H., 1964, Analysis of properties in landform geography: An application to broad scale landform mapping: Annals, American Association Geographers, v. 54, no. 1, p. 11–23.
Herbertson, A. J., 1905, The major natural regions: An essay in systemic geography: Geographical Journal, v. 20, p. 300–312.
Howard, A. D., and L. E. Spock, 1940, Classification of landforms: Journal of Geomorphology, v. 3, p. 332–345.
Hunt, C. B., 1974, Geology of soils: San Francisco, CA, W. H. Freeman, 344 p.
Mabbutt, J. A., 1968, Review of concepts of land classifications;in G. A. Stewart, ed., Land evaluation: CSIRO Symposium: Melbourne, Macmillan of Australia, p. 11–28.
Ruxton, B. P., 1968, Order and disorder in land:in G. A. Stewart, ed., Land evaluation: CSIRO Symposium: Melbourne, Macmillan of Australia, p. 29–39.
Savigear, R. A. G., 1965, A technique of morphological mapping: Annals, American Association Geographers, v. 55, p. 514–538.
Schumm, S. A., and R. W. Lichty, 1965, Time, space, casualty in geomorphology: American Journal of Science, v. 263, p. 110–119.
Stokes, W. L., 1977, Subdivisions of the major physiographic provinces in Utah: Utah Geology, v. 4, no. 1, p. 1–18.
Tricart, J., and A. Cailleux, 1972, Introduction to climatic geomorphology: New York, NY, St. Martin's Press (trans. C. J. K. deJonge) 274 p.
Thorn, C. S., 1988, Introduction to theoretical geomorphology: Boston, MA, Unwin Hyman, 247 p.
Way, D. S., 1973, Terrain analysis: Stroundsburg, PA, Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc., 392 p.
Wright, R. L., 1972, Principles in a geomorphological approach to land classification: Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie, v. 16, p. 351–373.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Godfrey, A.E., Cleaves, E.T. Landscape analysis: Theoretical considerations and practical needs. Environ. Geol. Water Sci 17, 141–155 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01701570
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01701570