Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Landform classification for community siting: A case study in Quxian county, China

  • Published:
Journal of Mountain Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study is to explore a suitable method to classify landform, in order to support the decision making for community siting in mountainous areas. It first proposes the landform classification for community siting (LCCS) method with detailed discussions on its rationality and the chosen parameters. This method is then tested and verified in Quxian county. The LCCS method entails two-grade parameters, which uses relative relief as the first grading parameter, slope as the second, followed by a synthesis process to form a suitable landform classification system. By applying the LCCS method in Quxian county, the result shows that its use of watershed to identify geomorphometric units, and its use of the altitude datum concept, can effectively classify landform according to the local cultural traditions, and the economic and environmental conditions. The verification result shows that comparing to the conventional methods, the LCCS method respects to people’s daily experience due to its bottom-up approach. It not only help to minimize the disturbance to the nature when choosing locations for community development, but also helps to prepare more precise land management policies, which maximizes agricultural production and minimizes terrain transformation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bailey R (2009) Mesoscale: Landform Differentiation (Landscape Mosaics). Ecosystem Geography. New York, NY: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-89516-1_9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baroni C, Armiraglio S, Gentili R, Carton A (2007) Landform–vegetation units for investigating the dynamics and geomorphologic evolution of alpine composite debris cones (Valle dell’Avio, Adamello Group, Italy). Geomorphology 84 (1-2): 59–79. DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.07.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barsch D, Caine N (1984) The nature of mountain geomorphology. Mountain Research and Development 4 (4): 287–298. DOI: 10.2307/3673231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai Z (1986) The suggestion of basic geomorphological types according to relative height. In: IGCAS [Institute of Geographic, Chinese Academy of Sciences], editor. Geomorphological Mapping Research. Surveying and Mapping Press, Beijing, China. pp 90–97. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Castillo V (1991) Landscape ecology-geomorphology. Landscape and Urban Planning 20 (4): 352–354. DOI: 10.1016/0169-2046(91)90009-B

  • Cheng W, Zhou C, Chai H (2009) Quantitative extraction and analysis of basic morphological types of land geomorphology in China. Geo-Spatial Information Science 11 (6): 725–736. (In Chinese with English abstract)

  • Cooke R, Brunsden D, Doornkamp J, Jones D (1982) Urban Geomorphology in Drylands. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA.

  • Demek J (1976) International Geomorphological Map of Europe: on 1:2,500,000 Institute Geography of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences Brno in cooperation with IGUCommission on Geomorphologic Survey and Mapping and UNESCO.

  • Deumlich D, Schmidt R, Sommer M (2010) A multiscale soillandform relationship in the glacial-drift area based on digital terrain analysis and soil attributes. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 173 (6): 843–851. DOI: 10.1002/jpln.200900094.

  • Diao C (1990) On the research of urban landform. Advance in Earth Science 6:42-47. (In Chinese)

  • Divgneaud P (1987) Introduction to Ecology [Chinese Edition]. Li Y. translator. Beijing, China: Science Press. (In Chinese)

  • Douglas I (1983) The Urban Environment. Edward Arnold, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Gale Group Inc. (2002) Mountains. In: Science of Everyday Things. Available online: http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Mountains.aspx (Accessed on 6 July 2014)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao X (2004) The subjective and objective classification of geomorphologic forms. Journal of Mountain Science 22 (3): 261–266. (In Chinese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Aguirre M, Ortiz M, Zamorano J, Reyes Y (2007) Vegetation and landform relationships at Ajusco volcano Mexico, using a geographic information system (GIS). Forest Ecology and Management 239 (1-3): 1–12. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2006.10.031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez M, Gutiérrez F (2013) Climatic Geomorphology. In: Shroder J (ed.), Treatise on Geomorphology. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA. pp 115–131. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-374739-6.00346-8.

  • Hoersch B, Braun G, Schmidt U (2002) Relation between landform and vegetation in alpine regions of Wallis, Switzerland. A multiscale remote sensing and GIS approach. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 26 (2-3):113–139. DOI: 10.1016/S0198-9715(01)00039-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang G (1998) Sustainable development of mountain human settlements. Journal of Chongqing Jianzhu University 20 (3): 1–5. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang G (2002) Pay attention to mountain development and protect the mountain ecosystem. In: Huang G (ed.), On Mounturbanology. China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, China. pp 2–5. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Крогиyc B (1979) City and Landform. Moscow City Press, Moscow, Former Soviet Union. (In Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  • LaGro J (2011) Site analysis: A contextual approach to sustainable land planning and site design. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li J (1987) Classification of fundamental types of geomorphological form in China. Geographical Research 6 (2): 32–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maitra S (1999) Landforms and geomorphological classification of part of the upper Baitarani River Basin. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing 27(3): 175–184. DOI: 10.1007/BF02991571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh W (2005) Landscape planning: Environmental applications. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHarg I (1969) Design with nature. Natural History Press, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • MLRPRC [Ministry of Land and Resources of the People’s Republic of China]. (2007) Current Land Use Classification (GB/T 21010-2007). Standards Press of China, Beijing, China. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Moura P, Francelino M, Schaefer C, et al.(2012) Distribution and characterization of soils and landform relationships in Byers Peninsula, Livingston Island, Maritime Antarctica. Geomorphology (155-156):45–54. DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph. 2011.12.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mu G, Gao J (1990) Studies on the theory and practice of the urban geomorphology. Journal of Southwest China Normal University(Natural Science Edition) 4: 593–599. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mu Y (1994) The initial study on urban landform. Areal Research and Development 02: 17–19. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • NRCCAS [Natural Regionalization Committee of Chinese Academy Of Sciences] (1959) Landforms Regionalization in China. Science Press, Beijing, China. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Odum E (1971) Fundamentals of Ecology. London, United Kingdom: Saunders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pike R, Evans I, Hengl T (2009). Geomorphometry: a brief guide. In: Tomislav H et al. (eds.), Geomorphometry — Concepts, Software, Applications. Development in Soil Science Special Publication, Volume 33 Elsevier B.V. pp 3–30. DOI: 10.1016/S0166-2481(08)00001-9.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rasemann S, Schmidt J, Schrott L, Dikau R (2004) Geomorphometry in Mountain Terrain. Springer, Berlin, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy G, Nagaraju M, Ramteke I, Sarkar D (2013) Terrain characterization for soil resource mapping using IRS-P6 data and GIS - A case study from Basaltic terrain of Central India. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing 2 (41): 331–343. DOI: 10.1007/s12524-012-0240-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renschler C, Doyle M, Thoms M (2007) Geomorphology and ecosystems: Challenges and keys for success in bridging disciplines. Geomorphology 89 (1-2):1–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.07.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SADO [Sichuan Agricultural Division Office] (1980) Geomorphologic Maps in Sichuan. Sichuan Agricultural Division Office, Chengdu, China. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner GW (1964) Marketing and social structure in rural China, Part I. The Journal of Asian Studies 24(01): 3–43. DOI:10.2307/2050412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Summerfield M A (1991) Global Geomorphology. Harlow: Longman. p 537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang G, Song J (2006) Comparison of slope classification methods in slope mapping from DEMs. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 20 (2): 157–192. (In Chinese). DOI:10.3321/j.issn:1009-2242.2006.02.038.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Sonklar C (1873) Geomorphology: The science about the relief form of earth surface. Wilhelm Braümuller, Vienna, Austria. P 254. (In German)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wondzell S, Cunningham G, Bachelet D (1996) Relationships between landforms, geomorphic processes, and plant communities on a watershed in the northern Chihuahuan Desert. Landscape Ecology 11 (6): 351–362. DOI: 10.1007/BF02447522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu Z, Li D (2010) Urban Planning Theory. China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, China. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang X (1988) The Chinese Fengshui theory within the site selection of tradition human settlements. New Achitecture 4: 67–71. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Xing Z (1998) Ecological periphery definition: On Fengshui pattern. Journal of Chongqing Jianzhu University 3: 62–65. (In Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400045, China

    Ke Zhao

  2. Key Laboratory of New Technology for Construction of Cities in Mountain Area, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400045, China

    Ke Zhao

  3. School of Architecture, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510641, China

    Zhao-hua Deng

  4. State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Building Science, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510641, China

    Zhao-hua Deng

Authors
  1. Ke Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhao-hua Deng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ke Zhao or Zhao-hua Deng.

Additional information

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8976-2380

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7409-0956

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhao, K., Deng, Zh. Landform classification for community siting: A case study in Quxian county, China. J. Mt. Sci. 12, 1025–1037 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-014-3069-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-014-3069-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation