Environmental Geology

, Volume 47, Issue 6, pp 782–794 | Cite as

Geology and rural landscapes in central Spain (Guadalajara, Castilla—La Mancha)

  • A. García-Quintana
  • J. F. Martín-Duque
  • J. A. González-Martín
  • J. F. García-HidalgoEmail author
  • J. Pedraza
  • P. Herranz
  • R. Rincón
  • H. Estévez
Original Article


Methods commonly used in regional geological analysis were employed to study the visual landscapes of the Sigüenza–Molina de Aragón area (Spain). Landscape data were compiled to produce a landscape map and a photograph catalogue. Lithological composition, tectonic structure and recent erosive processes are the main factors controlling the visual landscapes. Territorial properties, such as colours and agricultural capacities, are controlled by these geological characteristics. The landscape map and the photographic catalogue is the main contribution of this paper. The first level of landscape classification distinguishes zones with dominance of either flat, concave or convex areas. Other parts of the territory are, however, composed of concave and convex combinations that originate hybrid orographic structures. In a second level of classification, several subdivisions for each of these types are established.


Rural landscapes Landscape map Spain 



This work includes some of the results obtained in Project PR3/04-12421 of the Universidad Complutense de Madrid, and Project CGL2004-02179BTF of the Dirección General de Investigación (Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia). The authors wish to thank Adrian Burton for his help with the English.


  1. Al Bakri D (2001) Towards developing a geoscientific approach to sustainable agricultural and rural development. Environ Geol 40:543–555Google Scholar
  2. Aoki Y (1999) Trends in the study of the psychological evaluation of landscape. Landsc Res 24:85–94Google Scholar
  3. Bailey RG (1996) Ecosystem geography. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Barettino D, Gallego E (1996) Cartografía del paisaje. In: Manual de procedimientos. Plan nacional de cartografía temática ambiental. Instituto Tecnológico Geominero de España, MadridGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertrand G, Berutchachvili N (1978) Le Géosysthème ou systhème territoriel naturel. Revue Géographique des Pyrénées et du Sud-Ouest 49:167–180Google Scholar
  6. Bloom AL (1969) The surface of the Earth. Prentice-Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  7. Bourne R (1931) Regional survey and its relation to stock-taking of the agricultural and forest resources of the British Empire. In: Oxford forestry memoir 13. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  8. Burbank DW, Printer N (1999) Landscape evolution: the interactions of tectonics and surface processes. Basin Res 11:1–6Google Scholar
  9. Christian CS (1958) The concept of land units and land systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th Pacific Science Congress 20:74–81Google Scholar
  10. Estébanez Álvarez JG, Molina Ibáñez M, Panadero Moya M, Pérez Sierra C (1991) Castilla–La Mancha. In: Bosque J, Vila J (eds) Geografía de España, vol 7. Planeta, Madrid, pp 158–333Google Scholar
  11. Fairbanks DHK, Benn GA (2000) Identifying regional landscapes for conservation planning: a case study from KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Landsc Urban Plan 50:237–257Google Scholar
  12. Fenneman NM (1916) Physiographic divisions of the United States Plate I. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 6:1898Google Scholar
  13. García-Quintana A, González-Martín JA, Martín-Duque JF, García-Hidalgo JF (2000) Los paisajes de la región de Milmarcos: sistemática y cartografía (Cordillera Ibérica, Provincias de Guadalajara, Soria y Zaragoza). Geotemas 1:249–253Google Scholar
  14. García-Quintana A, García-Hidalgo JF, Martin-Duque JF, Pedraza J, González-Martin JA (2004) Geological factors of the Guadalajara landscapes (central Spain) and their relevance to landscape studies. Landsc Urban Plan 69:417–435Google Scholar
  15. Godfrey AE (1977) A physiographic approach to land use planning. Environ Geol 2:43–50Google Scholar
  16. Gómez de Mendoza J, Mata Olmo R, Sanz Herraiz C, Galiana Martín L, Manuel Valdés CM, Molina Holgado P (1999) Los paisajes de Madrid: naturaleza y medio rural. Alianza Editorial, MadridGoogle Scholar
  17. Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P (1994) Towards a definition of topographic divisions for Italy. Geomorphology 11:57–74Google Scholar
  18. Host GE, Polzer PL, Mladendoff DJ, White MA, Crow TR (1996) A quantitative approach to developing regional ecosystem classifications. Ecol Appl 6:608–618Google Scholar
  19. Howard JA, Mitchell CW (1980) Phyto-geomorphic classification of the landscape. Geoforum 11:85–106Google Scholar
  20. King C (1878) United States geological exploration of the 40th parallel, annual reports to the secretary of war, 8 vol, pp 1871–1878Google Scholar
  21. Laurie M (1975) An introduction to landscape architecture. Pitman, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Linton DL (1951) The delimitation of morphological regions. In: Stamp LD, Wooldrige (eds) London essays in geography. Longmans, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Martín Duque JF (1997) La Geomorfología en los estudios del medio físico y planificación territorial. Propuesta metodológica y aplicación a un sector del Sistema Central. PhD Thesis, Universidad Complutense, MadridGoogle Scholar
  24. Martín de Agar P, de Pablo CL, Pineda FD (1995) Mapping the ecological structure of a territory: a case study in Madrid (Central Spain). Environ Manage 19:345–357Google Scholar
  25. Moss MR, Nickling WG (1980) Landscape evaluation in environmental assessment and land use planning. Environ Manage 4:57–72Google Scholar
  26. Nikolayev VA (1973) Principles of a landscape classification. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta, geografiya 6:30–35Google Scholar
  27. Omernik JM (1987) Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 77:118–125Google Scholar
  28. Pain CF (1985) Mapping of landforms from Landsat Imagery: an example from eastern New South Wales, Australia. Rem SensEnvir 15:55–65Google Scholar
  29. Pedraza J, Gonzalez Alonso S, Centeno JD (1986) Mapa fisiográfico de Madrid. Comunidad de Madrid, MadridGoogle Scholar
  30. Powell JW (1875) Physical features of the Colorado Valley, I Mountains and Valleys. PopSci Month 7:384–399Google Scholar
  31. Sochava VB (1972) L’Étude des gèosysthèmes. Stade actuel de la Géographie physique complexe (Translated to French by CL Rondeau, CNRS Centre de Documentation et cartographie géographique, Paris). Izvestija Akademii Nauk SSSR, Serija Geografisceskaja 3:18–21Google Scholar
  32. Terkenli TS (2001) Towards a theory of the landscape: the Aegean landscape as a cultural image. Landsc Urban Plan 57:197–208Google Scholar
  33. Wheeler GM (1889) United States geographical surveys west of the one hundredth meridian, Washington Final Reports I-VIIGoogle Scholar
  34. Wright RL (1972) Principles in a geomorphological approach to land classification. Z Geomorph NF 16:351–373Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. García-Quintana
    • 1
  • J. F. Martín-Duque
    • 2
  • J. A. González-Martín
    • 3
  • J. F. García-Hidalgo
    • 4
    Email author
  • J. Pedraza
    • 2
  • P. Herranz
    • 5
  • R. Rincón
    • 1
  • H. Estévez
    • 1
  1. 1.Dpto. Estratigrafía, Inst. Geol. Económica, Fac. C.C. GeológicasU.C.MMadridSpain
  2. 2.Dpto. Geodinámica, Fac. C.C. GeológicasU.C.MMadridSpain
  3. 3.Dpto. Geografía, Fac. Filosofía y LetrasUniv. Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain
  4. 4.Dpto. Geología, Fac. C.C. AmbientalesUniv. de AlcaláAlcalá de HenaresSpain
  5. 5.Dpto. Correlaciones, Inst. Geol. Económica, Fac. C.C. GeológicasCSIC-UCMMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations