Communicating geomorphology: an empirical evaluation of the discipline's impact and visibility

Concern among geomorphologists that the discipline's visibility and impact are becoming suppressed are reflected in a series of recent Earth Surface Exchanges (ESEX) commentaries by Tooth et al. This paper from the British Society for Geomorphology (BSG) Communicating Geomorphology Fixed‐Term Working Group (FTWG) reports initial findings from an online survey of BSG members alongside an empirical assessment of the term's prominence in academic output: international peer‐reviewed journals, undergraduate Geoscience degrees in world‐leading institutions and the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) impact statements. Our observations indicate the scientific standing of the discipline has been retained but the term itself is less widely utilised and we offer a series of suggestions actionable by the geomorphology community. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Anthropocene: is there a geomorphological case?

The ‘Anthropocene’, as used to describe the interval of recent Earth history during which humans have had an ‘overwhelming’ effect on the Earth system, is now being formally considered as a possible new geological Epoch. Such a new geological time interval (possibly equivalent to the Pleistocene Epoch) requires both theoretical justification as well as empirical evidence preserved within the geological record. Since the geological record is driven by geomorphological processes that produce terrestrial and near‐shore stratigraphy, geomorphology has to be an integral part of this consideration. For this reason, the British Society for Geomorphology (BSG) has inaugurated a Fixed Term Working Group to consider this issue and advise the Society on how geomorphologists can engage with debates over the Anthropocene. This ESEX Commentary sets out the initial case for the formalisation of the Anthropocene and a priori considerations in the hope that it will stimulate debate amongst, and involvement by, the geomorphological community in what is a crucial issue for the discipline. The Working Group is now considering the practical aspects of such a formalization including the relative magnitude problem, the boundary problem and the spatial diachrony of ‘anthropogenic geomorphology’. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

New developments in process understanding and modelling in geomorphology: introduction and overview

This Special Issue of Earth Surface Processes and Landforms develops from the ‘Geomorphology: a 2020 Vision’ Annual Conference of the British Society for Geomorphology, organised at the University of Birmingham, UK, in July 2007. Entitled ‘New Developments in Process Understanding and Modelling in Geomorphology’, the Issue comprises a vibrant selection of 10 ‘process’ papers from leading researchers in geomorphological processes who presented at Birmingham. It aims to provide a readily accessible source of new and emerging ideas in understanding different landform processes across a range of space and time scales, based on innovations in geomorphological modelling and monitoring. The last few years have seen significant and exciting changes in geomorphology, especially in conceptual developments, numerical simulations, monitoring methodologies, data‐acquisition strategies and dating techniques. The resultant empirical datasets, theory development and modelling results have generated substantial advances in the understanding of geomorphological processes, form‐process feedbacks, scale impacts, long‐term landform evolution, the effects of climate and environmental change, and human impacts and management strategies. The Special Issue attempts to address the following key challenges: (a) to build on our Conference theme ‘Geomorphology: a 2020 Vision’, by identifying fundamental areas where doors need to be opened, for example in theory development, conceptual understanding, model evaluation, integration of the chemistry, physics, biology and mathematics of geomorphological processes, experimental validation, data needs and monitoring requirements; (b) to look forward to the next decade and beyond, and critically examine some of the approaches we will need for the questions ahead; and (c) to stimulate new research in the geomorphological sciences by highlighting both research gaps and promising developments, including emerging process modelling approaches, monitoring technologies and robust datasets. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Biogeomorphology: diverse,integrative and useful

Biogeomorphology is an umbrella term given to a highly‐active research area within geomorphology that focusses on the many and varied interactions and feedbacks between organisms and the physical Earth. In the last 25 years this interest has developed and diversified to include the direct and indirect influences of microorganisms, plants, animals and humans on earth surface processes and landform dynamics, and the roles of geomorphology in ecological functioning, resilience and evolution. This Commentary introduces a virtual special issue of 16 research papers and three ‘State of Science’ pieces, illustrating the diversity of the field, its continued theoretical and conceptual progression, and the applied relevance of biogeomorphological science in tackling environmental problems. Collectively, these papers demonstrate the merits of – and opportunities for – biogeomorphology as an inherently integrative science in understanding and managing the complexity of living landscapes. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Geomorphology and vegetation drive hydrochemistry changes in two Northeast Greenland streams

Climate change is causing drastic landscape changes in the Arctic, but how these changes modify stream biogeochemistry is not clear yet. We examined how catchment properties influence stream nitrogen (N) and dissolved organic carbon concentrations (DOC) in a high-Arctic environment. We sampled two contrasting headwater streams (10–15 stations over 4.8 and 6.8 km, respectively) in Northeast Greenland (74°N). We characterized the geomorphology (i.e., bedrock, solifluction and alluvial types) and the vegetation (i.e., barren, fell field, grassland and tundra types) cover of each subcatchment area draining into each sampling station and collected water samples for hydrochemistry characterization. The two sampled streams differed in geomorphology and vegetation cover in the catchment. Aucellaelv catchment was mostly covered by a ‘bedrock’ geomorphology (71%) and ‘fellfield’ vegetation (51%), whereas Kæerelv was mostly covered by ‘alluvial’ geomorphology (65%) and ‘grassland’ and ‘tundra’ vegetation (42% and 41% respectively). Hydrochemistry also differed between the two study streams, with higher concentrations of inorganic N forms in Aucellaelv and lower DOC concentrations, compared to Kærelv. The results from the linear mixed model selection showed that vegetation and geomorphology had contrasting effects on stream hydrochemistry. Subcatchments with higher solifluction sheets and limited vegetation had higher nitrate concentrations but lower DOC concentrations. Interestingly, we also found high variability on the production and removal of nitrate across subcatchments. These results indicate landscape controls to nutrient and organic matter exports via flow paths, soil organic matter stocks and nutrient retention via terrestrial vegetation. Moreover, the results suggest that climate change induced alterations to vegetation cover and soil physical disturbance in high-Arctic catchments will affect stream hydrochemistry, with potential effects in stream productivity, trophic relations as well as change of solute export to downstream coastal areas.     

Is geomorphology sleepwalking into oblivion?

This commentary uses Google Books N‐grams to briefly explore the changing use of the word geomorphology in books published in British English and American English. Both show a decline in the use of the term geomorphology in recent years. A singular feature of the British data is a very sharp rise and fall in the use of term geomorphology in books published since 1980. The steep falling limb (post 1993) of this curve is of particular concern and several possible explanations are put forward including, since 1986, the influence exerted by Research Assessment Exercises on publication practice in UK universities. The N‐gram trends pose important questions for all geomorphologists and we should monitor them to gain a better understanding of where we need to be most visible to ensure the long‐term health of our discipline. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Equality,diversity, inclusion: ensuring a resilient future for geomorphology

Within and beyond academia, debates around equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) have been gathering pace. We focus on EDI and geomorphology and address four main questions: (1) why does EDI matter for geomorphology?; (2) what are the barriers to greater EDI in geomorphology?; (3) how can we address these EDI barriers?; (4) can we ensure a resilient future for geomorphology by addressing EDI? At a time of critical environmental, social and economic transition, we contend that addressing EDI is essential for ensuring a resilient geomorphology, defined here as a discipline that is seen to be adapting to these changing external circumstances so that it remains relevant, vibrant and accessible to a wide cross-section of society. Not doing so will limit the intellectual development of geomorphology, incur reputational risk for geomorphological groups and organizations like the British Society for Geomorphology, and ensure that the many potential benefits of geomorphology for science and society remain underutilized at best. © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Engineering geomorphology: A novel professional profile to face applied challenges in earth surface dynamics in mid-Europe

Engineering geomorphology is concerned with the assessment of surface processes, sediment dynamics, landform changes and geomorphological hazards, which are related to civil engineering and construction. As an important planning component, it contributes significantly to the solution of societal problems on a dynamic earth surface. Unlike in the UK and other countries where it has become an independent sector within geotechnical engineering, the discipline has found little attention up to now in mid-European applied geosciences. This ESEX commentary discusses the under-representation and proposes an advancement of professional engineering geomorphology within the German-speaking countries. The relation to neighbouring disciplines and the history of the field are illustrated from the academic and practical perspectives. A brief outline of potential fields of activity, recent professional practice and requirements for academic training are presented to provide aspiring practitioners with an idea of their future prospects as engineering geomorphologists. As part of their qualification, teamwork with geologists and engineers must be considered a key aspect, involving mutual knowledge of methods, techniques and interfaces for the propagation of uncertainty. The discussion demonstrates ways engineering geomorphology could be implemented as an established profession/academic discipline in mid-Europe as part of physical geography, geosciences and neighbouring engineering disciplines.     

Breaking rocks made easy. Blending stress control concepts to advance geomorphology

All landscapes are subject to stress fields, conditioned by their formation and ongoing tectonic and geomorphic changes. With this ESEX Commentary we wish to stimulate a debate on this invisible but persistent stress control on landforms, processes and materials in geomorphology. We address the legacy of active and passive stress fields, which translates into the concept of ‘tectonic predesign’, in conjunction with a perspective of geomorphic processes being driven by subcritical stresses. These concepts complement each other as ‘subcritical processes’ are controlled by tectonic predesign and in turn modulate the stress fields. This offers new theoretical and practical perspectives on how landscapes evolve, processes form materials and how rocks break easily. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

‘Natural’ rivers, ‘hydromorphological quality’ and river restoration: a challenging new agenda for applied fluvial geomorphology

Fluvial geomorphology is rapidly becoming centrally involved in practical applications to support the agenda of sustainable river basin management. In the UK its principal contributions to date have primarily been in flood risk management and river restoration. There is a new impetus: the European Union's Water Framework and Habitats Directives require all rivers to be considered in terms of their ecological quality, defined partly in terms of ‘hydromorphology’. This paper focuses on the problematic definition of ‘natural’ hydromorphological quality for rivers, the assessment of departures from it, and the ecologically driven strategies for restoration that must be delivered by regulators under the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). The Habitats Directive contains similar concepts under different labels. Currently available definitions of ‘natural’ or ‘reference’ conditions derive largely from a concept of ‘damage’, principally to channel morphology. Such definitions may, however, be too static to form sustainable strategies for management and regulation, but attract public support. Interdisciplinary knowledge remains scant; yet such knowledge is needed at a range of scales from catchment to microhabitat. The most important contribution of the interdisciplinary R&D effort needed to supply management tools to regulators of the WFD and Habitats regulations is to interpret the physical habitat contribution to biodiversity conservation, in terms of ‘good ecological quality’ in rivers, and the ‘hydromorphological’ component of this quality. Contributions from ‘indigenous knowledge’, through public participation, are important but often understated in this effort to drive the ‘fluvial hydrosystem’ back to spontaneous, affordable, sustainable self‐regulation. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Major advances in studies of the physical geography and living environment of China during the past 70 years and future prospects

The natural environment provides material essentials for human survival and development. The characteristics,processes, regional differentiation and forcing mechanisms of the elements of the natural environment(e.g. geomorphology,climate, hydrology, soil, etc.) are the main objects of research in physical geography. China has a complex natural environment and huge regional differentiation and therefore it provides outstanding reserach opportunities in physical geography. This review summarizes the most important developments and the main contributions of research in the physical geography and human living environment in China during the past 70 years. The major topics addressed are the uplift of the Tibetan Plateau and the evolution of its cryosphere, the development of fluvial systems, the acidification of the vast arid region of the Asian interior, variations in the monsoon and westerly climate systems on multiple timescales, the development of lakes and wetlands, the watershed system model, soil erosion, past human-environment interactions, biogeography, and physical geographic zonality. After briefly introducing international research developments, we review the history of research in physical geography in China, focusing on the major achievements and major academic debates, and finally we summarize the status of current research and the future prospects. We propose that in the context of the national demand for the construction of an ecological civilization, we should make full use of the research findings of physical geography, and determine the patterns and mechanisms of natural environmental processes in order to continue to promote the continued contribution of physical geography to national development strategies, and to further contribute to the theory of physical geography from a global perspective.     

ROCK SURFACE ROUGHNESS AS AN INDICATOR OF DEGREE OF ROCK SURFACE WEATHERING

Rock surface weathering often leads to increased rock surface roughness, but roughness has proved difficult to quantify. Several instruments are available for micro-mapping and recording rock surface profiles, but the most appropriate for most purposes is the simple profile gauge. Short profiles can be recorded quickly and accurately. A range of roughness indices has been proposed in other areas of geomorphology and their efficacy as measures of roughness at scales of interest in studies of weathering is assessed. Some are too complex or labour-intensive and others are too sensitive to the scale of roughness to provide reliable measures of magnitude. The most appropriate indicator of both the scale and magnitude of roughness is the standard deviation of the differences between height values at a range of set horizontal intervals along a profile (the ‘deviogram’). Varying the measurement interval records roughness at different scales. A regression approach (root-mean-square roughness) provides a reliable measure of the magnitude of roughness at the maximum scale present. Three case studies confirm the efficacy of these approaches to studies of weathering of different rocks in different environments. Software is supplied which automates the calculation of roughness indices from gauge profiles.     

Long‐term landscape evolution: linking tectonics and surface processes

Research in landscape evolution over millions to tens of millions of years slowed considerably in the mid‐20th century, when Davisian and other approaches to geomorphology were replaced by functional, morphometric and ultimately process‐based approaches. Hack's scheme of dynamic equilibrium in landscape evolution was perhaps the major theoretical contribution to long‐term landscape evolution between the 1950s and about 1990, but it essentially ‘looked back’ to Davis for its springboard to a viewpoint contrary to that of Davis, as did less widely known schemes, such as Crickmay's hypothesis of unequal activity. Since about 1990, the field of long‐term landscape evolution has blossomed again, stimulated by the plate tectonics revolution and its re‐forging of the link between tectonics and topography, and by the development of numerical models that explore the links between tectonic processes and surface processes. This numerical modelling of landscape evolution has been built around formulation of bedrock river processes and slope processes, and has mostly focused on high‐elevation passive continental margins and convergent zones; these models now routinely include flexural and denudational isostasy. Major breakthroughs in analytical and geochronological techniques have been of profound relevance to all of the above. Low‐temperature thermochronology, and in particular apatite fission track analysis and (U–Th)/He analysis in apatite, have enabled rates of rock uplift and denudational exhumation from relatively shallow crustal depths (up to about 4 km) to be determined directly from, in effect, rock hand specimens. In a few situations, (U–Th)/He analysis has been used to determine the antiquity of major, long‐wavelength topography. Cosmogenic isotope analysis has enabled the determination of the ‘ages’ of bedrock and sedimentary surfaces, and/or the rates of denudation of these surfaces. These latter advances represent in some ways a ‘holy grail’ in geomorphology in that they enable determination of ‘dates and rates’ of geomorphological processes directly from rock surfaces. The increasing availability of analytical techniques such as cosmogenic isotope analysis should mean that much larger data sets become possible and lead to more sophisticated analyses, such as probability density functions (PDFs) of cosmogenic ages and even of cosmogenic isotope concentrations (CICs). PDFs of isotope concentrations must be a function of catchment area geomorphology (including tectonics) and it is at least theoretically possible to infer aspects of source area geomorphology and geomorphological processes from PDFs of CICs in sediments (‘detrital CICs’). Thus it may be possible to use PDFs of detrital CICs in basin sediments as a tool to infer aspects of the sediments' source area geomorphology and tectonics, complementing the standard sedimentological textural and compositional approaches to such issues. One of the most stimulating of recent conceptual advances has followed the considerations of the relationships between tectonics, climate and surface processes and especially the recognition of the importance of denudational isostasy in driving rock uplift (i.e. in driving tectonics and crustal processes). Attention has been focused very directly on surface processes and on the ways in which they may ‘drive’ rock uplift and thus even influence sub‐surface crustal conditions, such as pressure and temperature. Consequently, the broader geoscience communities are looking to geomorphologists to provide more detailed information on rates and processes of bedrock channel incision, as well as on catchment responses to such bedrock channel processes. More sophisticated numerical models of processes in bedrock channels and on their flanking hillslopes are required. In current numerical models of long‐term evolution of hillslopes and interfluves, for example, the simple dependency on slope of both the fluvial and hillslope components of these models means that a Davisian‐type of landscape evolution characterized by slope lowering is inevitably ‘confirmed’ by the models. In numerical modelling, the next advances will require better parameterized algorithms for hillslope processes, and more sophisticated formulations of bedrock channel incision processes, incorporating, for example, the effects of sediment shielding of the bed. Such increasing sophistication must be matched by careful assessment and testing of model outputs using pre‐established criteria and tests. Confirmation by these more sophisticated Davisian‐type numerical models of slope lowering under conditions of tectonic stability (no active rock uplift), and of constant slope angle and steady‐state landscape under conditions of ongoing rock uplift, will indicate that the Davis and Hack models are not mutually exclusive. A Hack‐type model (or a variant of it, incorporating slope adjustment to rock strength rather than to regolith strength) will apply to active settings where there is sufficient stream power and/or sediment flux for channels to incise at the rate of rock uplift. Post‐orogenic settings of decreased (or zero) active rock uplift would be characterized by a Davisian scheme of declining slope angles and non‐steady‐state (or transient) landscapes. Such post‐orogenic landscapes deserve much more attention than they have received of late, not least because the intriguing questions they pose about the preservation of ancient landscapes were hinted at in passing in the 1960s and have recently re‐surfaced. As we begin to ask again some of the grand questions that lay at the heart of geomorphology in its earliest days, large‐scale geomorphology is on the threshold of another ‘golden’ era to match that of the first half of the 20th century, when cyclical approaches underpinned virtually all geomorphological work. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Disturbance regimes at the interface of geomorphology and ecology

Geomorphological processes are an integral part of ecosystem functioning and ecosystem functioning affects geomorphological processes. Increasingly widespread acknowledgement of this simple idea is manifest in a vigorous research community engaged with questions that address the two‐way interaction between biota and geomorphology, at a range of scales and in a variety of terrestrial and aquatic environments. Geomorphological disturbances are a core element of biogeomorphological interest, and although the disciplines of geomorphology and ecology have each developed languages and theories that help to explore, model and understand disturbance events, little attempt has been made to draw together these approaches. Following a brief review of these issues, we introduce thirteen papers that investigate the interactions and feedbacks between geomorphological disturbance regimes and ecosystem functions. These papers reveal the singularity of wildfire impacts, the importance of landsliding for carbon budgeting and of vegetation accumulation for landsliding, the zoogeomorphic role of iconic and ‘Cinderella’ animals in fluvial geomorphology, biophysical interactions in aeolian, fluvial and torrential environments and the utility of living ecosystems as archives of geomorphic events. Most of these papers were first presented in a conference session at the European Geoscience Union General Assembly in 2010 and several others are from recent volumes of Earth Surface Processes and Landforms. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Horton's slope function

An error is pointed out in Robert Horton's (1945) presentation of his ‘slope function’. The history of its apparent non-detection provides an interesting perspective on the development of geomorphology as a science.     

The geomorphology of the Anthropocene: emergence,status and implications

The Anthropocene is proposed as a new interval of geological time in which human influence on Earth and its geological record dominates over natural processes. A major challenge in demarcating the Anthropocene is that the balance between human‐influenced and natural processes varies over spatial and temporal scales owing to the inherent variability of both human activities (as associated with culture and modes of development) and natural drivers (e.g. tectonic activity and sea level variation). Against this backdrop, we consider how geomorphology might contribute towards the Anthropocene debate by focusing on human impact on aeolian, fluvial, cryospheric and coastal process domains, and how evidence of this impact is preserved in landforms and sedimentary records. We also consider the evidence for an explicitly anthropogenic geomorphology that includes artificial slopes and other human‐created landforms. This provides the basis for discussing the theoretical and practical contributions that geomorphology can make to defining an Anthropocene stratigraphy. It is clear that the relevance of the Anthropocene concept varies considerably amongst different branches of geomorphology, depending on the history of human actions in different process domains. For example, evidence of human dominance is more widespread in fluvial and coastal records than in aeolian and cryospheric records, so geomorphologically the Anthropocene would inevitably comprise a highly diachronous lower boundary. Even to identify this lower boundary, research would need to focus on the disambiguation of human effects on geomorphological and sedimentological signatures. This would require robust data, derived from a combination of modelling and new empirical work rather than an arbitrary ‘war of possible boundaries' associated with convenient, but disputed, ‘golden’ spikes. Rather than being drawn into stratigraphical debates, the primary concern of geomorphology should be with the investigation of processes and landform development, so providing the underpinning science for the study of this time of critical geological transition. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Analysis of geomorphology citations in the last quarter of the 20th century

Three hundred and twenty‐eight geomorphology articles published in the last quarter of the 20th century were cited 20 or more times in Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) indices, as of 15 May 2001. At the close of the 20th century, well‐cited geomorphology is highly multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary with the most dominant fields being in biological, civil engineering, earth science, geography, geological, and soils disciplines. The very strong English‐language bias of well‐cited journal articles creates a geographical bias in study site selection, which may in turn bias geomorphic theory. Water‐based research (fluvial processes and landforms, riparian, drainage basin) dominates well‐cited papers, with the ‘hottest’ subfield in the 1990s being riparian research with a biological emphasis. Over 90 journals publish well‐cited papers, but Earth Surface Processes and Landforms hosts the largest number of well‐cited papers. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.