Contesting the role of regional geomorphology in spatial planning through

non-eucledian geometries and fuzzy clustering methodologies.

José Muñoz-Rojas (1). Rosa M. Carrasco. Javier de Pedraza Gilsanz.

(1) The James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, AB15 8QH, United Kingdom.

Regional Geomorphology (RG); scientific discipline in charge of explaining the spatial distribution of landforms and land-units throughout both regional and sub-regional scales.

Spatial Planning (SP); scientific discipline, administrative technique and political tool aimed at assigning the location and spatial distribution of human and natural land uses over territories and landscapes, across (nested) spatial/temporal scales.

Traditional relationship (RG-SP); RG defines and delimits landforms and land-units useful for natural resource management, risk and hazard mitigation/alleviation and land-use “best-allocation” (SP).

RECENT SHIFTS;

Spatial Planning (SP); From assigning “optimal land-uses” to “creating places and mediating spaces”.

Post-modern Socio-Environmental Sciences

Nature-sphere Social-Environmental

Systems

Noosphere/ Anthroposphere

UNCERTAINTY

COMPLEXITY

Is (Regional) Geomorphology (both epistemically and from a practitioner´s/scientist´s perspective) ready to act as a post-modern science, and thus contribute to the contemporary planning framework?.

Probably not, so what is needed from this branch of science to be fully incorporated within the contemporary planning process?.

i. New aims; contribute to unravelling the complexity of land-systems (real-world socio-environmental systems), and of their (non-linear) dynamics, with a particular focus on the sphere of interaction between society and the environment (land-forms and landscapes).

ii. New epistemologies; from pursuing rational “optimality” in land-use decission making (e.g. risk mitigation), to coping with (acknowledging the inevitability of) uncertainty in the dynamics of earth systems and land-systems, and thus addressing the impact of this uncertainty over the decission-making process;

acceptance + identification + quantification.

iii. New methods & techniques; drawing concepts, tools and techniques from established theories & models; fuzzy clustering, fractal geometry, resilience of complex systems.

Action plan within the diverse stages of the planning process.

i. Definition and delimitation of the region. ANALYSIS I.

ii. Analysis and diagnosis of the diverse land-systems (including, amongst others, geology/geomorphology, hydrology, hazards, landscape and land-uses/land-covers). DIAGNOSIS I.

iii. Integrated land-units (physiographic vs parametric). ANALYSIS II + DIAGNOSIS II.

iv. Land-based decission-making (land alocation & further management strategies). PROGNOSIS + SYNTHERESIS.

i. Definition and delimitation of the region. ANALYSIS I.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

i. Definition and delimitation of the region. ANALYSIS I.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

i. Definition and delimitation of the region. ANALYSIS I.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

i. Definition and delimitation of the region. ANALYSIS I.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

ii. Analysis and Diagnosis of Land-Systems. DIAGNOSIS I.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

ii. Analysis and Diagnosis of Land-Systems. DIAGNOSIS I.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

ii. Analysis and Diagnosis of Land-Systems. DIAGNOSIS I.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

ii. Analysis and Diagnosis of Land-Systems. DIAGNOSIS I.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

iii. Integrated land-units (physiographic vs parametric). ANALYSIS II + DIAGNOSIS II.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

iii. Integrated land-units (physiographic vs parametric). ANALYSIS II + DIAGNOSIS II.

Litho-morphographic UnitCalculated Uncertainty

(%)

Water Masses 9.765 %

River-bed sediment valleys and terraces

36.569 %

Piédmonts and “rañas” 33.203 %

Slopes & hilly Landforms 36.864 %

Armorican (Quarcite) Crests 63.550 %

Volcanic reliefs 7.653 %

Automated Classification (Elementary Landforms)

Adapted Classification

(Types of Slopes)

Peaks. Peaks.

Crests. Crests.

Saddle.Saddle (area of hydro-dynamic

equilibrium).

Ravine. Ravine.

Pit. Pit.

Slope under

hydro-dynamic equilibrium.

Slope under

hydro-dynamic equilibrium

Convex Slope. Slopes under hydro-dynamic miss-equilibrium

Convex Slope.

Concave Slope. Concave Slope.

Steep Slope. Steep Slope.

Area of Slope Inflection.

Area of Slope Inflection.

Litho-morphographic Unit

Mean Fractal Dimension

Standard

Deviation

Variance

Water Masses 1,0875 0,1642 0,1142

Armorican (Quarcite) Crests

1,2314 0,1816 0,1605

Slopes & hilly Landforms

1,1388 0,1855 0,1629

Piédmonts and “rañas” 1,1708 0,2052 0,1753

River-bed sediment valleys and

terraces1,1623 0,2006 0,1726

Volcanic reliefs 1,2255 0,1699 0,1510

Bullaque CatchmentBullaque Catchment 1,1440 0,1897 0,1658

iv. Land-based decission-making (land alocation & further management strategies). PROGNOSIS + SYNTHERESIS.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

iv. Land-based decission-making (land alocation & further management strategies). PROGNOSIS + SYNTHERESIS.

* The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

CONCLUSSIONS & DISCUSSION• It is possible to reconduct the path of (Regional) Geomorphology

towards post-normal science, and thus towards the core of (post-modern) Spatial Planning.

• We have both tools and conceptual frameworks to do so, but;

i. Both the scientific comunity, and most specially, the key decission-makers, need to acknowledge the inevitability of a certain degree of uncertainty when working within complex (such as land-based) systems.

ii. There needs to be a futher, and intensive, testing, of the validility and applicability of both the conceptual and technical tools avaiable up-to-date.

iii. Geomorphic systems are neither isolated, nor pure natural systems. They are social-environmental systems, and components of land-systems, thus characterized by a notable degree of uncertainty and complexity.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

* The author/s of this paper would like to acknowledge the diverse official institutions that provided with the layers of spatial information necessary to build on the maps and spatial indexes shown on this paper, and that were originally developed as part of the author’s Doctoral Dissertation. To this extent, he counted on specific and full permission of use and modification over this information.