Geomorphological Risks of Urban Systems in The Industrial and Urbanized Prydniprovia Region in The Context of Sustainable Development
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31861/Keywords:
urban geomorphology, relief transformation, geomorphological risks, urban systems, sustainable development.Abstract
Abstract: The modern stage of urban system development is characterized by the intensive transformation of the natural environment, which is especially manifested in the alteration of relief morphology under the influence of technogenic activities. In industrial regions such as Prydniprov'ia, urbanization, mining, engineering development, and the disturbance of hydrogeological conditions cause the severe activation of dangerous geomorphological processes, including landslides, flooding, and subsidence.
The relevance of this study is driven by the urgent need for a comprehensive understanding of how these profound relief modifications impact the safety of the urban environment and its infrastructure. The main idea of this article is to substantiate that urban geomorphological transformations act as the primary trigger in the formation of geomorphological risks, and to demonstrate the necessity of integrating these risk assessments into the spatial planning and sustainable development strategies of industrial urban systems. Despite a significant number of studies in the field of urban geomorphology, the comprehensive analysis of risks associated with relief transformations remains insufficiently developed, particularly concerning the creation of adaptive scenarios for urban development. This research addresses this gap by conducting a multi-level assessment of the Prydniprov'ia region, encompassing the cities of Kryvyi Rih, Dnipro, and Kamianske. The methodological basis of the study combines classical geomorphological approaches with modern geographic information systems technologies. High-precision digital elevation models were utilized for automated morphometric analysis, specifically calculating surface slope angles and aspect using the Zevenbergen-Thorne method.
This was supplemented by satellite imagery interpretation, geological maps, and statistical data on hazardous processes. The spatial analysis revealed a complex mosaic structure of the transformed relief, directly correlating with zones of increased geomorphological hazard. While the majority of the territory consists of gentle slopes typical of the Dnieper Upland, areas with slopes exceeding 10-15 degrees form distinct linear and local anomalies critical for risk assessment. Furthermore, the analysis of slope aspects indicated a vulnerability on southern exposures due to intense physical weathering and temperature fluctuations, degrading the structural integrity of loess deposits and provoking suffosion. Northern exposures, retaining higher moisture, demonstrated an increased propensity for landslides, especially in the densely built private sectors of Dnipro's right bank.
The study categorizes urban geomorphological transformations into four main types: technogenic reshaping, planning transformations, hydrogeological changes, and the induced activation of exogenous processes. Technogenic reshaping is predominantly observed in Kryvyi Rih, where mining activities have disturbed over 30 percent of the city's area, creating quarries up to 300 meters deep and dumps 100 meters high, leading to high morphodynamic stress and severe landslide and erosion risks. Planning transformations and hydrogeological changes dominate in Dnipro and Kamianske. In Dnipro, flooding affects 10-15 percent of the territory, exacerbating slow landslide deformations. In Kamianske, altered hydrogeological regimes with groundwater tables at 0.5-2.0 meters cover up to 30 percent of the area, triggering massive subsidence and suffosion. The results quantitatively confirm that the proportion of transformed territories within these large industrial cities reaches 30-50 percent. These areas act as nuclei of geomorphological instability. It is established that under conditions of intense urbanization, relief functions as a natural-technogenic system where anthropogenic factors completely override natural morphodynamics. The intensity and character of these transformations directly determine the scale of hazardous processes. The practical significance of this study lies in its provision of an evidence-based framework for risk minimization, offering spatial forecasting tools essential for municipal governance, optimizing the use of transformed lands, and implementing sustainable development principles in heavily industrialized urban environments.
References
1. Байрак, Г.Р., & Ковальчук, І.П. (2025). Концептуальні моделі геоморфогенезу: ретроспектива та сучасні тенденції. Український географічний журнал, (2), 26–34. [Bairak, H. R., & Kovalchuk, I. P. (2025). Kontseptualni modeli heomorfohenezu: retrospektyva ta suchasni tendentsii. Ukrainskyi heohrafichnyi zhurnal, (2), 26–34.] https://doi.org/10.15407/ugz2025.02.026
2. Васютинська, К.А., & Барбашев, С.В. (2021). Оцінка впливу урбанізації на розвиток карстових процесів в Україні. Геохімія техногенезу, (33), 34–45. [Vasiutynska, K. A., & Barbashev, S. V. (2021). Otsinka vplyvu urbanizatsii na rozvytok karstovykh protsesiv v Ukraini. Heokhimiia tekhnohenezu, (33), 34–45.]
3. Ковальчук, І. (2004). Екологічна геоморфологія та екологічна географія: поступ, проблеми, перспективи. Теоретичні та методичні засади екологічної географії. Наукові записки ТНПУ ім. В. Гнатюка, (2), 1–10. [Kovalchuk, I. (2004). Ekolohichna heomorfolohiia ta ekolohichna heohrafiia: postup, problemy, perspektyvy. Teoretychni ta metodychni zasady ekolohichnoi heohrafii. Naukovi zapysky TNPU im. V. Hnatiuka, (2), 1–10.] http://dspace.tnpu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/25594/1/Kovalchuk.pdf
4. Ковальчук, І.П. (2007). Регіональний аналіз геоморфологічних систем. Видавничий центр ЛНУ імені Івана Франка. [Kovalchuk, I. P. (2007). Rehionalnyi analiz heomorfolohichnykh system. Vydavnychyi tsentr LNU imeni Ivana Franka.]
5. Линник, І. (2023). Зсувні процеси в місті Дніпро та Дніпропетровській області. Просторовий розвиток, (5), 155–164. [Lynnyk, I. (2023). Zsuvni protsesy v misti Dnipro ta Dnipropetrovskii oblasti. Prostorovyi rozvytok, (5), 155–164.] https://doi.org/10.32347/2786-7269.2023.5.155-164
6. Мокрицька, Т.П. (2017). Геодинамічний ризик урбанізованих територій: умови формування та критерії оцінки. Вісник Харківського національного університету імені В. Н. Каразіна. Серія: Геологія. Географія. Екологія, (47), 34–41. [Mokrytska, T. P. (2017). Heodynamichnyi ryzyk urbanizovanykh terytorii: umovy formuvannia ta kryterii otsinky. Visnyk Kharkivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni V. N. Karazina. Seriia: Heolohiia. Heohrafiia. Ekolohiia, (47), 34–41.]
7. Регіональна доповідь про стан навколишнього природного середовища в Дніпропетровській області за 2021 рік. (2022). Дніпро. [Rehionalna dopovid pro stan navkolyshnoho pryrodnoho seredovyshcha v Dnipropetrovskii oblasti za 2021 rik. (2022). Dnipro.]
8. Рудько, Г.І., & Суматохіна, І.М. (2008). Стан ресурсів надр як чинник формування та розвитку міст і промислово-міських агломерацій. Маклауд. [Rudko, H. I., & Sumatokhina, I. M. (2008). Stan resursiv nadr yak chynnyk formuvannia ta rozvytku mist i promyslovo-miskykh ahlomeratsii. Maklaud.]
9. Сизенко, О.В. (2023). Порівняльний аналіз автоматичних патернових морфометричних класифікацій форм рельєфу на основі цифрових моделей висот. Науковий вісник Херсонського державного університету. Серія: Географічні науки, (18), 59–67. [Syzenko, O. V. (2023). Porivnialnyi analiz avtomatychnykh paternovykh morfometrychnykh klasyfikatsii form reliefu na osnovi tsyfrovykh modelei vysot. Naukovyi visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu. Seriia: Heohrafichni nauky, (18), 59–67.] https://doi.org/10.32999/ksu2413-7391/2023-18-7
10. Стецюк, В.В., & Ковальчук, І.П. (2005). Основи геоморфології. Вища школа. [Stetsiuk, V. V., & Kovalchuk, I. P. (2005). Osnovy heomorfolohii. Vyshcha shkola.]
11. Allen, C.D., & Thornbush, M.J. (1976). Urban geomorphology: Landforms and processes in cities. The Geographical Journal, 142(1), 59–65.
12. Cooke, R.U., Brunsden, D., Doornkamp, J.C., & Jones, D.K.C. (1982). Urban geomorphology in drylands. Oxford University Press..
13. Gupta, A., & Ahmad, R. (1999). Geomorphology and the urban tropics: Building an interface between research and usage. Geomorphology, 31(1–4), 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-555x(99)00076-8.
14. Pica, A., Zumpano, V., Di Martire, D., et al. (2024). Urban geomorphology methods and applications as a guideline for understanding the city environment. Land, 13(7), Article 907. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13070907.
15. Reynard, E., & Brilha, J. (2017). Geoheritage: Assessment, protection, and management. Elsevier..
16. Sharifi, A. (2021). Urban sustainability assessment: An overview and bibliometric analysis. Ecological Indicators, 121, Article 107102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107102.
17. Sharifi, S., Moghimi, I., & Yamani, M. (2023). Geomorphological hazards in urban development..
18. Slaymaker, O., Spencer, T., & Embleton-Hamann, C. (2009). Geomorphology and global environmental change. Cambridge University Press..
19. Szabó, J. (2010). Anthropogenic geomorphology: A guide to man-made landforms. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3058-0.
20. Tsaryk, L.P., Tsaryk, P.L., & Kuzyk, I.R. (2022). Geoecological contradictions in the functioning of urban ecosystems (on the example of Ternopil). Journal of Geology, Geography and Geoecology, 31(1), 142–150. https://doi.org/10.15421/112237
21. Yamazaki, D., Ikeshima, D., Tawatari, R., Yamaguchi, T., O'Loughlin, F., Neal, J., Sampson, C., Kanae, S., & Bates, P.D. (2017). A high-accuracy map of global terrain elevations. Geophysical Research Letters, 44(11), 5844–5853. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017gl072874.
