Rock, debris and earth spreads (including landscape creep)
Rock spread: Near-horizontal stretching (elongation) of a mass of coherent blocks of rock as a result of intensive deformation of an underlying weak material, or by multiple retrogressive sliding controlled by a weak basal surface. Usually with fairly limited total displacement and slow movement (Hungr et al., 2014).
Debris spread requires formal definition, but is likely to include sub-categories based on type of material and the velocity of the mass movement (cf. Cruden and Varnes, 1996; Hungr et al., 2014). It includes Sand/silt liquefaction spread: extremely rapid lateral spreading of a series of soil blocks, floating on a layer of saturated (loose) granular soil, liquefied by earthquake shaking or spontaneous liquefaction (Hungr et al., 2014).
Earth spread requires formal definition, but is likely to include sub-categories based on type of material and the velocity of the mass movement (cf. Cruden and Varnes, 1996; Hungr et al., 2014). It includes Sensitive clay spread: extremely rapid lateral spreading of a series of coherent clay blocks, floating on a layer of remoulded sensitive clay (Hungr et al., 2014).
Primary reference(s)
Hungr, O.; Leroueil, S.; Picarelli, L, 2014. The Varnes Classification of Landslide Types, an Update. Landslides, 11:167-194. DOI 10.1007/s10346-013-0436-y.
Cruden, D.M., Varnes, D.J., 1996. Landslide types and processes. In: Turner, A.K., Schuster, R.L. (eds) Landslides investigation and mitigation. Transportation research board, US National Research Council. Special Report 247, Washington, DC, Chapter 3, pp. 36–75
Annotations
Additional scientific description
Spreads are tensional features that are susceptible to changes in their geotechnical properties at the stratal boundary, commonly at low angles of dip. They manifest as an extension of cohesive soil or rock mass, commonly combined with subsidence. Typically, subsidence may occur because of liquefaction, suffosion, tectonic spreading, uplift, or hydrological change leading to creep or deep erosion, which may be naturally occurring or due to anthropogenic activity. Related phenomena can include the formation of fractures, gulls and lineations.
In rock spreads, solid ground extends and fractures, pulling away slowly from stable ground and moving over the weakened layer without necessarily forming a recognizable surface of rupture. The softer, weaker unit may, under certain conditions, squeeze upward into fractures that divide the extending layer into blocks. In earth spreads, the upper stable layer extends along a weaker underlying unit that has flowed following liquefaction or plastic deformation. If the weaker unit is relatively thick, the overriding fractured blocks may subside into it, translate, rotate, disintegrate, liquefy, or even flow.
Spreads can also be triggered in sensitive clays (also called quick clays or Leda clays) and involve the rapid translation and dislocation of a coherent soil mass in blocks in the form of horst and graben found above a weak horizon of remoulded, i.e., liquefied, sensitive clay (Cruden and Varnes, 1996; Hungr et al., 2014). When the soil mass completely liquefies, it will flow, which is then termed a flowslide (Hungr et al., 2014). In either case, the failure is retrogressive, meaning that the mass movement mainly progresses upslope (Richer et al., 2020). Such slope failures have been observed in the northern hemisphere in Scandinavian countries, USA (e.g., Alaska, Maine).
Spreads in sensitive clays usually subside in the form of a crater downslope leaving intact blocks of material within the crater. If the sediment completely liquefies, the crater is emptied as the sediment flows outside (Richer et al., 2020).
Landscape creep is the slow downward movement of slope-forming soil or rock, typically less than 1 m deep. Movement is caused by shear stresses that are sufficient to produce permanent deformation, but too small to produce shear failure (adapted from Hutchinson, 1968; Varnes, 1978). Three types of creep are recognised: within the depth affected by seasonal change in soil moisture and temperature; continuous where shear stress continuously exceeds material shear strength; and progressive where slopes are reaching the point of failure for other mass movement failure processes.
Solifluction in permafrost zones represents the slow mass-wasting associated with freeze-thaw action whilst the saturated soil movement associated with ground thawing is gelifluction (Washburn, 1979 and French, 1996).
In seismic zones, liquefaction may temporarily weaken the lower layer. Other triggering factors include ground loading, riverbank and coastal erosion and plastic deformation of unstable material at depth, e.g. salt.
Metrics and numeric limits
Landscape creep can be regional (tens of square kilometres) or confined to small areas, e.g. due to aspect. Creep rates are slow (0.5 to 15 mm/ year according to Saunders and Young, 1983). In contrast liquefaction-related movement is rapid, subsiding as post-seismic drainage occurs, but it can also be regional in extent.
An example of a spread in sensitive clays occurred in Sant-Jude, Québec, Canada on May 10th, 2010 where a family of four perished in their house during the rapid mass movement. Its volume was estimated at 520 000 m3, with a length of 80 m and width of 275 m. The slope gradient varied between 12° and 20° (Locat et al., 2017). The trigger was thought to be high porewater pressure during spring thaw.
Moreover, 14 historical cases were documented in detail in Québec where the width varied between 145 to 955 m and distance of retrogression ranged from 75 to 675 m. In sensitive clay spreads, the width is generally larger than the length (Locat et al., 2018).
Key relevant UN convention / multilateral treaty
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030.
Drivers
Ground shaking may induce liquefaction-driven spreading; tectonic uplift can drive cambering, and seasonal changes in rainfall and snowmelt are the typical triggers for landscape creep. In a multi-hazard context other drivers might include leaking pipes, poor drainage and construction. Spreading landslides can progress to earthflows. Sub-surface groundwater flow tends to be focused and this facilitates piping (subrosion) that can propagate upwards leading to sinkhole formation, e.g. in Ethiopia (Valenta et al., 2021) and cambering and valley bulging, as reported in the UK (Hawkins, 2013).
Impacts
Spreading landslides can rupture infrastructure such as pipelines, cables, buildings, highways and fences and can lead to more significant ground failures such as earth flows.
Multi-hazard context
The figure below summarises common interactions between spreads and other hazards. However, this information should be used with caution and not be solely relied upon in Disaster Risk Management, particularly as some interactions may not have been included. Note also that hazardous events occurring together or locally in space or time may not necessarily cause, amplify or be otherwise related to each other. Examples of multi-hazard context can be found in the ‘Hazard drivers’ and ‘Impacts’ sections above.
Multi-hazard diagram
Risk Management
The most common mitigation for creep is to ensure proper drainage of water, especially for seasonal creep. Slope modification such as flattening or removing all or part of the landslide mass, can be attempted, as well as the construction of retaining walls (Highland and Bobrowsky, 2008).
The Ministère des Transports et Mobilité durable (MTMD, 2024) in the province of Québec has created an interactive website of maps depicting potential zones of slope failures. With most of the population established within the St-Lawrence Lowlands, the region containing sensitive clays, invaluable information has been made accessible to individuals.
Monitoring
The section and the table below offer an overview of monitoring spreads. This information can be used for forecasting within a national early warning system (EWS). Since EWS capacities and processes differ across countries, the most current and specific information regarding EWS should be obtained from the appropriate national or regional agency/authority responsible for disaster management.
| Which institution(s) produce(s) Disaster Risk Data/Information? | Local Authorities; Geological Surveys may produce disaster risk data/information |
| How is the Hazard Observed/Monitored/Forecast? | Spreads can be monitored via satellite imagery, InSAR, and visual observations, among others. |
References
Cruden DM, Varnes DJ (1996) Landslide types and processes. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides investigation and mitigation. Transportation research board, US National Research Council. Special Report 247, Washington, DC, Chapter 3, pp. 36–75
French, H.M., 1996. The Periglacial Environment, 2nd ed. Longman,
Hawkins, A.B. 2013. Engineering significance of superficial structures and landslides in the Bath area, UK. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 72: 353-370. DOI 10.1007/s10064-013-0481-8
Highland, L.M. and P. Bobrowsky, 2008. The Landslide Handbook – A guide to understanding landslides. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1325.
Hungr, O.; Leroueil, S.; Picarelli, L, 2014. The Varnes Classification of Landslide Types, an Update. Landslides, 11:167-194. DOI 10.1007/s10346-013-0436-y
Hutchinson, J.N., 1968. Mass movement. In: Fairbridge, R.W. (ed), Encyclopedia of Geomorphology. Reinhold Publishers, pp. 688-695.
Locat, A., Locat, P., Demers, D., Leroueil, S., Robitaille, D., and Lefebvre, G., 2017, The Saint-Jude landslide of 10 May 2010, Quebec, Canada: Investigation and characterization of the landslide and its failure mechanism, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 54: 1357–1374. dx.doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2017-0085
Locat, A., Leroueil, S., Therrien, J., Demers, D., 2018, Understanding spreads in Canadian sensitive clays, Canadian Geotechnical Society Conference Proceedings, Université Laval, Québec, Canada, 3 pages.
Ministère des Transports et Mobilité durable, accessed 2024 Accessed 13 February 2025
Richer, B., Saedi, A., Boivin, M., Rouleau, A., 2020. Overview of retrogressive landslide risk analysis in sensitive clay slope, Geosciences, 10, 279; MDPI, doi:10.3390/geosciences10080279
Saunders I, Young A (1983) Rates of surface processes on slopes, slope retreat and denudation. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 8:473-501.
Valenta, J., Verner, K., Martínek, K., Hroch, T., Buriánek, D., Megerssa, L.A. et al. (2021) Ground fissures within the Main Ethiopian Rift: Tectonic, lithological and piping controls. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 46(15), 3158–3174. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.5227 Accessed 13 February 2025
Varnes, D.J., 1978. Slope movement types and processes. In: Schuster, R.L. and R.J. Krizek (eds), Landslides, Analysis and Control. Special report 176: Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, pp. 11-33.
Washburn, A.L., 1979. Geocryology: A Survey of Periglacial Processes and Environments. Edward Arnold, London.