F3 site map

Current situation
Potential factors



2 – Xian (after Lee et al., Engineering Geology, 1996; Qu et al., Remmote Sensing of the Environment, 2014)
4 – Guangming, Wuxi (after Ye et al., Proc. IAHS, 2015; Ye et al., Water Resources Research, 2018)


7 – Tous (after Lashkaripour et al., J. Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences, 2014)
8 – Sirijan (after Ziaie et al., Research J. of Environmental Sciences, 2009)


1 – Queretaro (after Carreon-Freyre et al., Hydrogeology J., 2016; Ochoa-Gonzalez et al., Engineering Geology, 2018)
5 – Jocotepec (after Teatini et al., Episodes, 2018)
6 – Ciudad Guzmán (after Brunori et al., Remote Sensing, 2015)
45 – Morelia (after Gigna et al., Remote Sensing of the Environment, 2012)
49 – Mexico City (after D. Carreón-Freyre, M. Cerca, R. Gutierrez-Calderon and C. Alcántara-Duran. Analysis of physical vulnerability to subsidence and fracturing in Mexico City, Final Report (in spanish), Centro Nacional de Prevención de Desastres (National Center for Disasters Prevention) – CENAPRED, 2017)
50 – Irapuato (after D. Carreón-Freyre, M. Cerca, R. Gutierrez-Calderon, M. González-Hernández, and C. Alcántara-Duran. Impact of Land Subsidence in the City of Irapuato, Guanajuato State, caused by the overexploitation of the aquifer system, Final Report (in spanish), Comisión Nacional del Agua (National Agency of Water) – CONAGUA, 2013.


3 – Kechi Baig, Quetta (after KaKar et al., Int. J. of Economic and Environmental Geology, 2016)


9 – Freemont Valley – CA (after Holzer and Pampeyan, Water Resour. Res., 1981)
10 – Chandler Heights – AZ (after Arizona Land Subsidence Group, Report 2007)