Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Remote Sensing of Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rse

Present-day land subsidence rates, surface faulting hazard and risk in

Mexico City with 2014–2020 Sentinel-1 IW InSAR
Francesca Cigna *, Deodato Tapete
Italian Space Agency (ASI), Via del Politecnico s.n.c., 00133 Rome, Italy

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Among the fastest sinking cities globally, the metropolitan area of Mexico City is the target of an unprecedented
Land subsidence satellite investigation based on over 300 Sentinel-1 Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Interferometric Wide swath
Groundwater pumping mode scenes acquired in 2014–2020. Two-pass differential Interferometric SAR (InSAR) and the parallelized
Aquifer depletion
Small BAseline Subset (SBAS) repeat-pass InSAR approach provide a complete account of spatial patterns, long-
Ground settlement
Surface faulting
term trend and present-day settlement rates affecting the city. The 3D deformation field reveals that foremost is
Flooding the role of the vertical velocity VU, with peaks of − 38.7 cm/year in Nezahualcóyotl, − 32.0 cm/year in Gustavo A.
Mexico Madero and Venustiano Carranza, and − 39.1 cm/year in Iztapalapa. Settlement at the metropolitan Cathedral in
InSAR Cuauhtémoc is ongoing at up to − 8.8 cm/year, consistently with the last six decades. Volcanic edifices mark
SBAS ground stability “islets” inside the main subsidence bowls. East-west rates are limited, except for some horizontal
Sentinel-1 strain (up to ±5 cm/year) within the subsidence bowls. Comparison with surface geology and geotechnical
SAR zoning confirms that aquitard compaction is the predominant process. The power relationship between VU [cm/
year] and the thickness of lacustrine clay deposits HC [m] is: VU = 76 1
*HC 1.8 . The 2019–2020 deformation sce­
nario shows that subsidence still involves most of Nezahualcóyotl, with − 3.0 cm/month VU. A well-defined long-
term deformation behaviour comes out from 2014–2019 InSAR time series and comparison with 2008–2020 GPS
data. RMSE of 0.9 cm is found at MMX1 station deployed within the lacustrine unit, and 0.6 cm at TNGF station
onto hard volcanic rocks. The sharpest subsidence gradients and angular distortions β in 2017–2019 (up to over
1/400, i.e. 0.14◦ ) – thus the greatest vulnerability to surface faulting and cracking as a consequence of large
tensile stress in the soil caused by differential settlement – are found at the foothills of Sierra de Santa Catarina,
Peñón del Marqués, Cerro Chimalhuachi, Peñón de los Baños and Sierra de Chichinautzin, where the transition
unit is narrower (or absent). Faults and cracks develop where β > 1/3000, i.e. 0.03%, in 2017–2019. The
observed width of the influence zone (i.e. damage band), where β is still significant to induce damage, is 250 m.
Differential settlement and surface faulting could compromise the serviceability of housing and utility infra­
structure. It is estimated that over 457,000 properties and 1.5 million inhabitants of the Valley of Mexico
Metropolitan Area (ZMVM) are in zones at high to very high surface faulting risk, mainly in Iztapalapa, Tláhuac,
Chimalhuacán and Chalco. Increased flood exposure due to formation of topographic depressions involves over
751,000 properties and ~2.7 million inhabitants of the ZMVM, mainly in Nezahualcóyotl, Tláhuac, Venustiano
Carranza, Iztapalapa, Gustavo A. Madero and Ecatepec de Morelos. These municipalities are often hit by cata­
strophic floods.

1. Introduction
Mexico City is one of the largest metropolises of the world, with over
8.8 million inhabitants in the Federal District and more than 21.1
million considering the Valley of Mexico Metropolitan Area (ZMVM,
Zona Metropolitana del Valle de México) (INEGI, 2010).
The city faces a severe water challenge, through cascading and
intermingled processes: frequent flooding from the hills towards the
centre of the Valley of Mexico basin, heat waves, water shortage due to
increasing demand for municipal, agricultural and industrial use, sig­
nificant water loss due to pipe leaks (Marín Salinas et al., 2016). In turn,
groundwater exploitation (providing ~70% of drinking water) in excess

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: francesca.cigna@asi.it (F. Cigna).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2020.112161
Received 1 February 2020; Received in revised form 19 September 2020; Accepted 23 October 2020
Available online 7 November 2020
0034-4257/© 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
of natural recharge induces aquifer system depletion and ground sub­
sidence, with exceptionally fast rates of ~40 cm/year (Galloway and
Burbey, 2011). This causes surface cracking, uneven settlement, leaning
and deformed buildings, seeming uplift of deeply-founded or piled
structures, and other forms of damage to urban infrastructure (Auvinet
et al., 2017; Auvinet et al., 2013; Waltham, 2014), increased exposure to
surface flooding, and modification of the seismic response of the basin
(Avilés and Pérez-Rocha, 2010).
High pumping rates combine with the intrinsic characteristics of the
clayey materials forming the aquitard (also identified as allophanes)
over which Mexico City is built (Galloway and Burbey, 2011). The urban
area is located in the central sector of the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt,
within a valley at around 2200 m a.s.l., and rests on lacustrine sediments
of a former interconnected system of lakes within the naturally endo­
rheic basin of the Valley of Mexico (Alcocer and Williams, 1996), sur­
rounded by mountains and hills made of basalt and andesite (Fig. 1).
From north to south, the ancient lakes included Zumpango, Xaltocan
and Texcoco saline lakes (later artificially separated by damming into
Xaltocan and San Cristobal lakes, and Texcoco and México lakes), and
Xochimilco freshwater lake (separated into Xochimilco and Chalco
Fig. 1. (a) Location and (b) simplified 1:250,000 scale geology of the study region (INEGI, 1983), with indication of regional faults (CENAPRED, 2017a), main
mountain ranges, ancient lakes, Sentinel-1 IW scene footprints and GPS stations. Fault names: SLT, San Lorenzo Tezonco; CO, Copilco; MI, Mixhuca; CA,
Santa Catarina.
2
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
lakes). In the XIV and XV centuries the Aztecs constructed dams, drains,
dykes and aqueducts to claim land to build the capital Tenochtitlán and
to protect from flooding. The lakes were further drained during the
Spanish colonization in the XVI and XVII centuries, also in response to a
series of catastrophic floods (e.g., Sosa-Rodriguez, 2010). Since then,
drainage continued with a significant boost in the XIX century, with the
construction of the ~47 km long Gran Canal del Desagüe open channel
to drain water towards the north into the Tequixquiac tunnel, and
substantial reduction of the lake up to small water bodies sparsely
distributed through the valley. This major change in the basin hydraulics
was accompanied by the drilling of the first wells to extract water from
the 300–350 m thick upper granular aquifer (alluvial-pyroclastic sedi­
ments), reaching over 1000 drilled wells in 1900 (e.g., Carrera-
Hernández and Gaskin, 2007).
Urban expansion and population growth mostly occurred in
1930–1950, resulting in intensified groundwater extraction and further
compaction of the ancient lake bed (i.e., the aquitard) at rates of 35–46
cm/year (Sosa-Rodriguez, 2010). Over 33 cm/year were observed at the
metropolitan Cathedral between 1947 and 1952 (Díaz Gutiérrez, 2017).
After those years, water extraction was suspended from some wells to
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
reduce subsidence rates, but new wells were drilled in the south, in
Chalco, Tláhuac and Xochimilco (e.g., Ortega-Guerrero et al., 1993).
Despite the implementation of a number of groundwater management
actions to mitigate land subsidence and favour the use of rainwater
(Marín Salinas et al., 2016), subsidence still persists today and often
causes damage to the drainage infrastructure itself.
Deformation of cohesive soils (e.g. clay) is renowned to occur when
pore water pressure decreases due to groundwater extraction and
aquifer depletion, thus inducing increase in the effective stress and
consequent settlement of the aquifer system (Terzaghi, 1925). The Na­
tional Water Commission (CONAGUA) recorded significant ground­
water deficit over the last years in many of the aquifer systems within
the ZMVM, namely Mexico City Metropolitan Area, Texcoco, Cuautitlán-
Pachuca and Chalco-Amecameca, i.e. 561, 112, 106 and 23 million m3/
year, respectively (Secretaría de Gobernación, 2018).
Several studies using satellite Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) im­
agery processed with differential Interferometric SAR (InSAR) methods
(e.g., Massonnet and Feigl, 1998) already proved that the relationship
between groundwater level change, aquifer system compaction and
surface deformation can be investigated with InSAR (e.g., Amelung
et al., 1999; Bell et al., 2008; Castellazzi et al., 2018). Many of such
studies focused on urban areas in central Mexico (e.g., Brunori et al.,
2015; Chaussard et al., 2014; Cigna et al., 2012a; Pacheco-Martínez
et al., 2015), owing to widespread occurrence of land subsidence in this
region (Figueroa-Miranda et al., 2018).
Occasions when Mexico City was used as the test-bed for InSAR-
based investigations are manifold, given the outstanding rates charac­
terizing its subsidence, up to some tens of centimetres per year. In this
regard, Supplementary Material Table S1 provides an account of the
whole InSAR literature, including journal articles, conference pro­
ceedings, books, book chapters, reports and theses that were published
on Mexico City:
(i) Either with primary goal to study the city, its land subsidence
process and derived geological hazard (e.g., Cabral-Cano et al.,
2008; López-Quiroz et al., 2009; Osmanoǧlu et al., 2011);
(ii) Or using the city as testing ground to demonstrate new SAR
acquisition modes, novel satellite missions, or newly developed
InSAR processing methods (e.g., Prats-Iraola et al., 2012; Sowter
et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2018).
To date, this is the first comprehensive summary of the published
InSAR studies covering Mexico City and, as such, it aims to act as a
Fig. 2. Positioning of this study in relation to the temporal distribution of the data used by the existing InSAR literature on Mexico City as of 31st August 2020
(coloured bars), with respect to the SAR data available in the archives (black lines). Supplementary Material Table S1 provides the comprehensive list of references.
(For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
3
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
reference for any future reviews on this topic.
The temporal distribution of the literature (Supplementary Material
Table S1) shows that, typically, publications appear soon after new
datasets are released, e.g. studies based on ERS-1/2 C-band and JERS-1
L-band SAR data for the second half of the 1990s were published in the
early 2000s (e.g., Strozzi et al., 2003). This is also the case with the trials
run with Terrain Observation with Progressive Scans (TOPS)-like SAR
datasets that were acquired during RADARSAT-2 C-band and TerraSAR-
X X-band experimental campaigns in 2009–2013, in preparation for the
launch of the first satellite of the European Copernicus Sentinel-1 C-band
SAR constellation in early 2014 (e.g., Lanari et al., 2015; Nannini et al.,
2016). On the other hand, freely distributed, long data stacks, such as
those acquired by ENVISAT in C-band in the 2000s, still offer opportu­
nities for research trials and applications in the mid/late 2010s (e.g.,
Osmanoğlu et al., 2016).
The temporal coverage of the data used in the literature (Fig. 2)
extends as far as early/mid 2018 with ALOS-2 PALSAR (Du et al., 2019;
Strozzi et al., 2020) and Sentinel-1 (Yalvaç, 2020; Zhao and Mallorquí,
2019). Nevertheless, an inspection of SAR data archives suggests that
datasets much longer than those used so far have been acquired over the
city (e.g., COSMO-SkyMed, TerraSAR-X, RADARSAT-2 and Sentinel-1),
and also additional imagery never analysed before exists (e.g.,
RADARSAT-1 1997–2007 data, and Kompsat-5 since 2014). InSAR
studies of subsidence-induced surface faulting hazard were last updated
as of the 2000s (Cabral-Cano et al., 2015) and for 2014–2017 only
(Fernández-Torres et al., 2020; Solano-Rojas et al., 2020a, 2020b),
therefore, currently a gap exists in the assessment of present-day sub­
sidence rates and induced hazard and risk.
This paper exploits the unprecedented opportunity to generate
displacement time series with some hundreds of input SAR scenes in C-
band offered by the Copernicus Sentinel-1 constellation, with the aim to
extend for the first time the land subsidence magnitude and hazard
assessment in Mexico City up to present days, and contribute to filling
the temporal gap identified above. This is the first time that such an
assessment is done with continuity using satellite information updated
as of early 2020 (Fig. 2), and also that a Sentinel-1 data stack with over
180 scenes is processed to extract deformation histories for Mexico City.
Moreover, multiple viewing geometries are used for the estimation of
deformation components along the vertical and east-west direction, thus
allowing enhanced understanding of the 3D land deformation field
affecting the city. This is another novel aspect of this paper, given that
the combination of different viewing geometries has not yet become an
established practice in the InSAR literature on Mexico City. Indeed, only
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
two out of the over 65 total publications listed in Supplementary Ma­
terial Table S1 attempted such an analysis based on ALOS-1 L-band
2007–2011 (Chaussard et al., 2014) and RADARSAT-2 C-band
2008–2011 (Samsonov and D’Oreye, 2017) data.
2. Data and methods
2.1. Sentinel-1 SAR data stacks
The input data encompass more than 300 C-band SAR scenes (f =
5.405 GHz, λ = 5.547 cm) acquired over Mexico City by Sentinel-1A and
Sentinel-1B spacecrafts (Torres et al., 2012). The latter were launched
on 3 April 2014 and 25 April 2016, respectively, share the same orbit
plane with a 180◦ orbital phasing difference, and together achieve
nominal site revisit of 6 days.
The data were acquired in Interferometric Wide (IW) swath mode
(De Zan and Monti Guarnieri, 2006), with a total swath of 250 km, and
are made up of the three sub-swaths IW1, IW2 and IW3, each consisting
of a series of bursts. The incidence angle θ varies between 30.8◦ and
46.2◦ from the near to the far range, and the pixel spacing is 2.3 m in
range and 14.1 m azimuth. The resulting ground range and azimuth
resolution is 5 m by 20 m (single-look).
Two stacks of 54 and 57 SAR scenes, acquired in ascending mode
along track T78 and in descending mode along track T143 respectively
(Fig. 1a), were used for a multi-temporal analysis to resolve the 3D
deformation field of the subsidence affecting the city over the last two
years, from October 2017 to October 2019. The starting date of these
stacks was, on purpose, selected after the 7.1 Mw Puebla earthquake (72
km depth) struck on 19 September 2017, to avoid any possible overlap
of surface deformation occurred due to this event (e.g., Atzori et al.,
2019) with those induced by groundwater resources exploitation.
An additional very long stack of 185 SAR images acquired in
descending mode along track T41 in 2014–2019 (but only covering the
western sector of the city with sub-swath IW1, i.e. in the near range;
Fig. 1a) was also used to investigate the whole long-term deformation
trend over the last five years. This stack begins in early October 2014, i.
e. after the end of the in-orbit commissioning phase of Sentinel-1A and
the start of routine operations.
The above three Sentinel-1 data stacks are, by far, the longest used to
date to investigate Mexico City’s subsidence, considering that most of
the InSAR literature based on Sentinel-1 imagery was limited to 15–25
scenes, and the maximum length exploited so far is of 45 (Emery and
Camps, 2017) and 46 (Yalvaç, 2020) scenes. There is only one very
recent study based on more than 140 Sentinel-1 scenes (Fernández-
Torres et al., 2020; Solano-Rojas et al., 2020a, 2020b). However, the
temporal period investigated in the latter is 2014–2017, thus not
providing InSAR estimates updated to present days.
One pair of IW scenes acquired along descending track T143 (Fig. 1a)
on 19 October 2019 and 23 January 2020 with perpendicular baseline
BP of 19 m, and another one on 23 January and 16 April 2020 with BP =
51 m, were also used to provide the most recent ever account of surface
deformation affecting the city. Another IW pair (15 October 2014 and 19
January 2015; BP = 60 m) was exploited to compare the present-day
subsidence pattern with that characterizing the city 5 years ago.
The spatial coverage of the three input data stacks, and the
2014–2015 and 2019–2020 image pairs, is shown in Fig. 1a in relation
to the extent of the ZMVM. Their overall temporal coverage is repre­
sented in Fig. 2, along with the periods already encompassed by the
existing InSAR literature.
2.2. Differential InSAR and SBAS analysis
Multi-temporal SAR data processing was carried out following the
Small BAseline Subset (SBAS) differential InSAR approach (Berardino
et al., 2002), using the Parallel-SBAS (P-SBAS) on-demand processing
service (Casu et al., 2014; De Luca et al., 2015; Manunta et al., 2019;
4
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
Zinno et al., 2017) and the distributed computing infrastructure within
the European Space Agency (ESA)’s Geohazards Exploitation Platform
(GEP) (Foumelis et al., 2019).
The VV polarized Single Look Complex (SLC) level-1 SAR scenes
were used, and small temporal baseline BT and orbital separation
(namely, BP) pairs were selected to form the interferograms with the aim
to reduce decorrelation (Zebker and Villasenor, 1992). Thanks to
Sentinel-1 narrow orbital tube (Torres et al., 2012), the small BP
requirement was intrinsically addressed. As for BT, the formation of
pairs was constrained by limiting the maximum number of consecutive
acquisitions to use for the multi-temporal analysis (Manunta et al.,
2019).
Precise image co-registration and formation of interferograms was
carried out at single burst level. Very high co-registration accuracy (i.e.
~10− 3 samples) was a requisite for TOPS data processing, due to the
large along-track Doppler centroid variations that cause phase ramps in
presence of mis-registration errors (Yague-Martinez et al., 2017). Burst
images co-registration was first done through a cascade sequence of
steps involving rigid offset estimation, master image rigid offset retrieval
and geometric registration (Lanari et al., 2015; Sansosti et al., 2006).
Burst interferograms were then generated, multi-looking in azimuth and
range (5 × 20) was applied to mitigate phase noise, and NASA’s 30 m
resolution Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) Digital Surface
Model (DSM) was used to subtract topographic phase components. The
burst interferograms were corrected by exploiting the Enhanced Spectral
Diversity (ESD) method (e.g., Prats-Iraola et al., 2012; Yague-Martinez
et al., 2016), in particular via range and azimuth ESD estimation within
overlapping areas between adjacent and consecutive bursts, followed by
interferometric phase compensation through phase ramps removal
(Manunta et al., 2019). Such an approach is crucial for InSAR processing
of squinted acquisitions (Scheiber and Moreira, 2000). Multi-looked
burst interferograms were then mosaicked into sub-swaths, and the
latter into the complete extent of the Sentinel-1 scene.
As for the two-pass InSAR analysis, the 2014–2015 and 2019–2020
differential interferograms were unwrapped using the Minimum Cost
Flow (MCF) algorithm, and then converted into Line-Of-Sight (LOS)
displacement dLOS, by multiplication of the differential phase Δφdiff by
λ/4π. The resulting maps, characterized by pixel spacing of ~75 m, were
tied to the permanent Global Positioning System (GPS) station UCHI
(19.531◦ N, − 99.131◦ E), often used in the InSAR literature as a stable
reference location (e.g., Osmanoǧlu et al., 2011).
To carry out the SBAS analysis, a noise-filtering operation plus the
selection of an optimized triangular network of interferograms were
implemented (Pepe et al., 2015; Yang et al., 2013). A total of 157 in­
terferograms were used for data stack T143, 149 for T78, and 531 for
T41. After phase unwrapping with the extended MCF algorithm, least
square solutions were retrieved for coherent targets. Atmospheric phase
components were also identified and removed.
The LOS velocity standard errors after the SBAS analysis are
inversely proportional to the square root of the number of independent
observations (Cigna and Sowter, 2017), therefore the number of dif­
ferential interferograms used in each SBAS run was the key parameter
determining the precision of the velocity estimates. Within the ZMVM,
the velocity standard deviations with respect to the linear regression
were mostly in the range of 0.03–0.08 cm/year (track T143), 0.04–0.09
cm/year (track T78), and 0.03–0.07 cm/year (track T41). The estimated
standard error of the time series was found equal to 0.24 (T143), 0.27
(T78) and 0.95 (T41) cm. The lower error observed for track T143 with
respect to T78 can be explained, in part, by the slightly greater number
of input scenes and interferograms used (i.e. 57 scenes and 157 in­
terferograms for T143, vs. 54 scenes and 149 interferograms for T78).
Moreover, T143 and T78 data stacks were acquired along different or­
bits, hence on different days and times of the day, in particular:
ascending data at 08:45 pm local time (i.e. dusk), and descending data at
07:30 am local time (i.e. dawn), resulting in different atmospheric
conditions (descending mode Sentinel-1 data over Mexico City are less
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
affected by atmospheric artefacts; e.g. Prats-Iraola et al. (2015)). On the
other side, the errors observed for dataset T41 refer to an input SAR
stack that is 3 times longer (i.e. > 180 scenes) than T143 and T78, and a
much smaller subset of coherent targets (~one order of magnitude less
than the other two datasets; due to its limited overlap with the ZMVM;
see Fig. 1). The length of T41 data stack also impacts on the goodness-of-
fit of the linear model to describe the time series and assess errors. In
particular, it implies much higher probability of non-linearities (hence
higher standard deviation) to be detected across a longer and temporally
denser time-span.
2.3. Post-processing and estimation of vertical and horizontal rates
Low spatial frequency signals due to uncompensated orbital errors or
atmospheric effects (e.g., Crosetto et al., 2016) were removed from the
SBAS datasets, after temporary conversion of the LOS velocity (VLOSj) of
each coherent target j to the vertical direction (VUj):
VUj =
VLOSj
(1)
ULOSj
where ULOSj = cosθj is the LOS directional cosine (i.e. unit vector) along
the vertical direction, and θj is the incidence angle. This conversion
avoided filtering out the LOS velocity variations across the swath that
are due to the different θj from the near to the far range (see Section 2.1).
The SBAS datasets were also referenced to a common stable location,
namely the GPS station UCHI (see Section 2.2). Since the T41 frame does
not cover UCHI, the vertical rate +0.09 cm/year measured at station
UJAL (19.313◦ N, − 99.226◦ E) over the last year (Blewitt et al., 2018)
was used as its reference.
In turn, the displacement histories were adjusted by recalculating the
vertical position dU of each target j at time tn, as follows:
dUj (tn ) = dUj old (tn ) − VU shift *[tn − t0 ] (2)
where dUj_old(tn) is the original position of the target at time tn with
respect to the first date of the time series t0, and VU_shift is the vertical
velocity shift due to both the low spatial frequency trend removal and
reference point homogenization.
The 3D deformation velocity field in 2017–2019 was derived by
combining ascending track T78 and descending track T143 velocities, i.
e. VA and VD, according to a multi-geometry data fusion approach
(Fuhrmann and Garthwaite, 2019).
The SBAS point-wise datasets were preliminarily resampled using a
grid with 100 m spacing, to account for the intrinsic differences in the
distribution and position of the targets in the two geometries. The at­
tributes from each dataset were transferred to the grid, based on the
nearest neighbour method. No interpolation was implemented in areas
devoid of targets.
For each grid element i, the east-west, north-south and vertical
directional cosines of the Sentinel-1 IW LOS in each acquisition mode
were considered: ELOSi = − cosαi*sinθi, NLOSi = sinαi*sinθi, and ULOSi =
cosθi, where αi is the ground track or heading angle of the satellite flight
direction (i.e. ~345–350◦ and ~ 190–195◦ for the ascending and
descending modes, respectively).
The vertical and east-west components of the velocity vector, i.e. VUi
and VEi, were computed by inverting the following system of two linear
equations with three unknown variables:
VAi = EAi *VEi + NAi *VNi + UAi *VUi (3)
VDi = EDi *VEi + NDi *VNi + UDi *VUi (4)
where VAi, EAi, NAi and UAi, are the known values of the annual velocities
and three directional cosines of the Sentinel-1 IW LOS at each grid
element i for ascending track T78, and VDi, EDi, NDi and UDi, are those for
descending track T143.
To solve the system, the assumption that VNi = 0 was made and, by
5
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
substitution, the two unknown variables VUi and VEi at each point i were
derived as follows (e.g., Cigna et al., 2019):
EDi *VAi − EAi *VDi
VUi = (5)
EDi *UAi − EAi *UDi
UAi *VDi − UDi *VAi
VEi = (6)
EDi *UAi − EAi *UDi
Areas covered only by one mode (ascending or descending), required
the additional assumption that VEi = 0. The VUi was therefore calculated
simply using Eq. (1), with either VAi or VDi as input for the VLOSi, as
applicable.
As commented above, the LOS directional cosines were precisely
computed at each location i, to account for the large variation of the LOS
orientation across the swath and avoid underestimations of the vertical
velocities at the far range and overestimations at the near range (e.g. up
to 15%, the greater the closer to the edges of the IW scene).
Even if more than two Sentinel-1 datasets were available for Mexico
City from different LOS geometries (two datasets in ascending and two
in descending mode; Fig. 1a), VNi was still poorly constrained due to the
near-polar orientation of the satellite orbit and the consequent pre­
dominant east-west orientation of the LOS. This means that the errors in
the estimation of VNi could be an order of magnitude more than the
relative data error, e.g. a few centimetres (Fuhrmann and Garthwaite,
2019; Pepe et al., 2016), and consequently exceed the magnitude of the
deformation occurring between one acquisition and the following. It is
therefore sound to use one dataset per geometry, and work under the
assumption that VNi = 0. However, during the geological interpretation
of the results, yet it is necessary to consider that this assumption could
introduce a bias in areas affected by north-south displacement (Fuhr­
mann and Garthwaite, 2019), though the latter is generally acceptable in
many cases, considering the precision of InSAR estimates. As shown by
the GPS data (see Section 3.2), in Mexico City the amount of vertical
displacement in the subsidence-affected area is significantly greater than
that occurring along the horizontal direction. Therefore, in most cases
the error that is generated by making such an assumption is negligible
compared to the magnitude of the ongoing vertical deformation.
2.4. Differential settlement and angular distortions
According to the geotechnical engineering practice (e.g., Burland
and Wroth, 1974), building damage severity depends on a number of
subsidence-related intensity parameters, such as the total and differen­
tial settlement affecting the structure, angular distortions and relative
rotations, in addition to construction year, type, characteristics and
maintenance state of the superstructures and their foundations (see also
Peduto et al., 2017). Differential settlement at the margins of subsiding
areas, sometimes occurring above discontinuities in bedrock geology
and aquifer system structure, are the primary cause for the development
of surface faulting, cracks and damage in urban infrastructure (e.g.,
Bouwer, 1977). In Mexico City this is due to the large tensile stresses
produced in the soil when differential compaction occurs at the sharp
transition zones between soft and firm soils (e.g., Auvinet et al., 2013).
Tipping or rigid body tilting of the urban structures may also occur as an
effect of differential settlement, often without formation of cracks.
Typical effects of structurally-controlled differential subsidence on civil
structures in central Mexico were discussed by Figueroa-Miranda et al.
(2018). To estimate the economic loss produced, Hernández-Madrigal
et al. (2014) also proposed an approach to assess the depreciation in the
value of urban properties due to subsidence-induced differential settle­
ments and aseismic ground failure.
Accounting for these aspects, the hazard produced by land subsi­
dence can be determined based not only on the annual displacement
velocity or the total settlement (namely, subsidence magnitude), but
also on the differential settlement ΔdUi between two points, which in
turn produces an angular distortion, β. The latter is defined as the ratio
F. Cigna and D. Tapete Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161

of ΔdUi to the distance l between the two points (Skempton and McDo­
nalds, 1956):
∆dUi
β= (7)
l
In the context of InSAR deformation estimates, l equals the original
spacing between the identified coherent points or, in this case, the size of
the grid used for the resampling and multi-geometry combination (i.e.,
100 m; see Section 2.3).
The differential settlement was recently adopted to assess surface
faulting hazard in Mexico City itself and other major cities in central
Mexico, such as Morelia, Aguascalientes and Toluca (Cabral-Cano et al.,
2008; Castellazzi et al., 2017; Cigna et al., 2011; Fernández-Torres et al.,
2020; Siles et al., 2015a), as well as to estimate angular distortions
affecting buildings in other cities and towns worldwide (e.g., Bianchini
et al., 2015; Qu et al., 2014; Sanabria et al., 2014; Zhu et al., 2018).
Vertical deformation records derived from the multi-geometry
combination of SBAS results were therefore used as input to compute
the differential settlements produced in the period 2017–2019 across the
region of interest, via estimation of horizontal gradients of land subsi­
dence. These were calculated as the maximum percentage rise (or rate of
change) in the total vertical displacement dUi measured at each 100 m
grid element i with respect to its adjacent elements, over a window of 3
by 3. As per the standard approach used in GIS for digital elevation data
(Burrough et al., 2015), this equals to the slope of a plane fitting the dUi
of the 8 elements around i, computed using the average maximum
technique.
Gradient values are dimensionless and expressed in percentage. High
gradients identify zones of abrupt transition between different vertical
deformation regimes, and therefore areas with the most pronounced
horizontal stress. For instance, 0.15% gradient indicates a differential
subsidence ΔdUi of 15 cm occurred in 2017–2019 between two locations
at a distance l of 100 m. When adjacent elements belong to the same
structure (e.g. building or road), the value of the gradient also provides
information on the angular distortion affecting the structure. For
instance, 0.15% gradient indicates β of 0.15%, equivalent to ~1/667, i.
e. an angle of 0.09◦ .
It is worth noting that β calculated with the above approach does not
indicate the total distortion affecting the building, but only the partial
distortion occurred over the period considered, i.e. in this case
2017–2019. Given the long-term subsidence process ongoing in Mexico
City for over 100 years (e.g., Auvinet et al., 2013), the total β affecting
the structures could easily be an order of magnitude greater than that
estimated for the 2 year-long period, unless structural interventions
were put in place locally.

Fig. 3. (a) Vertical and (b) horizontal displacement velocity in Mexico City in 2017–2019 from SBAS InSAR processing of multi-geometry Sentinel-1 IW scenes, with
indication of cross sections shown in Fig. 5 and geotechnical zoning (Gobierno del Distrito Federal, 2004), overlapped onto 10 m resolution Copernicus Sentinel-2
data 2019. (c) Number of input datasets available at each location and used for the computation of the displacement velocity components: 1 (either descending track
T143, or ascending track T78), and 2 (both T143 and T78), depending on data coverage.

6
F. Cigna and D. Tapete Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161

3. Results and discussion
3.1. Land subsidence and aquitard compaction
Fig. 3 provides an overview of the estimated velocity field in
2017–2019, as derived from the multi-geometry combination of the
Sentinel-1 SBAS InSAR results. Foremost is the role of the vertical ve­
locity component in the surface deformation process (Fig. 3a), with
peaks of VU of − 35.0 to − 38.7 cm/year in the central sector of Neza­
hualcóyotl – where the zone of maximum subsidence has shifted to from
its historical location in the old city centre (Cabral-Cano et al., 2008). VU
of − 25.0 to − 32.0 cm/year predominates also in the eastern sectors of
Gustavo A. Madero and Venustiano Carranza, and in the north-eastern
sector of Iztapalapa (Fig. 4). In the latter, peaks of − 39.1 cm/year are
observed. At the key landmark of the metropolitan Cathedral at Zócalo
Square in Cuauhtémoc, VU of − 7.0 to − 8.8 cm/year is found, which is
consistent with the − 8.7 cm/year observed in 1952–2010 (Díaz
Gutiérrez, 2017). Up to − 32.9 cm/year VU is estimated at Mexico City
International Airport Benito Juárez (MEX), while the land allocated for
the construction of the New International Airport Texcoco shows up to
− 24.5 cm/year (Fig. 4). However, this needs to be contextualised within
the somehow sparse coverage of the InSAR results at that location,
which is due to significant temporal decorrelation caused by the ongoing
engineering works and rapid landscape changes for the construction of
the new airport between September 2015 and December 2018.
General ground stability (VU in the range of ±0.5 cm/year) charac­
terizes the vast expanses of hard volcanic rocks (basaltic lava flows, tuffs
and sandy beds with gravel) belonging to Unit I of the geotechnical
classification adopted by the Federal District Government (Gobierno del
Distrito Federal, 2004). Subsidence rates gradually increase across slope
deposits of sands, silts and clays of the transition zone (Unit II), towards
the soft and highly compressible Quaternary clay and silt-rich deposits
of the ancient lakes which compose the aquitard (Unit III), as also un­
veiled in Fig. 5. VU increases from the western margin of the lacustrine
unit towards the centre of the subsidence bowl, while the change in VU is
much sharper moving from the centre towards the eastern margin,
where the transition zone is much narrower (Fig. 5a,b). The Peñón del
Marqués (also known as Peñón Viejo; Fig. 5b,c), Cerro de la Estrella,

Fig. 4. (a) Detailed view of vertical displacement velocity in Mexico City in 2017–2019 (see Fig. 3a), with indication of key landmarks and municipalities cited across
the text, as well as geotechnical zoning (Gobierno del Distrito Federal, 2004), overlapped onto 10 m resolution Copernicus Sentinel-2 data 2019. (b) extract of
1:250,000 scale geology of the study region (INEGI, 1983), with indication of regional faults (CENAPRED, 2017a), from Fig. 1b.

7
F. Cigna and D. Tapete Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161

Fig. 5. Vertical and horizontal displacement velocity in 2017–2019 along cross sections (a) A–A′ , (b) B–B′ and (c) C–C′ (see locations in Fig. 3), with indication of
geotechnical zoning (Gobierno del Distrito Federal, 2004).

Peñón de los Baños, Xico, Cerro del Elefante and other volcanic edifices
mark ground stability “islets” inside the main subsidence bowl (see lo­
cations in Fig. 1). The 3D view in Fig. 6 also allows for an enhanced
perception of the amount of total settlement that affected the region
over the two years between October 2017 and October 2019, compared
to the general ground stability of geotechnical Unit I.
As widely recognized in the literature, consolidation of the aquitard
consisting of the ancient lake bed is the predominant deformation pro­
cess in Mexico City. The comparison of subsidence patterns with geology
at the 1:250,000 scale (Fig. 1a) shows that the greatest subsidence rates
are found across lacustrine sediments (Fig. 4), but also over the exten­
sive areas of alluvium, especially in the municipalities between Sierra de
Guadalupe and the Zumpango lagoon, which were the specific focus of
previous studies by Siles et al., 2015a, 2015b. Cerro Tultepec is, instead,
another stability “islet” (Fig. 6). In agreement with the published liter­
ature (Cabral-Cano et al., 2010; Ortega-Guerrero et al., 1993; Ortiz-
Zamora and Ortega-Guerrero, 2010), subsidence is also apparent to the
south, in the area of former lakes Chalco and Xochimilco (Fig. 4), where
the thickness of the lacustrine unit can reach 100–300 m (Carrera-
Hernández and Gaskin, 2007). The Sentinel-1 SBAS analysis, though,

Fig. 6. 3D view of the total settlement occurred in Mexico City in 2017–2019, as estimated from the Sentinel-1 SBAS InSAR analysis.

8
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
shows that the subsidence process further extends towards the south-
eastern limit of the transition zone by at least 3 km (Fig. 4a), and in­
volves alluvial sediments around Cerro de Cocotitlán (Fig. 4b).
E-W rates are limited to the range of ±0.3 cm/year, except in some
sectors within the main subsidence bowls (Fig. 3b). Pronounced bands of
deformation with up to ±5 cm/year VE indicate the presence of hori­
zontal strain (both tensile and compressive). Horizontal deformation
occurs in the direction towards the centre of the subsidence bowls,
therefore towards the east (i.e. positive VE) and west (i.e. negative VE) at
the western and eastern sides of the bowls, respectively (Fig. 5a,b).
Maximum VE values seem to be located at the inflexion points of the
subsidence profiles (i.e. zones of maximum tilt), while null rates are
found at the margins and at the deepest points of the bowls, in agree­
ment with theoretical models (e.g., Samieie-Esfahany et al., 2009).
Presumably, a similar amount of deformation occurs along the north-
south direction at the northern and southern margins of the bowls,
though the assumption made during the multi-geometry post-processing
(see Section 2.3) does not allow for its direct quantification.
Subsidence patterns and rates persist up to present days in 2020, as
testified by the analysis of the wrapped differential interferograms, and
their derived maps of LOS displacement dLOS occurred over 3 month-
long periods from 19 October 2019 to 23 January 2020, and from 23
January to 16 April 2020 (Supplementary Material Fig. S1). In 2020, the
main subsidence bowl still extends across Nezahualcóyotl and reveals
occurrence of up to − 6.4 cm dLOS (i.e. -3.0 cm/month VU). This is
consistent with the long-term trend at − 35.0 cm/year found via the
SBAS analysis (Fig. 4). Across some sectors of the lacustrine unit in
Tláhuac and Chalco, over − 7.0 cm dLOS are observed, with a peak of − 8
to − 10.6 cm north of New Lake Chalco, indicating vertical settlement at
an exceptional rate of up to − 4.9 cm/month in the area where the
lacustrine unit reaches over 200 m thickness.
Not much difference in spatial pattern can be detected by compari­
son with the October 2014 to January 2015 period, i.e. exactly 5 years
before (Supplementary Material Fig. S1). The edge of the bowl seems to
have further shifted towards the east in more recent times, indicating
progressive deceleration of subsidence rates in the old city centre in
Cuauhtémoc, as well as in Benito Juárez, Iztacalco, Venustiano Carranza
and Ecatepec de Morelos. However, 2019–2020 rates in Nezahualcóyotl
appear more significant than in 2014–2015, thus testifying that in this
area the compaction process has likely intensified over the last 5 years.
The area of the New International Airport Texcoco shows high
coherence in 2019–2020, supposedly as no engineering works and
landscape changes were done after the end of 2018 when the project was
interrupted. Conversely, the land was mostly decorrelated in 2014–2015
before the construction started. The observed dLOS in 2019–2020 along
the runways is around − 3.0 to − 5.0 cm, indicating settlement at − 1.4 to
− 2.3 cm/month. A detailed investigation of the temporal variability (if
any) of these patterns would be required to better constrain the subsi­
dence process at this location, also in relation to geotechnical data.
Very good correlation is apparent between subsidence rates VU and
the thickness of soft clay deposits HC composing the aquitard, the latter
estimated via the analysis of geotechnical borings (Juárez-Camarena
et al., 2016). This evidence is consistent with observations by Solano
Rojas et al. (2015) for the 2003–2007 period. A power function describes
very well the relationship between VU based on 2017–2019 InSAR data
and HC (Fig. 7). Least-square regression provides: VU = a*HC b , where a
= 1/76 and b = 1.8, if VU is expressed in cm/year and HC in m. The
estimated error is 31%, and the coefficient of determination R2 is 0.6.
The fact that the consolidation of the clayey strata explains the vast
majority – but not all – of the subsidence process is in agreement with
Figueroa-Vega (1984) who estimated that, while 75% of the settlement
is explained by consolidation of the aquitard, the other 25% is due to
compression of the aquifer.
The behaviour observed in 2017–2019 is very similar to that found
by Avilés and Pérez-Rocha (2010) by analysing ground elevation mea­
surements at 960 benchmarks during the time period 1983–2005 for the
9
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
Fig. 7. Comparison of subsidence rates in 2017–2019 with thickness of the
lacustrine unit, with fitted power relationship (dashed line) and its error bands
(dotted lines).
Federal District, namely a = 1/55 and b = 1.8. Comparison of the latter
with the relationship derived for 2017–2019, indicates a slight decrease
in VU with respect to the previous decades, as expected due to the
evolution of the consolidation process. As discussed by Avilés and Pérez-
Rocha (2010), the above empirical relationship does not account for
local consolidation conditions, meaning that the use of the formula to
calculate VU based on the known value of HC, produces overestimation
for sites with consolidation at more advanced stage (e.g., the old historic
centre) and underestimation for younger unconsolidated deposits (e.g.,
more recently urbanized areas in the centre of the Texcoco, Xochimilco
and Chalco lakes).
On the other hand, a relatively weak correlation of subsidence and
groundwater level change rates was found by Solano Rojas et al. (2015)
by analysing hydrographs between 1990 and 2010 for 180 water wells
operating across the metropolitan area.
3.2. Long-term trend and comparison with GPS
Comparison of the InSAR derived displacements with continuous
monitoring records from permanent GPS stations shows good agreement
(Fig. 8a). The latter consist of 3D positioning data (24 h final solutions,
IGS14 reference frame) along with Median Interannual Difference
Adjusted for Skewness (MIDAS) rates (Blewitt et al., 2018). Absolute
differences in the vertical rates from InSAR and GPS are ~0.1–0.9 cm/
year for eight out of the nine GPS stations within the investigated area
that were operating for at least one full year in the period October 2017 –
October 2019 (Table 1; see locations in Fig. 1b). A greater difference is
observed at station MXTM where, differently from the other stations, a
− 4.3 cm/year VN is recorded. This suggests that the VN = 0 assumption
produces greater errors in the estimation of VU at this location (see
Section 2.3).
Date-by-date comparison of the vertical displacement data from the
InSAR analysis with the daily monitoring records of station MMX1
(McHugh, 2019) reveals a Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of 0.9 cm,
Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 0.8 cm and standard deviation of 0.5 cm.
This station is located within the lacustrine zone (Unit III), specifically at
MEX airport (see Fig. 1b). Its MIDAS rate was − 26.5 cm/year in
2008–2020, and the average rate observed in October 2017 – October
2019 was − 29.4 cm/year (Fig. 8a), compared to the − 30.3 cm/year
estimated via the InSAR analysis. By observing the whole GPS series, it
F. Cigna and D. Tapete Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161

Fig. 8. (a) Vertical displacement in 2008–2020 from MMX1 permanent GPS station compared with that derived from SBAS InSAR analysis of Sentinel-1 IW data in
2017–2019; (b) differences observed via date-by-date comparison of InSAR and GPS records in October 2017 – October 2019; and (c) displacement time series for
targets in Iztapalapa and Iztacalco derived from the SBAS InSAR analysis of Sentinel-1 2014–2019 data (descending mode track T41), with (d) detailed view of mid-
2017 when the Puebla earthquake occurred.

the TLALOCNet network (Cabral-Cano and Salazar-Tlaczani, 2016),

Table 1
located onto volcanic rocks of Unit I in Coyoacán (see Fig. 1b) and
Most recent horizontal and vertical MIDAS rates for 9 permanent GPS stations
moving at +0.005 cm/year in October 2017 to October 2019 (and
within Mexico City available from Blewitt et al. (2018), and observed difference
in vertical rates between InSAR analysis and GPS records. MIDAS rate of − 0.048 cm/year in 2016–2020), shows an RMSE of 0.6
cm, MAE of 0.5 cm and standard deviation of 0.3 cm.
GPS MIDAS rate [cm/year] Period used for VU difference
Similarly, a difference in annual rates of only 0.1 and 0.2 cm/year is
station comparison [cm/year]
VE VN VU found in Chalco by comparing the InSAR-derived VU with GPS rates in
ICMX − 0.68 − 0.48 − 1.97 Oct 2017 – Oct − 0.24 2017–2019 as measured by stations UTUL and UFXN, respectively, until
2019 March 2019 when their records interrupt (Table 1). UTUL is located
MMX1 − 0.71 +0.62 − 26.51 Oct 2017 – Oct − 0.86 within the sharp transition zone at the northern foothill of Sierra de
2019
MXMX − 0.81 − 0.14 − 0.61 Oct 2017 – Jun − 0.60
Chichinautzin, and UFXN within the much more extended transition
2019 zone south-west of Xico. InSAR rates at these locations are − 4.4 cm/year
MXTM − 0.02 − 4.34 − 27.54 Oct 2017 – May +4.85 (UTUL) and − 11.2 cm/year (UFXN).
2019 The observed Sentinel-1 P-SBAS accuracy at the GPS stations in
TNGF − 0.87 − 0.06 − 0.05 Oct 2017 – Oct − 0.98
Mexico City corroborates the assessment by Manunta et al. (2019), who
2019
UFXN n/a n/a n/a Oct 2017 – Mar − 0.22 found standard deviations of the differences between P-SBAS results and
2019 12 GPS deployed across the Italian territory lower than 0.5 cm, in line
UJAL n/a n/a n/a Mar 2018 – Mar − 0.69 with the performance observed for other SBAS investigations with C-
2019 band and X-band SAR data (Bonano et al., 2013; Casu et al., 2006).
UNVA − 0.80 − 0.13 − 1.11 Oct 2017 – Jun − 0.46
2019
In Fig. 8b, the time series obtained from the 185 Sentinel-1 data
UTUL n/a n/a n/a Oct 2017 – Mar +0.10 along descending mode track T41 outline the complete long-term
2019 displacement trend in the whole period 2014–2019, with a weekly to
n/a indicates absence of MIDAS rates for recently installed stations which pro­
bi-monthly sampling frequency. Unprecedented is the temporal detail
vide short records only or are affected by long interruptions in their series. that such a long stack of Sentinel-1 scenes can provide to contribute to
the better understanding and identification of the trend (and possible
trend changes) in the subsidence process. Evidence of a well-defined,
also becomes apparent that the station recorded an apparent increase in
linear long-term behaviour clearly comes out from the inspection of
the annual rate from − 26.6 cm/year in April 2008 – May 2017, to − 29.4
the time series, as also testified by the GPS data (e.g. MMX1 vertical
cm/year in June 2017 – March 2020.
displacement in Fig. 8a). While the whole monitoring record since 2008
On the other hand, date-by-date comparison at station TNGF from

10
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
is only available at the permanent GPS station, unique is the opportunity
to extend such record spatially for the whole urban area, that the InSAR
analysis of the big Sentinel-1 data stack offers. Moreover, the periods
monitored by the different GPS stations are quite varied across the city,
depending on the deployment date of each station and, sometimes, the
end of its service. Even more helpful becomes the information gathered
from the Sentinel-1 analysis in this respect.
Inspection of the 2014–2019 time series does not seem to reveal any
obvious trend change occurred in relation to the 2017 Puebla earth­
quake. However, many building collapses and damage caused by that
event were recorded, especially along the western sector of the lacus­
trine unit (Alberto et al., 2018), in a narrow sector bounded to the east
and west by the Mixhuca (MI) and Copilco (CO) regional faults (see
locations in Fig. 1b), and involving chiefly the municipalities of
Cuauhtémoc, Benito Juárez and Coyoacán. In depth InSAR time series
analysis, for instance via the computation of deviation indices or other
statistics (e.g., Berti et al., 2013; Cigna et al., 2012b; Notti et al., 2015;
Tapete and Casagli, 2013), could help to further investigate this aspect
and contribute to the recent SAR-based investigations of this event (e.g.,
Atzori et al., 2019). However, this is beyond the scope of this study.
3.3. Surface faulting hazard
The sharpest subsidence horizontal gradients in 2017–2019, and
thus vulnerability to surface faulting, are mostly concentrated at the
transition between lacustrine sediments and hard rock units (volcanic
structures), for instance in the south-eastern sector of Nezahualcóyotl
and in Iztapalapa. In this area, differential settlements of over 25 cm in 2
Fig. 9. Analysis of subsidence-induced surface faulting hazard in Mexico City in 2017–2019 from Sentinel-1 SBAS InSAR: (a) angular distortions and (b) derived
classification of hazard levels, with indication of geotechnical zoning (Gobierno del Distrito Federal, 2004), overlapped onto 10 m resolution Copernicus Sentinel-2
data 2019. Gaps in (b) indicate areas not covered by the InSAR results (no data) due to temporal decorrelation, and should not be interpreted as devoid of hazard.
11
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
years are estimated across 100 m distances (i.e. 0.25%), indicating
angular distortions β of more than 1/400, i.e. 0.14◦ (Fig. 9a). In Izta­
palapa, a number of surface faults and severe damage to the urban
infrastructure were mapped after field reconnaissance (CENAPRED,
2017b), due to the high physical vulnerability to ground fracturing
(Carreon-Freyre et al., 2020).
A simple classification of subsidence-derived surface faulting hazard
was used, by accounting for (i) geotechnical practice on empirical limits
for the allowable settlement of buildings (e.g., CEN, 2004; Skempton
and McDonalds, 1956), (ii) technical regulations of the Federal District
(Gobierno del Distrito Federal, 2004), and (iii) recent implementations
in the InSAR literature (e.g., Sanabria et al., 2014). Four hazard level
categories based on β were adopted: low (β ≤ 1/3000), medium (1/
3000 < β ≤ 1/1500), high (1/1500 < β ≤ 1/500) and very high (β > 1/
500), indicating an increasing likelihood of damage, from simply
aesthetical or non-structural, to heavy structural and therefore
compromising the serviceability of the urban infrastructure affected.
The zone of very high hazard is around Peñón de los Baños in
Venustiano Carranza and Peñón del Marqués in Iztapalapa, and along
the foothills of the Sierra de Santa Catarina in Iztapalapa and Tláhuac, as
well as the transition zone north of Sierra de Chichinautzin in Xochi­
milco and Tláhuac (Fig. 9b). This correlates with sharp changes in VU
between lacustrine sediments and the volcanic units, e.g. the ground
stability “islets” in Fig. 6. In the very high hazard zone, severe surface
faulting and cracking are apparent in both housing and road infra­
structure (CENAPRED, 2017b). When not yet developed, faults and
cracks in the urban infrastructure are very likely to propagate. In some
circumstances, the amount of differential settlement and resulting β are
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
also likely to exceed the serviceability limit of the structures.
The damage can also affect utility networks, such as clean water
pipes and the collectors of the combined drainage system, which in­
cludes both grey waters from households and black waters, i.e. sewage.
Therefore, this process further increases the amount of clean water that
is lost in infrastructure leaks (currently, this amounts to ~40% of the
total potable water in the network; Marín Salinas et al. (2016)), and also
exacerbates sewage spills and pollutant flow into the underground
aquifer, as well as into lakes and channels, thus affecting aquifer
vulnerability (e.g., Hernández-Espriú et al., 2014).
The generalized classification of surface faulting hazard in Fig. 9b
does not account for the differences in infrastructure types (buildings,
roads, walls, utilities), geometrical and structural characteristics of the
superstructures and foundations (e.g. rigidity), or the type of surface
geology. Future work will therefore need to investigate these aspects
further, and to tailor the hazard classification at the scale of single
structure.
Pacheco-Martínez et al. (2015) highlighted that research is needed to
determine critical subsidence gradient threshold related to the devel­
opment of surface faulting. Moreover, studies are due to investigate the
influence zone (or active zone, or damage band) width (Figueroa-
Miranda et al., 2018), where the effects of differential subsidence are
still significant to induce damage. To try to address these points, in
Fig. 10a, angular distortions from the Sentinel-1 SBAS InSAR analysis
are compared with the location of surface faults and cracks mapped in
the risk atlas by the National Centre for Disaster Prevention (CEN­
APRED) (Gobierno de la Ciudad de México, 2019). The distribution of
the observed values of β for the over 1800 faults and cracks within the
municipalities of Iztacalco, Iztapalapa, Venustiano Carranza, Tláhuac,
Xochimilco and Milpa Alta (Fig. 10b) shows a concentration around
0.01–0.04◦ , and median βmed and mean β of 0.019◦ (i.e. 1/3000, or
Fig. 10. (a) Comparison of angular distortions observed in 2017–2019 with surface faults and cracks in the area of Iztapalapa and former Xochimilco lake mapped in
the risk atlas of the Federal District (Gobierno de la Ciudad de México, 2019), with indication of geotechnical zoning (Gobierno del Distrito Federal, 2004). (b)
Analysis of angular distortions observed in 2017–2019 for the mapped faults. Notation: Qi, quartiles; βmed, median; β, mean.
12
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
0.0333%) and 0.025◦ (i.e. 1/2300, or 0.0435%), respectively. This
confirms that the empirical 1/3000 threshold is a good indicator to
establish the separation between the low and medium hazard level
categories.
Conversely, the determination of the influence zone width appears
much more challenging. On one hand, this would require the availability
of a comprehensive faults and cracks catalogue built according to a
standardized mapping approach, survey date and scale throughout,
whilst at present the latter are manifold (Gobierno de la Ciudad de
México, 2019). On the other hand, a hazard map with spatial resolution
finer than the 100 m employed in this study would be more appropriate
to better estimate the spatial variations of β at the local scale.
With these limitations in mind, it can be observed that the distance
between the peak values of β and the mapped faults and cracks in the
risk atlas is usually minimal (less than 50 m), and does not exceed 250 m
(Fig. 10a). This qualifies the latter value as the approximate width of the
influence zone, where the sharp differential settlement can cause an
impact on urban infrastructure. Many other factors (e.g. type, con­
struction characteristics and maintenance status of the infrastructure
involved in the fracturing), along with a local scale assessment based on
higher resolution SAR imagery, clearly need to be accounted for to refine
this empirical and scale-dependent estimate, before it can be exploited
to screen the whole metropolitan area with the aim to identify the
infrastructure that is more exposed to potential cracking.
3.4. Surface faulting risk assessment at AGEB level
According to the definition adopted by the United Nations (UNDRO,
1991), total risk is the expected loss from a given natural hazard (i.e.
probability of occurrence of a potentially damaging event in a particular
area and with a specific magnitude) to a given element at risk (e.g.
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
population, properties, economic activities). Assessment of subsidence-
induced surface faulting hazard based on the computation of subsi­
dence horizontal gradients (and therefore β), combined with informa­
tion about exposure and vulnerability of the elements at risk (e.g.
population, transport infrastructure, housing), can therefore provide
insights into the level of risk posed by land subsidence and feed into
urban development and management plans.
In order to derive an indication of risk, Cabral-Cano et al. (2015)
combined subsidence gradients information for 2003–2007 with popu­
lation data for basic geostatistical areas (AGEB) as defined by the Na­
tional Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI). Fernández-Torres
et al. (2020) performed a similar assessment for the 2014–2017 period,
also introducing the subsidence velocity among the parameters within
the risk assessment equation.
Using an analogous approach, subsidence-derived surface faulting
hazard information for 2017–2019 was combined with data on the
number of housing properties exposed, as provided for each urban AGEB
in the framework of the 2010 population census (INEGI, 2010). Urban
AGEBs are defined as areas occupied by a set of blocks delimited by
streets or avenues, with mainly residential, industrial, public or com­
mercial use. The AGEBs belonging to the ZMVM – which encompasses
the whole 16 municipalities of the Federal District plus 59 adjacent
municipalities belonging to the state of México, and 1 to the state of
Hidalgo – were considered for the risk analysis (Fig. 11).
Three classes of house densities δhouses were distinguished: low
(δhouses ≤ 2000 houses/km2), medium (2000 < δhouses ≤ 5000 houses/
km2), high (δhouses > 5000 houses/km2) density. The combination as­
sumes an increasing level of exposure of urban infrastructure to surface
faulting with increasing δhouses in each AGEB (Fig. 11d). At the same
time, vulnerability is determined by the location of houses in areas
potentially affected by faulting. Via the risk matrix in Fig. 12a, the data
were combined with information on hazard from the analysis of differ­
ential settlements and the maximum value of β observed within each
AGEB (Fig. 11b), to distinguish five risk categories: R0 - Very low, R1 -
Low, R2 - Medium, R3 - High, R4 - Very high.
Overall, the analysis shows that 6.3% out of the 5664 AGEBs in the
ZMVM are in zones at high (R3) and very high (R4) risk of surface
faulting (Fig. 12b). The zone at high to very high risk extends 100 km2
and includes more than 457,000 properties out of the nearly 6 million
censed within the ZMVM. Referring only to the Federal District, around
10.2% of its 2432 AGEBs are in zones R3 or R4, for a total of 64 km2 at
high to very high risk, where more than 303,000 properties are built, out
of the over 2.7 million censed within the administrative boundary (see
also full statistics in the Supplementary Material Table S2).
These zones are concentrated in the central sector of the urbanized
area, especially in Iztapalapa (mainly along the northern foothill of Si­
erra de Santa Catarina, and around Peñón del Marqués), La Paz,
Chimalhuacán and Nezahualcóyotl (around Cerro Chimalhuachi), and
moving towards the north-west in Iztacalco, Venustiano Carranza (i.e.
around Peñón de los Baños, west of the International Airport Benito
Juárez), Gustavo A. Madero and Ecatepec de Morelos, where high dif­
ferential subsidence is present along with high densities of properties.
More to the north, another zone with R4 and R3 risk is also at Coacalco
de Berriozábal, north of Sierra de Guadalupe (Fig. 12b). There the
transition from the lacustrine to the volcanic unit occurs across an
extremely narrow zone (even absent, in some cases; see also Fig. 5), and
the subsidence gradients are therefore quite emphasized. In the south,
several AGEBs in Xochimilco, Tláhuac, Valle de Chalco Solidaridad,
Chalco and Milpa Alta fall in class R3, and a few in R4 (Fig. 12b).
The areas highlighted as R3 and R4 based on β, as well as the dis­
tribution of zones subject to notable VU, agree with the distribution of
already developed surface faulting in the lacustrine aquitard. This is
noted especially at the boundary with the volcanic unit, as mapped in
Iztapalapa all around the foothills of Sierra de Santa Catarina and Sierra
de Chichinautzin (CENAPRED, 2017b), and in Chalco (Ortiz-Zamora
and Ortega-Guerrero, 2010), as discussed in Section 3.3.
13
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
Low (R1) and very low (R0) levels of subsidence risk are distributed
mainly on the peri-urban area, reflecting the combination of lower
spatial density in properties censed in each AGEB, with relatively small β
observed via the analysis of the 2017–2019 satellite data.
Distribution of the total population across the different AGEBs
(Fig. 11c) provides an indication of the proportion of inhabitants living
in properties that are under a high to very high risk of being affected by
faulting. In the ZMVM, it is estimated that over 1.5 million inhabitants
live in those AGEBs at high to very high risk of surface faulting (Fig. 12c,
d), where properties could potentially be affected by faulting and
cracking with possible consequences on serviceability. In the context of
risk assessment, this information helps to better understand the extent of
the socio-economic impact that such a “silent” hazard may induce on
population and their properties.
Qualitative subsidence risk mapping could act as a valuable support
to help local authorities for designing the best risk mitigation and
management strategies for the areas characterized by the highest risk
levels. On the other hand, the subsidence hazard map can be successfully
used to support land use zoning and the future planning of urban de­
velopments, by allowing the identification of areas where new devel­
opment and urban expansion should take place, or be discouraged due to
unacceptable hazard levels. For such an assessment, it is crucial to
consider a faulting hazard map as much updated as possible to account
for the spatial evolution of the subsidence process. When subsidence
persists, existing areas of surface faulting may further extend and
potentially enlarge, and new faulting can develop in other sectors. To
this aim, the map in Fig. 9b provides the most updated surface faulting
hazard map of Mexico City to date based on InSAR data, and so does the
risk map in Fig. 12b.
3.5. Increased flood exposure
Zones with small to null β, but affected by significant vertical set­
tlement (Fig. 11a), can be analysed in light of the increasing exposure to
flooding that land subsidence induces. Continuous ground sinking alters
urban morphology, thus favouring the development of topographic de­
pressions, some of which reach a level below that of the former lakes.
When depressions are localized, despite causing issues locally, they may
act as retention ponds for the floodwater and, as such, can beneficially
reduce the flooding downstream. Even when depressions are spread
spatially, the temporal water-pooling may not be an issue at all, if the
flood protection infrastructure is functioning. When the latter is not the
case, or the volume of floodwater exceeds the drainage network ca­
pacity, these depressions can potentially increase the impact of cata­
strophic floods.
Subsidence-induced morphology changes in Mexico City are
apparent in the area of the New Chalco Lake, west of Xico volcano (see
Fig. 4), where a new lake formed and developed in the 1990s and 2000s
(Ortiz-Zamora and Ortega-Guerrero, 2010). Similarly, other munici­
palities (e.g. Nezahualcóyotl) are progressively losing elevation with
respect to that of the former Texcoco lake, which was historically the
lowest point of the basin (Alcocer and Williams, 1996), but needed to be
artificially deepened by excavation to counterbalance relative lake level
rise due to subsidence. Today, the Mexico City sits in a depression below
the current level of the lake, making it more exposed to catastrophic
floods (Sosa-Rodriguez, 2010). At the volcanic range of Sierra de las
Cruces (see Fig. 1), frequent extreme rainfall events occur, combined
with fast runoff along unstable lahar slopes. During the wet season
(June–September), the municipalities of Tlalpan, Coyoacán, Miguel
Hidalgo in the western sector of the ZMVM, as well as Iztapalapa,
Gustavo A. Madero and Nezahualcóyotl, are often hit by floods. While in
the western part of the urbanized valley there is more runoff and less
evaporation, in the eastern part of the Federal District the evaporation is
most dominant, but topographic gradients are less pronounced and
infiltration is very low (Marín Salinas et al., 2016), also due to the level
of imperviousness determined by the dense urban fabric. The risk of
F. Cigna and D. Tapete Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161

Fig. 11. Analysis of subsidence-induced surface faulting hazard and elements at risk in the urban AGEBs of the Valley of Mexico Metropolitan Area: (a) maximum
settlement and (b) maximum angular distortion as estimated from 2017–2019 Sentinel-1 SBAS InSAR analysis; and (c) population density and (d) density of houses
from the 2010 national census (INEGI, 2010), overlapped onto shaded relief of 30 m resolution SRTM digital surface model.

14
F. Cigna and D. Tapete Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161

Fig. 12. Analysis of subsidence-induced surface faulting risk in 2017–2019 in the urban AGEBs of the Valley of Mexico Metropolitan Area: (a) risk matrix used to
combine data on hazard and elements at risk; (b) resulting risk zoning, overlapped onto shaded relief of 30 m resolution SRTM digital surface model; and population
statistics for the different risk levels within (c) the Federal District and (d) the Valley of Mexico Metropolitan Area.

flooding in these areas increases if the drainage system fails.
By altering local slope, ground settlement can also threaten the
serviceability of water and wastewater utilities, e.g. when the natural
flow direction of pipes and drains is inverted (e.g. significant loss of
slope occurred along a transect of the Gran Canal in the 1900s, thus
forcing the installation of pumping stations to allow the flow in the
correct direction and prevent wastewater flooding; Sosa-Rodriguez,
2010). Together with the growth of population, loss of slope along
drainage collectors brought to saturation of the network and wastewater
flooding on several occasions (e.g. in 1951).
Settlement rates in Fig. 3a can therefore be used to identify poten­
tially increasing levels of flood exposure. To this aim, 4 classes of ground
settlement were identified based on VU in 2017–2019: low (VU > − 10
cm/year), medium (− 20 < VU ≤ − 10 cm/year), high (− 30 < VU ≤ − 20
cm/year), and very high (VU ≤ − 30 cm/year).
Fig. 13 shows the resulting distribution of the number of properties
and the total population of the Federal District and the whole ZMVM
that are potentially involved. The properties censed in the AGEBs with
high and very high level of increased flood exposure are over 317,000 in
the Federal District, and over 751,000 in the ZMVM, accounting for the
11.6% and 12.5% of the total properties of the urban AGEBs therein,
respectively. Nearly 1.1 million inhabitants of the Federal District and
around 2.7 million in the ZMVM are involved. In descending order,
Nezahualcóyotl, Tláhuac, Venustiano Carranza, Iztapalapa, Gustavo A.
Madero and Ecatepec de Morelos are the municipalities where the
development of topographic depressions and potential increase in flood
exposure may impact many of their urban AGEBs (see full statistics in
Supplementary Material Table S2).
Although these figures alone do not allow the quantification of flood
risk, they can feed into the process of risk assessment together with other
flood hazard conditioning factors, such as catchment basin morphology,
surface imperviousness (preventing natural infiltration), rainfall and
drainage network capacity. The effects of flooding in Mexico City are
exacerbated by continuous growth of population and urban develop­
ment, and a drainage system yet not sufficient to sustain the total vol­
ume of rainwater to drain. Bursting of sewer pipes (which are often
clogged by rubbish disposed of along the streets) and sewage overflows
are also a common cascade effect of flash flooding.
A recent analysis of the water-related risk scenario by Marín Salinas
et al. (2016) identified a number of possible measures of adaptive,
multifunctional infrastructure and urban design to make the city more
water-sensitive and resilient, increase awareness and mitigate flood risk,
towards sustainability and an optimized use of groundwater resources in
a future city vision (Bricker et al., 2017). Adapted policies for water

15
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
Fig. 13. Properties and population of the urban AGEBs in (a) the Federal District and (b) the Valley of Mexico Metropolitan Area involved in increased exposure to
flooding due to land subsidence.
supply and management in Mexico City, aimed to control land subsi­
dence and mitigate its effects, are a key topic of discussion and concern
(e.g., Auvinet et al., 2017).
4. Conclusions
Analysis and interpretation of an unprecedented dataset of more
than 300 Sentinel-1 SAR scenes with two-pass and repeat-pass inter­
ferometry, allowed for the characterization of present-day land subsi­
dence pattern, rates and long-term trend in the Valley of Mexico
Metropolitan Area. Observed subsidence rates and patterns, along with
comparison with geological and geotechnical data, confirm the key role
played by the lacustrine aquitard compaction in the deformation pro­
cess. The derived surface faulting hazard and risk mapping, together
with the estimated angular distortions value that determines surface
faulting, and the observed influence zone width, provide crucial geo-
information that could feed into land management of Mexico City, as
well as of other subsiding cities in Mexico and other countries
worldwide.
Over the centuries, Mexico City adapted to mitigate subsidence im­
pacts, for instance through: deep pile foundations reaching the hard
layers (e.g., Angel of Independence monument; Auvinet et al., 2017);
concrete rafts as foundation for heavy buildings (e.g., Palacio de Bellas
Artes; Waltham, 2014); flexible joints for services and pipelines (Wal­
tham, 2014); and tailored geotechnical engineering works aimed to
mitigate the effects of differential settlement on monuments and archi­
tectural heritage (Ovando-Shelley et al., 2008). The observed fast rates
and spatial patterns of land subsidence, and the surface faulting and
cracking affecting vast portions of the metropolitan area, yet represent a
key topic of concern for city managers and administrators. In such
context, future updates of the geotechnical zoning, subsidence and its
16
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
derived faulting hazard and risk assessments for Mexico City could
benefit from the findings from this Sentinel-1 InSAR investigation, as
already proved by the recent incorporation of other InSAR-derived maps
and products into the risk atlas of the Federal District (Gobierno de la
Ciudad de México, 2019). Analogously, significant topographic de­
pressions of even several tens of centimetres to a few meters occurring in
some municipalities of the metropolitan area as an effect of aquifer
system compaction, are important inputs for a thorough assessment of
flood risk scenarios for the Valley of Mexico basin, and their fast-
changing dynamics. The water demand for domestic, agricultural and
industrial use, and the cascading effects from groundwater exploitation,
are crucial aspects to account for, to define a future vision of a large
metropolis such as Mexico City.
Possible improvement of the subsidence hazard and risk analysis for
Mexico City at a much finer detail could be achieved through higher
spatial resolution satellite SAR imagery, for instance 3 m resolution
StripMap data provided by X-band TerraSAR-X and COSMO-SkyMed
missions. As evidenced in Supplementary Material Table S1, the anal­
ysis of these data is still limited for Mexico City compared to C-band and
L-band SAR imagery, while it is clear that they would enable an analysis
not only at AGEB level, but also up to the scale of single building and
infrastructure. This would also help to better address the key scientific
question about the width of the influence zone (in this study, it was
estimated to be around 250 m, based on the spatial resolution of
Sentinel-1 SBAS datasets), thanks to a local scale sampling of the angular
distortions affecting vulnerable structures. The requirement for such an
implementation is the availability of X-band SAR stacks acquired regu­
larly over Mexico City, which is currently addressed by TerraSAR-X and
COSMO-SkyMed background observation scenarios.
Future studies will also need to focus on impacts of E-W deformation
on urban infrastructure, and on embedding such information into the
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
risk assessment.
From a technical perspective, the access to huge archives of SAR data
and the exploitation of remote platforms and high-performance
computing resources, such as those offered by ESA’s GEP that were
used in this study, open new opportunities to study and monitor
geological hazards affecting anthropogenic environments based on sat­
ellite Earth observation big data. Remote platforms equipped with
advanced and resource-demanding image processing chains and rou­
tines developed and tested by expert user groups and institutions, relieve
users of the tasks of input data downloading and processing in local, and
stimulate further the exploitation of Earth observation geo-information
in the current paradigm of big data challenges and opportunities.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
Copernicus Sentinel-1 IW SAR data were provided via and processed
in ESA’s Geohazards Thematic Exploitation Platform (Geohazards TEP,
or GEP), in the framework of the GEP Early Adopters Programme and
the Geohazards Lab initiative, the latter developed under the CEOS
Working Group on Disasters. SAR data processing was carried out using
the P-SBAS on-demand service developed and integrated by CNR-IREA
in GEP. Post-processing and analysis were carried out with ESRI Arc­
GIS Desktop v.10.6.1, licensed to ASI. Copernicus Sentinel-2 data were
sourced from Copernicus Open Access Hub. Topographic, geological and
other geospatial data were retrieved via the Datos Abiertos de México
portal (https://datos.gob.mx). NASA’s 1-arcsec global SRTM digital
surface model was provided by USGS via EarthExplorer (https://earth
explorer.usgs.gov). Contains Copernicus Sentinel-2 data 2019, and
modified Copernicus Sentinel-1 data 2014–2020. The authors thank the
whole GEP Team for providing technical support and assistance to use
the platform, CNR-IREA for making the P-SBAS chain available, and
Prof. Yong Wang and three anonymous reviewers for providing
constructive and insightful comments on this work.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.rse.2020.112161.
References
Alberto, Y., Otsubo, M., Kyokawa, H., Kiyota, T., Towhata, I., 2018. Reconnaissance of
the 2017 Puebla, Mexico earthquake. Soils Found. 58, 1073–1092. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.SANDF.2018.06.007.
Alcocer, J., Williams, W.D., 1996. Historical and recent changes in Lake Texcoco, a saline
lake in Mexico. Int . J. Salt Lake Res. 5, 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF01996035.
Amelung, F., Galloway, D.L., Bell, J.W., Zebker, H.A., Laczniak, R.J., 1999. Sensing the
ups and downs of Las Vegas: InSAR reveals structural control of land subsidence and
aquifer-system deformation. Geology 27, 483–486. https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-
7613(1999)027<0483:STUADO>2.3.CO;2.
Atzori, S., Antonioli, A., Tolomei, C., De Novellis, V., De Luca, C., Monterroso, F., 2019.
InSAR full-resolution analysis of the 2017–2018 M>6 earthquakes in Mexico.
Remote Sens. Environ. 234 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.111461.
Auvinet, G., Méndez, E., Juárez, M., 2013. Soil fracturing induced by land subsidence in
Mexico City. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Soil Mechanics
and Geotechnical Engineering, 2–6 Sept 2013. International Society for Soil
Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, pp. 2921–2924. Paris, France.
Auvinet, G., Méndez, E., Juárez, M., 2017. Recent information on Mexico City
subsidence. In: ICSMGE 2017 - 19th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering, pp. 3295–3298.
Avilés, J., Pérez-Rocha, L.E., 2010. Regional subsidence of Mexico City and its effects on
seismic response. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 30, 981–989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
soildyn.2010.04.009.
Bell, J.W., Amelung, F., Ferretti, A., Bianchi, M., Novali, F., 2008. Permanent scatterer
InSAR reveals seasonal and long-term aquifer-system response to groundwater
17
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
pumping and artificial recharge. Water Resour. Res. 44 https://doi.org/10.1029/
2007WR006152.
Berardino, P., Fornaro, G., Lanari, R., Sansosti, E., 2002. A new algorithm for surface
deformation monitoring based on small baseline differential SAR interferograms.
IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 40, 2375–2383. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TGRS.2002.803792.
Berti, M., Corsini, A., Franceschini, S., Iannacone, J.P., 2013. Automated classification of
persistent Scatterers interferometry time series. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 13,
1945–1958. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-1945-2013.
Bianchini, S., Pratesi, F., Nolesini, T., Casagli, N., 2015. Building deformation assessment
by means of persistent Scatterer interferometry analysis on a landslide-affected area:
the Volterra (Italy) case study. Remote Sens. 7, 4678–4701. https://doi.org/
10.3390/rs70404678.
Blewitt, G., Hammond, W., Kreemer, C., 2018. Harnessing the GPS Data Explosion for
Interdisciplinary Science, 99. Eos, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.1029/
2018eo104623.
Bonano, M., Manunta, M., Pepe, A., Paglia, L., Lanari, R., 2013. From previous C-band to
new X-band SAR systems: assessment of the DInSAR mapping improvement for
deformation time-series retrieval in urban areas. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens.
51, 1973–1984. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2012.2232933.
Bouwer, H., 1977. Land subsidence and cracking due to ground-water depletion.
Groundwater 15, 358–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.1977.tb03180.x.
Bricker, S.H., Banks, V.J., Galik, G., Tapete, D., Jones, R., 2017. Accounting for
groundwater in future city visions. Land Use Policy 69, 618–630. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.09.018.
Brunori, C.A., Bignami, C., Albano, M., Zucca, F., Samsonov, S., Groppelli, G., Norini, G.,
Saroli, M., Stramondo, S., 2015. Land subsidence, ground fissures and buried faults:
InSAR monitoring of Ciudad Guzmán (Jalisco, Mexico). Remote Sens. 7, 8610–8630.
https://doi.org/10.3390/rs70708610.
Burland, J.B., Wroth, C.P., 1974. Settlement of buildings and associated damage. In: SOA
Review, Proc. Conf. Settlement of Structures. Pentech Press, Cambridge, London,
pp. 611–654.
Burrough, P.A., McDonnell, R.A., Lloyd, C.D., 2015. Principles of Geographical
Information Systems, 3rd ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Cabral-Cano, E., Salazar-Tlaczani, L., 2016. TLALOCNet GPS Network - TNGF_Geofisica-
UNAM_Mexico_City_TNET_mx2015 P.S. UNAVCO, Inc., GPS/GNSS Observations
Dataset. https://doi.org/10.7283/T53X851M.
Cabral-Cano, E., Dixon, T.H., Miralles-Wilhelm, F., Díaz-Molina, O., Sánchez-Zamora, O.,
Carande, R.E., 2008. Space geodetic imaging of rapid ground subsidence in Mexico
City. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 120, 1556–1566. https://doi.org/10.1130/B26001.1.
Cabral-Cano, E., Osmanoglu, B., Dixon, T., Wdowinski, S., Demets, C., Cigna, F., Díaz-
Molina, O., 2010. Subsidence and fault hazard maps using PSI and permanent GPS
networks in Central Mexico. IAHS AISH Publ. 339, 255–259.
Cabral-Cano, E., Solano-Rojas, D., Oliver-Cabrera, T., Wdowinski, S., Chaussard, E.,
Salazar-Tlaczani, L., Cigna, F., DeMets, C., Pacheco-Martínez, J., 2015. Satellite
geodesy tools for ground subsidence and associated shallow faulting hazard
assessment in central Mexico. In: Proceedings of the International Association of
Hydrological Sciences, pp. 255–260. https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-372-255-2015.
Carreon-Freyre, D., Gutierrez-Calderon, R.I., Cerca, M., Alcantara-Duran, C.F., 2020.
Factors that condition physical vulnerability to ground fracturing in Mexico City. In:
Proceedings of the International Association of Hydrological Sciences, pp. 571–576.
https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-382-571-2020.
Carrera-Hernández, J.J., Gaskin, S.J., 2007. The basin of Mexico aquifer system: regional
groundwater level dynamics and database development. Hydrogeol. J. 15,
1577–1590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-007-0194-9.
Castellazzi, P., Garfias, J., Martel, R., Brouard, C., Rivera, A., 2017. InSAR to support
sustainable urbanization over compacting aquifers: the case of Toluca Valley,
Mexico. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 63, 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jag.2017.06.011.
Castellazzi, P., Longuevergne, L., Martel, R., Rivera, A., Brouard, C., Chaussard, E., 2018.
Quantitative mapping of groundwater depletion at the water management scale
using a combined GRACE/InSAR approach. Remote Sens. Environ. 205, 408–418.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.11.025.
Casu, F., Manzo, M., Lanari, R., 2006. A quantitative assessment of the SBAS algorithm
performance for surface deformation retrieval from DInSAR data. Remote Sens.
Environ. 102, 195–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2006.01.023.
Casu, F., Elefante, S., Imperatore, P., Zinno, I., Manunta, M., De Luca, C., Lanari, R.,
2014. SBAS-DInSAR parallel processing for deformation time-series computation.
IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 7, 3285–3296. https://doi.org/
10.1109/JSTARS.2014.2322671.
CEN, 2004. Eurocode 7: geotechnical design – Part 1: general rules [EN 1997-1]. In:
Authority: The European Union Per Regulation 305/2011, Directive 98/34/EC,
Directive 2004/18/EC.
CENAPRED, 2017a. Mapea UNAM fracturas en el suelo de la Ciudad de México. In:
Boletín UNAM-DGCS-677. Ciudad Univ.
CENAPRED, 2017b. Análisis de la Vulnerabilidad Física a la Subsidencia y Agrietamiento
en la Ciudad de México. In: UNAM Centro de Geociencias. Reporte de Actividades,
Actividad 4, Mayo 2017. UNAM.
Chaussard, E., Wdowinski, S., Cabral-Cano, E., Amelung, F., 2014. Land subsidence in
Central Mexico detected by ALOS InSAR time-series. Remote Sens. Environ. 140,
94–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2013.08.038.
Cigna, F., Osmanoǧlu, B., Cabral-Cano, E., Dixon, T.H., Ávila-Olivera, J.A., Garduño-
Monroy, V.H., DeMets, C., Wdowinski, S., 2012a. Monitoring land subsidence and its
induced geological hazard with synthetic aperture radar interferometry: a case study
in Morelia, Mexico. Remote Sens. Environ. 117, 146–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rse.2011.09.005.
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
Cigna, F., Sowter, A., 2017. The relationship between intermittent coherence and
precision of ISBAS InSAR ground motion velocities: ERS-1/2 case studies in the UK.
Remote Sens. Environ. 202, 177–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.05.016.
Cigna, F., Cabral-Cano, E., Osmanoglu, B., Dixon, T.H., Wdowinski, S., 2011. Detecting
subsidence-induced faulting in Mexican urban areas by means of persistent scatterer
interferometry and subsidence horizontal gradient mapping. In: International
Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS). IEEE, pp. 2125–2128.
https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2011.6049585.
Cigna, F., Tapete, D., Casagli, N., 2012b. Semi-automated extraction of deviation indexes
(DI) from satellite persistent Scatterers time series: tests on sedimentary volcanism
and tectonically-induced motions. Nonlinear Process. Geophys. 19, 643–655.
https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-19-643-2012.
Cigna, F., Tapete, D., Garduño-Monroy, V.H., Muñiz-Jauregui, J.A., García-
Hernández, O.H., Jiménez-Haro, A., 2019. Wide-area InSAR survey of surface
deformation in urban areas and geothermal fields in the eastern trans-Mexican
Volcanic Belt, Mexico. Remote Sens. 11, 2341. https://doi.org/10.3390/
rs11202341.
Crosetto, M., Monserrat, O., Cuevas-González, M., Devanthéry, N., Crippa, B., 2016.
Persistent scatterer interferometry: a review. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2015.10.011.
De Luca, C., Cuccu, R., Elefante, S., Zinno, I., Manunta, M., Casola, V., Rivolta, G.,
Lanari, R., Casu, F., 2015. An on-demand web tool for the unsupervised retrieval of
Earth’s surface Deformation from SAR data: the P-SBAS service within the ESA G-
POD environment. Remote Sens. 7, 15630–15650. https://doi.org/10.3390/
rs71115630.
De Zan, F., Monti Guarnieri, A., 2006. TOPSAR: terrain observation by progressive scans.
IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 44, 2352–2360. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TGRS.2006.873853.
Díaz Gutiérrez, Y., 2017. Evaluación del hundimiento regional de la Ciudad de México.
National Polytechnic Institute, Ciudad de México, México.
Du, Z., Ge, L., Ng, A.H., Zhu, Q., Zhang, Q., Kuang, J., Dong, Y., 2019. Long-term
subsidence in Mexico City from 2004 to 2018 revealed by five synthetic aperture
radar sensors. L. Degrad. Dev. 30, 1785–1801. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3347.
Emery, W., Camps, A., 2017. In: Emery, W., Camps, A. (Eds.), Chapter 5: Radar. Elsevier,
Introduction to Satellite Remote Sensing, pp. 291–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/
B978-0-12-809254-5.00005-1.
Fernández-Torres, E., Cabral-Cano, E., Solano-Rojas, D., Havazli, E., Salazar-Tlaczani, L.,
2020. Land subsidence risk maps and InSAR based angular distortion structural
vulnerability assessment: an example in Mexico City. In: Proceedings of the
International Association of Hydrological Sciences, pp. 583–587. https://doi.org/
10.5194/piahs-382-583-2020.
Figueroa-Miranda, S., Tuxpan-Vargas, J., Ramos-Leal, J.A., Hernández-Madrigal, V.M.,
Villaseñor-Reyes, C.I., 2018. Land subsidence by groundwater over-exploitation
from aquifers in tectonic valleys of Central Mexico: a review. Eng. Geol. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.09.023.
Figueroa-Vega, G.E., 1984. Case history no. 9.8. In: Mexico, D.F. (Ed.), Guidebook to
Studies of Land Subsidence Due to Ground-Water Withdrawal. Studies and Reports
in Hydrology, pp. 217–232.
Foumelis, M., Papadopoulou, T., Bally, P., Pacini, F., Provost, F., Patruno, J., 2019.
Monitoring geohazards using on-demand and systematic services on ESA’s
geohazards exploitation platform. In: International Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Symposium (IGARSS). IEEE, pp. 5457–5460. https://doi.org/10.1109/
IGARSS.2019.8898304.
Fuhrmann, T., Garthwaite, M.C., 2019. Resolving three-dimensional surface motion with
InSAR: constraints from multi-geometry data fusion. Remote Sens. 11, 241. https://
doi.org/10.3390/rs11030241.
Galloway, D.L., Burbey, T.J., 2011. Review: regional land subsidence accompanying
groundwater extraction. Hydrogeol. J. 19, 1459–1486. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10040-011-0775-5.
Gobierno del Distrito Federal, 2004. Normas Técnicas Complementarias Para Diseño y
Construcción de Cimentaciones: Gaceta Oficial del Distrito Federal, II (103-BIS).
de la Ciudad de México, Gobierno, 2019. Atlas de Riesgos de la Ciudad de México [WWW
Document]. URL. http://atlas.cdmx.gob.mx (accessed 1.14.20).
Hernández-Espriú, A., Reyna-Gutiérrez, J.A., Sánchez-León, E., Cabral-Cano, E., Carrera-
Hernández, J., Martínez-Santos, P., Macías-Medrano, S., Falorni, G., Colombo, D.,
2014. The DRASTIC-Sg model: an extension to the DRASTIC approach for mapping
groundwater vulnerability in aquifers subject to differential land subsidence, with
application to Mexico City. Hydrogeol. J. 22, 1469–1485. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10040-014-1130-4.
Hernández-Madrigal, V.M., Muñiz-Jáuregui, J.A., Garduño-Monroy, V.H., Flores-
Lázaro, N., Figueroa-Miranda, S., 2014. Depreciation factor equation to evaluate the
economic losses from ground failure due to subsidence related to groundwater
withdrawal. Nat. Sci. 06, 108–113. https://doi.org/10.4236/ns.2014.63015.
INEGI, 1983. Carta Geológica 1:250,000. Tile: E14-2, Ciudad de México. In: INEGI.
INEGI, 2010. Censo de Población y Vivienda 2010 [WWW Document]. URL. https:
//www.inegi.org.mx/programas/ccpv/2010/.
Juárez-Camarena, M., Auvinet-Guichard, G., Méndez-Sánchez, E., 2016. Geotechnical
zoning of Mexico Valley subsoil. Ing. Investig. y Tecnol. 17, 297–308. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.riit.2016.07.001.
Lanari, R., Berardino, P., Bonano, M., Casu, F., De Luca, C., Elefante, S., Fusco, A.,
Manunta, M., Manzo, M., Ojha, C., Pepe, A., Sansosti, E., Zinno, I., 2015. Sentinel-1
results: SBAS-DInSAR processing chain developments and land subsidence analysis.
In: International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS). IEEE,
pp. 2836–2839. https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2015.7326405.
18
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
López-Quiroz, P., Doin, M.P., Tupin, F., Briole, P., Nicolas, J.M., 2009. Time series
analysis of Mexico City subsidence constrained by radar interferometry. J. Appl.
Geophys. 69, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2009.02.006.
Manunta, M., De Luca, C., Zinno, I., Casu, F., Manzo, M., Bonano, M., Fusco, A., Pepe, A.,
Onorato, G., Berardino, P., De Martino, P., Lanari, R., 2019. The parallel SBAS
approach for Sentinel-1 Interferometric wide swath deformation time-series
generation: algorithm description and products quality assessment. IEEE Trans.
Geosci. Remote Sens. 57, 6259–6281. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TGRS.2019.2904912.
Marín Salinas, E., Boer, F., van de Pas, B., Rico Espínola, V., 2016. Towards a Water
Sensitive Mexico City. Public Space as a Rain Management Strategy. Rotterdam,
Netherlands.
Massonnet, D., Feigl, K.L., 1998. Radar interferometry and its application to changes in
the earth’s surface. Rev. Geophys. 36, 441–500. https://doi.org/10.1029/
97RG03139.
McHugh, T., 2019. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) GPS Network - MMX1 Station.
Nannini, M., Prats-Iraola, P., De Zan, F., Geudtner, D., 2016. TOPS time series
performance assessment with TerraSAR-X data. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs.
Remote Sens. 9, 3832–3848. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2015.2508062.
Notti, D., Calò, F., Cigna, F., Manunta, M., Herrera, G., Berti, M., Meisina, C., Tapete, D.,
Zucca, F., 2015. A user-oriented methodology for DInSAR time series analysis and
interpretation: landslides and subsidence case studies. Pure Appl. Geophys. 172,
3081–3105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-015-1071-4.
Ortega-Guerrero, A., Cherry, J.A., Rudolph, D.L., 1993. Large-scale Aquitard
consolidation near Mexico City. Groundwater 31, 708–718. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1745-6584.1993.tb00841.x.
Ortiz-Zamora, D., Ortega-Guerrero, A., 2010. Evolution of long-term land subsidence
near Mexico City: review, field investigations, and predictive simulations. Water
Resour. Res. 46 https://doi.org/10.1029/2008wr007398.
Osmanoǧlu, B., Dixon, T.H., Wdowinski, S., Cabral-Cano, E., Jiang, Y., 2011. Mexico City
subsidence observed with persistent scatterer InSAR. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf.
13, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2010.05.009.
Osmanoğlu, B., Sunar, F., Wdowinski, S., Cabral-Cano, E., 2016. Time series analysis of
InSAR data: methods and trends. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 115, 90–102.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2015.10.003.
Ovando-Shelley, E., Oliveira, M.O.P., Villa, E.S., Hernández, V., 2008. Mexico City:
geotechnical concerns in the preservation of monuments. Int. J. Archit. Herit. 2,
60–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583050701612887.
Pacheco-Martínez, J., Cabral-Cano, E., Wdowinski, S., Hernández-Marín, M., Ortiz-
Lozano, J., Zermeño-de-León, M., 2015. Application of InSAR and Gravimetry for
land subsidence Hazard zoning in Aguascalientes, Mexico. Remote Sens. 7,
17035–17050. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs71215868.
Peduto, D., Nicodemo, G., Maccabiani, J., Ferlisi, S., 2017. Multi-scale analysis of
settlement-induced building damage using damage surveys and DInSAR data: a case
study in the Netherlands. Eng. Geol. 218, 117–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enggeo.2016.12.018.
Pepe, A., Yang, Y., Manzo, M., Lanari, R., 2015. Improved EMCF-SBAS processing chain
based on advanced techniques for the noise-filtering and selection of small baseline
multi-look DInSAR interferograms. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 53,
4394–4417. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2015.2396875.
Pepe, A., Solaro, G., Calò, F., Dema, C., 2016. A minimum acceleration approach for the
retrieval of multiplatform InSAR deformation time series. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl.
Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 9, 3883–3898. https://doi.org/10.1109/
JSTARS.2016.2577878.
Prats-Iraola, P., Scheiber, R., Marotti, L., Wollstadt, S., Reigber, A., 2012. TOPS
interferometry with TerraSAR-X. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 50, 3179–3188.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2011.2178247.
Prats-Iraola, P., Nannini, M., Scheiber, R., De Zan, F., Wollstadt, S., Minati, F.,
Vecchioli, F., Costantini, M., Borgstrom, S., De Martino, P., Siniscalchi, V.,
Walter, T., Foumelis, M., Desnos, Y.-L., 2015. Sentinel-1 assessment of the
interferometric wide-swath mode. In: International Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Symposium (IGARSS). IEEE, pp. 5247–5251. https://doi.org/10.1109/
IGARSS.2015.7327018.
Qu, F., Zhang, Q., Lu, Z., Zhao, C., Yang, C., Zhang, J., 2014. Land subsidence and ground
fissures in Xi’an, China 2005–2012 revealed by multi-band InSAR time-series
analysis. Remote Sens. Environ. 155, 366–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
RSE.2014.09.008.
Samieie-Esfahany, S., Hanssen, R., van Thienen-Visser, K., Muntendam-Bos, A., 2009. On
the effect of horizontal deformation on InSAR subsidence estimates. In: Proceedings
of Fringe 2009 Workshop. ESA ESRIN, Frascati, Italy, p. 7, 30 Nov - 4 Dec 2009.
Samsonov, S.V., D’Oreye, N., 2017. Multidimensional Small Baseline Subset (MSBAS) for
two-dimensional deformation analysis: case study Mexico City. Can. J. Remote. Sens.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07038992.2017.1344926.
Sanabria, M.P., Guardiola-Albert, C., Tomás, R., Herrera, G., Prieto, A., Sánchez, H.,
Tessitore, S., 2014. Subsidence activity maps derived from DInSAR data: Orihuela
case study. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 14, 1341–1360. https://doi.org/10.5194/
nhess-14-1341-2014.
Sansosti, E., Berardino, P., Manunta, M., Serafino, F., Fornaro, G., 2006. Geometrical SAR
image registration. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 44, 2861–2870. https://doi.
org/10.1109/TGRS.2006.875787.
Scheiber, R., Moreira, A., 2000. Coregistration of interferometric SAR images using
spectral diversity. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 38, 2179–2191. https://doi.org/
10.1109/36.868876.
Secretaría de Gobernación, 2018. Acuerdo por el que se Actualiza la Disponibilidad
Media Anual de Agua Subterránea de los 653 Acuíferos de los Estados Unidos
F. Cigna and D. Tapete
Mexicanos, Mismos que Forman Parte de las Regiones Hidrológico-Administrativas
que se Indican, 4. Diario Oficial de la Federación.
Siles, G.L., Alcérreca-Huerta, J.C., López-Quiroz, P., Hernández, J.C., 2015a. On the
potential of time series InSAR for subsidence and ground rupture evaluation:
application to Texcoco and Cuautitlan–Pachuca subbasins, northern valley of
Mexico. Nat. Hazards 79, 1091–1110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1894-4.
Siles, G.L., Alcérreca-Huerta, J.C., López-Quiroz, P., Niemeier, W., 2015b. Long term
subsidence analysis and soil fracturing zonation based on InSAR time series
modelling in northern Zona Metropolitana del Valle de Mexico. Remote Sens. 7,
6908–6931. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs70606908.
Skempton, A.W., McDonalds, D.H., 1956. Allowable settlements of buildings. In: Proc.
ICE, London, 5, pp. 727–768.
Solano Rojas, D., Cabral Cano, E., Hernández Espriú, A., Wdowinski, S., DeMets, C.,
Salazar Tlaczani, L., Falorni, G., Bohane, A., 2015. La relación de subsidencia del
terreno InSAR-GPS y el abatimiento del nivel estático en pozos de la zona
Metropolitana de la Ciudad de México. Bol. Soc. Geol. Mex. 67, 273–283. https://
doi.org/10.18268/bsgm2015v67n2a10.
Solano-Rojas, D., Cabral-Cano, E., Fernández-Torres, E., Havazli, E., Wdowinski, S.,
Salazar-Tlaczani, L., 2020a. Remotely triggered subsidence acceleration in Mexico
City induced by the September 2017 mw 7.1 Puebla and the mw 8.2 Tehuantepec
September 2017 earthquakes. In: Proceedings of the International Association of
Hydrological Sciences. IAHS, pp. 683–687.
Solano-Rojas, D., Wdowinski, S., Cabral-Cano, E., Osmanoglu, B., Havazli, E., Pacheco-
Martínez, J., 2020b. A multiscale approach for detection and mapping differential
subsidence using multi-platform InSAR products. In: Proceedings of the International
Association of Hydrological Sciences. IAHS, pp. 173–177.
Sosa-Rodriguez, F.S., 2010. Impacts of water-management decisions on the survival of a
city: from ancient Tenochtitlán to modern Mexico City. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 26,
675–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2010.519503.
Sowter, A., Bin Che Amat, M., Cigna, F., Marsh, S., Athab, A., Alshammari, L., 2016.
Mexico City land subsidence in 2014–2015 with Sentinel-1 IW TOPS: results using
the intermittent SBAS (ISBAS) technique. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 52,
230–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2016.06.015.
Strozzi, T., Wegmüller, U., Werner, C.L., Wiesmann, A., Spreckels, V., 2003. JERS SAR
interferometry for land subsidence monitoring. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 41,
1702–1708. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2003.813273.
Strozzi, T., Carreon-Freyre, D., Wegmüller, U., 2020. Land subsidence and associated
ground fracturing: study cases in Central Mexico with ALOS-2 PALSAR-2 ScanSAR
interferometry. In: Proceedings of the International Association of Hydrological
Sciences, pp. 179–182. https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-382-179-2020.
Tapete, D., Casagli, N., 2013. Testing computational methods to identify deformation
trends in RADARSAT persistent scatterers time series for structural assessment of
archaeological heritage. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin,
Heidelberg, pp. 693–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39643-4_50.
19
Remote Sensing of Environment 253 (2021) 112161
Terzaghi, K., 1925. Settlement and consolidation of clay. In: Principles of Soil Mechanics,
95. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA, pp. 874–878.
Torres, R., Snoeij, P., Geudtner, D., Bibby, D., Davidson, M., Attema, E., Potin, P.,
Rommen, B.Ö., Floury, N., Brown, M., Traver, I.N., Deghaye, P., Duesmann, B.,
Rosich, B., Miranda, N., Bruno, C., L’Abbate, M., Croci, R., Pietropaolo, A.,
Huchler, M., Rostan, F., 2012. GMES Sentinel-1 mission. Remote Sens. Environ. 120,
9–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.05.028.
UNDRO, 1991. Mitigating natural disasters: phenomena effects and options. In:
A Manual for Policy Makers and Planners. UN Publication E 90 III M.1, New York,
USA.
Waltham, T., 2014. Ground subsidence in Mexico City. Mercian Geol. 18, 194–195.
Wang, X., Zhang, Q., Zhao, C., Qu, F., Zhang, J., 2018. A novel method of generating
deformation time-series using interferometric synthetic aperture radar and its
application in Mexico City. Remote Sens. 10, 1741. https://doi.org/10.3390/
rs10111741.
Yague-Martinez, N., Prats-Iraola, P., Gonzalez, F.R., Brcic, R., Shau, R., Geudtner, D.,
Eineder, M., Bamler, R., 2016. Interferometric processing of Sentinel-1 TOPS data.
IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 54, 2220–2234. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TGRS.2015.2497902.
Yague-Martinez, N., De Zan, F., Prats-Iraola, P., 2017. Coregistration of Interferometric
stacks of Sentinel-1 TOPS data. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 14, 1002–1006.
https://doi.org/10.1109/LGRS.2017.2691398.
Yalvaç, S., 2020. Validating InSAR-SBAS results by means of different GNSS analysis
techniques in medium- and high-grade deformation areas. Environ. Monit. Assess.
192, 12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-019-8009-8.
Yang, Y., Pepe, A., Manzo, M., Bonano, M., Liang, D.N., Lanari, R., 2013. A simple
solution to mitigate noise effects in time-redundant sequences of small baseline
multi-look DInSAR interferograms. Remote Sens. Lett. 4, 609–618. https://doi.org/
10.1080/2150704X.2013.771826.
Zebker, H.A., Villasenor, J., 1992. Decorrelation in interferometric radar echoes. IEEE
Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 30, 950–959. https://doi.org/10.1109/36.175330.
Zhao, F., Mallorquí, J.J., 2019. Coherency matrix decomposition-based Polarimetric
persistent Scatterer interferometry. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 57,
7819–7831. https://doi.org/10.1109/tgrs.2019.2916649.
Zhu, M., Wan, X., Fei, B., Qiao, Z., Ge, C., Minati, F., Vecchioli, F., Li, J., Costantini, M.,
2018. Detection of building and infrastructure instabilities by automatic
spatiotemporal analysis of satellite SAR interferometry measurements. Remote Sens.
10, 1816. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10111816.
Zinno, I., Casu, F., De Luca, C., Elefante, S., Lanari, R., Manunta, M., 2017. A cloud
computing solution for the efficient implementation of the P-SBAS DInSAR
approach. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 10, 802–817. https://doi.
org/10.1109/JSTARS.2016.2598397.