The past two years have seen a rapidly growing realization amongst both geophysicists and geologists of the importance of relationships between tectonics and landscape development. One focus of interest for geophysicists has been the problem of passive margins, and in particular the inability of many of the initial tectonic models to account for the significant marginal uplands characteristic of many such margins. Of equal significance, however, has been the explicit incorporation of denudation into models of orogen development and an appreciation that spatial variations in denudation may play a key role in controlling the structure of collisional orogenic belts.The growing interest of geologists in geomorphology in general, and tectonic geomorphology in particular, has also arisen from an increasing awareness of the role that the response of the landscape to tectonic processes plays in controlling the infilling of sedimentary basins. In the particular context of terrains experiencing active faulting Leeder et al. (1991) have remarked on the close relationship that exists between tectonics, geomorphology and sedimentology, while Perlmutter and Matthews (1990) have explored the role of tectonics and climate in controlling patterns of erosion and sediment supply. More generally, Leeder (1991) has attempted to link some elementary principles of landscape development to the effects of vertical crustal deformation in order to analyse at the broadest level the factors controlling sediment supply to basins. This new awareness of the geomorphological controls operating on sediment supply is, however, far from universal, as is illustrated by a recent summary of basin sedimentology which pays little attention to morphological features (Allen and Allen, 1990).In this review I will examine some of these issues in more detail as well as briefly considering other important developments in tectonic geomorphology at a wide range of spatial and temporal scales.