Broken foreland basins are caused by crustal-scale contractional basement structures that compartmentalize (or break) a contiguous retroarc or collisional foreland basin into smaller disconnected basins. Broken foreland basins differ from their unbroken counterparts in their deformational, depositional, and geodynamic framework. Whereas contiguous (unbroken) foreland basins are generated mainly by regional flexural loading due to shortening of supracrustal cover strata and uppermost basement in organized ramp-flat thrust systems, broken foreland basins are governed principally by isolated topographic loads and structural tilting associated with widely spaced crustal-scale reverse faults that accommodate intraplate basement shortening. These structural contrasts foster either décollement-style fold-thrust belts (orogenic wedges) with large integrated erosional drainage systems (watersheds) spanning diverse sediment source regions (including thin-skinned fold-thrust belts, elevated hinterland zones, accreted terranes, and magmatic arcs) or independent foreland block uplifts with local drainage systems dominated by basement sources. Although the genesis of broken foreland basins has been uniquely attributed to flat slab subduction, these basins are also sensitive to inherited structural, stratigraphic, thermal, and rheological configurations, as well as synorogenic mass redistribution in relationship to climate, erosion, sediment transport efficiency, and sediment accumulation.

Despite the many modern and ancient examples, questions persist over the underlying geodynamic processes that promote development of a broken or compartmentalized foreland basin instead of a single regionally unified flexural foreland basin. Additional uncertainties and misconceptions surround the criteria used to define broken foreland basins and their linkages to subduction dynamics (chiefly slab geometry), strain magnitude, and structural reactivation. Here we review the tectonic framework of broken foreland basins—with emphasis on South and North America (Pampean and Laramide provinces)—and propose that their genesis can be ascribed to a combination of: (i) underlying conditions in the form of tectonic inheritance, including precursor structural, stratigraphic, thermal, and rheological heterogeneities and anisotropies; and (ii) mechanical triggers, such as increased stress, enhanced horizontal stress transmission, and/or selective crustal strengthening or weakening.

破碎的前陆盆地是由地壳尺度的收缩基底结构引起的，这些结构将连续的弧后或碰撞前陆盆地划分（或破坏）成较小的不连贯盆地。破碎的前陆盆地与完整的前陆盆地的变形、沉积和地球动力学框架不同。在有组织的斜坡-平坦冲断系统中，由于地壳上盖层和最上部基底的缩短，连续（未破裂）的前陆盆地主要由区域弯曲载荷产生，而破碎的前陆盆地主要由孤立的地形载荷和与大间距地壳相关的结构倾斜控制适应板内地下室缩短的规模反向断层。这些结构对比促进了脱垂式褶皱冲断带（造山楔）与大型综合侵蚀排水系统（分水岭）跨越不同沉积物源区（包括薄皮褶皱冲断带、高架腹地带、增生地体和岩浆弧） ) 或独立的前陆块隆起，局部排水系统以地下室水源为主。虽然破碎前陆盆地的成因被独特地归因于平板俯冲，但这些盆地也对继承的构造、地层、热力和流变构造以及与气候、侵蚀、泥沙输送效率相关的同成生物质再分布敏感，和泥沙堆积。

尽管有许多现代和古代的例子，但对于促进破碎或分隔的前陆盆地而不是单一区域统一的弯曲前陆盆地的潜在地球动力学过程的问题仍然存在。其他不确定性和误解围绕着用于定义破碎前陆盆地的标准及其与俯冲动力学（主要是板片几何形状）、应变大小和结构重新激活的联系。在这里，我们回顾了破碎的前陆盆地的构造框架——重点是南美洲和北美洲（Pampean 和 Laramide 省）——并提出它们的成因可归因于以下组合：（i）构造继承形式的潜在条件，包括前体结构、地层、热和流变异质性和各向异性；