Relief morphometry fundamentally influences the spatial organization of physical gradients, surface processes, and geoenvironmental conditions, yet these relationships have rarely been integrated into a unified quantitative framework linking terrain structure to biosphere conditions. This study systematically evaluated relationships among key morphometric parameters—including slope, elevation, curvature, aspect, and terrain roughness—and physical gradients, geoenvironmental conditions, and biosphere conditions through a quantitative-dialectical synthesis of the literature. Fifty-nine studies published between 1993 and 2025 were selected using Population–Exposure–Outcome (PEO) criteria and screened following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework. Evidence, primarily derived from digital elevation models (DEMs) with spatial resolutions of 30 m or finer, was synthesized using standardized morphometric metrics. Across the reviewed studies, moderate-to-strong associations ($r$ = 0.58–0.84) were reported between relief morphometry and major physical and geoenvironmental variables. Slope was consistently associated with erosion and drainage dynamics, elevation with climatic gradients and ecological zonation, and curvature and terrain roughness with water redistribution, infiltration, and ecosystem resilience.The evidence supports an integrated functional pathway whereby relief morphometry structures physical gradients that regulate hydrological and gravitational surface processes, thereby shaping geoenvironmental and, ultimately, biosphere conditions. On this basis, an integrative $M \rightarrow \Phi \rightarrow P \rightarrow C \rightarrow B$ framework was proposed, where $M$ denotes relief morphometry, $\Phi$ physical gradients, $P$ surface processes, $C$ geoenvironmental conditions, and $B$ biosphere conditions. Climate, lithology, and land use were incorporated as contextual modulators.The framework provides a systematic basis for geomorphological zoning, erosion-susceptibility assessment, preliminary landslide-susceptibility screening, watershed characterization, and terrain-based environmental assessment. Although a coherent conceptual and quantitative synthesis is established, the proposed framework should not be interpreted as a universally validated causal model; its transferability, parameterization, and predictive performance remain to be tested across contrasting geological, climatic, ecological, and geomorphological settings.