A typology of European farmers' viewpoints on soil management and an investigation of their context-dependency

Soils perform more functions than primary productivity. Examples of these functions are the recycling of nutrients, the regulation and purification of water, the regulation of the climate, and supporting biodiversity. These abilities are generally referred to as the soil quality. Soil management that favors primary productivity may have positive and negative impacts on the other functions, and vice versa, depending on soil and climatic conditions. All these functions are under pressure, particularly in intensive agriculture. In the absence of mandatory regulations, most European farmers give limited attention to other functions than primary productivity in spite of recommendations by scientists, society and policy makers to acknowledge the ecosystem services provided by soils. The present paper analyses the underlying causes of this limited attention for the multi-functionality of soils by farmers. It is concluded that their focus on primary productivity may stem from (1) insufficient visible proof for soil degradation and benefits of preventive measures over curative measures, (2) limited awareness or conviction of long-term synergies, (3) insufficient remuneration of ecosystem services by society or compensation of yield penalties in favor of these services, (4) lacking trustworthy knowledge about and support for multi-functional soil management, and (5) absence of incentives and regulations on soil management and their enforcement. All these shortcomings need to be addressed by advisors, scientists, and policy makers, whilst acknowledging the need for underpinning and differentiation of incentives and regulations.

Abstract. Adopting soil and crop management practices that conserve or enhance soil structure is critical for supporting the sustainable adaptation of agriculture to climate change, as it should help maintain agricultural production in the face of increasing drought or water excess without impairing environmental quality. In this paper, we evaluate the evidence for this assertion by synthesizing the results of 34 published meta-analyses of the effects of such practices on soil physical and hydraulic properties relevant for climate change adaptation in European agriculture. We also review an additional 127 meta-analyses that investigated synergies and trade-offs or help to explain the effects of soil and crop management in terms of the underlying processes and mechanisms. Finally, we identify how responses to alternative soil–crop management systems vary under contrasting agro-environmental conditions across Europe. This information may help practitioners and policymakers to draw context-specific conclusions concerning the efficacy of management practices as climate adaptation tools. Our synthesis demonstrates that organic soil amendments and the adoption of practices that maintain “continuous living cover” result in significant benefits for the water regulation function of soils, mostly arising from the additional carbon inputs to soil and the stimulation of biological processes. These effects are clearly related to improved soil aggregation and enhanced bio-porosity, both of which reduce surface runoff and increase infiltration. One potentially negative consequence of these systems is a reduction in soil water storage and groundwater recharge, which may be problematic in dry climates. Some important synergies are reductions in nitrate leaching to groundwater and greenhouse gas emissions for nonleguminous cover crop systems. The benefits of reducing tillage intensity appear much less clear-cut. Increases in soil bulk density due to traffic compaction are commonly reported. However, biological activity is enhanced under reduced tillage intensity, which should improve soil structure and infiltration capacity and reduce surface runoff and the losses of agro-chemicals to surface water. However, the evidence for these beneficial effects is inconclusive, while significant trade-offs include yield penalties and increases in greenhouse gas emissions and the risks of leaching of pesticides and nitrate. Our synthesis also highlights important knowledge gaps on the effects of management practices on root growth and transpiration. Thus, conclusions related to the impacts of management on the crop water supply and other water regulation functions are necessarily based on inferences derived from proxy variables. Based on these knowledge gaps, we outlined several key avenues for future research on this topic.

Soils form the basis for agricultural production and other ecosystem services, and soil management should aim at improving their quality and resilience. Within the SoilCare project, the concept of soil-improving cropping systems (SICS) was developed as a holistic approach to facilitate the adoption of soil management that is sustainable and profitable. SICS selected with stakeholders were monitored and evaluated for environmental, sociocultural, and economic effects to determine profitability and sustainability. Monitoring results were upscaled to European level using modelling and Europe-wide data, and a mapping tool was developed to assist in selection of appropriate SICS across Europe. Furthermore, biophysical, sociocultural, economic, and policy reasons for (non)adoption were studied. Results at the plot/farm scale showed a small positive impact of SICS on environment and soil, no effect on sustainability, and small negative impacts on economic and sociocultural dimensions. Modelling showed that different SICS had different impacts across Europe—indicating the importance of understanding local dynamics in Europe-wide assessments. Work on adoption of SICS confirmed the role economic considerations play in the uptake of SICS, but also highlighted social factors such as trust. The project’s results underlined the need for policies that support and enable a transition to more sustainable agricultural practices in a coherent way.

Adopting soil and crop management practices that conserve or enhance soil structure is critical for supporting the sustainable adaptation of agriculture to climate change, as it should help maintain agricultural production in the face of increasing drought or water excess without impairing environmental quality. In this paper, we evaluate the evidence for this assertion by synthesizing the results of 34 published meta-analyses of the effects of such practices on soil physical and hydraulic properties relevant for climate change adaptation in European agriculture. We also review an additional 127 meta-analyses that investigated synergies and trade-offs or help to explain the effects of soil and crop management in terms of the underlying processes and mechanisms. Finally, we identify how responses to alternative soil-crop management systems vary under contrasting agro-environmental conditions across Europe. This information may help practitioners and policymakers to draw context-specific conclusions concerning the efficacy of management practices as climate adaptation tools. Our synthesis demonstrates that organic soil amendments and the adoption of practices that maintain “continuous living cover” result in significant benefits for the water regulation function of soils, mostly arising from the additional carbon inputs to soil and the stimulation of biological processes. These effects are clearly related to improved soil aggregation and enhanced bio-porosity, both of which reduce surface runoff and increase infiltration. One potentially negative consequence of these systems is a reduction in soil water storage and groundwater recharge, which may be problematic in dry climates. Some important synergies are reductions in nitrate leaching to groundwater and greenhouse gas emissions for non-leguminous cover crop systems. The benefits of reducing tillage intensity appear much less clear-cut. Increases in soil bulk density due to traffic compaction are commonly reported. However, biological activity is enhanced under reduced tillage intensity, which should improve soil structure, infiltration capacity, and reduce surface runoff and the losses of agro-chemicals to surface water. However, the evidence for these beneficial effects is inconclusive, while significant trade-offs include yield penalties and increases in greenhouse gas emissions and the risks of leaching of pesticides and nitrate.

Adopting soil and crop management practices that conserve or enhance soil structure is critical for supporting the sustainable adaptation of agriculture to climate change, as it should help maintain agricultural production in the face of increasing drought or water excess without impairing environmental quality. In this paper, we evaluate the evidence for this assertion by synthesizing the results of 34 published meta-analyses of the effects of such practices on soil physical and hydraulic properties relevant for climate change adaptation in European agriculture. We also review an additional 127 meta-analyses that investigated synergies and trade-offs or help to explain the effects of soil and crop management in terms of the underlying processes and mechanisms. Finally, we identify how responses to alternative soil-crop management systems vary under contrasting agro-environmental conditions across Europe. This information may help practitioners and policymakers to draw context-specific conclusions concerning the efficacy of management practices as climate adaptation tools. Our synthesis demonstrates that organic soil amendments and the adoption of practices that maintain “continuous living cover” result in significant benefits for the water regulation function of soils, mostly arising from the additional carbon inputs to soil and the stimulation of biological processes. These effects are clearly related to improved soil aggregation and enhanced bio-porosity, both of which reduce surface runoff and increase infiltration. One potentially negative consequence of these systems is a reduction in soil water storage and groundwater recharge, which may be problematic in dry climates. Some important synergies are reductions in nitrate leaching to groundwater and greenhouse gas emissions for non-leguminous cover crop systems. The benefits of reducing tillage intensity appear much less clear-cut. Increases in soil bulk density due to traffic compaction are commonly reported. However, biological activity is enhanced under reduced tillage intensity, which should improve soil structure, infiltration capacity, and reduce surface runoff and the losses of agro-chemicals to surface water. However, the evidence for these beneficial effects is inconclusive, while significant trade-offs include yield penalties and increases in greenhouse gas emissions and the risks of leaching of pesticides and nitrate.

Adopting soil and crop management practices that conserve or enhance soil structure is critical for supporting the sustainable adaptation of agriculture to climate change, as it should help maintain agricultural production in the face of increasing drought or water excess without impairing environmental quality. In this paper, we evaluate the evidence for this assertion by synthesizing the results of 34 published meta-analyses of the effects of such practices on soil physical and hydraulic properties relevant for climate change adaptation in European agriculture. We also review an additional 127 meta-analyses that investigated synergies and trade-offs or help to explain the effects of soil and crop management in terms of the underlying processes and mechanisms. Finally, we identify how responses to alternative soil-crop management systems vary under contrasting agro-environmental conditions across Europe. This information may help practitioners and policymakers to draw context-specific conclusions concerning the efficacy of management practices as climate adaptation tools. Our synthesis demonstrates that organic soil amendments and the adoption of practices that maintain “continuous living cover” result in significant benefits for the water regulation function of soils, mostly arising from the additional carbon inputs to soil and the stimulation of biological processes. These effects are clearly related to improved soil aggregation and enhanced bio-porosity, both of which reduce surface runoff and increase infiltration. One potentially negative consequence of these systems is a reduction in soil water storage and groundwater recharge, which may be problematic in dry climates. Some important synergies are reductions in nitrate leaching to groundwater and greenhouse gas emissions for non-leguminous cover crop systems. The benefits of reducing tillage intensity appear much less clear-cut. Increases in soil bulk density due to traffic compaction are commonly reported. However, biological activity is enhanced under reduced tillage intensity, which should improve soil structure, infiltration capacity, and reduce surface runoff and the losses of agro-chemicals to surface water. However, the evidence for these beneficial effects is inconclusive, while significant trade-offs include yield penalties and increases in greenhouse gas emissions and the risks of leaching of pesticides and nitrate.

Adopting soil and crop management practices that conserve or enhance soil structure is critical for supporting the sustainable adaptation of agriculture to climate change, as it should help maintain agricultural production in the face of increasing drought or water excess without impairing environmental quality. In this paper, we evaluate the evidence for this assertion by synthesizing the results of 34 published meta-analyses of the effects of such practices on soil physical and hydraulic properties relevant for climate change adaptation in European agriculture. We also review an additional 127 meta-analyses that investigated synergies and trade-offs or help to explain the effects of soil and crop management in terms of the underlying processes and mechanisms. Finally, we identify how responses to alternative soil-crop management systems vary under contrasting agro-environmental conditions across Europe. This information may help practitioners and policymakers to draw context-specific conclusions concerning the efficacy of management practices as climate adaptation tools. Our synthesis demonstrates that organic soil amendments and the adoption of practices that maintain “continuous living cover” result in significant benefits for the water regulation function of soils, mostly arising from the additional carbon inputs to soil and the stimulation of biological processes. These effects are clearly related to improved soil aggregation and enhanced bio-porosity, both of which reduce surface runoff and increase infiltration. One potentially negative consequence of these systems is a reduction in soil water storage and groundwater recharge, which may be problematic in dry climates. Some important synergies are reductions in nitrate leaching to groundwater and greenhouse gas emissions for non-leguminous cover crop systems. The benefits of reducing tillage intensity appear much less clear-cut. Increases in soil bulk density due to traffic compaction are commonly reported. However, biological activity is enhanced under reduced tillage intensity, which should improve soil structure, infiltration capacity, and reduce surface runoff and the losses of agro-chemicals to surface water. However, the evidence for these beneficial effects is inconclusive, while significant trade-offs include yield penalties and increases in greenhouse gas emissions and the risks of leaching of pesticides and nitrate.

This paper presents a Europe-wide agricultural land use systems map produced by the integration and harmonization of grasslands and croplands layers from the Copernicus Land Monitoring Service High Resolution Layers (HRL) in Europe. By utilizing high-resolution spatial data from the Copernicus Sentinel missions, the study applies a predefined set of logical rules to identify crop-grass sequences by combining the HRL products. The resulting maps provide detailed classifications of permanent grasslands, permanent crops, arable systems, and land use changes across 38 countries in the European Environment Agency network (EEA38) from 2017 to 2021. European agriculture is dominated by permanent grasslands (45.5%), followed by arable systems including temporary grassland (33.5%), permanent crops (3.8%), and land use change (1.6%). While the study is based on HRL products with substantial accuracy, some discrepancies (<3% of classified areas), such as disagreements in land use classifications across years and data gaps, present opportunities for further refinement and improvement. The derived harmonized agricultural land use systems data is a step forward for assessments in land and soil management, nature restoration, and climate mitigation targets.

Soil management strategies involving the application of organic matter (OM) inputs (crop residues, green and livestock manure, slurry, digestate, compost and biochar) can increase soil carbon storage but simultaneously lead to an increase in non‐CO 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions such as N 2 O. Although multiple meta‐analyses have been conducted on the topic of OM input impacts on GHG, none has focused specifically on European arable soils. This study plugs this gap and can assist policymakers in steering European agriculture in a more sustainable direction. The objective of this meta‐analysis was to quantify how OM inputs of different nature and quality, but also the application strategy, can mitigate soil N 2 O emissions in different pedoclimatic conditions in Europe. We quantitatively synthesised the results of over 50 field experiments conducted in 15 European countries. Diverse arable crops, mainly cereals, were cultivated in monoculture or in crop rotations on mineral soils. Cumulative N 2 O emissions were monitored during periods of 30–1070 days in treatments, which received OM inputs, alone or in combination with mineral N fertiliser; and in controls fertilised with mineral N. The overall effect of OM inputs had a slight tendency to reduce N 2 O emissions by 10% ( n = 53). With the increasing carbon‐to‐nitrogen ratio of the OM inputs, this mitigation effect became more pronounced. In particular, compost and biochar significantly reduced N 2 O emissions by 25% ( n = 6) and 33% ( n = 8) respectively. However, their effect strongly depended on pedoclimatic characteristics. Regarding the other types of OM inputs studied, a slight N 2 O emission reduction can be achieved by their application alone, without mineral N fertiliser (by 16%, n = 17). In contrast, their co‐application with mineral N fertiliser elevated emissions to some extent compared to the control (by 14%, n = 22). We conclude that amongst the seven OM inputs studied, the application of compost and biochar are the most promising soil management practices, clearly demonstrating N 2 O emission reduction compared to mineral N fertiliser. In contrast, other OM inputs had a small tendency to mitigate N 2 O emissions only when applied without mineral N fertiliser.

&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;&amp;amp;#160;It has been widely reported that although IPCC methodologies appropriate for national-level accounting purposes, they lack the farm level resolution and holistic approach required for whole-farm systems analysis. The importance of evaluating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from crop production, animal farming and agroforestry within the whole farm setting is being realized as more important than evaluating these emissions in isolation. Thus, whole-farm systems modelling is widely used for farm-level analysis. Here we compare three whole-farm models e.g. FarmSim, Holos and IFSM to simulate the effect of management practices on GHG emissions at the whole farm level and evaluate the carbon sequestration and methane oxidation potential of afforestation as a compensation mechanism for the mitigation of farm-level GHG emissions. Ideally, we would also want information on model performance in predicting GHG emissions in future climatic scenarios. Initial results indicate that these models can accurately predict CO&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; emissions but the accuracy of these models for predicting methane (CH&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;4&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;) and nitrous oxide (N&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;O) emissions is quite low. We found that the most prominent drivers for GHG emissions in a whole farm setting were the enteric CH&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;4&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; from animal farming and N&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;O emissions from soil management in cropland. &amp;amp;#160;Thus, the low prediction accuracy for CH&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;4&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and N&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;O emissions in whole-farm models may introduce substantial errors into GHG inventories and lead to incorrect mitigation recommendations, which necessitates further fine-tuning of these models. Efforts are ongoing to integrate carbon sequestration and soil methane oxidation potential of farm-level afforestation in the whole farm models. There are indications that afforestation can be an effective mitigation strategy. The variation we found in farm system parameters, and the inherent uncertainties associated with emissions of CH&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;4&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt; and N&amp;lt;sub&amp;gt;2&amp;lt;/sub&amp;gt;O can have substantial implications for reported agricultural emissions requiring uncertainty or sensitivity analysis in any modelling approach. Although there is considerable variation among the quality of farm data, boundary assumptions, the emission factors used we suggest that whole-farm systems models are an appropriate tool to develop and measure GHG mitigation strategies for the European farmed landscape.&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;

Local adaptation strategies to increase or maintain soil organic carbon content under arable farming in Europe: Inspirational ideas for setting operational groups within the European innovation partnership

Salinization is one of the main challenges of contemporary agriculture affecting food security and sustainability. Climate change with more persistent droughts, floods and sea-level rise is expected to increase this challenge, making it one of the most common land degradation processes. At the same time, an increasingly complex institutional landscape has emerged across multiple issue areas of global environmental governance related to salinization. This can be seen in a myriad of public, private, and hybrid actors coming together by creating initiatives to address the issue of growing salinization through saline agriculture. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to characterize the development of a governance landscape of cooperative initiatives for saline agriculture in Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East, and to discuss how to harness their potential and orchestrate their efforts. The preliminary findings suggest that the fragmented landscape of initiatives is predominated by public actors and research institutions. This potentially hampers benefit sharing and upscaling efforts. Operational activities are most frequently the governance function, followed by information and networking efforts thereafter. Thematically, initiatives focus on the development of new crop varieties and water and soil management practices. Linkages to the Sustainable Development Goals suggest saline agriculture is connected to policy debates on sustainable food systems, climate change, water security, and land degradation.

Key messages:Climate change has an impact on European agriculture in a number of ways. Climate change has already negatively affected the agriculture sector in Europe, and this will continue in the future. Future climate change might also have some positive effects on the sector due to longer growing seasons and more suitable crop conditions. However, the number of climate extreme events negatively affecting agriculture in Europe is projected to increase. A cascade of impacts from climate change outside Europe may affect the price, quantity and quality of products, and consequently trade patterns, which in turn may affect agricultural income in Europe. Although fodder and food security in the EU will probably not be an issue, the increase in food demand could exert pressure on food prices in the coming decades.The EU strategy on adaptation to climate change and the common agricultural policy have enabled adaptation actions in the agriculture sector. The new proposed common agricultural policy for 2021-2027 has adaptation as a clear objective, which could lead to EU Member States having to increase their financing of adaptation measures in the sector.The EU Member States have defined the agriculture sector as a priority in their national adaptation strategies or national adaptation plans. Measures at national or regional levels include awareness raising, practical measures to decrease the impacts and risks of extreme weather events, or risk-sharing strategies, and developing and implementing infrastructure for irrigation and flood protection.There are opportunities for implementing a wide variety of existing measures at farm level that aim to improve the management of soils and water, which can provide benefits for adaptation, mitigation, the environment and the economy. However, adaptation at the farm level, in many cases, does not take place because of a lack of, among other things, resources for investment, policy initiatives to adapt, institutional capacity and access to adaptation knowledge.

Organic soil management and related climate and agriculture policy planning is emerging issue globally, at European Union (EU) level and nationally, especially for organic soil rich countries like Latvia and in a light of movement towards climate neutrality by 2050. Relatively small proportion of these soils by area significantly impact greenhouse gas (GHG) emission balance of many European countries including Latvia where organic soil management related GHG emissions make up to one third of GHG emissions associated with agriculture land management. Organic soil can act either as an effective carbon storage or as considerable source of greenhouse gas emissions. The effect achieved largely depends on the management practices applied and considering importance of agriculture support system - also on agriculture and climate policy planning. In this study we analyze top-down policy and legislative framework of organic soil management in Latvia to detect development pattern of the political importance of organic soil and to map normative and policy framework around this issue. We found that international policies, i.e. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and related European level agriculture and Climate policies i.e. European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Climate policy are drivers of organic soil management at national level. Study results show genesis of the organic soil issue, map political time frame and suggest further development needs.

Fertile soils are essential for human health and nutrition and formed the foundation of human economies for millennia. Soils deserve close attention from environmental and economic historians and sustainability scientists. Most soil history literature addresses failure: misuse of soil, uncontrolled erosion, and the resulting collapse of past civilizations. More important, however, and of urgent interest for our present and future prosperity, are the mundane ways that historical farm communities sustained soil health, even while cultivating the same land for centuries. This article explains five strategies by which European and North American farmers accessed, recycled, replenished, and sustained soil fertility over 250 years. By evaluating inputs, extractions, transfers, and annual balances of potassium, phosphorus, and, especially, nitrogen, it models historical soil management in a variety of agroecosystems in various geographical settings and through time. This biophysical environmental history, based on socioecological metabolism methods borrowed from sustainability science, reveals ongoing adaptation to shifting social and environmental contexts. As industrialization, global trade, and population accelerated, farmers adjusted their soil fertility strategies to keep up with new pressures and opportunities. Each solution to existing soil fertility constraints created new obstacles and bottlenecks. Through the past quarter millennium, farm sustainability meant constant readjustment to new circumstances. As farmers innovated crop choices and rotations, corralled livestock, adopted new technologies, deployed novel energy sources, and expanded into new lands, they increased food productivity to feed growing world population and supply expanding markets, while maintaining the supply of soil nutrients necessary to fertilize next year’s crop.