@article{VasićPaulStraussetal.2020, author = {Vasić, Filip and Paul, Carsten and Strauss, Veronika and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Ecosystem Services of Kettle Holes in Agricultural Landscapes}, series = {Agronomy}, volume = {10}, journal = {Agronomy}, number = {9}, publisher = {MDPI}, issn = {2073-4395}, doi = {10.3390/agronomy10091326}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-3407}, pages = {22}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Kettle holes are small water bodies of glacial origin which mostly occur in agricultural landscapes. They provide numerous ecosystem services (ES), but their supply may be negatively affected by agricultural management. We conducted a literature review to identify which ES are supplied by kettle holes and to analyze feedbacks with agricultural management. Taking Germany as a test case, we also analyzed how kettle holes are addressed in policy documents and for which ES they are regulated. This was done to identify the societal value officially associated with kettle holes. The literature review found eight ES attributed to kettle holes, of which hydrological cycle and flood control, chemical condition of freshwaters, nursery populations and habitats and biotic remediation of wastes were addressed most often. In contrast, only the provision of habitat service was addressed in German policy documents related to kettle holes. We identified types of agricultural management that negatively affected the supply of ES by kettle holes, in particular artificial drainage, high levels of pesticide and fertilizer application, and management where tillage and erosion result in elevated sediment inputs. Additionally, climate change may lead to an increased drying up of kettle holes. Based on our finding, we conclude that the intensity of agricultural management around kettle holes threatens the supply of all ES while only the service of providing habitats for biodiversity is addressed in German policy regulations. Further regulation is required to induce agricultural management change towards a conservation of all ES supplied by kettle holes.}, language = {en} } @article{HamidovHelming2020, author = {Hamidov, Ahmad and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Sustainability Considerations in Water-Energy-Food Nexus Research in Irrigated Agriculture}, series = {Sustainability}, volume = {12}, journal = {Sustainability}, number = {15}, publisher = {MDPI}, issn = {2071-1050}, doi = {10.3390/su12156274}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-3381}, pages = {20}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Irrigated agriculture is essential to satisfying the globally increasing demand for food and bio-based products. Yet, in water scarce regions, water-use for irrigation aggravates the competition for the use of water for other purposes, such as energy production, drinking water and sanitation. Solutions for sustainable food production through irrigated agriculture require a systemic approach to assess benefits and trade-offs across sectors. Here, the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus has become an important concept in natural resource management. It has been conceptualized to analyze linkages and trade-offs between the three sectors, across temporal and spatial scales. However, the concept has so far mainly been conceptual, with little empirical evidence or proof of concept in real world cases. The objective of this paper was to take stock of the rapidly advancing literature on the WEF nexus in irrigated agriculture, and to analyze how the concept was actually implemented in research studies, and how the nexus between water, food and energy was actually dealt with. The study period ranges from 2011 to 2019, and includes 194 articles. Results showed that the WEF nexus is indeed very relevant in irrigated agriculture, and the respective literature makes up one third of all WEF nexus papers. Modeling and empirical research have caught up with conceptual synthesis studies during the last four years, thereby indicating that the WEF nexus concept is indeed increasingly operationalized. However, most studies addressed the WEF nexus from a perspective of either socioeconomic, technological or environmental categories, and they place one of the dimensions of water, food or energy into the foreground. To address sustainable development, there is a need to fully integrate across research disciplines and thematic dimensions. Such studies are only starting to emerge. These findings are an important evidence-base for future WEF nexus research on irrigated agriculture, in support of sustainable solutions for water scarce regions, especially in settings undergoing transformations.}, language = {en} } @article{MacPhersonPaulHelming2020, author = {MacPherson, Joseph and Paul, Carsten and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Linking Ecosystem Services and the SDGs to Farm-Level Assessment Tools and Models}, series = {Sustainability}, volume = {12}, journal = {Sustainability}, number = {16}, publisher = {MDPI}, issn = {2071-1050}, doi = {10.3390/su12166617}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-3395}, pages = {19}, year = {2020}, abstract = {A number of tools and models have been developed to assess farm-level sustainability. However, it is unclear how well they potentially incorporate ecosystem services (ES), or how they may contribute to attaining the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Understanding how farm-level assessment tools and models converge on these new paradigms of sustainability is important for drawing comparison on sustainability performances of farming systems, conducting meta-analyses and upscaling local responses to global driving forces. In this study, a coverage analysis was performed for several farm-level sustainability assessment (SA) tools (SAFA, RISE, KSNL, DLG) and models (MODAM, MONICA, APSIM), in regard to their potential for incorporating ES and contribution to attaining the SDGs. Lists of agricultural-relevant CICES classes and SDG targets were compiled and matched against the indicators of the tools and models. The results showed that SAFA possessed the most comprehensive coverage of ES and SDGs, followed by RISE and KSNL. In comparison to models, SA tools were observed to have a higher degree of potential for covering ES and SDGs, which was attributed to larger and broader indicators sets. However, this study also suggested that, overall, current tools and models do not sufficiently articulate the concept of ecosystem services.}, language = {en} } @article{PaulBartkowskiDoenmezetal.2023, author = {Paul, Carsten and Bartkowski, Bartosz and D{\"o}nmez, Cenk and Don, Axel and Mayer, Stefanie and Steffens, Markus and Weigl, Sebastian and Wiesmeier, Martin and Wolf, Andr{\´e} and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Carbon farming: Are soil carbon certificates a suitable tool for climate change mitigation?}, series = {Journal of Environmental Management}, journal = {Journal of Environmental Management}, number = {330}, publisher = {Elsevier}, issn = {0301-4797}, doi = {10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117142}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-8140}, pages = {11}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Increasing soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks in agricultural soils removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and contributes towards achieving carbon neutrality. For farmers, higher SOC levels have multiple benefits, including increased soil fertility and resilience against drought-related yield losses. However, increasing SOC levels requires agricultural management changes that are associated with costs. Private soil carbon certificates could compensate for these costs. In these schemes, farmers register their fields with commercial certificate providers who certify SOC increases. Certificates are then sold as voluntary emission offsets on the carbon market. In this paper, we assess the suitability of these certificates as an instrument for climate change mitigation. From a soils' perspective, we address processes of SOC enrichment, their potentials and limits, and options for cost-effective measurement and monitoring. From a farmers' perspective, we assess management options likely to increase SOC, and discuss their synergies and trade-offs with economic, environmental and social targets. From a governance perspective, we address requirements to guarantee additionality and permanence while preventing leakage effects. Furthermore, we address questions of legitimacy and accountability. While increasing SOC is a cornerstone for more sustainable cropping systems, private carbon certificates fall short of expectations for climate change mitigation as permanence of SOC sequestration cannot be guaranteed. Governance challenges include lack of long-term monitoring, problems to ensure additionality, problems to safeguard against leakage effects, and lack of long-term accountability if stored SOC is re-emitted. We conclude that soil-based private carbon certificates are unlikely to deliver the emission offset attributed to them and that their benefit for climate change mitigation is uncertain. Additional research is needed to develop standards for SOC change metrics and monitoring, and to better understand the impact of short term, non-permanent carbon removals on peaks in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations and on the probability of exceeding climatic tipping points.}, language = {en} } @article{DonmezSchmidtCileketal.2023, author = {Donmez, Cenk and Schmidt, Marcus and Cilek, Ahmet and Grosse, Meike and Paul, Carsten and Hierold, Wilfried and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Climate change impacts on long-term field experiments in Germany}, series = {Agricultural Systems}, journal = {Agricultural Systems}, number = {205}, publisher = {Elsevier}, doi = {10.1016/j.agsy.2022.103578}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-8150}, pages = {17}, year = {2023}, abstract = {CONTEXT Long-Term Field Experiments (LTEs) were implemented to study the long-term effects of different management practices, including tillage, fertilization and crop rotation under otherwise constant conditions. Climate change is expected to change these conditions, challenging interpretation of LTE data with regard to the distinction between climate change and management effects. OBJECTIVE The objective of the study was to quantify the expected, spatially differentiated changes of agroclimatic conditions for the German LTE sites as a precondition for modelling and LTE data interpretation. METHODS We developed a framework combining spatially distributed climate data and LTE metadata to identify the possible climatic changes at 247 LTE sites with experiments running for 20 years or more. The LTEs were classified using the following categories: fertilization, tillage, crop rotation, field crops or grassland, conventional or organic. We utilized climate variables (temperature, precipitation) and agroclimatic indicators (aridity, growing degree days, etc.) to compare a baseline (1971-2000) with future periods (2021-2100) under the IPCC's Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSP). A comprehensive LTE risk assessment was conducted, based on changes in climate variables and agroclimatic indicators between baseline and future scenarios. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Under the most extreme scenario (SSP585), 150 LTEs are expected to shift from humid and dry sub-humid to semi-arid conditions. Frost days in LTE areas are expected to decline by 81\%, and the growing season to lengthen by up to 92\%. The spatial differentiation of expected climate change also facilitates the identification of suitable sites for future agricultural practices and may inform the design of new LTEs. SIGNIFICANCE Our results may guide the interpretation of LTE data regarding the effect of climate change, facilitating future soil crop modelling studies with LTE data and providing information for planning new LTE sites to support future agricultural research and/or adapting management on existing LTE sites. The framework we developed can easily be transferred to LTE sites in agricultural regions worldwide to support LTE research on climate change impacts and adaptation.}, language = {en} } @article{VoglhuberSlavinskyLemkeMacPhersonetal.2023, author = {Voglhuber-Slavinsky, Ariane and Lemke, Nahleen and MacPherson, Joseph and D{\"o}nitz, Ewa and Olbrisch, Mathias and Sch{\"o}bel, Philipp and Moller, Bj{\"o}rn and Bahrs, Enno and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Valorization for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in the Agri-Food Value Chain}, series = {Environmental Management}, volume = {72}, journal = {Environmental Management}, number = {6}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, doi = {10.1007/s00267-023-01860-7}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-8104}, pages = {1163 -- 1188}, year = {2023}, abstract = {This article defines the term valorization of biodiversity and ecosystem services (BES) measures, as distinguished from their valuation, and underpins it with an assessment of private valorization examples along the agri-food value chain. Valorization incentivizes measures for promoting BES, while valuation refers to its quantification. Valuation can be a step of valorization but is not indispensable. In scientific literature, the terms valorization and valuation are often used interchangeably. In addition, there is a lack of research on private options versus conventional, public policy options. Therefore, we searched for private valorization options primarily in public sources (gray literature and websites). This led to the identification of four clusters (markets for voluntary services, labeling, and certification, environmental management/CSR, and tradable permits and quotas). Based on these clusters the options were assessed from a legal and systems dynamics perspective. In addition, the viability of selected valorization options in different future scenarios was examined. The analysis revealed a wide range of private valorization options, which in contrast to public policy options that focus almost entirely on the production stage, are spread across the agri-food value chain. Their suitability differs under different future scenarios, legal and systems conditions.}, language = {en} } @article{MouratiadouLemkeChenetal.2023, author = {Mouratiadou, Ioanna and Lemke, Nahleen and Chen, Cheng and Wartenberg, Ariani and Bloch, Ralf and Donat, Marco and Gaiser, Thomas and Hanike Basavegowda, Deepak and Helming, Katharina and Ali Hosseini Yekani, Seyed and Krull, Marcos and Lingemann, Kai and Macpherson, Joseph and Melzer, Marvin and Nendel, Claas and Piorr, Annette and Shaaban, Mostafa and Zander, Peter and Weltzien, Cornelia and Bellingrath-Kimura, Sonoko Dorothea}, title = {The Digital Agricultural Knowledge and Information System (DAKIS): Employing digitalisation to encourage diversified and multifunctional agricultural systems}, series = {Environmental Science and Ecotechnology}, volume = {16}, journal = {Environmental Science and Ecotechnology}, publisher = {Elsevier}, issn = {2666-4984}, doi = {10.1016/j.ese.2023.100274}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-8012}, pages = {13}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Multifunctional and diversified agriculture can address diverging pressures and demands by simultaneously enhancing productivity, biodiversity, and the provision of ecosystem services. The use of digital technologies can support this by designing and managing resource-efficient and context-specific agricultural systems. We present the Digital Agricultural Knowledge and Information System (DAKIS) to demonstrate an approach that employs digital technologies to enable decision-making towards diversified and sustainable agriculture. To develop the DAKIS, we specified, together with stakeholders, requirements for a knowledge-based decision-support tool and reviewed the literature to identify limitations in the current generation of tools. The results of the review point towards recurring challenges regarding the consideration of ecosystem services and biodiversity, the capacity to foster communication and cooperation between farmers and other actors, and the ability to link multiple spatiotemporal scales and sustainability levels. To overcome these challenges, the DAKIS provides a digital platform to support farmers' decision-making on land use and management via an integrative spatiotemporally explicit approach that analyses a wide range of data from various sources. The approach integrates remote and in situ sensors, artificial intelligence, modelling, stakeholder-stated demand for biodiversity and ecosystem services, and participatory sustainability impact assessment to address the diverse drivers affecting agricultural land use and management design, including natural and agronomic factors, economic and policy considerations, and socio-cultural preferences and settings. Ultimately, the DAKIS embeds the consideration of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and sustainability into farmers' decision-making and enables learning and progress towards site-adapted small-scale multifunctional and diversified agriculture while simultaneously supporting farmers' objectives and societal demands.}, language = {en} } @article{RecklingWatsonWhitbreadetal.2023, author = {Reckling, Moritz and Watson, Christine A. and Whitbread, Anthony and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Diversification for sustainable and resilient agricultural landscape systems}, series = {Agronomy for Sustainable Development}, volume = {43}, journal = {Agronomy for Sustainable Development}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, issn = {1773-0155}, doi = {10.1007/s13593-023-00898-5}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-8135}, pages = {5}, year = {2023}, abstract = {This virtual issue comprises papers that address diversification for providing sustainable solutions at different scales from cropping and grassland to food systems. The authors investigated processes in case studies at the landscape scale where synergies and trade-offs between social and environmental objectives become the most tangible. Contributions from all continents highlighted regional specificities related to diversification and include research from natural and social sciences, with inter- and transdisciplinary approaches including synthesis of knowledge (reviews), empirical studies with experiments as well as assessments with interviews in case studies: Model-based design of crop diversification, the role of digitalization for achieving sustainability in the European context, ecological engineering for rice pest suppression in China, the role of cereal species mixtures in Ethiopian smallholder farmers, diversified planting in arid irrigation areas in northwestern China, integration of legumes in European and Canadian cropping systems, screening of native forage legumes for northern Swedish grassland systems, cropping system diversification of smallholder farmers in south-central Bangladesh, identification of how farmers imagine diversified landscapes in southern Idaho in the US, farm diversification affecting impacts from COVID-19 across Europe, the role of diversified farming in Mato Grosso Brazil, diversification and soil management measures in Germany, value chain formation for the scaling of crop diversification, and the design process with farmers and scientists for the transition toward legume-supported farming in Europe. A key finding from these examples is that agricultural intensification has led to the simplification of cropping systems and landscapes in terms of species diversity and ecosystem function. To instead move towards sustainable transformation, all system levels (i.e. from the plot, farm, landscape, governance and overall food systems) need to interact and reinforce each other for diversification to deliver the desired outcomes.}, language = {en} } @article{StraussPaulDoenmezetal.2023, author = {Strauss, Veronika and Paul, Carsten and D{\"o}nmez, Cenk and L{\"o}bmann, Michael and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Sustainable soil management measures: a synthesis of stakeholder recommendations}, series = {Agronomy for Sustainable Development}, volume = {43}, journal = {Agronomy for Sustainable Development}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, doi = {10.1007/s13593-022-00864-7}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-8129}, pages = {26}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Soil degradation threatens agricultural production and soil multifunctionality. Efforts for private and public governance are increasingly emerging to leverage sustainable soil management. They require consensus across science, policy, and practice about what sustainable soil management entails. Such agreement does not yet exist to a sufficient extent in agronomic terms; what is lacking is a concise list of soil management measures that enjoy broad support among all stakeholders, and evidence on the question what hampers their implementation by farmers. We therefore screened stakeholder documents from public governance institutions, nongovernmental organizations, the agricultural industry, and conventional and organic farmer associations for recommendations related to agricultural soil management in Germany. Out of 46 recommended measures in total, we compiled a shortlist of the seven most consensual ones: (1) structural landscape elements, (2) organic fertilization, (3) diversified crop rotation, (4) permanent soil cover, (5) conservation tillage, (6) reduced soil loads, and (7) optimized timing of wheeling. Together, these measures support all agricultural soil functions, and address all major soil threats except soil contamination. Implementation barriers were identified with the aid of an online survey among farmers (n = 78). Results showed that a vast majority of farmers (> 80\%) approved of all measures. Barriers were mostly considered to be economic and in some cases technological, while missing knowledge or other factors were less relevant. Barriers were stronger for those measures that cannot be implemented in isolation, but require a systemic diversification of the production system. This is especially the case for measures that are simultaneously beneficial to many soil functions (measures 2, 3, and 4). Results confirm the need for a diversification of the agricultural system in order to meet challenges of food security and climate change. The shortlist presents the first integrative compilation of sustainable soil management measures supporting the design of effective public or private governance.}, language = {en} } @article{PaulKuhnSteinhoffKnoppetal.2020, author = {Paul, Carsten and Kuhn, Kristin and Steinhoff-Knopp, Bastian and Weißhuhn, Peter and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Towards a standardization of soil-related ecosystem service assessments}, series = {European Journal of Soil Science}, volume = {72}, journal = {European Journal of Soil Science}, number = {4}, publisher = {Wiley}, issn = {1365-2389}, doi = {10.1111/ejss.13022}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-5801}, pages = {1543 -- 1558}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The concept of ecosystem services (ES) creates understanding of the value of ecosystems for human well-being. With regard to soils, it provides a framework for assessments of soil contributions and soil management impacts. However, a lack of standardization impedes comparisons between assessment studies and the building of synthesis information. The Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) is an important step forward, although its application to soils is not without difficulty. CICES version 5.1 defines 83 ES classes, of which only some are relevant for soils. We compiled two subsets of CICES classes: one set of soil-related ES comprising 29 services defined as directly and quantifiably controlled by soils and their properties, processes and functions, and another set of 40 ES defined as being affected by agricultural soil management. Additionally, we conducted a systematic literature review, searching for published lists of soil-related ES that claim completeness. We identified 11 relevant lists. Of all CICES classes, 12 were included in more than 75\% of the lists, whereas another 36 classes were included in 25-75\% of them. Regarding the suitability of the CICES classification for addressing ES in the context of soils and their agricultural management, we identified constraints, such as overlaps, gaps, and highly specific or very broad class definitions. Close cooperation between the soil research and ES communities could ensure better consideration of soils in future CICES updates. A shortlist of 25 service classes affected by agricultural soil management facilitates a standardized approach and may function as checklists in impact assessments.}, language = {en} } @article{MacPhersonVoglhuberSlavinskyOlbrischetal.2022, author = {MacPherson, Joseph and Voglhuber-Slavinsky, Ariane and Olbrisch, Mathias and Sch{\"o}bel, Philipp and D{\"o}nitz, Ewa and Mouratiadou, Ioanna and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Future agricultural systems and the role of digitalization for achieving sustainability goals. A review}, series = {Agronomy for Sustainable Development}, journal = {Agronomy for Sustainable Development}, number = {42}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, issn = {1773-0155}, doi = {10.1007/s13593-022-00792-6}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-6886}, pages = {18}, year = {2022}, abstract = {By leveraging a wide range of novel, data-driven technologies for agricultural production and agri-food value chains, digital agriculture presents potential enhancements to sustainability across food systems. Accordingly, digital agriculture has received considerable attention in policy in recent years, with emphasis mostly placed on the potential of digital agriculture to improve efficiency, productivity and food security, and less attention given to how digitalization may impact other principles of sustainable development, such as biodiversity conservation, soil protection, and human health, for example. Here, we review high-level policy and law in the German and European context to highlight a number of important institutional, societal, and legal preconditions for leveraging digital agriculture to achieve diverse sustainability targets. Additionally, we combine foresight analysis with our review to reflect on how future frame conditions influencing agricultural digitalization and sustainability could conceivably arise. The major points are the following: (1) some polices consider the benefits of digital agriculture, although only to a limited extent and mostly in terms of resource use efficiency; (2) law as it applies to digital agriculture is emerging but is highly fragmented; and (3) the adoption of digital agriculture and if it is used to enhance sustainability will be dependent on future data ownership regimes.}, language = {en} } @article{BartkowskiBartkeHelmingetal.2020, author = {Bartkowski, Bartosz and Bartke, Stephan and Helming, Katharina and Paul, Carsten and Techen, Anja-Kristina and Hansj{\"u}rgens, Bernd}, title = {Potential of the economic valuation of soil-based ecosystem services to inform sustainable soil management and policy}, series = {PeerJ}, journal = {PeerJ}, doi = {10.7717/peerj.8749}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-6319}, pages = {31}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The concept of ecosystem services, especially in combination with economic valuation, can illuminate trade-offs involved in soil management, policy and governance, and thus support decision making. In this paper, we investigate and highlight the potential and limitations of the economic valuation of soil-based ecosystem services to inform sustainable soil management and policy. We formulate a definition of soil-based ecosystem services as basis for conducting a review of existing soil valuation studies with a focus on the inclusion of ecosystem services and the choice of valuation methods. We find that, so far, the economic valuation of soil-based ecosystem services has covered only a small number of such services and most studies have employed cost-based methods rather than state-of-the-art preference-based valuation methods, even though the latter would better acknowledge the public good character of soil related services. Therefore, the relevance of existing valuation studies for political processes is low. Broadening the spectrum of analyzed ecosystem services as well as using preference-based methods would likely increase the informational quality and policy relevance of valuation results. We point out options for improvement based on recent advances in economic valuation theory and practice. We conclude by investigating the specific roles economic valuation results can play in different phases of the policy-making process, and the specific requirements for its usefulness in this context.}, language = {en} } @article{CreamerHagensBaartmanetal.2021, author = {Creamer, Rachel E. and Hagens, Mathilde and Baartman, Jantiene and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Editorial for special issue on "understanding soil functions - from ped to planet"}, series = {European Journal of Soil Science}, volume = {72}, journal = {European Journal of Soil Science}, number = {4}, publisher = {Wiley}, issn = {1365-2389}, doi = {10.1111/ejss.13099}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-6870}, pages = {1493 -- 1496}, year = {2021}, language = {en} } @incollection{TechenHelmingBrueggemannetal.2020, author = {Techen, Anja-K. and Helming, Katharina and Br{\"u}ggemann, Nicolas and Veldkamp, Edzo and Reinhold-Hurek, Barbara and Lorenz, Marco and Bartke, Stephan and Heinrich, Uwe and Amelung, Wulf and Augustin, Katja and Boy, Jens and Corre, Marife and Duttman, Rainer and Gebbers, Robin and Gentsch, Norman and Grosch, Rita and Guggenberger, Georg and Kern, J{\"u}rgen and Kiese, Ralf and Kuhwald, Michael and Leinweber, Peter and Schloter, Michael and Wiesmeier, Martin and Winkelmann, Traud and Vogel, Hans-J{\"o}rg}, title = {Chapter Four - Soil research challenges in response to emerging agricultural soil management practices}, series = {Advances in Agronomy}, booktitle = {Advances in Agronomy}, number = {161}, editor = {Sparks, Donald L.}, publisher = {Elsevier}, issn = {0065-2113}, doi = {10.1016/bs.agron.2020.01.002}, publisher = {Hochschule f{\"u}r nachhaltige Entwicklung Eberswalde}, pages = {179 -- 240}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Agricultural management is a key force affecting soil processes and functions. Triggered by biophysical constraints as well as rapid structural and technological developments, new management practices are emerging with largely unknown impacts on soil processes and functions. This impedes assessments of the potential of such emerging practices for sustainable intensification, a paradigm coined to address the growing demand for food and nonfood products. In terms of soil management, sustainable intensification means that soil productivity is increased while other soil functions and services, such as carbon storage and habitat for organisms, are simultaneously maintained or even improved. In this paper we provide an overview of research challenges to better understand how emerging soil management practices affect soil processes and functions. We distinguish four categories of soil management practices: spatial arrangements of cropping systems, crops and rotations, mechanical pressures, and inputs into the soil. Key research needs identified for each include nutrient efficiency in agroforestry versus conventional cropping systems, soil-rhizosphere microbiome elucidation to understand the interacting roles of crops and rotations, the effects of soil compaction on soil-plant-atmosphere interactions, and the ecotoxicity of plastics, pharmaceuticals and other pollutants that are introduced into the soil. We establish an interdisciplinary, systemic approach to soil science and include cross-cutting research activities related to process modeling, data management, stakeholder interaction, sustainability assessment and governance. The identification of soil research challenges from the perspective of agricultural management facilitates cooperation between different scientific disciplines in the field of sustainable agricultural production.}, language = {en} } @article{PerkovićPaulVasićetal.2022, author = {Perković, Stanislava and Paul, Carsten and Vasić, Filip and Helming, Katharina}, title = {Human Health and Soil Health Risks from Heavy Metals, Micro(nano)plastics, and Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria in Agricultural Soils}, series = {Agronomy}, volume = {12}, journal = {Agronomy}, number = {12}, publisher = {MDPI}, issn = {2073-4395}, doi = {10.3390/agronomy12122945}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:eb1-opus-3739}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Humans are exposed to agricultural soils through inhalation, dermal contact, or the consumption of food. Human health may be at risk when soils are contaminated; while some soil contaminants such as heavy metals (HMs) have been extensively studied, others such as micro(nano)plastics (MNPs) or antibiotic-resistant bacteria (ARB) pose novel threats. This paper investigates the linkages between soil contamination and human health risk by reviewing the state of knowledge on HMs, MNPs, and ARB in agricultural soils. A keyword-based search in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar was conducted, complemented with a backward snowball search. We analysed main sources of contamination for agricultural soils, risks to human health differentiated by uptake pathway (ingestion, inhalation, dermal), and interactions of contaminants with microorganism, soil fauna, and plants. Results show that the emergence and spread of ARB and antibiotic resistant genes from agricultural soils and their contribution to antibiotic resistances of human pathogens is recognized as a significant threat. Likewise, a growing body of evidence indicates that MNPs are able to enter the food chain and to have potentially harmful effects on human health. For HM, knowledge of the effects on human health is well established. Multiple agricultural practices increase HM concentrations in soils, which may lead to adverse health effects from the ingestion of contaminated products or inhalation of contaminated soil particles. Severe knowledge gaps exist about the pathways of the contaminants, their behaviour in soil, and human uptake. Little is known about long-term exposure and impacts of MNPs, antibiotics and ARB on human health or about the possible combined effects of MNPs, ARB, and HMs. Missing monitoring systems inhibit a comprehensive assessment of human health risks. Our research demonstrates the need for human health risk assessment in the context of agricultural soils, in particular to be able to assess risks related to measures reinforcing the concept of the circular economy.}, language = {en} }