Refine
Document Type
- Article (14)
- Part of a Book (1)
Language
- English (15)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (15)
Keywords
- sustainability (2)
- Agri-environmental policy; Ecosystem services; Economic valuation; Literature review; Multifunctionality; Policy cycle; Soil management (1)
- Agricultural management (1)
- Agriculture (1)
- Agriculture in transition; Diversification in agriculture; Soil functions; Soil health; Sustainable soil management; Stakeholder recommendations (1)
- Biodiversity (1)
- Biodiversity; Ecosystem services; Valorization; Value chain; Foresight; Private valorization options (1)
- CDR (1)
- CICES (1)
- Carbon sequestration (1)
Institute
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.