Explore the vast range of titles available.

Soil health is a term used to describe the general state or quality of soil, and in an agroecosystem, soil health can be defined as the ability of the soil to respond to agricultural practices in a way that sustainably supports both agricultural production and the provision of other ecosystem services. Conventional agricultural practices cause deterioration in soil quality, increasing its compaction, water erosion, and salinization and decreasing soil organic matter, nutrient content, and soil biodiversity, which negatively influences the productivity and long-term sustainability of the soil. Currently, there are many evidences throughout the world that demonstrate the capability of conservation agriculture (CA) as a sustainable system to overcome these adverse effects on soil health, to avoid soil degradation and to ensure food security. CA has multiple beneficial effects on the physical, chemical, and biological properties of soil. In addition, CA can reduce the negative impacts of conventional agricultural practices on soil health while conserving the production and provision of soil ecosystem services. Today, agricultural development is facing unprecedented challenges, and CA plays a significant role in the sustainability of intensive agriculture. This review will discuss the impact of conservation agricultural practices on soil health and their role in agricultural sustainability.

Climate change poses serious risks to Indian agriculture as half of the agricultural land of the country is rainfed. Climate change affects crop yield, soil processes, water availability, and pest dynamics. Several adaptation strategies such as heat- and water stress-tolerant crop varieties, stress-tolerant new crops, improved agronomic management practices, improved water use efficiency, conservation agriculture practices and improved pest management, improved weather forecasts, and other climate services are in place to minimize the climatic risks. The agriculture sector contributes 14% of the greenhouse gas (GHG) from the country. Mitigation of GHG emission from agriculture can be achieved by changing land-use management practices and enhancing input-use efficiency. Experiments in India showed that methane emission from lowland rice fields can be reduced by 40–50% with alternate wetting and drying (AWD), growing shorter duration varieties, and using neem-coated urea according to soil health card (SHC) and leaf color chart (LCC). Dry direct-seeding of rice, which does not require continuous soil submergence, can reduce methane emission by 70–75%. Sequestration of carbon (C) in agricultural soil can be promoted with the application of organic manure, crop residues, and balanced nutrients. India has taken several proactive steps for addressing the issues of climate change in agriculture. Recently, it has also committed for reducing GHG emission intensity by 45% by 2030 and achieving net zero emission by 2070. The paper discusses the major impacts of climate change, potential adaptation, and mitigation options and the initiatives of Govt. of India in making Indian agriculture climate-smart.

The current and projected anthropogenic global warming and the attendant increase in the severity and extent of soil degradation may exacerbate the intensity and duration of drought occurrence in agroecosystems. Restoration of the soil organic matter (SOM) content of degraded/depleted soils can increase soil water retention (SWR) more at field capacity (FC) than that at the permanent wilting point (PWP), and thus increase the plant available water capacity (PAWC). The magnitude of increase in PAWC may depend on soil texture and the initial SOM content. Thus, restoration of the SOM content of degraded/depleted soils can make them as well as agroecosystems climate‐resilient. Management practices which enhance soil health by restoring SOM content include conservation agriculture, cover cropping, residue mulching, and complex farming systems involving integration of crops with trees and livestock. Such technologies must be fine‐tuned under site‐specific conditions. Additional research is needed to establish the cause‐effect relationship between increase in SOM content and PAWC and the ameliorative effect on drought‐resilience for diverse crops and cropping systems.

Intensive agriculture causes land degradation and other environmental problems, such as pollution, soil erosion, fertility loss, biodiversity decline, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which exacerbate climate change. Sustainable agricultural practices, such as reduced tillage, growing cover crops, and implementing crop residue retention measures, have been proposed as cost-effective solutions that can address land degradation, food security, and climate change mitigation and adaptation by enhancing soil organic carbon (SOC) sequestration in soils and its associated co-benefits. In this regard, extensive research has demonstrated that conservation agriculture (CA) improves soil physical, chemical, and biological properties that are crucial for maintaining soil health and increasing agroecosystem resilience to global change. However, despite the research that has been undertaken to implement the three principles of CA (minimum mechanical soil disturbance, permanent soil organic cover with crop residues and/or cover crops, and crop diversification) worldwide, there are still many technical and socio-economic barriers that restrict their adoption. In this review, we gather current knowledge on the potential agronomic, environmental, and socio-economic benefits and drawbacks of implementing CA principles and present the current agro-environmental policy frameworks. Research needs are identified, and more stringent policy measures are urgently encouraged to achieve climate change mitigation targets.

AbstractThe impact of different arable farming practices on soil erosion is only partly resolved, and the effect of conservation tillage practices in organic agriculture on sediment loss has rarely been tested in the field. This study investigated rainfall-induced interrill sediment loss in a long-term replicated arable farming system and tillage experiment (the FAST trial) with four different cropping systems: (1) organic farming with intensive tillage, (2) organic farming with reduced tillage, (3) conventional farming with intensive tillage, and (4) conventional farming with no tillage. Measurements were carried out under simulated heavy rainfall events with runoff plots in 2014 (fallow land after winter wheat) and 2017 (during maize growth). Organic farming decreased mean sediment delivery compared to conventional farming by 30% (0.54 t ha−1 h−1). This study demonstrated that reduced tillage in organic farming decreased sediment delivery (0.73 t ha−1 h−1) compared to intensively tilled organic plots (1.87 t ha−1 h−1) by 61%. Nevertheless, the combination of conventional farming and no tillage showed the lowest sediment delivery (0.24 t ha−1 h−1), whereas intensively tilled conventional plots revealed the highest delivery (3.46 t ha−1 h−1). Erosion rates were much higher in June during maize growth (2.92 t ha−1 h−1) compared to those of fallow land after winter wheat (0.23 t ha−1 h−1). Soil surface cover and soil organic matter were the best predictors for reduced sediment delivery, and living plant cover from weeds in reduced organic treatments appeared to protect soil surfaces better than plant residues in conventional, no-tillage plots. Soil erosion rates were significantly lower when soil cover was above 30%. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that both organic farming and conservation agriculture reduce soil losses and showed for the first time that reduced tillage practices are a major improvement in organic farming when it comes to soil erosion control.

  Conservation agriculture is often assumed to reduce soil N 2 O emissions. Yet, studies analyzing the specific effect of conservation agriculture practices on N 2 O emissions give contradictory results. Herein, we synthesized a comprehensive database on the three main conservation agriculture practices (cover crops, diversified crop rotations, and no-till and/or reduced tillage (NT/RT)) to elucidate the role of conservation practices on N 2 O emissions. Further, we used a random meta-forest approach to identify the most important predictors of the effects of these practices on soil N 2 O emissions. Averaged across all comparisons, NT/RT significantly decreased soil N 2 O emissions by 11% (95% CI: –19 to –1%) compared to conventional tillage. The reductions due to NT/RT were more commonly observed in humid climates and in soils with an initial carbon content < 20 g kg –1 . The implementation of cover crops and diversified crop rotations led to variable effects on soil N 2 O emissions. Cover crops were more likely to reduce soil N 2 O emissions at neutral soil pH, and in soils with intermediate carbon (~20 g kg –1 ) and nitrogen (~3 g kg –1 ) contents. Diversified crop rotations tended to increase soil N 2 O emissions in temperate regions and neutral to alkaline soils. Our results provide a comprehensive predictive framework to understand the conditions in which the adoption of various conservation agriculture practices can contribute to climate change mitigation. Combining these results with a similar mechanistic understanding of conservation agriculture impacts on ecosystem services and crop production will pave the way for a wider adoption globally of these management practices.

Africa’s need to double food production and feed the burgeoning human population, without compromising its natural resource base, has raised the momentum for sustainable agricultural intensification on the continent. Many studies describe agronomic practices that can increase productivity on existing agricultural land without damaging the environment and without increasing the agricultural carbon footprint. However, there is limited information on specific practices with the greatest potential to contribute to sustainable intensification on smallholder farms in sub-Saharan Africa, while simultaneously keeping the carbon footprint low. The objectives of this review were to (1) identify good agronomic practices with potential for contributing to sustainable intensification across sub-Saharan Africa, (2) synthesize available information on benefits and synergies from these technologies, and (3) discuss bottlenecks in their adoption in order to obtain insights that inform the formulation of supportive policies. Agroforestry, cereal-legume intercropping, conservation agriculture, doubled-up legume cropping, fertilizer micro-dosing, planting basins, and push-pull technology were identified as key agronomic innovations widely promoted in sub-Saharan Africa. We show that these innovations can build synergies and increase resource use efficiency while reducing agricultural carbon footprint. We outline the benefits, trade-offs, and limitations of these practices and discuss their potential role in strengthening food sovereignty and climate change adaptation and mitigation.

The glyphosate controversy before the renewal of the authorization of glyphosate in the European Union (EU) once again turned the spotlight on pesticide regulation in the EU. In the EU, pesticides are attracting more public attention than in other parts of the world, and many nongovernmental organizations specifically target pesticide regulation, trying to influence politicians and other decision makers. Following an overview of the EU pesticide legislation and the impact hitherto on EU agriculture, this paper outlines the glyphosate controversy and presents the outcome of desk studies conducted in Germany, the United Kingdom, France, and Sweden on the potential effects of a glyphosate ban on agricultural productivity and farm income. All studies concluded that the loss of income depends very much on farm type and cropping practice, but they all reached the conclusion that particularly no-tillage farming/conservation agriculture will be facing severe problems without glyphosate to control weeds and terminate cover crops. No-tillage/conservation agriculture is viewed as an effective strategy to prevent soil erosion and loss of nutrients, which could become larger problems without glyphosate. Other issues highlighted in the studies were the impact on resistance management, as glyphosate is largely seen as a “herbicide-resistance breaker.” Without glyphosate, fundamental changes in farming practices in the EU are required, and it is hard to imagine that they will come without a cost, at least in the short term.

Conservation agriculture, which is based on minimum tillage, permanent soil cover and crop rotations, has widely been promoted as a practice to maintain or improve soil quality and enhance crop productivity. To a large extent, the beneficial effects of conservation agriculture are expected to be provided by permanent soil cover with crop residues. Surface crop residues play an important role for crop growth through their benefits on soil-related structural components and processes in the agro-ecosystem, referred to in this study as agro-ecological functions. Through a meta-analysis of the literature, we have studied the relative effects of surface crop residue levels on the performance of a set of agro-ecological functions compared with a no-till bare soil, i.e., without surface residues. The selected agro-ecological functions were soil water evaporation control, soil water infiltration, soil water runoff control, soil loss control, soil nutrient availability, soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks and gains, weed control and soil meso- and macrofauna abundance. The potential effects of crop residue cover were quantified using boundary line models. Our main findings were (1) 8 t ha −1 of residues were needed to decrease soil water evaporation by about 30% compared to no-till bare soil. (2) To achieve the maximum effect on soil water infiltration, water runoff and soil loss control, residue amounts of at least 2 t ha −1 were required. (3) The effect of increasing the amounts of surface crop residues on soil nutrient supply (N, P and K) was relatively low; the boundary line models were not significant. (4) The average annual SOC gain increased with increasing amounts of residues, with a mean of 0.38 t C ha −1  year −1 with 4 to 5 t ha −1 of residues. (5) Weed emergence and biomass can be reduced by 50% compared to a no-till bare soil with residue amounts of 1 t ha −1 or more. (6) There was a weak response in soil meso- and macrofauna abundance to increasing amounts of surface crop residues. The maximum effect corresponded to an increase of 45% compared to a no-till bare soil and was reached from 10 t ha −1 of residues. Our findings suggest that optimal amounts of surface residues in the practice of conservation agriculture will largely depend on the type of constraints to crop production which can be addressed with mulching.

The agri-food system is facing a range of social-ecological threats, many of which are caused and amplified by industrial agriculture. In response, numerous sustainable agriculture narratives have emerged, proposing solutions to the challenges facing the agri-food system. One such narrative that has recently risen to prominence is regenerative agriculture. However, the drivers for the rapid emergence of regenerative agriculture are not well understood. Furthermore, its transformative potential for supporting a more sustainable agri-food system is underexplored. Through a genealogical analysis of four prominent sustainable agriculture narratives; organic agriculture, conservation agriculture, sustainable intensification, and agroecology; we consider how regenerative agriculture’s growing momentum can be contextualised within existing narratives and explore the implications this might have for its transformative potential. This analysis reveals that the genealogies of these sustainable agriculture narratives have led to a number of contestations and complementarities which have coalesced to drive the emergence of regenerative agriculture. We also find that, in contrast to agroecology, regenerative agriculture shares with other Global North narratives a limited scope for offering transformative pathways for agricultural production. This is largely due to their inadequate consideration of power and equity issues in the agri-food system. We argue that regenerative agriculture therefore risks inhibiting deeper agri-food system transformations that address both social and ecological challenges and is not the unifying sustainable agriculture narrative it claims to be. Nonetheless, regenerative agriculture could contribute towards a broader plurality of sustainable agriculture narratives that collectively might enable a transformation to a more sustainable, diverse, and just agri-food system.