Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Mar;26(3):1085-1108.
doi: 10.1111/gcb.14844. Epub 2019 Oct 26.

Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology

Alasdair J Sykes  1 , Michael Macleod  1 , Vera Eory  1 , Robert M Rees  1 , Florian Payen  1   2 , Vasilis Myrgiotis  2 , Mathew Williams  2 , Saran Sohi  2 , Jon Hillier  3 , Dominic Moran  3 , David A C Manning  4 , Pietro Goglio  5 , Michele Seghetta  5 , Adrian Williams  5 , Jim Harris  5 , Marta Dondini  6 , Jack Walton  6 , Joanna House  7 , Pete Smith  6
Affiliations
Review

Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology

Alasdair J Sykes et al. Glob Chang Biol. 2020 Mar.

Abstract

To limit warming to well below 2°C, most scenario projections rely on greenhouse gas removal technologies (GGRTs); one such GGRT uses soil carbon sequestration (SCS) in agricultural land. In addition to their role in mitigating climate change, SCS practices play a role in delivering agroecosystem resilience, climate change adaptability and food security. Environmental heterogeneity and differences in agricultural practices challenge the practical implementation of SCS, and our analysis addresses the associated knowledge gap. Previous assessments have focused on global potentials, but there is a need among policymakers to operationalise SCS. Here, we assess a range of practices already proposed to deliver SCS, and distil these into a subset of specific measures. We provide a multidisciplinary summary of the barriers and potential incentives towards practical implementation of these measures. First, we identify specific practices with potential for both a positive impact on SCS at farm level and an uptake rate compatible with global impact. These focus on: (a) optimising crop primary productivity (e.g. nutrient optimisation, pH management, irrigation); (b) reducing soil disturbance and managing soil physical properties (e.g. improved rotations, minimum till); (c) minimising deliberate removal of C or lateral transport via erosion processes (e.g. support measures, bare fallow reduction); (d) addition of C produced outside the system (e.g. organic manure amendments, biochar addition); (e) provision of additional C inputs within the cropping system (e.g. agroforestry, cover cropping). We then consider economic and non-cost barriers and incentives for land managers implementing these measures, along with the potential externalised impacts of implementation. This offers a framework and reference point for holistic assessment of the impacts of SCS. Finally, we summarise and discuss the ability of extant scientific approaches to quantify the technical potential and externalities of SCS measures, and the barriers and incentives to their implementation in global agricultural systems.

Keywords: 4 per mille; agriculture; greenhouse gas removal; negative emissions; soil carbon sequestration; soil organic carbon.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Systematic approach to selection and assessment of soil carbon sequestration measures followed for this analysis
Figure 2
Figure 2
Results of the shortlisting and categorisation process for the selected SCS measures. Attribution of practices to pathways is expanded in Sections 3.1, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.3, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.4, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3, 3.5, 3.5.1, 3.5.2, 3.5.3, 3.6, 3.6.1, 3.7
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Abdalla, M. , Hastings, A. , Chadwick, D. R. , Jones, D. L. , Evans, C. D. , Jones, M. B. , … Smith, P. (2018). Critical review of the impacts of grazing intensity on soil organic carbon storage and other soil quality indicators in extensively managed grasslands. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 253, 62–81. 10.1016/j.agee.2017.10.023 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ahmad, W. , Singh, B. , Dijkstra, F. A. , & Dalal, R. C. (2013). Inorganic and organic carbon dynamics in a limed acid soil are mediated by plants. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 57, 549–555. 10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.10.013 - DOI
    1. Alliaume, F. , Rossing, W. A. H. , Tittonell, P. , Jorge, G. , & Dogliotti, S. (2014). Reduced tillage and cover crops improve water capture and reduce erosion of fine textured soils in raised bed tomato systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 183, 127–137. 10.1016/j.agee.2013.11.001 - DOI
    1. Álvaro‐Fuentes, J. , López Sánchez, M. V. , Cantero‐Martínez, C. , & Arrúe Ugarte, J. L. (2008). Tillage effects on soil organic carbon fractions in Mediterranean dryland agroecosystems. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 72(2), 541–547. 10.2136/sssaj2007.0164 - DOI
    1. Amézquita, M. C. , Murgueitio, E. , Ibrahim, M. , & Ramírez, B. (2008). Carbon sequestration in pasture and silvo‐pastoral systems under conservation management in four ecosystems of tropical America. Rome, Italy: FAO/CTIC Conservation Agriculture Carbon Offset Consultation.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources