Search

Climate change is likely to have a major impact on agricultural production in Mediterranean regions, due to higher temperatures and lower water availability for irrigation. A Hybrid Land Evaluation System (HLES) is proposed allowing a comparison between plant demands on the one hand and estimated future temperatures and soil water regimes on the other. A storyline is followed for each plant species hybrid and each soil mapping unit in the area to be studied, starting with step 1: evaluation of thermal conditions, followed by step 2: a traditional empirical land evaluation procedure identifying limiting features that are not covered by crop simulation models (such as flooding, surface stones, salt). Step 3 applies the quantitative Soil–Water–Atmosphere–Plant (SWAP) model and calculates soil water regimes and associated productions, at 100%, 80%, and 60% hypothetical irrigation water availability. HLES was applied in the Destra Sele area in Italy, comparing two climates: “reference” (1961–1990) and “future” (2021–2050), studying 11 maize hybrids and showing that in future, 6 hybrids suffered severely at 80% water availability and 7 could not meet requirements at 60%. HLES allows a proactive approach to future water allocation issues and provides data for genetic modification studies in terms of defining hydrological conditions for sites of native plants and for areas where new hybrids are to be introduced. HLES presents options, to be explored in close interaction with users, rather than one-way judgments.

Scientific institutions all over the world emphasize the importance of effective links between science and society when pursuing sustainable development thereby linking science and development. Unfortunately, the knowledge paradox implies that too much research is not applied, partly because the research community is still rather inward looking, creating a gap between what is written and what is achieved in practice. The Dutch government initiated, therefore, the large 6-year TransForum program to enhance innovation in agriculture, not allowing the regular research circuit to set the agenda. TransForum emphasized the relevance of connected value development when dealing with wicked problems associated with sustainable development, requiring a balance between the well-known people, planet, and profit aspects of sustainable development. Thus new and innovative 3P businesses were created through the sequence of value proposition, -creation, and -capture, together constituting connected value development. This required transdisciplinary interaction between knowledge institutions, entrepreneurs, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and governmental bodies working together on innovation (KENGi partners), each of these partners contributing different opinions, goals, and values. In this chapter, four case studies are used to illustrate that innovation was achieved by successively working together on value proposition, -creation, and -capture. Only the committed persistence of entrepreneurs supported by knowledge brokers and development of new business and organizational models ultimately led to the desired connected value development, representing a successful link between knowledge creation and societal appreciation. The process involved mobilization and strategic injection of various forms of tacit and scientific knowledge in the overall interaction process that often took more than 10 years to mature, requiring an important role for knowledge brokers with hard knowledge and social intelligence (“T-shaped skills”) as well as long-term funding. The development of value propositions needed much more attention than is usually provided. Research planning and management procedures as well as judgement procedures need to be adapted to fit transdisciplinary requirements. The cases demonstrate that the process of connected value development is unique for each project; there is no standard recipe. Track records of case studies, as presented, can be used in education as a learning tool to create awareness for possible opportunities as well as pitfalls in transdisciplinary studies.

Research results that could potentially provide a major contribution to innovation and sustainable development are often not accepted by or implemented in society. This, in short, is the knowledge paradox that is also relevant for soil science. The need to operate in a more interactive mode towards stakeholders and policy makers has been recognized in literature, has become more urgent in our Knowledge Democracy and is accepted by funding agencies. But true transdisciplinarity is difficult to realize and recommendations are discussed for soil science research to improve its effectivity by (i) focusing on unique niches, defined here in terms of seven basic soil functions, some of which have been preempted by others; (ii) considering the policy cycle as a point of reference; (iii) focusing on deriving a series of options (each one with economic, social and environmental tradeoffs) rather than on single solutions of problems related to sustainable development; and (iv) taking the entire knowledge chain into consideration from the tacit to the cutting-edge. Additional attention is suggested for communication and public relations in terms of (i) defining soil quality; (ii) adopting the ecological footprint concept and (iii) presenting storylines for major soil types. Transdisciplinarity requires working in “Communities of Practice” (CoPs); but first, the soil science profession should improve internal cohesion and cooperation by combating current atomization of subdisciplines and by defining mutual responsibilities in soil science “Communities of Scientific Practice” (CSPs) with special attention to quality control, education, and basic research, which is vital for the future of the soil science profession.

Many research and scientific organizations emphasize the importance of science for society in their strategic plans. This is certainly true for land use studies being discussed in this chapter as new environmental policies are introduced at European and national level. Such policies reflect concerns of society so that a structural link between science and policymaking would appear to be logical and desirable. Rather than following traditional top‐down and disciplinary research approaches, emphasis is increasingly being placed on interactive, interdisciplinary work in Communities of Practice (CoPs) in which scientists work together with various stakeholders and policymakers in a joint learning mode. But this requires new research approaches including long‐term engagement during the entire policy cycle asking for a new attitude of scientists. Few experiences have been reported so far. Three Dutch case studies are therefore discussed to illustrate the functioning of CoPs by focusing on up‐ and downscaling (called multiscaling hereafter), a key element of land use research. Five types of multiscaling were used in the three case studies. Three were technical: (1) use of model‐ or design‐based (geo)statistical techniques, (2) extrapolation of data obtained from experimental plots to larger areas, and (3) use of quasi‐3D process models to upscale grid data in a Geographic Information System (GIS) to regions. Two were policy oriented: (1) nutrient balances for farms to allow upscaling from fields to farm and (2) a research framework for regions, based on the DPSIR approach, which sequentially covers aspects mentioned in environmental laws as being important for sustainable development. Quite diverse and unrelated questions about land use issues by different members of the CoP cannot be a fruitful basis for research programs. Scientists have therefore an important role to play within a CoP in orchestrating a demand analysis that puts questions into context and defines existing knowledge as well as knowledge gaps. Defining research on the basis of a demand analysis in a CoP creates innovative ideas, creates commitment of participants, and allows definition of needed research that is functional. This includes cutting edge research publishable in literature and requires for land use studies updating of valuable existing soil survey information to a level that can be used in modern modeling techniques including functional characterization of soil series, development of pedotransfer functions, and definition of phenoforms. Particular attention is needed for introducing modern monitoring techniques for soil and water because the high cost of traditional methods implies that little monitoring is done now with detrimental effects for the calibration and validation of simulation models that increasingly secure a live of their own. The scientific community needs to take a fresh look at its paradigms. Next to the establishment of CoPs, we therefore advocate development of Communities of Scientific Practice (CSP) within the research community that define different functions for members of the scientific community in terms of (1) communication within CoPs by shaping the demand analysis and to the outside world and (2) defining research needs and its execution, using knowledge chains including basic research.

Publisher Summary Science and technology in situ has changed its course along with social and economic developments. Although it has not always been beneficial to human beings, civilization has got the required mileage to drive information, culture, resources, and wealth throughout the world from one era to another. The awareness of soil goes right back to the start of our civilization. The ‘‘true’’ soil has been the favorite domain of the soil scientist, using ever more sophisticated methods to measure soil characteristics and to characterize dynamic soil processes. This has greatly expanded the knowledge about soils and been a major contribution to society at large as this knowledge was applied in many products and services. Effects of land use are difficult to predict in the same quantitative and unique manner in which, for example, a Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC) can be predicted because conditions are so diverse. There is no single magic answer to any given land‐use question because many stakeholders are involved with widely varying interests. The soil scientist should try to define the ‘‘true’’ soil as well as possible but should be modest and know his limits. Soil scientists have a major handicap: soils occur underground and are invisible except when excavated. Plants and animals are highly visible, at least partly explaining the viability of policies enforcing biodiversity. There are efforts now to define soil‐charters and the EU is working on soil policies.

Hydropedology is an intertwined branch of soil science and hydrology that encompasses multiscale basic and applied research of interactive pedological and hydrological processes and their properties in the unsaturated zone. The synergistic integration of classical pedology with soil physics, hydrology, and other related bio- and geosciences into hydropedology suggests a renewed perspective and a more integrated approach to studying landscape–soil–water dynamics across scales. Pedality, layering of soil horizons, and soil–landscape relationships are three essential characteristics of soils as occurring on the landscape. Fundamental issues of hydropedology include (1) soil structure and layering as indicators of flow and transport characteristics in field soils; (2) soil morphology as signatures of soil hydrology; (3) water movement over the landscape; and (4) hydrology as a factor of soil formation and a driving force of dynamic soil system. Hydrology affects and is affected by all of the five natural soil-forming factors and the four general soil-forming processes. Hence, hydropedology offers potential opportunities for quantifying soil-forming processes. Future needs in advancing hydropedology are encapsulated in the philosophy of “bridging disciplines, scales, data, and education.” These include (1) systems approaches to understanding and communicating landscape–soil–water dynamics; (2) addressing variability using patterns at various scales; (3) enhancing pedotransfer functions and developing soil inference systems and hydropedoinformatics; and (4) education of the next generation of soil scientists and hydrologists. Hydropedology calls for adequate attention to soil morphology (including soil structure) in the field and soil patterns over the landscape to guide optimal soil physical and hydrological measurements, field monitoring and experimental designs, and understanding and modeling of flow and transport in the critical zone. Identification and prediction of patterns (spatial-temporal organizations) across multiple scales are coming to the forefront in soil science and hydrology, which offer rich and comprehensive insights regarding variability and the underlying processes. We suggest various hydropedological approaches to address diverse knowledge gaps. Given its links to a wide array of environmental, ecological, geological, agricultural, and natural resource issues of societal importance, hydropedology is emerging as a promising field that could contribute significantly to the study of the pedosphere, the hydrological cycle, the earth's critical zone, and the earth system.