Search

The Integrated Administration and Control System IACS consist of several digital and interconnected databases, notably: a system for identifying all agricultural plots in EU countries called the Land Parcel Identification System (LPIS), a system that allows the farmers to graphically declare the agricultural areas for which they apply for aid (the geospatial application GSA). To improve the IACS data availability, EC DG AGRI, in collaboration with the EC DG JRC, has established an IACS data-sharing process to be implemented by the Member States. Thanks to the underpinning INSPIRE Directive and its infrastructure, we are starting to have now millions of parcel data available. These data might be further used within climatic, environmental and soil-related domains, as well as provide additional insights together with precision agriculture data. However, to date, there is not a unique usable platform providing EU-wide IACS data to improve data availability and data reuse further. IACS data are being used and tested in many soil-related use cases, notably in the “land degradation indicator” that will provide a high-resolution agricultural spatial data time series and implement these products into the SDG 15.3.1 indicator geospatial framework. It includes aggregated statistics and actionable recommendations to show what can be done with them to deepen our knowledge of farms and how they can be used for policy support and development. Co-designing usage of IACS data will provide broader understanding of the role of IACS in the frame of the European Commission soil policy development. The analysis carried out in this soil use case provided an application of the UNCCD SDG 15.3.1 indicator at the NUTS3 scale using global and EU available datasets for the three sub-indicators, additionally for the sub-indicator land cover IACS data provided high-resolution information on land cover changes that might cause degradation or improvement in delivering ecosystem services. The SDG 15.3.1 LD indicator calculation has been carried out using the Trends.Earth software; in particular it implies the reclassification of LC from an equivalent level 3 in CORINE to an equivalent level 2, which reduces the quality of the information (cropland includes arable land, permanent crops and mixed classes with over 50% of crops; grassland includes natural grassland and managed pasture land; rangelands include shrubland, herbaceous and sparsely vegetated areas; forestland includes all forest categories and mixed classes with tree cover greater than 40%). IACS data substantially improved the LD assessment in the timeframe (2010-2020) by adding a high-resolution land cover change layer. Now, only the spatial information derived by GSA was used. However, the integration of parcel topography and climatic proxies can reveal patterns and provide useful information for the early detection of LD and the correct management of degraded areas. This system can contribute to better detection of Land degradation drivers.

Protecting the structure and functioning of soil ecosystems is one of the central aims of current regulations of chemicals. This is, for instance, shown by the emphasis on the protection of key drivers and ecosystem services as proposed in the protection goal options for soil organisms by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Such targets require insight into soil biodiversity, its role in the functioning of ecosystems, and the way it responds to stress. Also required are tools and methodologies for properly assessing biodiversity. To address these issues, the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Europe 14th Special Science Symposium (SESSS14) was held 19 to 20 November 2019 in Brussels, Belgium. The central aim of the SESSS14 was to provide information on how to include soil biodiversity and soil functions as protection goal options in the risk assessment and quantification of the effects of chemicals and other stressors (including their respective regulations). This paper is based on the presentations and discussions at the SESSS14 and will give a brief update on the scientific state‐of‐the art on soil biodiversity, novel scientific developments, experimental and modeling approaches, as well as case studies. It will also discuss how these approaches could inform future risk assessment of chemicals and other stressors in the regulatory context of protecting soil ecosystems. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:541–551. © 2020 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC), KEY POINTS The SETAC Europe 14th Special Science Symposium (SESSS14) aimed at providing information on how to include soil biodiversity and soil functions (ecosystem services) as protection goal options in the risk assessment and quantification of the effects of chemicals and other stressors.Definitions and associated terminology currently used to describe soil biodiversity are given, together with a brief but comprehensive state‐of‐the‐art overview of the current scientific knowledge on soil biodiversity and its relation to the functioning of soils.Backgrounds and current practices regarding the way protection of soil biodiversity is addressed in chemical regulations are described, including drawbacks and the possible ways forward.Novel methods for assessing biodiversity in soils are presented, as well as approaches, both experimental and modeling, for assessing effects of (chemical) stressors on soil biodiversity and the potential consequences for ecosystem services.

Lately, there has been a lot of discussion on soil terminology, perhaps because policymakers have recognized the need to use soil as an ally tackling future climate demands, but mostly because this recognition will likely be translated from the EU Soil Strategy into a new soil health law for the EU. Such an initiative for soil is tightly connected to the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, the Climate Adaptation Strategy, the UN 15.3 Goal for Land Degradation Neutrality, and other environmentally-related policy initiatives (Figure 1) stemming from the European Green Deal and from the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Figure 1. Links between EU Soil Strategy and other EU initiatives. Source: European Commission, 2021. At the end of 2021 the European Commission launched the EU soil strategy for 2030, giving the first step towards a consolidated understanding of what a healthy soil means, “(…) when they are in good chemical, biological and physical condition, and thus able to continuously provide as many of the following ecosystem services as possible (…)”. This definition is therefore expected to be translated into a collection and combination of various soil parameters and associated dynamic thresholds (in time and space). Allowing thus the determination of the spatial extent of healthy - and unhealthy - soils, being likely used to assess the EU progress towards the objectives set.On top of the importance of such initiatives for our future, this is also a great opportunity for researchers and policymakers to understand i) where we stand in terms of major soil threats, ii) what the major current knowledge gaps for EU soils are, iii) and which are the areas at higher risk for land degradation that then require further restoration actions. The problem seems complex from a diversified European perspective, due to the policy landscape, [the lack of] harmonized data availability, as well as local and regional differences. Nevertheless, the EU needs to start building on the current environmental acquis.The aim of this work is to present the current status of the EU soils making extensive use of the latest LUCAS soil monitoring campaigns and to identify and discuss with the scientific community the identification of key-thresholds for identified parameters, which will likely determine future land and soil management actions towards a healthy soil.

The European Soil Observatory (EUSO) was launched in December 2020 to generate and disseminate policy-relevant and harmonized EU–wide soil data and indicators in support of the soil perspectives of the European Green Deal, in particular the new Soil Strategy and the Mission on Soil Health and Food. Among the activities of the Observatory, paramount importance is placed on the development of an EU-wide soil monitoring system, to assess progress towards soil-related targets, to support research & innovation and provide a European Soil Forum dedicated to a broad user base (citizens, farmers, land planners, scientists). These features will be an important step in providing access to a huge range of soil-related data through dedicated data-streams, from biodiversity to heavy metal concentrations.The EUSO will establish a comprehensive dashboard containing indicators that present data on soil-related issues within and, in some cases, outside of the EU. Examples of indicators i include soil erosion, soil carbon, pollutants and soil nutrients (phosphorus, nitrogen, potassium) with relevance to the new EU Soil Strategy, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), Zero Pollution Action Plan and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).Indicators will be fed through models and operational soil monitoring systems ensuring seamless and harmonised data flows, where the LUCAS Soil programme will be fully integrated with national soil monitoring systems. s In addition to supporting the development of oil health indicators, an integrated monitoring system should also support the assessment of soil-related ecosystem services. .Operational policy support for the policy makers and other stakeholders will be a key issue for the development of accurate soil properties assessment and specific soil management strategies and tailored suggestion to member states targeted to their farming systems. The EUSO forum was a great debate where five working groups were launched addressing key aspects in the implementation or the underpinning knowledge base of the EUSO. These included: i) soil monitoring, ii) soil biodiversity, iii) soil data sharing, iv) soil erosion and v) soil pollution. A strong emphasis will be given to data harmonization, a specific section on data is proposed to coordinate MS efforts in providing data that need to be harmonized and out of that comprehensive statistics and maps will be delivered to the stakeholders.The EUSO will work with EU countries to identify and present relevant national soil data, possibly using advanced web service technologies. The EUSO builds on the achievements of the European Soil Data Centre (ESDAC), which has been the thematic node for soil-related data in Europe since 2006. The EUSO aims to incorporate the legacy data stemming from EU-funded soil-related projects in order not to lose valuable, useful and usable results for the future. The EUSO will contribute to collaborate with the European Soil Partnership a regional partnership of European countries under the United Nations FAO’ Global Soil Partnership (GSP). from the EUSO aims to bring a European perspective to the many activities of the GSP in the areas of sustainable soil management, raising soil awareness, soil research and soil data collection and handling.

Employing a linkage between a biophysical and an economic model, this study estimates the economic impact of soil erosion by water on the world economy. The global biophysical model estimates soil erosion rates, which are converted into land productivity losses and subsequently inserted into a global market simulation model. The headline result is that soil erosion by water is estimated to incur a global annual cost of eight billion US dollars to global GDP. The concomitant impact on food security is to reduce global agri-food production by 33.7 million tonnes with accompanying rises in agri-food world prices of 0.4%–3.5%, depending on the food product category. Under pressure to use more marginal land, abstracted water volumes are driven upwards by an estimated 48 billion cubic meters. Finally, there is tentative evidence that soil erosion is accelerating the competitive shifts in comparative advantage on world agri-food markets. Published

We use the latest projections of climate and land use change (year 2070) to assess potential global soil erosion rates by water erosion (interrill and rill processes) (Borrelli et al., 2020) using the RUSLE-based semiempirical modeling platform (GloSEM) (Borrelli et al., 2017). With some degree of uncertainty, GloSEM allows prediction of both state and change of soil erosion, identifying hotspots thanks to its high resolution (250 × 250 m) and predicting future variation based on projections of change in land use, soil conservation practices, and climate change.Three alternative scenarios (2.6, 4.5, and 8.5) are tested using the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway and Representative Concentration Pathway (SSP-RCP) (LUH2 data) and 14 General Climate Models (GCMs) (WorldClim data), for a total of 42 modelling scenarios.In the 2015 scenario, we estimate global soil erosion equal to 43 (+9.2/−7) Pg yr−1; with a study area covering ∼95.5% of the Earth’s land surface (in Borrelli et al. 2017 the study area was ~84.1% of the Earth’s land surface). The future scenarios suggest that socioeconomic developments impacting land use will either decrease (SSP1-RCP2.6–10%) or increase (SSP2-RCP4.5 +2%, SSP5-RCP8.5 +10%) water erosion by 2070. By contrast, climate projections, for all global dynamics scenarios, indicate a trend, moving toward a more vigorous hydrological cycle, which could increase global water erosion (+30 to +66%). Quantitatively, 56.1 (+20.6+ /- 16.4) Pg yr−1, 64.8 (+28.5/-21.4) Pg yr−1, and 71.6 (+32.5/-24.7) Pg yr−1 are predicted for the SSP1-RCP2.6, SSP2-RCP4.5, and SSP5-RCP8.5 scenarios, respectively.The modeling framework presented in this study adopts standardized data in an adequate format to communicate with adjacent disciplines and moves us toward robust, reproducible, and open data science. ReferencesBorrelli, P., Robinson, D.A., Fleischer, L.R., Lugato, E., Ballabio, C., Alewell, C., Meusburger, K., Modugno, S., Schütt, B., Ferro, V. and Bagarello, V., 2017. An assessment of the global impact of 21st century land use change on soil erosion. Nature communications, 8(1), pp.1-13.Borrelli, P., Robinson, D.A., Panagos, P., Lugato, E., Yang, J.E., Alewell, C., Wuepper, D., Montanarella, L. and Ballabio, C., 2020. Land use and climate change impacts on global soil erosion by water (2015-2070). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(36), pp.21994-22001.

Black Soils have attracted renewed attention from policy-makers and the public thanks to strong interest from China; an International Network on Black Soils was launched in 2017 and the first plenary meeting held in Harbin in 2018. The Chernozem originally defined by Dokuchaev in 1883 is the central concept of Black Soils but, more than 140 years on, these soils have been much changed by human intervention and there is a need for a new definition—including Chernozem but, also, other soils with similar properties. The term Black Soils is taken to encompass Chernozem, Kastanozem and Phaeozem—all characterized by thick, dark-coloured, humus-rich topsoil originally developed under grassland. Chernozems, in particular, are known for their granular structure, optimal bulk density, and goodly stock of plant nutrients; however, all these favorable properties are only present in soils within virgin ecosystems that are now rare. Black Soils make up only 7% of the land surface but they are of fundamental importance to food security; UN Sustainable Development Goal 2—to end hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture by 2030—will only be achieved if we introduce a mandatory framework for their sustainable management. Sustainable management means arrest of soil erosion, compaction, salinity, sodicity, pollution and soil sealing; maintenance of protective cover, a stable stock of soil organic matter both as a store of plant nutrients and as a carbon sink; maintenance of capacity to infiltrate and hold rainfall and irrigation water but drain any excess to streams and groundwater; and conservation of biodiversity to maintain essential soil functions.

Soil erosion is a major global soil degradation threat to land, freshwater, and oceans. Wind and water are the major drivers, with water erosion over land being the focus of this work; excluding gullying and river bank erosion. Improving knowledge of the probable future rates of soil erosion, accelerated by human activity, is important both for policy makers engaged in land use decision-making and for earth-system modelers seeking to reduce uncertainty on global predictions. Here we predict future rates of erosion by modeling change in potential global soil erosion by water using three alternative (2.6, 4.5, and 8.5) Shared Socioeconomic Pathway and Representative Concentration Pathway (SSP-RCP) scenarios. Global predictions rely on a high spatial resolution Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)-based semiempirical modeling approach (GloSEM). The baseline model (2015) predicts global potential soil erosion rates of 43+9.2−7 Pg yr−1, with current conservation agriculture (CA) practices estimated to reduce this by ∼5%. Our future scenarios suggest that socioeconomic developments impacting land use will either decrease (SSP1-RCP2.6–10%) or increase (SSP2-RCP4.5 +2%, SSP5-RCP8.5 +10%) water erosion by 2070. Climate projections, for all global dynamics scenarios, indicate a trend, moving toward a more vigorous hydrological cycle, which could increase global water erosion (+30 to +66%). Accepting some degrees of uncertainty, our findings provide insights into how possible future socioeconomic development will affect soil erosion by water using a globally consistent approach. This preliminary evidence seeks to inform efforts such as those of the United Nations to assess global soil erosion and inform decision makers developing national strategies for soil conservation., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117 (36), ISSN:0027-8424, ISSN:1091-6490

Soil erosion is one of the eight threats in the Soil Thematic Strategy, the main policy instrument dedicated to soil protection in the European Union (EU). During the last decade, soil erosion indicators have been included in monitoring the performance of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and the progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study comes five years after the assessment of soil loss by water erosion in the EU [Environmental science & policy 54, 438–447 (2015)], where a soil erosion modelling baseline for 2010 was developed. Here, we present an update of the EU assessment of soil loss by water erosion for the year 2016. The estimated long-term average erosion rate decreased by 0.4% between 2010 and 2016. This small decrease of soil loss was due to a limited increase of applied soil conservation practices and land cover change observed at the EU level. The modelling results suggest that, currently, ca. 25% of the EU land has erosion rates higher than the recommended sustainable threshold (2 t ha−1 yr−1) and more than 6% of agricultural lands suffer from severe erosion (11 t ha−1 yr−1). The results suggest that a more incisive set of measures of soil conservation is needed to mitigate soil erosion across the EU. However, targeted measures are recommendable at regional and national level as soil erosion trends are diverse between countries which show heterogeneous application of conservation practices.

International audience; Editorial

The assessment of land degradation and restoration by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services shows that land degradation across the globe is a wide and severe issue and is showing no signs of slowing down. This trend must be halted and reversed.

There has been the recognition that trans-national binding legal agreements related to soils are very difficult to achieve, given the sensitivities related to national sovereignty in relation to land and soils. However, the Soil Thematic Strategy played an important role to raise the awareness of soil importance, integrate soils in different policy areas (agriculture, climate change, SDGs), develop research findings and finally increase our know how on European Soils. The Soil Thematic Strategy continue to be the main policy instrument dedicated to foster soil protection in the European Union (EU). The EU consider the importance of soils and land degradation taking into account global challenges such as the sustainable production intensification, food security, climate change and escalating population growth. During the last decade both the 7th Framework Programme for Research (FP7) and the HORIZON2020 financed research and innovation projects for advancing soil protection and better understanding of soil management in EU.

The novelty of this study lies in the analyses of legislation concerning land use policies by examining the specific boundary between land ownership and land take. The basic motive was that the European Commission (EC) withdrew the Soil Framework Directive (SFD) in 2014 following the objections of certain Member States (MS) who countered that as most lands are privately owned, they should not fall under the remit of public governance. Since the withdrawal of the SFD land take is an issue receiving more attention. The legal content of ownership rights has been subjected to constant debate in the context of land-use policies and planning practices, which raises the questions of who decides how the land can be used and whether administrative authorities give priority to non-agricultural uses. Our study seeks to explore these issues through the lens of property law by comparing different legislations on access to land on three levels of policy implementation: the EU, the national, and the local levels. MS legislations are highlighted through the example of Hungary in two aspects: (1) regulation regarding Access to Land and Land Ownership Rights (ALOR), and (2) legislation and results of the LANDSUPPORT decision support system concerning Land Take Changes (LTC). We designed figures to demonstrate how policymakers can use the new LANDSUPPORT platform to show the gaps and inconsistencies among the above aspects. We found that the legislative regulations concerning private land use to achieve soil protection objectives remain the weakest link in the environmental protection legislation of the EU. Anxieties concerning built-in legal guarantees on each of the studied levels actualise our research. Currently, global land management is not on the political table although common European legislation might be able to preserve land for agricultural use.

The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) identify the need to restore degraded soils in order to improve productivity and the provision of ecosystem services. The aim is to support food production, store and supply clean water, conserve biodiversity, sequester carbon, and improve soil resilience in a context of climate change. Within this framework, in order to achieve the SDGs and to correct land management in the long-term, soil management is considered mandatory. The reduction of land degradation should be based on various sustainable soil management practices that improve and maintain soil organic matter levels, increase water infiltration, and improve soil water management. This technical review - a policy paper - summarizes the sustainable and territorial impact of soil degradation, including soil water erosion, from the global level to the European and National levels. Furthermore, with the aim of sharing ongoing soil and water management actions, instruments, and initiatives, we provide information on soil and water conservation activities and prospects in Italy. Highlights - Sustainable soil management practices should be implemented to address soil degradation. - Impact of erosion on crop production reduces global crop yields by 0.4% per year. - Improving the physical and chemical characteristics of soils can contribute to store and supply water to plants. - Soil protection is a very important topic in the European Commission’s proposal for the CAP 2021-2027.

UDK 631.4:502.1 Soils are considered across the Rio Conventions and while some advances have been made in the past two decades, implementation remains lacking and soil-related issues persist. This calls for a more integrated approach for the implementation of the Conventions. Similarly, soils will play a key role to achieve the post-2015 development agenda and can be found across the proposed Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This cross-cutting role is not being sufficiently acknowledged in the negotiations. Putting soils on the policy agenda will depend on a major shift in the discussion to recognize that soils underpin a wide range of services and should, therefore, be protected for future generations. Concerted efforts for advocacy within the post-2015 development agenda need to focus on keeping soils on the agenda and on making proposals for the effective implementation and monitoring of the SDGs.

Our current information society, populated by increasingly well-informed and critical stakeholders, presents a challenge to both the policy and science arenas. The introduction of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offers a unique and welcome opportunity to direct joint activities towards these goals. Soil science, even though it is not mentioned as such, plays an important role in realizing a number of SDGs focusing on food, water, climate, health, biodiversity, and sustainable land use. A plea is made for a systems approach to land use studies, to be initiated by soil scientists, in which these land-related SDGs are considered in an integrated manner. To connect with policy makers and stakeholders, two approaches are functional. The first of these is the policy cycle when planning and executing research, which includes signaling, design, decision making, implementation, and evaluation. Many current research projects spend little time on signaling, which may lead to disengagement of stakeholders. Also, implementation is often seen as the responsibility of others, while it is crucial to demonstrate – if successful – the relevance of soil science. The second approach is the DPSIR approach when following the policy cycle in land-related research, distinguishing external drivers, pressures, impact, and responses to land use change that affect the state of the land in the past, present, and future. Soil science cannot by itself realize SDGs, and interdisciplinary studies on ecosystem services (ESs) provide an appropriate channel to define contributions of soil science in terms of the seven soil functions. ESs, in turn, can contribute to addressing the six SDGs (2, 3, 6, 12, 13, and 15) with an environmental, land-related character. SDGs have a societal focus and future soil science research can only be successful if stakeholders are part of the research effort in transdisciplinary projects, based on the principle of time-consuming "joint learning". The internal organization of the soil science discipline is not yet well tuned to the needs of inter- and transdisciplinary approaches.

Because of the increasing pressures exerted on soil, below-ground life is under threat. Knowledge-based rankings of potential threats to different components of soil biodiversity were developed in order to assess the spatial distribution of threats on a European scale. A list of 13 potential threats to soil biodiversity was proposed to experts with different backgrounds in order to assess the potential for three major components of soil biodiversity: soil microorganisms, fauna, and biological functions. This approach allowed us to obtain knowledge-based rankings of threats. These classifications formed the basis for the development of indices through an additive aggregation model that, along with ad-hoc proxies for each pressure, allowed us to preliminarily assess the spatial patterns of potential threats. Intensive exploitation was identified as the highest pressure. In contrast, the use of genetically modified organisms in agriculture was considered as the threat with least potential. The potential impact of climate change showed the highest uncertainty. Fourteen out of the 27 considered countries have more than 40% of their soils with moderate-high to high potential risk for all three components of soil biodiversity. Arable soils are the most exposed to pressures. Soils within the boreal biogeographic region showed the lowest risk potential. The majority of soils at risk are outside the boundaries of protected areas. First maps of risks to three components of soil biodiversity based on the current scientific knowledge were developed. Despite the intrinsic limits of knowledge-based assessments, a remarkable potential risk to soil biodiversity was observed. Guidelines to preliminarily identify and circumscribe soils potentially at risk are provided. This approach may be used in future research to assess threat at both local and global scale and identify areas of possible risk and, subsequently, design appropriate strategies for monitoring and protection of soil biota.

Soil plays a central role in food safety as it determines the possible composition of food and feed at the root of the food chain. However, the quality of soil resources as defined by their potential impact on human health by propagation of harmful elements through the food chain has been poorly studied in Europe due to the lack of data of adequate detail and reliability. The European Union's first harmonized topsoil sampling and coherent analytical procedure produced trace element measurements from approximately 22,000 locations. This unique collection of information enables a reliable overview of the concentration of heavy metals, also referred to as metal(loid)s including As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Pb, Zn, Sb. Co, and Ni. In this article we propose that in some cases (e.g. Hg and Cd) the high concentrations of soil heavy metal attributed to human activity can be detected at a regional level. While the immense majority of European agricultural land can be considered adequately safe for food production, an estimated 6.24% or 137,000 km2 needs local assessment and eventual remediation action. Keywords: Soil screening, Soil contamination, Heavy metals

The new assessment of soil loss by water erosion in Europe based on RUSLE2015 ( Panagos et al., 2015a ) was criticized in a comment by Fiener and Auerswald (2015) . The objective of the pan-European assessment was not to challenge any regional- or national-scale modelling but to develop a harmonized assessment aiming to improve our knowledge and understanding of soil erosion by water across the European Union and to accentuate the differences and similarities between different regions and countries beyond national borders and nationally adapted models. The main points of critique of Fiener and Auerswald (2015) were: (i) the ambition of this assessment to become a benchmark, ii) the absence of soil erosion community in this work, (iii) the K-factor and R-factor models (iv) the non-transparent origin of the cover management factor, (v) the lack of any validation process, and (vi) the non-comparability of this new data set to previous published data. We reply as follows: (i) We never expressed statements or opinions to set the study as a benchmark and we invite the scientific community to evaluate our study and judge if this pan-European assessment is an improvement compared to past soil erosion assessments at this scale. (ii) It is not true that the soil erosion community was not consulted and involved as many scientists have participated both in the soil erosion assessment and the analysis of erosion factors described in recent papers. (iii) The published K-factor map for Europe has been modelled with the latest state of the art soil data (LUCAS) and a robust geo-statistical model with valid simplifications which were necessary at European scale. (iv) The C-factor map for Europe has been published with a detailed description of the applied methodology which takes into account crop composition and management practices at the best available spatial resolution. (v) Modelled soil loss data was compared with the European Environment Information and Observation Network (EIONET) dataset.(vi) Our model outputs compared well both with national soil loss data in Germany and the European EIONET data. The direct comparison of predicted soil loss data with measured plot data lacks comprehension and needs solving of scaling issues related to the comparison of large-scale long-term data with small-scale plot studies.

The new European Green Deal has the ambition to make the European Union the first climate-neutral continent by 2050. The European Commission presented an ambitious package of measures within the Biodiversity Strategy 2030, the Farm to Fork and the European Climate Law including actions to protect our soils. The Farm to Fork strategy addresses soil pollution with 50 % reduction in use of chemical pesticides by 2030 and aims 20 % reduction in fertilizer use plus a decrease of nutrient losses by at least 50%. The Biodiversity Strategy has the ambition to set a minimum of 30 % of the EU’s land area as protected areas, limit urban sprawl, reduce the pesticides risk, bring back at least 10 % of agricultural area under high-diversity landscape features, put forward the 25 % of the EU’s agricultural land as organically farmed, progress in the remediation of contaminated sites, reduce land degradation and plant more than three billion new trees. The maintenance of wetlands and the enhancement of soil organic carbon are also addressed in the European Climate Law. The new EU Soil Observatory will be collecting policy relevant data and developing indicators for the regular assessment and progress towards the ambitious targets of the Green Deal.

This paper presents the second part of the mapping of topsoil properties based on the Land Use and Cover Area frame Survey (LUCAS). The first part described the physical properties (Ballabio et al., 2016) while this second part includes the following chemical properties: pH, Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC), calcium carbonates (CaCO3), C:N ratio, nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K). The LUCAS survey collected harmonised data on changes in land cover and the state of land use for the European Union (EU). Among the 270,000 land use and cover observations selected for field visit, approximately 20,000 soil samples were collected in 24 EU Member States in 2009 together with more than 2000 samples from Bulgaria and Romania in 2012. The chemical properties maps for the European Union were produced using Gaussian process regression (GPR) models. GPR was selected for its capacity to assess model uncertainty and the possibility of adding prior knowledge in the form of covariance functions to the model. The derived maps will establish baselines that will help monitor soil quality and provide guidance to agro-environmental research and policy developments in the European Union., Highlights • The LUCAS harmonised soil survey comprising 20,000 observations was used in this study. • Soil chemical properties were mapped over the extent of Europe using Gaussian process regression (GPR). • GPR with Matérn kernel modelled soil properties with high accuracy. • GPR allows the production of uncertainty maps as it allows the estimation of prediction variance. • These maps complete the series of topsoil properties for Europe based on LUCAS.

Many factors threaten European Soils, and currently, all the Member States (MS) are introducing many types of soil protection measures. Erosion, pollution, sealing and decline of the organic matter are just some of the threats that affect one of the primary non-removable resources of the planet. Soils play a vital role in the biodiversity and are the provider of numerous Ecosystem Services that support human life on Earth. Following the withdrawal of the Soil Framework Directive proposal by the European Commission, we investigate how the different MS of the European Union (EU) address sustainable soil management under the pressures of different threats. The methodology used is based on a gap analysis applied to the instruments and/or policies adopted by the MS to contrast the various threats according to their specific level of intensity. The study presents for the first time a systematic review of the current EU policies covering all the regulatory instruments, the economic instruments, the information tools, the monitoring systems, and the research and innovation activities. The comparative analysis of the different approaches adopted by MS reveals the absence of a common EU strategy to address soil protection and the inefficacy of the subsidiary principle in the sustainable management of soil resources especially in the view of addressing the Sustainable Development Goals achieving the targets by 2030. Results show how the lack of a Soil Framework Directive has weakened the possibility to have strong coordination among the MS for soil protection. Each Country is adopting an autonomous legislative framework which reveals a huge dis-homogeneity and un-coherences among approaches.

Human activities are accelerating global biodiversity change and have resulted in severely threatened ecosystem services. A large proportion of terrestrial biodiversity is harbored by soil, but soil biodiversity has been omitted from many global biodiversity assessments and conservation actions, and understanding of global patterns of soil biodiversity remains limited. In particular, the extent to which hotspots and coldspots of aboveground and soil biodiversity overlap is not clear. We examined global patterns of these overlaps by mapping indices of aboveground (mammals, birds, amphibians, vascular plants) and soil (bacteria, fungi, macrofauna) biodiversity that we created using previously published data on species richness. Areas of mismatch between aboveground and soil biodiversity covered 27% of Earth's terrestrial surface. The temperate broadleaf and mixed forests biome had the highest proportion of grid cells with high aboveground biodiversity but low soil biodiversity, whereas the boreal and tundra biomes had intermediate soil biodiversity but low aboveground biodiversity. While more data on soil biodiversity are needed, both to cover geographic gaps and to include additional taxa, our results suggest that protecting aboveground biodiversity may not sufficiently reduce threats to soil biodiversity. Given the functional importance of soil biodiversity and the role of soils in human well-being, soil biodiversity should be considered further in policy agendas and conservation actions by adapting management practices to sustain soil biodiversity and considering soil biodiversity when designing protected areas.Disparidades Mundiales entre la Biodiversidad Sobre y Bajo el Suelo Resumen Las actividades humanas están acelerando el cambio en la biodiversidad mundial y han tenido como resultado unos servicios ambientales severamente amenazados. Una gran proporción de la biodiversidad terrestre está albergada en el suelo, pero la biodiversidad de este ha sido omitida de varias evaluaciones mundiales de biodiversidad y de las acciones de conservación, además de que el entendimiento de los patrones mundiales de la biodiversidad del suelo permanece limitado; particularmente, la extensión del traslape entre los puntos fríos y calientes de biodiversidad sobre y bajo suelo no está clara. Examinamos los patrones mundiales de estos traslapes mapeando los índices de biodiversidad sobre el suelo (mamíferos, aves, anfibios y plantas vasculares) y bajo el suelo (bacterias, hongos y macrofauna) que creamos con datos previamente publicados de la riqueza de especies. Las áreas de disparidad entre la biodiversidad sobre y bajo el suelo cubrieron el 27% de la superficie terrestre del planeta. El bioma de los bosques templados de plantas frondosas y mixtas tuvo la proporción más alta de celdas de cuadrícula con una biodiversidad alta sobre el suelo, pero baja para en el subsuelo, mientras que los biomas boreales y de la tundra tuvieron una biodiversidad intermedia bajo el suelo, pero baja para el sobre suelo. Aunque se requieren más datos sobre la biodiversidad del suelo, tanto para cubrir los vacíos geográficos como para incluir a taxones adiciones, nuestros resultados sugieren que la protección a la biodiversidad sobre el suelo puede no reducir suficientemente las amenazas para la biodiversidad del suelo. Dada la importancia funcional de la biodiversidad del suelo y el papel de los suelos en el bienestar humano, se debería considerar a la biodiversidad del suelo mucho más en las agendas políticas y en las acciones de conservación, adaptando a las prácticas de manejo para que mantengan a la biodiversidad del suelo y la consideren cuando designen áreas protegidas.人类活动正在导致全球生物多样性的快速变化, 并已严重影响到生态系统服务功能。陆地生物多样性中很大一部分存在于土壤之中, 然而, 许多全球生物多样性评估和保护行动都没有考虑土壤生物多样性, 人们对全球土壤生物多样性格局的认识也十分有限, 特别是对地表生物多样性和土壤生物多样性的热点地区及贫瘠地区的重叠程度知之甚少。为了研究全球地表生物多样性和土壤生物多样性的重叠情况, 我们利用已发表的物种丰富度数据设计了地表生物多样性 (哺乳动物、鸟类、两栖类、维管植物) 及土壤生物多样性 (细菌、真菌、大型动物群) 指标, 用于绘制相应的地图。结果显示, 地表和土壤生物多样性不匹配的地区占地球陆地面积的 27% 。在温带阔叶林和混交林生物群中, 地表生物多样性高而土壤生物多样性低的栅格占比最高, 而寒带和苔原生物群则是土壤生物多样性中等而地表生物多样性低。虽然还有待增加土壤生物多样性的数据以囊括更多地理区域和生物类群, 但我们的结果已经表明, 保护地表生物多样性可能不足以减少对土壤生物多样性的威胁。鉴于土壤生物多样性的重要功能以及土壤对人类福祉的作用, 应在政策议程和保护行动中更多地考虑土壤生物多样性, 如调整管理实践以保护土壤生物多样性、在保护区设计中纳入土壤生物多样性等等。【翻译: 胡怡思; 审校: 聂永刚】.