Vol. 14 No. 1 (2025)
Full Research Articles

Soils and ecosystem services: policy narratives and instruments for soil health in the EU

PDF
  • Greta Winkler,
  • Luciano Pagano,
  • Daniele Vergamini,
  • Fabio Bartolini
Greta Winkler
Department of Chemical, Pharmaceutical and Agricultural Sciences (DOCPAS), University of Ferrara, Italy
Luciano Pagano
Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment (DAFE), University of Pisa, Italy
Daniele Vergamini
Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment (DAFE), University of Pisa, Italy
Fabio Bartolini
Department of Chemical, Pharmaceutical and Agricultural Sciences (DOCPAS), University of Ferrara, Italy
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-15466

Published 2024-09-10

Keywords

  • soil health,
  • ecosystem services,
  • policy instruments,
  • incentives,
  • Soil Monitoring Law

How to Cite

Winkler, G., Pagano, L., Vergamini, D., & Bartolini, F. (2024). Soils and ecosystem services: policy narratives and instruments for soil health in the EU. Bio-Based and Applied Economics, 14(1), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-15466

Copyright (c) 2025 Greta Winkler, Luciano Pagano, Daniele Vergamini, Fabio Bartolini

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

European soils and their status is a matter of concern that has entered the policy arena and the objective to restore soil health is part of the Soil strategy to 2030. Aim of this study is to explore the integration of the concept of soil health and the provision of soil ecosystem service by conducting i) a content analysis of EU policies and ii) a scoping review of literature over policy instruments for soil governance. Results show a focus on soil fertility, mainly soil organic matter, while services such as conservation of biodiversity or cultural heritage still appear underrepresented. Findings are reinforced by the gap in literature, providing little evidence of policy instruments contributing to soil health. A more coordinated effort among policy sectors is required to prioritize soil health in the EU; invesitgating the role of market-based instruments could complement what public policies are lacking.

PDF

References

  1. Adhikari, K., & Hartemink, A. E. (2016). Linking soils to ecosystem services - A global review. Geoderma 262: 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GEODERMA.2015.08.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.08.009
  2. Arias-Navarro, C., Panagos, P., Jones, A., Amaral, M. J., Schneegans, A., van Liedekerke, M., Wojda, P., & Montanarella, L. (2023). Forty years of soil research funded by the European Commission: Trends and future. A systematic review of research projects. European Journal of Soil Science 74(5). https://doi.org/10.1111/ejss.13423 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ejss.13423
  3. Bampa, F., O’Sullivan, L., Madena, K., Sandén, T., Spiegel, H., Henriksen, C. B., Ghaley, B. B., Jones, A., Staes, J., Sturel, S., Trajanov, A., Creamer, R. E., & Debeljak, M. (2019). Harvesting European knowledge on soil functions and land management using multi-criteria decision analysis. Soil Use and Management 35(1): 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/SUM.12506 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12506
  4. Bartkowski, B., Hansjürgens, B., Möckel, S., & Bartke, S. (2018). Institutional economics of agricultural soil ecosystem services. Sustainability (Switzerland) 10(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072447 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072447
  5. Baveye, P. C., Baveye, J., & Gowdy, J. (2016). Soil “ecosystem” services and natural capital: Critical appraisal of research on uncertain ground. Frontiers in Environmental Science 4(JUN). https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2016.00041 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2016.00041
  6. Bouma, J., de Haan, J., & Dekkers, M. F. S. (2022). Exploring Operational Procedures to Assess Ecosystem Services at Farm Level, including the Role of Soil Health. Soil Systems 6(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems6020034 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems6020034
  7. Bünemann, E. K., Bongiorno, G., Bai, Z., Creamer, R. E., De Deyn, G., De Goede, R., Fleskens, L., Geissen, V., Kuyper, T. W., Mäder, P., Pulleman, M., Sukkel, W., Van Groenigen, J. W., & Brussaard, L. (2018). Soil quality – A critical review. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 120: 105–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.01.030 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.01.030
  8. Byrne, J. A. (2016). Improving the peer review of narrative literature reviews. Research Integrity and Peer Review 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0019-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0019-2
  9. Chaudhary, S., McGregor, A., Houston, D., & Chettri, N. (2015). The evolution of ecosystem services: A time series and discourse-centered analysis. In Environmental Science and Policy 54: 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.04.025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.04.025
  10. Coderoni, S. (2023). Key policy objectives for European agricultural policies: Some reflections on policy coherence and governance issues. Bio-Based and Applied Economics 12(2): 85–101. https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-13971 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-13971
  11. Costantini, E. A. C. (2023). Possible policies and actions to protect the soil cultural and natural heritage of Europe. Geoderma Regional 32. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GEODRS.2022.E00599 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2022.e00599
  12. D’Alberto, R., Raggi, M., & Viaggi, D. (2023). Innovative contract solutions for the Agri-Environmental-Climate Public Goods provision: Which features meet the farmers’ approval? Insights from Emilia-Romagna (Italy). Bio-Based and Applied Economics 13(1): 73–101. https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-14016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-14016
  13. Deines, J. M., Guan, K., Lopez, B., Zhou, Q., White, C. S., Wang, S., & Lobell, D. B. (2023). Recent cover crop adoption is associated with small maize and soybean yield losses in the United States. Global Change Biology 29(3): 794–807. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16489 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16489
  14. Dominati, E., Mackay, A., Green, S., & Patterson, M. (2014). A soil change-based methodology for the quantification and valuation of ecosystem services from agro-ecosystems: A case study of pastoral agriculture in New Zealand. Ecological Economics 100: 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLECON.2014.02.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.02.008
  15. Eastburn, D. J., O’Geen, A. T., Tate, K. W., & Roche, L. M. (2017). Multiple ecosystem services in a working landscape. PLoS ONE 12(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166595 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166595
  16. Eichhorn, T., Kantelhardt, J., & Schaller, L. L. (2024a). Understanding farmers’ intention to perform result-based agri-environmental schemes for the improved provision of biodiversity and soil quality. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2024.2364774 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2024.2364774
  17. Eichhorn, T., Schaller, L., Hamunen, K., & Runge, T. (2024b). Exploring macro-environmental factors influencing adoption of result-based and collective agri-environmental measures: a PESTLE approach based on stakeholder statements. Bio-Based and Applied Economics 13(1): 49–71. https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-14489 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-14489
  18. European Commission: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (2023), EU missions – Soil deal for Europe – What is the EU mission – A soil deal for Europe, Publications Office of the European Union. Available at https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/171313 (accessed July 3rd 2024)
  19. FAO and ITPS. (2015). Status of the World’s Soil Resources (SWSR) – Main Report. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils, Rome, Italy. Available online at: https://www.fao.org/3/i5199e/I5199E.pdf. Accessed: 17.02.2023
  20. Friedrichsen, C. N., Hagen-Zakarison, S., Friesen, M. L., McFarland, C. R., Tao, H., & Wulfhorst, J. D. (2021). Soil health and well-being: Redefining soil health based upon a plurality of values. Soil Security 2: 100004. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SOISEC.2021.100004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soisec.2021.100004
  21. Garrett, L., & Neves, B. (2016). Incentives for Ecosystem Services: Spectrum. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available online at: http://www.fao.org/in-action/incentives-for-ecosystem-services/toolkit/sources-of-incentives/en/. Accessed on 17.02.2023
  22. Gómez-Baggethun, E., De Groot, R., Lomas, P. L., & Montes, C. (2010). The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecological Economics 69(6): 1209–1218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.007
  23. Gomiero, T. (2018). Large-scale biofuels production: A possible threat to soil conservation and environmental services. Applied Soil Ecology 123: 729–736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2017.09.028 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2017.09.028
  24. Gonzalez Lago, M., Plant, R., & Jacobs, B. (2019). Re-politicising soils: What is the role of soil framings in setting the agenda? Geoderma 349: 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.04.021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.04.021
  25. Guimarães, M. H., Pinto-Correia, T., de Belém Costa Freitas, M., Ferraz-de-Oliveira, I., Sales-Baptista, E., da Veiga, J. F. F., Tiago Marques, J., Pinto-Cruz, C., Godinho, C., & Belo, A. D. F. (2023). Farming for nature in the Montado: the application of ecosystem services in a results-based model. Ecosystem Services 61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101524 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101524
  26. Heuser, Dr. I. (2022). Soil Governance in current European Union Law and in the European Green Deal. Soil Security 6: 100053. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SOISEC.2022.100053 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soisec.2022.100053
  27. IPBES (2018). The IPBES assessment report on land degradation and restoration. Montanarella, L., Scholes, R., & Brainich, A. (Eds.). Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany. 744 pages. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3237392
  28. Ingram, J., Mills, J., Black, J. E., Chivers, C. A., Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., Elsen, A., Frac, M., López-Felices, B., Mayer-Gruner, P., Skaalsveen, K., Stolte, J., & Tits, M. (2022). Do Agricultural Advisory Services in Europe have the Capacity to Support the Transition to Healthy Soils? Land 11(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/land11050599 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/land11050599
  29. Janzen, H. H., Janzen, D. W., & Gregorich, E. G. (2021). The ‘soil health’ metaphor: Illuminating or illusory? Soil Biology and Biochemistry 159: 108167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108167 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108167
  30. Jordan, A., & Lenschow, A. (2010). Policy paper environmental policy integration: A state of the art review. Environmental Policy and Governance 20(3): 147–158. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.539 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.539
  31. Juerges, N., & Hansjürgens, B. (2018). Soil governance in the transition towards a sustainable bioeconomy – A review. Journal of Cleaner Production 170: 1628–1639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.143 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.143
  32. Keenor, S. G., Rodrigues, A. F., Mao, L., Latawiec, A. E., Harwood, A. R., & Reid, B. J. (2021). Capturing a soil carbon economy. Royal Society Open Science 8(4). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.202305 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.202305
  33. Keesstra, S., Sannigrahi, S., López-Vicente, M., Pulido, M., Novara, A., Visser, S., & Kalantari, Z. (2021). The role of soils in regulation and provision of blue and green water. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 376(1834). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2020.0175 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2020.0175
  34. Keith, A. M., Schmidt, O., & McMahon, B. J. (2016). Soil stewardship as a nexus between Ecosystem Services and One Health. Ecosystem Services 17: 40–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.008
  35. Lal, R. (2020). The role of industry and the private sector in promoting the “4 per 1000” initiative and other negative emission technologies. Geoderma 378: 114613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114613 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114613
  36. Lant, C. L., Ruhl, J. B., & Kraft, S. E. (2008). The tragedy of ecosystem services. BioScience 58(10): 969–974. https://doi.org/10.1641/B581010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1641/B581010
  37. Lehmann, J., Bossio, D. A., Kögel-Knabner, I., & Rillig, M. C. (2020). The concept and future prospects of soil health. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment 1(10). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0080-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0080-8
  38. Löbmann, M. T., Maring, L., Prokop, G., Brils, J., Bender, J., Bispo, A., & Helming, K. (2022). Systems knowledge for sustainable soil and land management. Science of the Total Environment 822: 153389. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2022.153389 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153389
  39. Mantino, F. (2022). Rural areas between locality and global networks. Local development mechanisms and the role of policies empowering rural actors. Bio-Based and Applied Economics 10(4): 265–281. https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-12364 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-12364
  40. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human-well being: A framework for assessment. Available online at: https://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/Framework.html. Accessed on: 21.02.2023
  41. Montanarella, L., & Alva, I. L. (2015). Putting soils on the agenda: the three Rio Conventions and the post-2015 development agenda. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 15: 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.07.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.07.008
  42. Neill, A. M., O’Donoghue, C., & Stout, J. C. (2022). Conceptual integration of ecosystem services and natural capital within Irish national policy: An analysis over time and between policy sectors. Ecosystem Services 57: 101468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101468 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101468
  43. Neto, B., & Gama Caldas, M. (2018). The use of green criteria in the public procurement of food products and catering services: a review of EU schemes. Environment, Development and Sustainability 20(5): 1905-1933. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-017-9992-y
  44. Panagos, P., Montanarella, L., Barbero, M., Schneegans, A., Aguglia, L., & Jones, A. (2022). Soil priorities in the European Union. Geoderma Regional 29: e00510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2022.e00510 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2022.e00510
  45. Peters, M. D. J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C. M., & Khalil, H. (2020). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis 18(10): 2119–2126. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167
  46. Piñeiro, V., Arias, J., Dürr, J., Elverdin, P., Ibáñez, A. M., Kinengyere, A., Opazo, C. M., Owoo, N., Page, J. R., Prager, S. D., & Torero, M. (2020). A scoping review on incentives for adoption of sustainable agricultural practices and their outcomes. Nature Sustainability 3(10): 809–820. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00617-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00617-y
  47. Raina, N., Zavalloni, M., & Viaggi, D. (2024). Incentive mechanisms of carbon farming contracts: A systematic mapping study. Journal of Environmental Management 352: 120126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.120126
  48. Roe, E. (1994). Narrative Policy Analysis: Theory and Practice. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv11hpqq4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822381891
  49. Rogge, K. S., & Reichardt, K. (2016). Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis. Research Policy 45(8): 1620–1635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.004
  50. Ronchi, S., Salata, S., Arcidiacono, A., Piroli, E., & Montanarella, L. (2019). Policy instruments for soil protection among the EU member states: A comparative analysis. Land Use Policy 82: 763–780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.01.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.01.017
  51. Runge, T., Latacz-Lohmann, U., Schaller, L., Todorova, K., Daugbjerg, C., Termansen, M., Liira, J., le Gloux, F., Dupraz, P., Leppanen, J., Fogarasi, J., Vigh, E. Z., Bradfield, T., Hennessy, T., Targetti, S., Viaggi, D., Berzina, I., Schulp, C., Majewski, E., … Velazquez, F. J. B. (2022). Implementation of Eco-schemes in Fifteen European Union Member States. EuroChoices 21(2): 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12352 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12352
  52. Saldaña, J. (2013). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  53. Schröder, J. J., ten Berge, H. F. M., Bampa, F., Creamer, R. E., Giraldez-Cervera, J. V., Henriksen, C. B., Olesen, J. E., Rutgers, M., Sandén, T., & Spiegel, H. (2020). Multi-Functional Land Use Is Not Self-Evident for European Farmers: A Critical Review. Frontiers in Environmental Science 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.575466 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.575466
  54. Shanahan, E. A., Jones, M. D., & McBeth, M. K. (2011). Policy narratives and policy processes. Policy Studies Journal 39(3): 535-561. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00420.x
  55. Stevens, A. W. (2022). The economics of land tenure and soil health. Soil Security 6: 100047. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SOISEC.2022.100047 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soisec.2022.100047
  56. Targetti, S., Niedermayr, A., Häfner, K., & Schaller, L. (2024). New pathways for improved delivery of public goods from agriculture and forestry. Bio-Based and Applied Economics 13(1): 3–11. https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-15862 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-15862
  57. Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
  58. Turpin, N., ten Berge, H., Grignani, C., Guzmán, G., Vanderlinden, K., Steinmann, H. H., Siebielec, G., Spiegel, H., Perret, E., Ruysschaert, G., Laguna, A., Giráldez, J. V., Werner, M., Raschke, I., Zavattaro, L., Costamagna, C., Schlatter, N., Berthold, H., Sandén, T., & Baumgarten, A. (2017). An assessment of policies affecting Sustainable Soil Management in Europe and selected member states. Land Use Policy 66: 241–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2017.04.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.04.001
  59. van Bruggen, A. H. C., Goss, E. M., Havelaar, A., van Diepeningen, A. D., Finckh, M. R., & Morris, J. G. (2019). One Health - Cycling of diverse microbial communities as a connecting force for soil, plant, animal, human and ecosystem health. Science of the Total Environment 664: 927–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.091 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.091
  60. Vatn, A. (2018). Environmental Governance – From Public to Private? Ecological Economics 148: 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.01.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.01.010
  61. Vergamini, D., Olivieri, M., Andreoli, M., & Bartolini, F. (2024). Simulating policy mixes to reduce soil erosion and land abandonment in marginal areas: A case study from the Liguria Region (Italy). Land Use Policy 143: 107188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107188 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107188
  62. Vysna, V., Maes, J., Petersen, J. E., La Notte, A., Vallecillo, S., Aizpurua, N., Ivits, E., & Teller, A. (2021). Accounting for ecosystems and their services in the European Union (INCA). Statistical Report. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

Most read articles by the same author(s)