Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Policy implications of multiple concurrent soil erosion processes in European farmland

Nature Sustainability volume 6, pages 103–112 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Soil erosion is a serious threat to soil functions leading to land productivity decline and multiple off-site effects. Here we show, using a multi-model approach, the spatial risk of soil erosion by water, wind, tillage and harvesting and where the co-occurrence of these different processes is observed. Moreover, we analysed where these locations of multiple erosion co-occurrence are likely to intersect with the projected increase of dry/wet climate conditions. Of the ~110 million hectares (M ha) of arable land in the European Union, our estimates show that 43 M ha are vulnerable to a single driver of erosion, 15.6 M ha to two drivers and 0.81 M ha to three or more drivers. About 3.2 M ha of arable land are vulnerable to the possible interaction of increased flood, drought, water and wind erosion. We contend that this set of predictions serves as a basis for developing an efficient stratified monitoring network and informing targeted mitigation strategies under the Common Agricultural Policy 2023–2027. The road to the sustainable, carbon-neutral and biodiversity-friendly system of agriculture advocated for in the EU Green Deal goes through a thematic strategy for soil protection from multiple concurrent erosion processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Potential multi-process soil displacement modelled for the EU member states and UK arable land.
Fig. 2: Changes in future water and wind erosion vulnerability in the European Union and United Kingdom.
Fig. 3: Flow diagram of the conservation scenarios and their effects on the soil displacement by water-erosion estimates.

Data availability

All data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article text and Supplementary Information or are freely available at the European Soil Data Centre (ESDAC), the institutional soil data repository of the European Commission Joint Research Centre (https://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/). Additional higher-resolution maps (GeoTIFF format) will be made available via ESDAC.

Code availability

Code and programmes can be retrieved from the European Soil Data Centre (ESDAC) (https://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/) and from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Robinson, D. A. et al. Soil natural capital in Europe; a framework for state and change assessment. Sci. Rep. 7, 6706 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Keesstra, S. D. et al. The significance of soils and soil science towards realization of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. SOIL 2, 111–128 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Borrelli, P. et al. Soil erosion modelling: a global review and statistical analysis. Sci. Total Environ. 780, 146494 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Poesen, J. Soil erosion in the Anthropocene: research needs. Earth Surf. Processes Landforms 84, 64–84 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Verheijen, F. G. A., Jones, R. J. A., Rickson, R. J. & Smith, C. J. Tolerable versus actual soil erosion rates in Europe. Earth Sci. Rev. 94, 23–38 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Borrelli, P. et al. Monitoring gully erosion in the European Union: a novel approach based on the Land Use/Cover Area frame Survey (LUCAS). Int. Soil Water Conserv. Res. 10, 17–28 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. The Common Agricultural Policy at a Glance (European Commission, 2022); https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy/cap-glance_en

  8. Silva, V. et al. Distribution of glyphosate and aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) in agricultural topsoils of the European Union. Sci. Total Environ. 621, 1352–1359 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Healthy Soils–New EU Soil Strategy (European Commission, 2022); https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12634-Healthy-soils-new-EU-soil-strategy_en

  10. Schebesta, H. & Candel, J. J. L. Game-changing potential of the EU’s farm to fork strategy. Nat. Food 1, 586–588 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Christel, A., Maron, P. A. & Ranjard, L. Impact of farming systems on soil ecological quality: a meta-analysis. Environ. Chem. Lett. 19, 4603–4625 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Claassen, R. et al. Tillage Intensity and Conservation Cropping in the United States (USDA Economic Research Service, 2018).

  13. Borrelli, P. et al. Land use and climate change impacts on global soil erosion by water (2015–2070). Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 21994–22001 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Stroosnijder, L. Measurement of erosion: is it possible? Catena 64, 162–173 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hu, L.-J. & Flanagan, D. C. Towards new-generation soil erosion modeling: building a unified omnivorous model. J. Soil Water Conserv. 68, 100A–103A (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Boardman, J. & Evans, R. The measurement, estimation and monitoring of soil erosion by runoff at the field scale: challenges and possibilities with particular reference to Britain. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 44, 31–49 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fick, S. E. & Hijmans, R. J. WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 37, 4302–4315 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Panagos, P. et al. The new assessment of soil loss by water erosion in Europe. Environ. Sci. Policy 54, 438–447 (2015).

  19. Van Oost, K., Cerdan, O. & Quine, T. A. Accelerated sediment fluxes by water and tillage erosion on European agricultural land. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 34, 1625–1634 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Borrelli, P., Lugato, E., Montanarella, L. & Panagos, P. A new assessment of soil loss due to wind erosion in European agricultural soils using a quantitative spatially distributed modelling approach. L. Degrad. Dev. 28, 335–344 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Panagos, P., Borrelli, P. & Poesen, J. Soil loss due to crop harvesting in the European Union: a first estimation of an underrated geomorphic process. Sci. Total Environ. 664, 487–498 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bryan, R. B. Soil erodibility and processes of water erosion on hillslope. Geomorphology 32, 385–415 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Nearing, M. A., Yin, S.-Q., Borrelli, P. & Polyakov, V. O. Rainfall erosivity: an historical review. Catena 157, 357–362 (2017).

  24. Panagos, P., Borrelli, P. & Meusburger, K. A new European slope length and steepness factor (LS-factor) for modeling soil erosion by water. Geosciences 5, 117–126 (2015).

  25. Panagos, P. et al. Estimating the soil erosion cover-management factor at the European scale. Land Use Policy 48, 38–50 (2015).

  26. Panagos, P. et al. Rainfall erosivity in Europe. Sci. Total Environ. 511, 801–814 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Panagos, P., Meusburger, K., Ballabio, C., Borrelli, P. & Alewell, C. Soil erodibility in Europe: a high-resolution dataset based on LUCAS. Sci. Total Environ. 479–480, 189–200 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Panagos, P. et al. Modelling the effect of support practices (P-factor) on the reduction of soil erosion by water at European scale. Environ. Sci. Policy 51, 23–34 (2015).

  29. Lindstrom, M. J., Nelson, W. W. & Schumacher, T. E. Quantifying tillage erosion rates due to moldboard plowing. Soil Tillage Res. 24, 243–255 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Govers, G., Vandaele, K., Desmet, P., Poesen, J. & Bunte, K. The role of tillage in soil redistribution on hillslopes. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 45, 469–478 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Van Oost, K., Govers, G., de Alba, S. & Quine, T. A. Tillage erosion: a review of controlling factors and implications for soil quality. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 30, 443–466 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lobb, D. A., Gary Kachanoski, R. & Miller, M. H. Tillage translocation and tillage erosion in the complex upland landscapes of southwestern Ontario, Canada. Soil Tillage Res. 51, 189–209 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lobb, D. A., Huffman, E. & Reicosky, D. C. Importance of information on tillage practices in the modelling of environmental processes and in the use of environmental indicators. J. Environ. Manage. 82, 377–387 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Van Oost, K., Govers, G. & Desmet, P. Evaluating the effects of changes in landscape structure on soil erosion by water and tillage. Landsc. Ecol. 15, 577–589 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Fryrear, D. W., Sutherland, P. L., Davis, G., Hardee, G. & Dollar, M. Wind erosion estimates with RWEQ and WEQ. In Sustaining the Global Farm – Selected papers from the10th International Soil Conservation Organization Meeting (eds. Stott, D. E., Mohtar, R. H., & Steinhardt, G. C.) 79720 760–765 (USDA and Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 2001).

  36. Fryrear, D. W., Chen, W. N. & Lester, C. Revised wind erosion equation. Ann. Arid Zone 40, 265–279 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ruysschaert, G., Poesen, J., Verstraeten, G. & Govers, G. Soil loss due to crop harvesting: significance and determining factors. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 28, 467–501 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Poesen, J. W. A., Verstraeten, G., Soenens, R. & Seynaeve, L. Soil losses due to harvesting of chicory roots and sugar beet: an underrated geomorphic process? Catena 43, 35–47 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ruysschaert, G., Poesen, J., Verstraeten, G. & Govers, G. Interannual variation of soil losses due to sugar beet harvesting in West Europe. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 107, 317–329 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ruysschaert, G., Poesen, J., Verstraeten, G. & Govers, G. Soil losses due to mechanized potato harvesting. Soil Tillage Res. 86, 52–72 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ruysschaert, G., Poesen, J., Verstraeten, G. & Govers, G. Soil loss due to harvesting of various crop types in contrasting agro-ecological environments. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 120, 153–165 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ruysschaert, G., Poesen, J., Verstraeten, G. & Govers, G. in Soil Erosion in Europe (eds Boardman, J. & Poesen, J.) 609–621 (John Wiley & Sons, 2006).

  43. Ruysschaert, G., Poesen, J., Auerswald, K., Verstraeten, G. & Govers, G. Soil losses due to potato harvesting at the regional scale in Belgium. Soil Use Manage. 23, 156–161 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ballabio, C., Panagos, P. & Monatanarella, L. Mapping topsoil physical properties at European scale using the LUCAS database. Geoderma 261, 110–123 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. d’Andrimont, R. et al. From parcel to continental scale–a first European crop type map based on Sentinel-1 and LUCAS Copernicus in-situ observations. Remote Sens. Environ. 266, 112708 (2021).

  46. Demography, Population Stock and Balance (Eurostat, accessed September 2021); https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/population-demography/demography-population-stock-balance/database

  47. Borrelli, P. et al. An assessment of the global impact of 21st century land use change on soil erosion. Nat. Commun. 8, 2013 (2017).

  48. Kuhwald, M., Busche, F., Saggau, P. & Duttmann, R. Is soil loss due to crop harvesting the most disregarded soil erosion process? A review of harvest erosion. Soil Tillage Res. 215, 105213 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. McGehee, R., Flanagan, D. & Srivastava, P. WEPPCLIFF: a command-line tool to process climate inputs for soil loss models. J. Open Source Softw. 5, 2029 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Reuter, H. I., Nelson, A. & Jarvis, A. An evaluation of void-filling interpolation methods for SRTM data. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 21, 983–100 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The modelling framework of this study is part of the research activities promoted by the EU Soil Observatory (EUSO)–Soil Erosion Working Group. We thank the European Commission and the Joint Research Centre for providing data and logistic support. Funding for P.B. was provided by the EcoSSSoil Project, Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute (KEITI) (grant number 2019002820004). Funding for D.A.R. was provided by a Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Knowledge Exchange fellowship (grant number NE/N005309/1) and the Natural Environment Research Council award number NE/R016429/1 as part of the UK Status, Change and Projections of the Environment (UK–ScaPE) Programme Delivering National Capability.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Science, Roma Tre University, Rome, Italy

    Pasquale Borrelli

  2. Department of Biological Environment, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea

    Pasquale Borrelli

  3. European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Ispra, Italy

    Panos Panagos, Cristiano Ballabio & Emanuele Lugato

  4. Department of Environmental Sciences, Environmental Geosciences, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

    Christine Alewell

  5. Institute of Hydraulic Research, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil

    Hugo de Oliveira Fagundes

  6. International Platform for Dryland Research and Education, Tottori University, Tottori, Japan

    Nigussie Haregeweyn

  7. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy

    Michael Maerker

  8. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Jean Poesen & Matthias Vanmaercke

  9. Institute of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Maria-Curie Sklodowska University, Lublin, Poland

    Jean Poesen

  10. UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Environment Centre Wales, Bangor, United Kingdom

    David A. Robinson

Authors
  1. Pasquale Borrelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Panos Panagos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christine Alewell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cristiano Ballabio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hugo de Oliveira Fagundes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nigussie Haregeweyn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Emanuele Lugato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Michael Maerker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Jean Poesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Matthias Vanmaercke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. David A. Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

P.B., D.A.R. and P.P. led the work and designed the study. P.B., C.B., P.P. and E.L. performed the computational steps and analysis. D.A.R. and P.B. wrote the initial draft of the manuscript; all other remaining authors made substantial contributions to the study design and methodology, provided data and helped improve the manuscript. P.B. was the research leading author, and D.A.R. and P.P. were the supervising authors. All other contributing authors are listed in alphabetical order.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pasquale Borrelli.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Sustainability thanks Lulseged Tamene and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figs. 1–6, Tables 1–5 and References 1–5.

Reporting Summary.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Borrelli, P., Panagos, P., Alewell, C. et al. Policy implications of multiple concurrent soil erosion processes in European farmland. Nat Sustain 6, 103–112 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-00988-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-022-00988-4

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing