IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2014i12p9538-9563d43821.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Current European Policies Prevent Soil Threats and Support Soil Functions?

Author

Listed:
  • Nadia Glæsner

    (Directorate, Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Müncheberg 15374, Germany
    Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Thorvaldsensvej 40, Frederiksberg 1871, Denmark)

  • Katharina Helming

    (Directorate, Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Müncheberg 15374, Germany)

  • Wim De Vries

    (Alterra, Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR), P.O. Box 47, Wageningen 6700 AA, The Netherlands)

Abstract

There is currently no legislation at the European level that focuses exclusively on soil conservation. A cross-policy analysis was carried out to identify gaps and overlaps in existing EU legislation that is related to soil threats and functions. We found that three soil threats, namely compaction, salinization and soil sealing, were not addressed in any of the 19 legislative policies that were analyzed. Other soil threats, such as erosion, decline in organic matter, loss of biodiversity and contamination, were covered in existing legislation, but only a few directives provided targets for reducing the soil threats. Existing legislation addresses the reduction of the seven soil functions that were analyzed, but there are very few directives for improving soil functions. Because soil degradation is ongoing in Europe, it raises the question whether existing legislation is sufficient for maintaining soil resources. Addressing soil functions individually in various directives fails to account for the multifunctionality of soil. This paper suggests that a European Soil Framework Directive would increase the effectiveness of conserving soil functions in the EU.

Suggested Citation

  • Nadia Glæsner & Katharina Helming & Wim De Vries, 2014. "Do Current European Policies Prevent Soil Threats and Support Soil Functions?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-26, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:12:p:9538-9563:d:43821
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/12/9538/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/12/9538/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Prager, Katrin & Schuler, Johannes & Helming, Katharina & Zander, Peter & Ratinger, Tomas & Hagedorn, Konrad, 2011. "An analytical framework for soil degradation, farming practices, institutions and policy responses," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114773, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    3. Barrios, Edmundo, 2007. "Soil biota, ecosystem services and land productivity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 269-285, December.
    4. Nkonya, Ephraim & von Braun, Joachim & Mirzabaev, Alisher & Le, Quang Bao & Kwon, Ho Young & Kirui, Oliver K., 2013. "Economics of Land Degradation Initiative: Methods and Approach for Global and National Assessments," Discussion Papers 158663, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rudi Hessel & Guido Wyseure & Ioanna S. Panagea & Abdallah Alaoui & Mark S. Reed & Hedwig van Delden & Melanie Muro & Jane Mills & Oene Oenema & Francisco Areal & Erik van den Elsen & Simone Verzandvo, 2022. "Soil-Improving Cropping Systems for Sustainable and Profitable Farming in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-27, May.
    2. Cerdà, A. & Rodrigo-Comino, J. & Giménez-Morera, A. & Novara, A. & Pulido, M. & Kapović-Solomun, M. & Keesstra, S.D., 2018. "Policies can help to apply successful strategies to control soil and water losses. The case of chipped pruned branches (CPB) in Mediterranean citrus plantations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 734-745.
    3. Ronchi, Silvia & Salata, Stefano & Arcidiacono, Andrea & Piroli, Erika & Montanarella, Luca, 2019. "Policy instruments for soil protection among the EU member states: A comparative analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 763-780.
    4. Roxana-Gabriela Popa & Emil-Cătălin Șchiopu & Aniela Bălăcescu & Luminița-Georgeta Popescu & Aurelia Pătrașcu, 2023. "Assessment of Soil Sustainability Using the LUCAS Database in the Southwest Region of Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, May.
    5. Dirk Vrebos & Francesca Bampa & Rachel E. Creamer & Ciro Gardi & Bhim Bahadur Ghaley & Arwyn Jones & Michiel Rutgers & Taru Sandén & Jan Staes & Patrick Meire, 2017. "The Impact of Policy Instruments on Soil Multifunctionality in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, March.
    6. Stefano Salata & Bertan Arslan, 2022. "Designing with Ecosystem Modelling: The Sponge District Application in İzmir, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-26, March.
    7. Tiankui Li & Yi Liu & Sijie Lin & Yangze Liu & Yunfeng Xie, 2019. "Soil Pollution Management in China: A Brief Introduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, January.
    8. Plaas, Elke & Meyer-Wolfarth, Friederike & Banse, Martin & Bengtsson, Jan & Bergmann, Holger & Faber, Jack & Potthoff, Martin & Runge, Tania & Schrader, Stefan & Taylor, Astrid, 2019. "Towards valuation of biodiversity in agricultural soils: A case for earthworms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 291-300.
    9. Kipling, Richard P. & Bannink, André & Bellocchi, Gianni & Dalgaard, Tommy & Fox, Naomi J. & Hutchings, Nicholas J. & Kjeldsen, Chris & Lacetera, Nicola & Sinabell, Franz & Topp, Cairistiona F.E. & va, 2016. "Modeling European ruminant production systems: Facing the challenges of climate change," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 24-37.
    10. Jürges, Nataly, 2016. "Wahrnehmungen und Funktionen in der Transformation zur Bioökonomie: Eine Akteursanalyse im Politikfeld "Boden"," UFZ Discussion Papers 6/2016, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    11. Yuan Quan & Chenxing Wang & Yan Yan & Gang Wu & Hongxun Zhang, 2016. "Impact of Inter‐Basin Water Transfer Projects on Regional Ecological Security from a Telecoupling Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-12, February.
    12. Rui Zhao & Kening Wu, 2021. "Soil Health Evaluation of Farmland Based on Functional Soil Management—A Case Study of Yixing City, Jiangsu Province, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-27, June.
    13. Cabini, Emanuele & Fontana, Luca & Malavasi, Pierluigi & Iavicoli, Ivo, 2018. "Land use: The perception of risk by the citizens and local administrators in the North of Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 553-564.
    14. Tomáš Brabenec & Anna Maroušková & Tomáš Zoubek & Martin Filip, 2021. "Residues from Water Precipitation via Ferric Hydroxide Threaten Soil Fertility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-11, April.
    15. Rui Zhao & Junying Li & Kening Wu & Long Kang, 2021. "Cultivated Land Use Zoning Based on Soil Function Evaluation from the Perspective of Black Soil Protection," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-29, June.
    16. Stankovics, Petra & Montanarella, Luca & Kassai, Piroska & Tóth, Gergely & Tóth, Zoltán, 2020. "The interrelations of land ownership, soil protection and privileges of capital in the aspect of land take," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    17. Dietze, Victoria & Hagemann, Nina & Jürges, Nataly & Bartke, Stephan & Fürst, Christine, 2019. "Farmers consideration of soil ecosystem services in agricultural management - A case study from Saxony, Germany," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 813-824.
    18. Till Hermanns & Katharina Helming & Katharina Schmidt & Hannes Jochen König & Heiko Faust, 2015. "Stakeholder Strategies for Sustainability Impact Assessment of Land Use Scenarios: Analytical Framework and Identifying Land Use Claims," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-29, September.
    19. Spyra, Marcin & Kleemann, Janina & Calò, Nica Claudia & Schürmann, Alina & Fürst, Christine, 2021. "Protection of peri-urban open spaces at the level of regional policy-making: Examples from six European regions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    20. Jessica Stubenrauch & Beatrice Garske & Felix Ekardt, 2018. "Sustainable Land Use, Soil Protection and Phosphorus Management from a Cross-National Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-23, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dominati, Estelle & Patterson, Murray & Mackay, Alec, 2010. "A framework for classifying and quantifying the natural capital and ecosystem services of soils," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1858-1868, July.
    2. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur, 2016. "Classification and valuation of soil ecosystem services," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 24-38.
    3. Turner, Katrine Grace & Anderson, Sharolyn & Gonzales-Chang, Mauricio & Costanza, Robert & Courville, Sasha & Dalgaard, Tommy & Dominati, Estelle & Kubiszewski, Ida & Ogilvy, Sue & Porfirio, Luciana &, 2016. "A review of methods, data, and models to assess changes in the value of ecosystem services from land degradation and restoration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 319(C), pages 190-207.
    4. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    5. Stefan Liehr & Julia Röhrig & Marion Mehring & Thomas Kluge, 2017. "How the Social-Ecological Systems Concept Can Guide Transdisciplinary Research and Implementation: Addressing Water Challenges in Central Northern Namibia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-19, June.
    6. Yanzi Wang & Chunming Wu & Yongfeng Gong & Zhen Zhu, 2021. "Can Adaptive Governance Promote Coupling Social-Ecological Systems? Evidence from the Vulnerable Ecological Region of Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Breffle, William S. & Muralidharan, Daya & Donovan, Richard P. & Liu, Fangming & Mukherjee, Amlan & Jin, Yongliang, 2013. "Socioeconomic evaluation of the impact of natural resource stressors on human-use services in the Great Lakes environment: A Lake Michigan case study," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 152-161.
    8. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. P. Hlaváčková & D. Šafařík, 2016. "Quantification of the utility value of the recreational function of forests from the aspect of valuation practice," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 345-356.
    10. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    11. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    13. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    14. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    15. Juliana Hurtado Rassi, 2020. "Gestión conjunta de ecosistemas transfronterizos: la importancia del trabajo articulado entre los Estados para la conservación de los recursos naturales. Análisis del caso particular de la “Reserva de," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1241, htpr_v3_i.
    16. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    17. Griewald, Yuliana, 2018. "The Art of the State to Intervene: Insights Into Agricultural Land Management in Russia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1-9.
    18. Rode, Julian & Le Menestrel, Marc & Cornelissen, Gert, 2017. "Ecosystem Service Arguments Enhance Public Support for Environmental Protection - But Beware of the Numbers!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 213-221.
    19. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    20. Stenger, Anne & Harou, Patrice & Navrud, Ståle, 2009. "Valuing environmental goods and services derived from the forests," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 1-14, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:12:p:9538-9563:d:43821. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.