Driving effectively soil research towards practice and towards policy solutions requires that the involved stakeholders, i.e researchers, practitioners and both national and regional policy makers interact and share information and views. However, these communities rather function in isolation. The European Joint Co-fund programme, EJP SOIL (Towards climate-smart and sustainable agricultural soil management) developed an innovative instrument to this end in each of its 24 participating countries.

EJP SOIL National Hubs are committees of soil stakeholders (farmers, farmers advisors and farmers organisations, industry and agrobusiness, NGOs, local or national governance and policy implementing representatives, scientists), that were set either de-novo for the EJP SOIL or based on existing committees. Their mission is to (i) provide feedback to the EJP SOIL activities and outputs, (ii) voice national position and needs, (iii) contribute to and learn from the work done in research and iv) support in the dissemination of EJP SOIL outcomes

These entities appeared as precious assets for developing a science-policy-practice interface. As an example, the EJP SOIL National Hubs contributed to elaborating the roadmap of the programme and more recently were informed and provided feedback on the programme outputs on soil data harmonization and sharing and on soil monitoring in the perspective of the future European soil health law.

We performed an analysis of their composition and functioning gives insights on how to effectively create and use these entities, which is forecasted by the EU Mission “A Soil Deal for Europe” for all land uses.

How to cite: Chenu, C., Visser, S., O'Toole, A., Keesstra, S., Besse, A., and Carlenius, L.: A new instrument for contributing to the soil science - policy interface: the EJP SOIL National Hubs, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-16230, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-16230, 2023.

InBestSoil (IBS) project has been funded under the call "Incentives and business models for soil health" from the EU Missions program (Horizon Europe) — Grant Agreement n° 1010910990. The University of Vigo leads the project within a consortium of 19 partners from 10 countries with a 48-month duration.

The IBS aims to quantify the economic benefits of the different ecosystem services that healthy soils can provide and analyze the costs and benefits of the interventions to improve soil health. This economic valuation will facilitate investments in soil health and the generation of new businesses, incentives, and policies that help us to reclaim degraded soils or improve the quality of existing ones.

In IBS, we analyzed nine case studies across Europe with different land uses (agricultural, forestry, urban, and mining) across four different biogeographic regions (Boreal, Continental, Atlantic and Mediterranean). These long-term experiments have been running for years into an established network of stakeholders and businesses created to exploit improved soil quality benefits. In each case study, we will assess the outcome of soil reclamation actions by examining the actual soil quality indicators and comparing them with the antecedent indicators before the restoration process. Then, we will conduct an economic valuation of the soil quality differences by considering the potential income from the enhanced ecosystem services that have proved effective in improving soil quality indicators.

To develop a multi-actor approach, we will gather data and opinions from stakeholders about every relevant item in this transformation, i.e., from selecting soil indicators to creating new incentives and policies. These consultations will be done at each step of the project through a collaborative platform developed specifically for the IBS. The IBS partners come from a wide range of sectors (from universities to distribution companies of organic products), allowing us to create an extensive network of stakeholders to share information, feedback experiences, and diffusion of results.

With this information, we will first try to scale up by exporting to other areas the business models that were created around our case studies. Second, we will use the information obtained through the economic valuation to develop new business models. Finally, we will try to integrate the information obtained to develop a set of incentive support systems and new policies.

Acknowledgments: This study has been funded by the Horizon Europe Project InBestSoil (GA  101091099).

How to cite: Soto Gómez, D., López Periago, J. E., Fernández Calviño, D., and Rodríguez Pérez, P.: InBestSoil — Monetary valuation of soil ecosystem services and creation of initiatives to invest in soil health: setting a framework for the inclusion of soil health in business and the policy-making process (Horizon Europe Project), EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-12848, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-12848, 2023.

Since withdrawal from the European Union a series of reforms of agricultural policy are under development in the United Kingdom. There is currently no dedicated soil policy in Wales and the reforms provide an opportunity to devise a new position on soils that sets an ambition for the sustainable use of soils for future generations. To maximise soil policy adoption, we learnt from previous unsuccessful attempts to launch soil policies and developed a completely different approach to co-designing soil policy. We reflect on our experiences as researchers working in placements directly within government policy teams as a mechanism for soil policy development. This involved several different aspects of policy development and a wide range of actors. Key activities included an independent evidence review to ensure current scientific knowledge provided the foundation for the draft soil policy statement. The embedded nature of the researchers within the policy teams meant effective and fluid dialogue, building trusted relationships and the opportunity to challenge the potential bias within the policy teams regarding key evidence. Building consensus towards a draft soil policy statement was a major barrier to overcome. We used the concept of co-design with the policy team and other stakeholders (other policy teams, regulatory bodies, non-governmental organisations, and farmers) to further the development of the draft soil policy statement and to select key objectives for sustainable soil management relevant to Wales. The main outcomes from the placements were: understanding the policy context and mechanisms for policy development; presenting clear and concise evidence; managing complex relationships and challenging institutional structures.

How to cite: Hannam, J., Sánchez-García, C., and Button, E.: Experiences from co-designing a national soil policy with researchers, policy teams and farmers in Wales, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-11131, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-11131, 2023.

Substantial majority of food used by humanity depends on soil. Human population as well as per capita consumption are growing, this growth requires development of agriculture. At the same time, increasing proportion of human population lives in cities which causes detachment of consumers from soil and food production. Agricultural intensification has increased crop production but at the same time may bring negative environmental effects. Food market chains are, with a few exceptions, driven by retailers who determine sales strategies, price structure, production standards etc. Price is one of the key factors determining customer decisions. Pressure for lower prices can contribute, together with decreasing labor force in agriculture and many other factors, to increased pressure on farm intensification which have negative feedback to environment, society but also to stability of food market supply chain as explained above.  However, an increasing number of food retailers and food and beverage companies view environmental impacts of intensification, including soil degradation, as a risk to stability of their supply chains. They seek options to ensure more sustainable food production. Businesses employ standards and other interventions to steer their suppliers towards preferred practices either as part of their direct contact with suppliers or by using various certification and monitoring schemes operated by third party. This concept is now well established in biodiversity and prevention of deforestation. Nevertheless, soil protection has been emerging as a priority topic as well. Business engagement in soil protection will require effective instruments that can be applied in supply chains. Here we summarize our experiences with development soil protection guidelines in cooperation with Czech Confederation of Commerce and Tourism. 

How to cite: Frouzova, J., Čemus, V., Kotecký, V., Peterkova, A., and Frouz, J.: Why food industry and retail need to control impact of their supply chains on soil and how to achieve that, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-1039, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-1039, 2023.

Soils are routinely undervalued, damaged and disposed of during construction and urban development. It is crucial that we not only stem the damage done to these vital ecosystems, but also actively consider how better planning and management of soil can result in environmentally and socially beneficial development. However, this is a significant policy and practice challenge. For example, currently in the United Kingdom, soils on construction sites fall within a gap in policy and legislation and government department remits. Large amounts of soil are being lost and damaged as a result. In 2018, 29.5 million tonnes of soil from construction sites were disposed of in landfill in the UK. Only 0.6 % of this was hazardous, which means a huge amount of this vital resource is being lost during construction. 

In this contribution, we will share evidence on the impacts of construction on soils and present a new set of guiding principles to help improve how soils and their multifunctionality are planned for and managed during construction and urban development. These principles were co-developed by a team spanning academia, local policymakers, master planners and landscape architects, and were formed in consultation with key policy and industry representatives. We will share insights generated through this process and reflect on what’s needed next for securing soil sustainability in planning and construction.

How to cite: Davies, J., Quinton, J., O'Riordan, R., Hatch, P., Dart, S., Birchall, A., Hontzsch, B., Campion, C., and Farrer, N.: Building on soil sustainability: Principles for soils in planning and construction, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-7840, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-7840, 2023.

We investigated the impact of soil organic carbon (SOC) and fertilizer use on NUE, Carbon footprint, and N₂O footprint from agrosystems within the context of EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Green Deal (EUGD) for sustainable agriculture, GHG mitigation, and fertilizer use reduction.

We targeted 27 fields from the Imathia Plains in Greece, including cotton, maize, and tomato crops, and collected farmer and soil data. The collected data were used within the Cool Farm Alliance Tool to calculate GHG emissions, N₂O emissions, and NUE. Six scenario cases were studied: Scenario 1 used data collected from farmers, with original fertilizer use and current soil organic matter (SOM); Scenario 2 increased SOM by 20%; Scenario 3 involved the application of 20 ton/ha of fully aerobic compost containing 1% total N, resulting in an additional 200 kg N/ha in the soil; Scenario 4 reduced the use of fertilizers by 20%; Scenario 5 reduced fertilizers use by 20% and increased SOM by 20%; and Scenario 6 combined a 20% reduction in fertilizers with the co-application of 20 ton/ha of fully aerobic compost. Compost was added to Scenarios 3 and 6 to evaluate its impact and alignment with CAP and EUGD goals. We assumed that crop yield would be the same for all the scenarios.

The results showed that Scenarios 3 and 6 had NUE values between 30% and 80%. This suggests a low risk of soil mining or N losses. However, these scenarios also had significantly higher GHG (CO2-eqv) and N₂O kg emissions compared to scenarios without compost application. Additionally, increasing SOC by 20% (Scenarios 2 and 5) did not significantly impact NUE and GHG emissions for most crops.

The higher GHG and N₂O emissions in some scenarios may be due to the mechanical processes and fuel required for compost application. Additionally, the decomposition of compost can also produce GHGs, such as methane and carbon dioxide. It is important to consider that carbon fuels microbial activity in the soil, including the production of N₂O. While the addition of organic matter can improve soil health and increase NUE, it is necessary to carefully evaluate the potential impacts on GHG and N₂O emissions and identify strategies to mitigate these emissions if needed.

Based on the results of our research, one question that arises is whether the benefits of improved NUE and reduced risk of soil mining or high N losses are offset by the higher GHG and N₂O emissions in Scenarios 3 and 6. Trade-offs between different factors may need to be considered for sustainable and effective soil management. More research may be needed to understand the higher GHG and N₂O emissions in Scenarios 3 and 6 and identify ways to mitigate these emissions while improving NUE.

Funding: The MSc research work by Korina Koukoutsi was partly supported by the Hellenic Foundation for Research and Innovation (HFRI) Post-Doctoral Grant #1053 awarded to Principal Investigator Dr Georgios Giannopoulos. This project was co-implemented with industrial partner Corteva Agriscience Hellas SA.    

How to cite: Koukoutsi, K. (., Litskas, V., Monokrousos, N., Zanakis, G., and Giannopoulos, G.: Impact of EU Policies on NUE, Carbon and N₂O Footprint: Do EU Policies mitigate GHGs Emissions?, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-9815, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-9815, 2023.

An extensive body of research has shown that land management practices can increase soil organic carbon stocks on agricultural lands. This knowledge has also gained interest among policy makers, and the concept of carbon farming is increasing in attention. Recently, the EU Commission published its proposal for a regulatory framework on carbon removals, in here the European Commission will set standards for certifying carbon farming activities.

Successful carbon farming presupposes that scheme design enables land users’ to effectively implement relevant carbon farming practices.  Despite these new legislative ambitions on carbon farming, key questions remain, and knowledge is needed on land-users' perceptions of strengths and weaknesses of different designs for carbon farming schemes. In this paper, we analyse 9 different partner countries in EU, that have facilitated focus groups with landowners on carbon farming and scheme design. The paper, presents and discuss the basis for designing schemes that are perceived as fair and effective by land-users. Implementing stakeholders’ preferences in scheme design is important for land-users’ support and uptake of such schemes.

How to cite: Graversgaard, M.: Land-users' perspectives on carbon farming and result-based schemes, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-14245, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-14245, 2023.

The aim of our study was to review agri-environment (AE) schemes in terms of outcomes for soil water requirements. It should be noted that the implementation of agri-environmental measures in Europe contributes to several ecosystem services and thus has several objectives; of these, the conservation of soil water and soil organic matter is a relevant agenda spearheaded to the heart of research because of the current climatic conditions. The link to carbon storage is relevant although not straightforward. The starting point was a large body of work on agri-environmental measures that examined the effects on biodiversity in narrow geographical areas and the sociology of stakeholder engagement with policy. However, our study proceeded to focus on the effects of agri-environmental measures on soil water and soil organic matter. This study focused on several neighbouring Member States. Two methodological approaches were applied. The quantitative approach was carried out in view of the assessment of expenditure related to agri-environment schemes. The data we used came from the archive of agricultural area per farm in the Eurostat country files, and the expenditure data were reconstrued from the documentation of rural development budget over fifteen years in an in-house archive set up from the sheets by the European Commission. Cost -effectiveness was modelled in a set of two agri-environment schemes. A qualitative approach was used to examine rural development programmes in Central and Eastern Europe ( the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia)  and thus to pinpoint the relevant measures for soil water effects. These analyses were anchored in an extensive set of literature reviews on the identification of soils that need to be protected because of inadequate levels of soil water.

We found that the costs of AE measures reflect thecosts of the particular agri-environmental practice and its constraints on commercial performance. It was found that agri-environmental practices with effect on soil water and soil organic matter are likely to be a precursor for fledgling carbon farming schemes in Central and Eastern Europe, although monitoring is much more a crux in carbon farming than in agri-environmental schemes.

Keywords: soil; water; arable farming; agri-environmental measures

How to cite: Polakova, J., Holec, J., Janku, J., Maitah, M., and Soukup, J.: Do Agri-Environment Schemes have a role for Soil, Water and Soil Organic Matter, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-16337, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-16337, 2023.

In the EJP Soil project ‘Road4Schemes’ (WP2), we have been working on an inventory of carbon farming schemes throughout Europe. This resulted in a list of 175 schemes, of which some however were located outside the EU. These schemes differed a lot in several characteristics, summarised in six overall themes: 1) documentation available, 2) Payment / Buyers Information, 3) MRV, 4) Safeguards for the society and the environment, 5) Transparency, and 6) Attractiveness. Each of the partner countries in the project selected 1-5 schemes from their national inventory, that they found promising in the light of the expected framework for Carbon Farming that would be outlined by the European Commission in December 2022 (which they actually did). The schemes selected were analysed using the method of a SWOT-analysis. In the SWOT-methodology Strengths and Weaknesses of each scheme were identified using a questionnaire with questions that covered the six themes listed. These questions already included the Opportunities and Threats that were expected to come up from the framework that was announced by the EC. For each theme a score 1, 2 or 3 was given, 1 indicating a very poor quality of that specific theme, 2 presenting an average quality and a score of 3 was given when the theme was (almost) perfectly addressed in the way the scheme had been organised. Each scheme in the SWOT-analysis received six scores in total and an overall score was calculated as the unweighted average of these six scores. The results of this method revealed large differences in quality between the schemes in the inventory. [1] Looking deeper into the results showed us, that a number of ‘overall methodologies’ for carbon farming including making schemes result-based and taking care of proper payments for the farmers can be discerned, that can serve as a basis for designing more or less perfect archetype carbon farming schemes.

At the EGU-session, we would like to present the methods and results of this study and discuss the relevance and consequences of these results for the way existing carbon farming schemes should be improved or future schemes should be designed.

How to cite: Smit, B. and van der Kolk, J.: Carbon farming schemes throughout Europe, an overall inventory and analysis, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-16595, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-16595, 2023.

There is the expectation that carbon farming can contribute significantly to climate change mitigation by both sequestering carbon from the atmosphere and preventing the release of additional CO₂-emissions from the soil. While it seems uncontroversial that measures to improve soil carbon provide many additional ecological benefits, it is rather challenging to integrate carbon farming activities into the existing climate policy frameworks. Apart from the usual concerns about the robustness of monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) and the permanence of the carbon farming result there are other unresolved questions regarding additionality, double-claiming and double-counting when combining state-based action with voluntary carbon markets, where private schemes sell their carbon-credits to companies for the offsetting of their emissions.

Within the scope of the EJP-Soil sub-project Road4Schemes our objective was to examine the current state of carbon farming policies in 9 European countries (including Switzerland and Turkey as non-EU members). Having collected questionnaires both at the level of policy makers and at the level of experts on national greenhouse gas inventories, we are able to make a first assessment of the relevance of carbon farming as a climate mitigation strategy in the individual countries, the reportability of different measures in national climate reporting and the role of private initiatives in achieving scalable climate change mitigation effects. It is furthermore of interest to compare countries’ policy approaches for enhancing carbon farming and integrating the different stakeholders and actors. In this way, this study aims to contribute to the current discussion on the potentials and obstacles of using carbon farming for climate mitigation.

How to cite: Hönle, S. and Heidecke, C.: Status and current considerations on carbon farming in selected European countries, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-17445, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-17445, 2023.

Enhancing the potential of soils to store more carbon while maintaining existing SOC levels, especially on peatlands and other agricultural soils, is a key lever for mitigating climate change in the LULUCF sector. In late 2022, the European Commission announced a framework for a regulatory framework on carbon removals, which will set standards for future carbon farming activities. To meet the ambitions, the European Commission also emphasises that the forthcoming Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) that comes into effect from January 2023 should increasingly reward farmers environmental- and climate friendly performance through a more result-oriented model. In result-based schemes, payment levels reflect the actual impact of the management practices on carbon stocks (relative to a benchmark), may thus reduce the cost to attain a given environmental benefit.

However, designing effective schemes is a complex process, particularly in terms of (1) minimizing costs (of incentives and MRV), (2) and ensuring environmental performance (effectiveness, additionality and additional ecosystem services) and (3) social (fairness, legitimacy and land-user engagement). Further, optimizing schemes only according to the ability to sequester carbon or prevent emissions may lead to sub-optimal outcomes, rather it may be important to move beyond schemes that only optimize on one parameter. The EJP SOIL Road4Schemes project has gathered an inventory containing 170 European carbon farming schemes. While some of the identified schemes focus exclusively on carbon sequestration while other scheme designs support a wider number of ecosystem services. This presentation synthesizes the experience from these 170 schemes regarding opportunities and barriers for designing successful result-based carbon farming schemes that also include additional ecosystem services.

How to cite: Thorsøe, M.: Result-based carbon farming and multifunctionality, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-15630, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-15630, 2023.

Soil is an ecological system and a phylogenetic organism that evolved in response to stimuli and changes. It is a precious, fragile, limited and non-renewable resource, since it takes 100 to 1,000 years to produce one centimetre of fertile soil. Soil constitutes the largest existing organic carbon store and, consequently, plays a central role in the global carbon cycle and in the fight against climate change.

However, land degradation has progressed markedly around the world. In fact, studies show that about 33% of the world’s soils are moderately or strongly degraded. An estimated annual global loss of 75 billion tons of fertile soil is caused by erosion, pollution, unsustainable agronomic practices, change of use (e.g. deforestation or conversion from pasture to cultivated land) and sealing of land. More than 12.7% of EU soil is subject to moderate to severe erosion and degradation. Stocks of organic carbon in farmland and the extent of wetlands and peatlands are steadily decreasing.  

Moreover, carbon, in temperate and cold areas of the planet (such as the EU), is stored in greater quantities in the soil rather than in plants’ biomass, while in tropical areas the exact opposite occurs. Therefore, the protection of soil organic carbon is fundamental especially in Europe.

To maintain and increase soil C stocks, agroecological practices should be fostered by European policies and financial mechanisms. Carbon credits represent one of these financial mechanisms, being tradable certificates corresponding to 1 ton of CO₂eq. The methodologies and standards used for the quantification of soil Carbon stocks, aimed at the issuing of corresponding carbon credits are defined as soil C accounting.

In this study, a detailed and critical analysis of soil C accounting initiatives implemented in EU and extra-EU countries has been conducted considering different scales of implementation, C assessment methods and potential barriers.

More specifically, this work aims to:

- in EU: describe the state of carbon accounting legislation and its level of implementation, case studies, relevant and successful EIP Operational Groups;

- identify the critical issues inherent in Carbon Farming (e.g. payment schemes, overlapping of EU public fundings with carbon credits, etc.);
- extra EU: report international case studies of carbon accounting and carbon credits schemes (Australia, Alberta in Canada, Brazil and the United States) to inspire proposals for possible implementation in the EU;
- provide recommendations for future European policies in order to avoid greenwashing and ensure environmental protection.

The outcome is a synthesis of “Lessons Learned” and recommendations for possible transferability of extra-EU initiatives to EU.

How to cite: Criscuoli, I., Falconi, I., Martelli, A., Maurino, S., Valentina Lasorella, M., Galioto, F., Pirelli, T., Dara Guccione, G., and Bonati, G.: A review of soil C accounting initiatives implemented in EU and extra-EU countries, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-17475, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-17475, 2023.

The potential for carbon sequestration (CSP) in soils is limited by several factors like the geological provenience, the climatic conditions and the land management. Based on the methodology provided by FAO, a national map has been developed for Austria. Additionally to the climatic and topographic data provided by FAO, more detailed data sources have been used to increase the accuracy of the map.

To model the CSP, scenarios with increasing carbon inputs have been used: Business as Usual (BAU),  plus 5% (low), 10% (medium) and 20% (high) carbon input, projected to 2038 and 2040.  The Austrian Soil Organic Carbon (ASOC) map was used as the starting point for the Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) stocks of the soil in the model.

The carbon stocks of Austria's agricultural soils range for the most part between 43 and 103 tC/ha in the BAU scenario, between 43 and 104 tC/ha in the "Low" scenario, between 44 and 105 tC/ha in the "Medium" scenario and between 45 and 108 tC/ha in the "High" scenario. The modelling based on the detailed Austrian data showed the smallest increases in each case (BAU: 43 - 70 tC/ha; Low: 43 - 71 tC/ha; Medium: 44 - 72 tC/ha; High: 45 - 74 tC/ha). The differences between the individual scenarios were also not very pronounced.

An evaluation of the results at the regional level allows a basic interpretation of the sequestration potential based on soil and climatic conditions and can be used as a basis for estimating the possible effect of measures that either stabilise or increase the humus content.

How to cite: Baumgarten, A., Haslmayr, H.-P., Schwarz, M., Schwarz, M., Jandl, R., Maier, P., and Formayer, H.: Possibilities of Carbon Sequestration in Austrian Soils, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-11766, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-11766, 2023.

How to cite: Sala, S., Miglio, E., Burra, D. D., and Hopkins, A.: A Soil Data Platform to Inform Soil Health Investment, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-16833, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-16833, 2023.

Life on Earth depends on healthy soils. Soil provides food, clean water and habitats for biodiversity while contributing to climate resilience. They are at the centre of many of the most pressing societal challenges of this century. Knowing the state of soil health, its current pressures and its trends is essential for the soil community (e.g. policy makers, researchers or practitioners) to know about where, when and how to better protect, improve or restore soils. The Dashboard of the EU Soil Observatory (JRC Unit D3) aims to do just this. Tapping into the wealth of soil data produced by the JRC and other international research institutions, it provides a clear picture of the state and trend of soil health in the EU. It will also report on the state of implementation of EU soil policy. A focus in the Dashboard is to present soil data spatially. In particular, the EUSO Dashboard uses the ‘convergence of evidence’ methodology to map the likely occurrence of soil degradation processes in the EU and the UK. Through visuals (graphs, maps, infographics, etc.) the EUSO Dashboard aims to be the reference point providing a clear up-to-date assessment of the state of soil health and the policy actions taken at EU level to improve it.

How to cite: Marechal, A.: The Dashboard of the EU Soil Observatory – making soil data speak to policy-makers and society, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-13190, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-13190, 2023.

A centuries-long research area continues to develop on determining diversity in the heterogeneous environment in which the soil is inherently located. As a result of open data sharing, accessible datasets can be easily used by the scientific community and can be of great benefit to the soil science community and policy stakeholders and improve the learning process for early career researchers. Through bibliometric analysis, this study aims to evaluate the scientific outputs obtained from Web of Science databases produced using the Land Use and Coverage Area frame Survey (LUCAS) soil module dataset between 2000 and 2022. A search was made using the words “LUCAS”, “Soil”, and “European” in the title/abstract/keywords field, and over 100 studies have been found and evaluated. Preliminary results showed that the dataset had been used with interest in the scientific community since the first open access date of 2013 in around 100 peer-review papers. LUCAS has been expanding over the years, and international integration has increased. As a result of bibliometric analysis, many colleagues produced scientific outputs using the LUCAS datasets. Review analysis provides insights into the future use of LUCAS, an open-access dataset, in the scientific community. Results enable academics in this field to give references and quick access to regional soil data information on the principal physical, chemical and selected biological properties.

How to cite: Kaya, F., Schillaci, C., Kaplan, G., and Başayiğit, L.: Review of the usage of LUCAS soil data for soil modeling and mapping via bibliometric analysis, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-13165, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-13165, 2023.