{"type": "FeatureCollection", "features": [{"id": "10.1002/pan3.10080", "type": "Feature", "geometry": null, "properties": {"updated": "2026-05-30T16:14:36Z", "type": "Journal Article", "created": "2020-03-09", "title": "Action needed for the EU Common Agricultural Policy to address sustainability challenges", "description": "Abstract

Making agriculture sustainable is a global challenge. In the European Union (EU), the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is failing with respect to biodiversity, climate, soil, land degradation as well as socio\uffe2\uff80\uff90economic challenges.

The European Commission's proposal for a CAP post\uffe2\uff80\uff902020 provides a scope for enhanced sustainability. However, it also allows Member States to choose low\uffe2\uff80\uff90ambition implementation pathways. It therefore remains essential to address citizens' demands for sustainable agriculture and rectify systemic weaknesses in the CAP, using the full breadth of available scientific evidence and knowledge.

Concerned about current attempts to dilute the environmental ambition of the future CAP, and the lack of concrete proposals for improving the CAP in the draft of the European Green Deal, we call on the European Parliament, Council and Commission to adopt 10 urgent action points for delivering sustainable food production, biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation.

Knowledge is available to help moving towards evidence\uffe2\uff80\uff90based, sustainable European agriculture that can benefit people, nature and their joint futures.

The statements made in this article have the broad support of the scientific community, as expressed by above 3,600 signatories to the preprint version of this manuscript. The list can be found here (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3685632).

A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

", "keywords": ["330", "333.7 Landfl\u00e4chen", " Naturr\u00e4ume f\u00fcr Freizeit und Erholung", " Naturreservate", " Energie", "public goods", "ddc:320", "0211 other engineering and technologies", "02 engineering and technology", "SMART targets", "01 natural sciences", "7. Clean energy", "630", "Article", "12. Responsible consumption", "GF1-900", "11. Sustainability", "evidence-based policy", "ddc:630", "European Green Deal", "QH540-549.5", "agriculture", "biodiversity", "0105 earth and related environmental sciences", "2. Zero hunger", "Ecology", "ddc:333", "1. No poverty", "15. Life on land", "320", "Agronomy", "Environmental sciences", "climate change", "Human ecology. Anthropogeography", "13. Climate action", "evidence\u2010based policy", "Common Agricultural Policy"]}, "links": [{"href": "https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/pan3.10080"}, {"href": "https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10080"}, {"rel": "related", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/People%20and%20Nature", "name": "related record", "description": "related record", "type": "application/json"}, {"rel": "self", "type": "application/geo+json", "title": "10.1002/pan3.10080", "name": "item", "description": "10.1002/pan3.10080", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/10.1002/pan3.10080"}, {"rel": "collection", "type": "application/json", "title": "Collection", "name": "collection", "description": "Collection", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main"}], "time": {"date": "2020-03-08T00:00:00Z"}}, {"id": "10.1016/j.rser.2011.02.011", "type": "Feature", "geometry": null, "properties": {"license": "Closed Access", "updated": "2026-05-30T16:17:15Z", "type": "Journal Article", "created": "2011-05-08", "title": "Integrated Assessment Of Sustainability Trade-Offs And Pathways For Global Bioenergy Production: Framing A Novel Hybrid Approach", "description": "Abstract Current controversies and debates on bioenergy production in the areas of greenhouse gases emission reduction, food and energy security, social exclusion and welfare erosion, and ecosystem deterioration attest to the challenges which the bioenergy sector has to overcome to achieve its global production potentials. Because it is yet an evolving sector, the sustainability of bioenergy production in different regions is very elusive. Experiences show that bioenergy policies in one region can have impacts not only on its own but also on other regions\u2019 social, economic and ecological sustainability. It is thus important to assess development pathways for bioenergy to exploit the potential benefits and forestall any unnecessary costs. This paper frames a novel hybrid approach for assessing bioenergy potentials for regions with diverging economic, social and ecological systems. The approach is based on a conceptual framework that takes into account trade-offs decisions on sustainability goals and production options in the assessment of bioenergy pathways. It combines different empirical techniques for the systematic investigation of trade-offs and pathways including fuzzy logic, conjoint, logit, and path analyses. To show the relevance and utility of these techniques for the integrated assessment of trade-offs and pathways in bioenergy development, we illustrated their application using results and data from previous related studies.", "keywords": ["[SDE] Environmental Sciences", "13. Climate action", "11. Sustainability", "0211 other engineering and technologies", "0202 electrical engineering", " electronic engineering", " information engineering", "02 engineering and technology", "320", "7. Clean energy", "12. Responsible consumption"]}, "links": [{"href": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.02.011"}, {"rel": "related", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/Renewable%20and%20Sustainable%20Energy%20Reviews", "name": "related record", "description": "related record", "type": "application/json"}, {"rel": "self", "type": "application/geo+json", "title": "10.1016/j.rser.2011.02.011", "name": "item", "description": "10.1016/j.rser.2011.02.011", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/10.1016/j.rser.2011.02.011"}, {"rel": "collection", "type": "application/json", "title": "Collection", "name": "collection", "description": "Collection", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main"}], "time": {"date": "2011-08-01T00:00:00Z"}}, {"id": "10.1101/2025.03.30.646173", "type": "Feature", "geometry": null, "properties": {"updated": "2026-05-30T16:19:10Z", "type": "Journal Article", "created": "2025-08-19", "title": "Deciphering spatiotemporal patterns of rhizodeposition with a functional-structural root model: RhizoDep", "description": "Abstract Background and Aims

Rhizodeposition, i.e. the release of organic matters by roots, constitutes a significant fraction of the plant carbon (C) budget and plays a key role in plant-soil interactions. However, its spatial and temporal dynamics remain poorly understood.

Methods

We developed RhizoDep, a new functional-structural root model that simulates 3D root growth, respiration, and rhizodeposition based on C balance and root morphology at the individual root segment level.

Results

Our model successfully reproduced the dynamics of belowground C flows observed in a previous pulse-labelling field experiment on spring wheat. Our simulations revealed that root C exudation largely dominated over mucilage secretion and cap cells sloughing in terms of C release. The spatial distribution of exudation rate along the roots was driven by the preferential unloading of sugars to support root elongation and emergence, and was modulated by the formation of apoplastic barriers. Furthermore, our results demonstrated that, for a given C allocation flow to roots, variations in root hairs or lateral root number had minimal effects on rhizodeposition, whereas changes in root tissue density had a significant impact.

Conclusion

RhizoDep offers a new opportunity to explore the dynamics of C exchange at the plant-soil interface and to identify traits and environmental conditions that favor rhizodeposition.

", "keywords": ["cycle du carbone", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_24242", "Mucilage", "mod\u00e8le de simulation", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_16034", "enracinement", "bl\u00e9 de printemps", "hexose", "Root hairs", "[SDV.BV] Life Sciences [q-bio]/Vegetal Biology", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_11547", "[SDV.SA.SDS] Life Sciences [q-bio]/Agricultural sciences/Soil study", "mucilage", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_6651", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_32027", "FSPM", "syst\u00e8me racinaire", "ArchiSimple", "Root exudation", "croissance", "Root architecture", "racine", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_3394", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_7337", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_6569", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_6649", "http://aims.fao.org/aos/agrovoc/c_17299", "[INFO.INFO-MO] Computer Science [cs]/Modeling and Simulation", "rhizosph\u00e8re", "Cells sloughing"]}, "links": [{"href": "https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.03.30.646173"}, {"rel": "related", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/Plant%20and%20Soil", "name": "related record", "description": "related record", "type": "application/json"}, {"rel": "self", "type": "application/geo+json", "title": "10.1101/2025.03.30.646173", "name": "item", "description": "10.1101/2025.03.30.646173", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/10.1101/2025.03.30.646173"}, {"rel": "collection", "type": "application/json", "title": "Collection", "name": "collection", "description": "Collection", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main"}], "time": {"date": "2025-04-03T00:00:00Z"}}, {"id": "10.1111/gcb.14878", "type": "Feature", "geometry": null, "properties": {"updated": "2026-05-30T16:19:24Z", "type": "Journal Article", "created": "2019-10-22", "title": "Which practices co\u2010deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?", "description": "Abstract

There is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as \uffe2\uff80\uff9cland challenges\uffe2\uff80\uff9d). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3\uffc2\uffa0Gt CO2eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing\uffe2\uff80\uff90up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges.There is a clear need for transformative change in the land management and food production sectors to address the global land challenges of climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, combatting land degradation and desertification, and delivering food security (referred to hereafter as \uffe2\uff80\uff9cland challenges\uffe2\uff80\uff9d). We assess the potential for 40 practices to address these land challenges and find that: Nine options deliver medium to large benefits for all four land challenges. A further two options have no global estimates for adaptation, but have medium to large benefits for all other land challenges. Five options have large mitigation potential (>3\uffc2\uffa0Gt CO2eq/year) without adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Five options have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other land challenges. Sixteen practices have large adaptation potential (>25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges. Most practices can be applied without competing for available land. However, seven options could result in competition for land. A large number of practices do not require dedicated land, including several land management options, all value chain options, and all risk management options. Four options could greatly increase competition for land if applied at a large scale, though the impact is scale and context specific, highlighting the need for safeguards to ensure that expansion of land for mitigation does not impact natural systems and food security. A number of practices, such as increased food productivity, dietary change and reduced food loss and waste, can reduce demand for land conversion, thereby potentially freeing\uffe2\uff80\uff90up land and creating opportunities for enhanced implementation of other practices, making them important components of portfolios of practices to address the combined land challenges.