More than half of the cultivation\uffe2\uff80\uff90induced carbon loss from agricultural soils could be restored through improved management. To incentivise carbon sequestration, the potential of improved practices needs to be verified. To date, there is sparse empirical evidence of carbon sequestration through improved practices in East\uffe2\uff80\uff90Africa. Here, we show that agroforestry and restrained grazing had a greater stock of soil carbon than their bordering pair\uffe2\uff80\uff90matched controls, but the difference was less obvious with terracing. The controls were treeless cultivated fields for agroforestry, on slopes not terraced for terracing, and permanent pasture for restrained grazing, representing traditionally managed agricultural practices dominant in the case regions. The gain by the improved management depended on the carbon stocks in the control plots. Agroforestry for 6\uffe2\uff80\uff9320\uffc2\uffa0years led to 11.4 Mg\uffc2\uffa0ha\uffe2\uff88\uff921 and restrained grazing for 6\uffe2\uff80\uff9317\uffc2\uffa0years to 9.6\uffc2\uffa0Mg\uffc2\uffa0ha\uffe2\uff88\uff921 greater median soil carbon stock compared with the traditional management. The empirical estimates are higher than previous process\uffe2\uff80\uff90model\uffe2\uff80\uff90based estimates and indicate that Ethiopian agriculture has greater potential to sequester carbon in soil than previously estimated.
", "keywords": ["AFRICA", "Carbon Sequestration", "ta1172", "agricultural practices", "GREENHOUSE-GAS MITIGATION", "East-Africa", "soil", "HIGHLANDS", "mitigation", "Soil", "NORTHERN ETHIOPIA", "SYSTEMS", "MANAGEMENT", "STOCKS", "2. Zero hunger", "SOIL ORGANIC-MATTER", "CLIMATE-CHANGE", "LAND-USE", "carbon stock", "Agriculture", "04 agricultural and veterinary sciences", "ta4111", "Models", " Theoretical", "15. Life on land", "Carbon", "Environmental sciences", "climate change", "0401 agriculture", " forestry", " and fisheries"]}, "links": [{"href": "https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13288"}, {"rel": "related", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/Global%20Change%20Biology", "name": "related record", "description": "related record", "type": "application/json"}, {"rel": "self", "type": "application/geo+json", "title": "10.1111/gcb.13288", "name": "item", "description": "10.1111/gcb.13288", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main/items/10.1111/gcb.13288"}, {"rel": "collection", "type": "application/json", "title": "Collection", "name": "collection", "description": "Collection", "href": "https://repository.soilwise-he.eu/cat/collections/metadata:main"}], "time": {"date": "2016-06-01T00:00:00Z"}}, {"id": "10.1111/gcb.14878", "type": "Feature", "geometry": null, "properties": {"updated": "2026-09-21T16:17:34Z", "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": "AbstractThere 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.