English   español  
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/40884
logo share SHARE logo core CORE   Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE

Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL | DATACITE
Exportar a otros formatos:


The need for harmonizing methodologies for assessing soil threats in Europe

AuthorsVan Beek, C. L.; Tóth, T.; Hagyó, A.; Tóth, G.; Recatalá Boix, Luis ; Añó Vidal, Carlos ; Malet, J. P.; Maquaire, O.; Van den Akker, J. J. H.; Van der Zee, S.; Verzandvoort, Simone; Simota, C.; Kuikman, P. J.; Oenema, O.
KeywordsEU soil strategy
Soil organic matter decline
Issue DateSep-2010
CitationSoil Use and Management 26(3): 299-309 (2010)
AbstractCentral to the EU thematic strategy for soil protection is that areas affected by soil degradation through erosion, soil organic matter (SOM) decline, compaction, salinization and landslides should be identified in a clear and consistent way. However, the current methodologies to achieve this often differ and this can result in different perceptions of risks amongst EU Member States. The aims of this paper are to: (i) assess the current status of assessment methodologies in Europe (EU27) associated with erosion, SOM decline, compaction, salinization and landslides and (ii) discuss the issues associated with harmonization of these methodologies throughout the EU27. The need for harmonization is assessed using the relative share of common elements between different methodologies. The results demonstrate that the need for harmonization in methodology is greatest for erosion and compaction and least for SOM decline and landslides. However, many of the methodologies which were investigated are still incomplete and there are significant differences in terms of: (i) understanding the threats, (ii) methods of data collection, (iii) processing and interpretation and (iv) risk perception. We propose two options for the harmonized assessment of soil threats: (i) a two-tiered approach based on data availability and spatial scale and (ii) a combination of standardization and harmonization for each assessment methodology. Future assessments should focus on the advantages and disadvantages of these options as the current situation will result in endless discussions on differences and the merits of particular methodologies instead of taking appropriate measures to reduce or eliminate the actual threats.
Description11 páginas, 3 figuras, 3 tablas.
Publisher version (URL)http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2010.00280.x
Appears in Collections:(CIDE) Artículos
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
CAño03.pdf152,65 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
Show full item record
Review this work

Related articles:

WARNING: Items in Digital.CSIC are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.