Geoderma (Sep 2024)

Comparing LUCAS Soil and national systems: Towards a harmonized European Soil monitoring network

  • Claire Froger,
  • Elena Tondini,
  • Dominique Arrouays,
  • Katrien Oorts,
  • Christopher Poeplau,
  • Johanna Wetterlind,
  • Elsa Putku,
  • Nicolas P.A. Saby,
  • Maria Fantappiè,
  • Quentin Styc,
  • Claire Chenu,
  • Joost Salomez,
  • Seth Callewaert,
  • Frédéric M. Vanwindekens,
  • Bruno Huyghebaert,
  • Julien Herinckx,
  • Stefan Heilek,
  • Laura Sofie Harbo,
  • Lucas De Carvalho Gomes,
  • Alberto Lázaro-López,
  • Jose Antonio Rodriguez,
  • Sylwia Pindral,
  • Bożena Smreczak,
  • András Benő,
  • Zsofia Bakacsi,
  • Kees Teuling,
  • Fenny van Egmond,
  • Vladimír Hutár,
  • Boris Pálka,
  • Dominik Abrahám,
  • Antonio Bispo

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 449
p. 117027

Abstract

Read online

A recent assessment states that 60–70% of soils in Europe are considered degraded. Protecting such valuable resource require knowledge on soil status through monitoring systems. In Europe, different types of monitoring networks currently exist in parallel. Many EU Member states (MS) developed their own national soil information monitoring system (N-SIMS), some being in place for decades. In parallel in 2009, the European Commission extended the periodic Land Use/Land Cover Area Frame Survey (LUCAS) led by EUROSTAT to sample and analyse the main properties of topsoil in EU in order to develop a homogeneous dataset for EU.Both sources of information are needed to support European policies on soil health evaluation. However, a question remains whether the assessment obtained by using soil properties from both monitoring programs (N-SIMS and LUCAS Soil) are comparable, and what could be the limitations of using either one dataset or the other.Conducted in the context of European Joint Programme (EJP) SOIL, this study shows the results of a comparison between N-SIMS and LUCAS Soil programs among 12 different EU member states including BE, DE, DK, EE, ES, FR, DE, HU, IT, NL, PL, SE and SK. The comparison was done on: (i) the sampling strategies including site densities, land cover and soil type distribution; (ii) the statistical distribution of three soil properties (organic carbon, pH and clay content); (iii) two potential indicators of soil quality (i.e. OC/Clay ratio and pH classes). The results underlined substantial differences in soil properties statistical distributions between N-SIMS and LUCAS Soil in many member states, particularly for woodland and grassland soils, affecting the evaluation of soil health using indicators. Such differences might be explained by both the monitoring strategy and sampling or analytical protocols exposing the potential effect of data source on European and national policies. The results demonstrate the need to work towards data harmonization and in the light of the Soil Monitoring Law, to carefully design the future of soil monitoring in Europe taking into account both LUCAS Soil and N-SIMS considering the significant impact of the monitoring strategies and protocols on soil health indicators.

Keywords