for Soil carbon sequestration
Soil organic matter
Open-field agriculture
Policy makers
Agricultural field practices
Tilling/ploughing
Complete solution
Authors: Brieuc Hardy, Bruno Huyghebeart, Julia Fohrafellner, Dario Fornara, Gabriela Barančíková, Teresa G. Bárcena, Maarten De Boever, Claudia Di Bene, Dalia Feizienė, Thomas Kätterer, Peter Laszlo, Lilian O’Sullivan, Daria Seitz, Leonor Rodrigues
Journal: Global Change Biology
Journal link: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/13652486
Publication date: 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15897
Article link: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gcb.15897
Open access: Yes
Article funding source:
This study has been funded and supported by the Horizon 2020 European Joint Programme SOIL (EJP-SOIL), grant agreement: 862695; Funding source: H2020-SFS-2018-2020/H2020-SFS-2019-1.
Author location: Switzerland
Authors` other locations: Austria, Belgium, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, Slovakia, Sweden, United Kingdom
Corresponding author email: leonormaria.gondimrodrigues@agroscope.admin.ch
Files: --
Audio Visual Material: --
This section contains a brief assessment of the FEFTS described.
There are 3 basic categories: General, Environmental and Socioeconomic assessment.
The purpose of this assessment is to give a quick overview to the potential FEFTS user of its application benefits.
For each question, the Likert scale is used with the following possible answers:
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Neither agree nor disagree (Neutral)/non applicable, Agree, Strongly agree
Keep in mind that this assessment is subjective, based on publicly available information.
All registered users are asked to evaluate each FEFTS and when an adequate number of reviews is gathered the results depicted here are updated. Each review is screened in order to avoid malicious practices.
FEFTS providers who do not agree with the assessment results, can send their inquiry to info@agrofossilfree.eu and a direct action based on their petition will be taken.