for Soil carbon sequestration
Soil and water conservation techniques
Open-field agriculture
Advisory services, Policy makers, Companies, Industry
Tools
Other
Methodology
Authors: Pasut, Tang, Hamilton, Riley, Maggi
Journal: Global Biogeochemical Cycles
Journal link: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/19449224/2021/35/4
Publication date: 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GB006816
Article link: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2020GB006816
Open access: Yes
Article funding source:
SREI2020 EnviroSphere research program, University of Sydney's high performance computing cluster Artemis, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research, National Computational Infrastructure, Australian Government, Australian Research Council and University of Sydney
Author location: Australia
Authors` other locations: United States
Corresponding author email: c.pasut@sydney.edu.au
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.