During the last few years, the idea that carbon farming must not only focus on carbon but also place biodiversity and ecosystem services at the centre of the picture has become widely acknowledged. MARVIC has played a key role in the development of this new paradigm, supporting the Carbon Removals and Carbon Farming (CRCF) Regulation policy development and participating in high-level forums such as the European Carbon Farming Summit. In this context, MARVIC partners Adam Svoboda, Elena Larysch and Jana Poláková have recently co-authored a scientific article in the journal Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, where they explore the effects of carbon farming on cropland biodiversity in Europe by reviewing empirical studies carried out on agricultural land over the past 36 years.
As the authors highlight, biodiversity loss is a significant threat to ecosystem functioning and sustainability, with agriculture identified as one of the primary drivers. Carbon farming practices, aimed originally at promoting carbon sequestration and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, are now also assessed regarding their additional co-benefits (and trade-offs) in terms of biodiversity, soil health, and ecosystem function. In this sense, several studies have explored the effects of these agricultural practices on soil organic carbon in Europe, as well as the impacts on biodiversity at the global scale, but the co-benefits and trade-offs on the biodiversity of key taxonomic groups in Europe had not been addressed so far.
In their publication, Svoboda et al. synthesized data from almost a hundred studies across Europe, analysing the impacts of seven selected carbon farming practices on several taxonomic groups covering both above- and below-ground biodiversity. The goal of the study was to confirm whether these practices, such as cover/catch crops, crop rotations, zero/reduced tillage, organic amendments, mulching, semi-natural habitats, and silvoarable agroforestry systems, have a positive impact on agrobiodiversity indicators (e.g. taxonomic richness, species richness and abundance) compared to practices commonly used in conventional agriculture.
As a result of this meta-analysis, the authors found that these practices promote certain species while disadvantaging others by altering soil structure and moisture levels, changing the availability of organic matter, and reshaping trophic relationships. Significantly, practices promoting greater biomass input and structural complexity, such as organic amendments and agroforestry, yield the strongest benefits, impacting primarily arthropods, birds, earthworms, fungi, and bacteria. All in all, this work provides an integrated assessment of how carbon farming practices affect biodiversity, underscoring the need to evaluate combined approaches to optimise these co-benefits.
