Science
  • The Nature Assessment Approach
  • Natural Capital Indicators
    • Carbon Indicators
      • Indicator: Above ground carbon
      • Indicator: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
    • Soil Indicators
      • Indicator: Soil Carbon Stock
      • Indicator: Soil Carbon Potential
    • Water Indicators
      • Indicator: Soil Moisture
      • Indicator: Water Holding Capacity
      • Indicator: Water Holding Capacity Potential
      • Indicator: Precipitation Trend
    • Biodiversity Indicators
      • Indicator: Protected On-Farm Habitat
      • Indicator: Species Presence
      • Indicator: Landscape Habitat Diversity & Farm-level Contribution
      • Indicator: Ecological Integrity
      • Indicator: Habitat Intactness
      • Indicator: Indicator Species Presence
    • Auxiliary Indicators
      • Indicator: Deforestation (EUDR)
      • Indicator: Climate Risk
      • Indicator: Forest Canopy & Height Cover
      • Indicator: Vegetation Condition
      • Indicator: Land Use and Land Cover
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  1. Natural Capital Indicators
  2. Soil Indicators

Indicator: Soil Carbon Potential

Indicator

Soil Carbon Potential

Description

Plot-level forecast of future soil carbon stocks under different land management scenarios (e.g., reduced or no-till, applying manure and cover crops). This forecast runs for 20 years.

Unit

Metric tons (total and per hectare)

Temporal Resolution

Projection into the future

Spatial Resolution

field-level model, 250m input data

Input Data

IRSIC SoilGrids v2: organic carbon stock, bulk density, texture

Method

The soil carbon potential is modelled by coupling baseline soil carbon data with anticipated changes due to various land management practices. The baseline is the current status of soil carbon modelled by TLG historical assessment. The CoolFarmTool is utilized to assess the impact of different farm management scenarios on future soil carbon stocks.

Confidence interval

Confidence intervals are derived from two main sources of uncertainty. First, SoilGrid data, which provides quantiles (05, 50, and 95), is not symmetrically distributed around the median or mean. To prevent negative standard deviation values, a log-normal distribution is assumed, leading to confidence intervals that are not perfectly symmetrical around the median.

Second, uncertainty arises from land use, tillage, and management practices. The impact of these factors on soil carbon varies due to micro-environmental differences. For example, tillage may increase soil carbon by a factor of 0.02 in a specific climate and soil type, but the actual effect can range between 0.01 and 0.03.

Benchmarking

Benchmarks are created for each combination of climate zones and soil types, treating each combination as a separate group. Within each group, soil carbon levels are analyzed separately for croplands and grasslands. The poor benchmark is set at the lower 25th percentile of SoilGrid estimates, representing low carbon input conditions. The good benchmark is estimated using the CFT model under optimal management practices. The average benchmark is the midpoint between the poor and good values.

PreviousIndicator: Soil Carbon StockNextWater Indicators

Last updated 2 months ago