Towards soil security: Understanding soil erosion footprints and their implications in NSW

A key challenge in maintaining soil security is assessing and mitigating soil degradation. The soil footprint is a promising indicator for quantifying degradation impacts, yet it remains underdeveloped, lacking a standardized definition and a comprehensive calculation framework. This study introduces a generalized soil footprint framework, integrating three key components: (1) Threat to soil, representing degradation processes such as soil water erosion or salinization; (2) Soil service ratio, which quantifies changes in soil services such as crop yield or Available Water Capacity relative to their natural state; and (3) Inherent mitigation capability, reflecting the soil's resilience to degradation. Applied in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, we calculated two soil erosion footprints using crop yield and Available Water Capacity (AWC) as indicators of soil services. In both cases, soil erosion rate, specifically water erosion, was used as the threat to soil, while erosion risk capability represented the soil's intrinsic mitigation capacity. Results show that oats had the highest soil erosion footprint due to lower yields, whereas wheat, barley, sorghum, and grain legumes had smaller footprints. An inverse relationship between soil erosion footprint and crop receipts (i.e., farm revenue from crop production) highlights the economic risks of soil erosion, particularly in high-revenue regions like the Northwest Slopes and Plains and the Riverina. AWC-based soil erosion footprints were highest in coastal and dryland cropping areas, indicating greater erosion stress, while irrigated systems, plantation forests, and managed resource protection areas showed lower footprints, reflecting better resilience. Modified pastures, native forests, nature conservation areas, and minimal-use lands had higher footprints. This study highlights the need to integrate soil service ratios and erosion risk capability alongside erosion rates for a more comprehensive approach to soil sustainability and mitigation strategies. The proposed soil footprint framework provides a valuable tool for evaluating human impacts on soil services, guiding targeted soil conservation efforts.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Soil Security
Published
2025-04-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soisec.2025.100184
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Soil erosion and sediment transport
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.37

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Towards soil security: Understanding soil erosion footprints and their implications in NSW

Alex B. McBratney, Budiman Minasny, Anilkumar Hunakuntim
2 citations
Soil Security
Soil erosion and sediment transport
2.37
article

Towards soil security: Understanding soil erosion footprints and their implications in NSW

Alex B. McBratney, Budiman Minasny, Anilkumar Hunakuntim
article en
2 citations

Abstract

A key challenge in maintaining soil security is assessing and mitigating soil degradation. The soil footprint is a promising indicator for quantifying degradation impacts, yet it remains underdeveloped, lacking a standardized definition and a comprehensive calculation framework. This study introduces a generalized soil footprint framework, integrating three key components: (1) Threat to soil, representing degradation processes such as soil water erosion or salinization; (2) Soil service ratio, which quantifies changes in soil services such as crop yield or Available Water Capacity relative to their natural state; and (3) Inherent mitigation capability, reflecting the soil's resilience to degradation. Applied in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, we calculated two soil erosion footprints using crop yield and Available Water Capacity (AWC) as indicators of soil services. In both cases, soil erosion rate, specifically water erosion, was used as the threat to soil, while erosion risk capability represented the soil's intrinsic mitigation capacity. Results show that oats had the highest soil erosion footprint due to lower yields, whereas wheat, barley, sorghum, and grain legumes had smaller footprints. An inverse relationship between soil erosion footprint and crop receipts (i.e., farm revenue from crop production) highlights the economic risks of soil erosion, particularly in high-revenue regions like the Northwest Slopes and Plains and the Riverina. AWC-based soil erosion footprints were highest in coastal and dryland cropping areas, indicating greater erosion stress, while irrigated systems, plantation forests, and managed resource protection areas showed lower footprints, reflecting better resilience. Modified pastures, native forests, nature conservation areas, and minimal-use lands had higher footprints. This study highlights the need to integrate soil service ratios and erosion risk capability alongside erosion rates for a more comprehensive approach to soil sustainability and mitigation strategies. The proposed soil footprint framework provides a valuable tool for evaluating human impacts on soil services, guiding targeted soil conservation efforts.

Soil SecurityVol. 19
Australian Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Soil erosion and sediment transport
2.37
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.