Carbon Farming for Sustainable Agriculture: A Critical Review of Soil Carbon Sequestration, Nutrient Management and Climate Resilience

Résumé fourni par la source

Carbon farming has moved from a soil-management concept to a prominent climate-policy proposition, yet the agronomic value of building soil organic carbon and the credibility of soil carbon as a durable climate-removal pathway are not identical questions. This critical narrative review evaluates carbon farming as an integrated strategy for soil carbon sequestration, nutrient management and climate resilience. The literature was selected from accessible scholarly indexes and disciplinary databases, supplemented by citation chaining and authoritative source verification, with emphasis on field experiments, long-term trials, meta-analyses, mechanistic soil-carbon studies and work on measurement, reporting and verification. Evidence indicates that practices which increase carbon inputs, reduce avoidable carbon losses and improve biological nutrient cycling can rebuild depleted soil organic carbon, particularly where initial stocks are low and management constraints are substantial. Cover crops, diversified rotations, organic amendments, agroforestry and context-appropriate biochar generally show stronger or more interpretable carbon benefits than simple claims based on reduced tillage alone. Benefits for nutrient retention, aggregation, rooting conditions and yield stability are plausible and often observed, but vary with climate, soil texture and mineralogy, baseline fertility, water regime, residue availability and the duration of management. Carbon gains are finite, reversible and vulnerable to sampling artefacts; transferring manure or crop residues between locations can also create apparent project gains without equivalent net atmospheric removal. Credible carbon farming therefore requires whole-system greenhouse-gas accounting, explicit treatment of additionality and permanence, consistent soil-depth and bulk-density protocols, and conservative crediting. The strongest case for carbon farming is consequently not as a universal substitute for emissions reduction, but as a geographically targeted form of soil restoration that can deliver climate mitigation alongside agronomic and resilience co-benefits when carbon accounting is rigorous and nutrient trade-offs are managed.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.