Exploratory analysis of carbon farming systems in 9 countries on the European continent

Carbon farming as a concept is undergoing rapid changes in how it is perceived and defined across countries and stakeholders. A popular definition in recent years has been that carbon farming consists of “farm management practices that aim to deliver climate mitigation in agriculture” (McDonald et al., 2021). Because the scope of this definition involves the entire farm, it considers both arable as well as livestock farming and refers to “all pools of carbon in soils, materials and vegetation, plus fluxes of carbon dioxide (CO₂) and methane (CH4), as well as nitrous oxide (N2O)” (European Commission et al., 2021). This holistic approach promotes the optimization of farm management for climate mitigation and need for emission reductions in all areas of agricultural production (e.g. from enteric fermentation, manure management, stable management, fertilization methods) as well as emissions from agricultural land use on cropland and grassland (see i.e.: Annys et al., 2022; McDonald et al., 2021).
However, with its proposal for a carbon removal certification framework (CRCF1) in November 2022, the European Commission narrowed the definition of carbon farming to “a green business model that rewards land managers for taking up improved land management practices, resulting in the increase of carbon sequestration in living biomass, dead organic matter and soils by enhancing carbon capture and/or reducing the release of carbon into the atmosphere, in respect of ecological principles favourable to biodiversity and the natural capital overall” (European Commission, 2022; Kerstine Appunn, 2022). Examples of improved land management practices as defined by the European Commission are afforestation, agroforestry, rewetting and restoring peatlands and improving carbon sequestration in mineral soils (European Commission, 2022). More specific examples for the latter include reduced or non-inversion tillage, cover crops (e.g. oilseed rape) and the maintenance of permanent grassland. The improved agricultural practices mentioned here are not new and often fall under the umbrella of agro-ecological practices, but are now also defined as carbon farming practices, because of the positive impact on carbon sequestration and avoided emissions (Annys et al., 2022). This interest in the mitigation potential of these practices encourages ways to remunerate farmers for the stored carbon (or avoided emissions) via carbon farming schemes which are: ‘any voluntary agreements in which a farmer or a group of farmers commit themselves to apply carbon farming measures in return for a payment in any form’ (Thorsøe, 2021).
There are many examples of carbon farming schemes starting up on the European continent and in other parts of the world, of which some show better results than others considering their ability to achieve climate mitigation, climate adaptation, soil health or have high participation levels of farmers (Thorsøe, in preparation). The essence of numerous ongoing research projects, policy initiatives, and collaborative working groups revolves around getting these kind of schemes to actually accomplish all their intended goals (see for instance EJP Soil Road4Schemes, C-farms, Expert Group Carbon Removals). This requires approaching the concept from multiple angles at once, such as how land users perceive carbon farming practices and schemes (Graversgaard, in preparation), as well as the incorporation of carbon farming schemes into national policymaking (Hönle, in preparation).
The essence of numerous ongoing research projects, policy initiatives, and collaborative working groups revolves around getting these kind of schemes to actually accomplish all their intended goals (see for instance EJP Soil Road4Schemes, C-farms, Expert Group Carbon Removals). This requires approaching the concept from multiple angles at once, such as how land users perceive carbon farming practices and schemes (Graversgaard, in preparation), as well as the incorporation of carbon farming schemes into national policymaking (Hönle, in preparation). Complementary to such research, we propose a conceptual framework to structure and visualise these multiple angles of approach and how they might fit in the evolution of carbon farming systems. Such a framework has the potential to provide a broader perspective by examining the system-level dynamics, including the interplay between carbon farming schemes, a broad range of stakeholders, and incentives within the social-ecological context. It can further enable the structural comparison of various elements in the steps of carbon farming systems (often referred to as the 'steps' of these systems) and how they might evolve in complexity. For example, in some countries, there may exist forums for deliberation where stakeholders collectively determine the guiding principles of the carbon farming system.
These principles could include decisions about which carbon farming practices to endorse and the permissible climate-related claims that financiers can make. Additionally, we have performed an exploratory system analysis for each country in the Road4Schemes consortium, which takes stock of their regional carbon farming systems through a survey. This exploratory system analysis follows the structure of the conceptual framework we propose. The aim is to uncover inspiring and transferable ideas or identify areas where further knowledge is needed.