Search for: All records

Abstract No-till management is often recognized for its environmental and economic benefits, but its potential to reduce climate warming is still uncertain. Beyond ongoing debate over its effects on soil carbon storage, no-till also leaves plant residue on the surface, which can reflect more sunlight. This increase in surface reflectivity, called albedo, may help mitigate climate change by reducing the energy absorbed by the land. Here, we assessed this climate benefit of no-till across the U.S. Corn Belt using conservation survey records, county-level tillage data, and satellite observations. We found that no-till increased land surface brightness during the dormant season, reducing absorbed solar energy by an estimated 50 grams of CO₂equivalent per square meter per year. Regionally, this could add up to 24 teragrams of CO₂equivalent per year in potential climate benefits. Areas with low adoption, especially those with dark, carbon-rich soils, offer the greatest opportunity for further mitigation. 

Abstract Worldwide, voluntary agri-environmental programs encourage farmers to adopt environmentally friendly practices. However, the impact of program design on farmers’ participation and long-term practice persistence is unclear. Toward improving program effectiveness, this study illustrates the value of a tailored practice-specific approach to agri-environmental program design. We present a case study of programs promoting cover crops, a conservation practice that can improve soil health and reduce nutrient pollution, drawing from five focus groups with farmers (n = 20) and program administrators (n = 14) in the U.S. Midwest (Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana). Participants perceived cover crop programs to best support farmers is characterized by flexibility and minimal transaction costs. Participants suggested a more data-driven approach to program design particularly for understanding the farm-level economic implications of cover crop use. Integrating financial planning and participatory research components alongside traditional financial incentives and technical assistance were proposed as valuable strategies to enhance program design and broaden the appeal of conservation practices like cover crops. 

Climate solutions related to mitigation and adaptation vary across the United States and India, given their unique current socio-political–technological abilities and their histories. Here, we discuss results from online face-to-face interviews undertaken with 33 U.S.-based climate experts and 30 India-based climate experts. Using qualitative grounded theory, we explore open-ended responses to questions related to mitigation and adaptation and find the following: (1) there is broad agreement among experts in both countries on the main mitigation solutions focused on the decarbonization of energy systems, but (2) there are a diversity of views between experts on what to prioritize and how to achieve it. Similarly, there is substantial agreement that adaptation solutions are needed to address agriculture, water management, and infrastructure, but there is a wide variety of perspectives on other priorities and how best to proceed. Experts across both countries generally perceived mitigation as needing national policies to succeed, while adaptation is perceived as more local and challenging given the larger number of stakeholders involved in planning and implementation. Our findings indicate that experts agree on the goals of decarbonization, but there was no consensus on how best to accomplish implementation.