MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384498290 · doi:10.1139/er-2022-0129

Carbon sequestration in Canada's croplands: a review of multiple disciplines influencing the science–policy interface

2023· review· en· W4384498290 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Lisa Ashton, Hannah P. Lieberman, Callum Morrison, Marie-Élise Samson

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of ManitobaMcGill UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon sequestrationEcosystem servicesSoil carbonEnvironmental scienceAgricultureEnvironmental resource managementOutreachClimate change mitigationContext (archaeology)BusinessNatural resource economicsGreenhouse gasSoil waterEcosystemGeographyEcologySoil sciencePolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A widely considered climate change mitigation strategy in agriculture is enhancing soil carbon (C) sequestration—the process of capturing atmospheric carbon dioxide and storing it in the soil. By adopting natural climate solutions (NCS) such as cover crops, reduced tillage, and diverse crop rotations, farmers can increase soil C sequestration and co-benefits such as improved biodiversity. Canada is increasingly interested in better positioning farmers to adopt NCS via government cost-share programs, ecosystem marketplaces, and outreach and education initiatives. Given the policy and market-driven interest in soil C sequestration in agriculture, there is a need to advance the science–policy interface, ensuring foundational science, NCS implementation, and approaches to promote NCS are aligned. Herein, the objective is to present insights from multiple disciplines that can help build connections between soil C sequestration science and policy relevant to Canada's croplands. The method is a review of literature on soil and pedoclimate science, agricultural NCS adoption, agricultural NCS governance, and science–policy interfaces to achieve this objective. From this review, key insights underline that Canadian cropland soils do not have a homogenous history in NCS adoption and production type, nor are all regions influenced by the same contextual factors, have the same potential in C storage, or exist within the same agri-environmental conditions. Therefore, it is emphasized herein that policies that aim to enhance soil organic C in croplands should consider local context and C sequestration potential. Policies and programs implemented locally to enhance C sequestration across Canada should be complemented by nationally scalable measuring and monitoring to ensure outcomes are accounted for against climate goals. This review aims to contribute to building a common understanding of soil C sequestration in Canada's croplands and its science–policy interface. Efforts to further strengthen the science–policy interface for soil C sequestration in Canada's croplands might include greater integration and utilization of science and data from multiple disciplines, co-design and collaborative opportunities, and establishing on-the-ground test projects to explore innovation in policy and market design.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.027
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207