Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The potential of soil functions and planner-oriented soil evaluation to achieve sustainable land use

  • SOILS, SEC 2 • GLOBAL CHANGE, ENVIRON RISK ASSESS, SUSTAINABLE LAND USE • DISCUSSION ARTICLE
  • Published:
Journal of Soils and Sediments Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Since application of ecological soil evaluation is not widely introduced in planning processes, a need for harmonisation of soil evaluation methods and spatial planning is evident. Conflicts are caused by the discrepancy between a holistic and site-specific approach of soil evaluation and the demand of spatial planners for easy-to-handle planner-oriented evaluation methods. Planners require less differentiation of pedological aspects but a detailed consideration of land use aspects. The aim of this paper is to illustrate the evolution of the concept of soil function and the development of the understanding of the soil functionality with time, respectively. This is reflected before the background of its applicability for spatial planning. Restrictions and deficits are highlighted, and strategies for further research work are sketched. The relation of soil functions and soil evaluation is examined exemplarily with algorithms of the TUSEC method applied for typical but fictive planning situations.

Main features

An introduction comprising the early history of soil evaluation and the widening of the view on soil functionality with time is given. Since 1978, the restriction on the function of soil to biomass productivity was overcome, and today, a set of ecological functions ensuring a sustainable land use is introduced. This process is reflected here by drawing a time order of definitions of soil functions, whereas the function of soil as carbon stock and genetic pool are the most recently accepted ones. In addition, functions of special meaning for the environmental quality in urban areas are highlighted. The multi-functionality of soil is reflected as a basic principle of the modern understanding of soils. It is explained here that the complexity of the concept of multi-functionality of soils does not fit directly to the administrative sight on the belongings of soil protection. Therefore, the chapters in this paper dealing with principle aspects of soil functions are followed by passages focusing on the application of soil functions, its practice, problems and perspectives.

Results and discussion

Strategies for future adaptations of soil evaluation to the requirements of spatial planning are discussed. Thus, strategies to summarise soil functions are sketched, and a reasonable land use specified soil evaluation is proposed.

Conclusions

Spatial planning needs a method for soil evaluation allowing a multi-level approach and some simplifications to meet the goals of rational land-use planning. Further work on this topic is strongly necessary to make efforts in soil protection and to support sustainable land use or, if anything, to bring sustainability into effect.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beatty MT, Petersen GW, Swindale LD (eds) (1979) Planning the uses and management of land: Agronomy Monograph 21. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 1028

  • Blum WEH, Santelises AA (1994) A concept of sustainability and resilience based on soil functions. In: Greenland DJ, Szaboles I (eds) Soil resilience and sustainable land use. CABI, Wallingford, pp 535–542

    Google Scholar 

  • Blume H-P (2003) Die Wurzeln der Bodenkunde. In: Blume HP, Felix-Henningsen P, Fischer WP, Frede HG, Horn R, Stahr K (eds, 1996 ff) Handbuch der Bodenkunde. ecomed, Landsberg-Lech, since 2007 Villey-VCH, Weinheim

  • Brümmer G (1978) Funktionen des Bodens im Stoffhaushalt der Ökosphäre. In: Olschowy G (ed) Natur–und Umweltschutz in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, p 111–124

  • Bundesministerium des I (ed) (1985) Bodenschutzkonzeption der Bundesregierung. Stuttgart. Bundestags-Drucksache 10/2977, Stuttgart, 229 pBurghardt W, Banko G, Hoeke S, Hursthouse A, de L’Escaille Th, Ledin S, Ajmone Marsan F, Sauer D, Stahr K, Amann E, Quast J, Nerger M, Schneider J, Kuehn K (2004) Research, sealing and cross-cutting issues, Task Group 5 on sealing soils, soils in urban areas, land use and land use planning. In: Van-Camp L, Bujarrabal B, Gentile A-R, Jones RJA, Montanarella L, Olazabal C, Selvaradjou S-K (2004) Reports of the Technical Working Groups Established under the Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection. EUR 21319 EN/6, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Luxembourg, p 872

  • Bundesministerium der J (1998) Bundes-Bodenschutzgesetz—BBodSchG. Bundesgesetzblatt I. Bonn, p 502

  • Burghardt W, Banko G, Hoeke S, Hursthouse A, de L'Escaille Th, Ledin S, Ajmone Marsan F, Sauer D, Stahr K, Amann E, Quast J, Nerger M, Schneider J, Kuehn K (2004) Research, sealing and cross-cutting issues, Task Group 5 on sealing soils, soils in urban areas, land use and land use planning. In: Van-Camp L, Bujarrabal B, Gentile A-R, Jones RJA, Montanarella L, Olazabal C, Selvaradjou S-K (2004). Reports of the Technical Working Groups Established under the Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection. EUR 21319 EN/6, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Luxembourg, 872 p

  • Carter MR, Gregorich EG, Anderson DW, Doran JW, Janzen HH, Pierce FJ (1997) Concepts of soil quality and their significance. In: Gregorich EG, Carter MR (eds) Soil quality for crop production and ecosystem health. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1–19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dieterich V (1953) Forstwirtschaftspolitik. Parey, p 389

  • Endres M (1905) Handbuch der Forspolitik. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2002) Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: “Towards a thematic strategy for soil protection”. Council Conclusions on Integrated Soil Protection, Brussels, p 6

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2006) Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the protection of soil and amending Directive 2004/35/EC. European Commission, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (1976) A framework for land evaluation Soil Bulletin 32. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2006) Guidelines for soil description, 4th edn. Rome, Italy, p 97

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2007) Land evaluation—towards a revised framework. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruban W, Eickeler A, Honrich H, Tusch M (2006) Conclusions and Key Findings—Internal Final Report for Work Package 10 “Conclusions” of the project TUSEC-IP, a project of the EU Community Initiative INTERREG III B Alpine Space Programme. City of Munich, p 83

  • Hansten U (1970) Sozialfunktion des Waldes in der Forsteinrichtung. Landschaft + Stadt: Beiträge zur Landespflege und Landesentwicklung. Institut für Landschaftspflege und Naturschutz der TU 2(2):68–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Hildebrand EE (1989) The influence of soil compaction on soil functions in forest soils. Anais X Seminario de atualizacao sobre sistemas de colheita de madeira e transporte florestal, Universidade Federal do Paraná, pp 63–75

  • Hochfeld B, Gröngröft A, Miehlich G (2003) Großmaßstäbige Bodenfunktionsbewertung für Hamburger Böden: Verfahrensbeschreibung und Begründung. Behörde für Umwelt und Gesundheit, Hamburg, p 89

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenny R, Geitner C, Gruban W, Tusch M (eds) (2006) Soil evaluation in spatial planning. City of Munich, Department of Health and Environment. http://www.alpinespace.org/uploads/media/TUSEC-IP_Soil_Evaluation_in_Spatial_Planning_EN.pdf p 47

  • Karlen DL, Mausbach MJ, Doran JW, Cline RG, Harris RF, Schuman GE (1997) Soil quality: a concept, definition, and framework for evaluation (a guest editorial). Soil Sci Soc Am J 61(1):4–10

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klingebiel AA, Montgomery PH (1961) Agricultural Handbook No. 210. USDA, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Kneib W, Schemschat B (2004) Probleme bei der Funktionsbewertung, p. 657. In: Blume H-P (ed) Handbuch des Bodenschutzes. p 915

  • Larson WE, Pierce FJ (1994) Conservation and enhancement of soil quality. In: Doran JW, Coleman DC, Bezdicek DF, Stewart BA (eds) Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 175–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann A (2006) Technosols and other proposals on urban soils for the WRB (World Reference Base for Soil Resources), International Agrophysics 20/2, http://www.international-agrophysics.org/artykuly/international_agrophysics/IntAgr_2006_20_2_129.pdf p 129–134

  • Lehmann A, David S, Stahr K (2008)TUSEC—Handbuch zur Bewertung von natürlichen Böden und anthropogenenStadtböden/TUSEC—A manual for the evaluation of Natural Soils and AnthropogenicUrban Soils. Hohenheimer Bodenkundliche Hefte, 86, p 224

  • Niemann E (1977) Eine Methode zur Erarbeitung der Funktionsleistung von Landschaftselementen. Archiv Naturschutz und Landschaftsforschung, pp 119–157

  • Rakodi C, Nunan F, Mc Callum D (2002) Sustainable Urbanisation—Achieving Agenda 21. Human Settlement Program, UN-Habitat, Geneva, p 32

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlichting E (1972) Böden puffern Umwelteinflüsse ab. Umsch Wiss Tech 72:50–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Soil Science Society of America (1995) Statement on soil quality. Agronomy News, June 1995

  • Stahr K (1985) Wie lassen sich Bodenfunktionen erhalten? Landschaftsentwicklung und Umweltforschung, Berlin, pp 152–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Storie RE (1933) An index for rating agricultural value of soil. Calif Agric Exp Sta Bul 566:48

    Google Scholar 

  • Umweltministerium von BW (1991) Bodenschutzgesetz von Baden-Württemberg (BodSchG). GBl, pp 434–440

  • Umweltministerium BW (1995) Bewertung von Böden nach ihrer Leistungsfähigkeit, 31. Umweltministerium Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart, p 34

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (1992) Population, environment and development: proceedings of the United Nations Expert Group Meeting on Population, Environment and Development, 20–24 January 1992. New York, p 285

  • Van-Camp L, Bujarrabal B, Gentile AR, Jones RJA, Montanarella L, Olazabal C, Selvaradjou SK (2004) reports of the technical working groups established under the thematic strategy for soil protection. EUR 21319 EN/1 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, p 872

    Google Scholar 

  • van Diepen CA, Van Keulen H, Wolf J, Berkhout JAA (1991) Land evaluation: from intuition to quantification. In: Stewar BA (ed) Advances in Soil Science. Springer, New York, pp 139–204

    Google Scholar 

  • Vittoria LM, Goldberg F (1975) Le funzioni del suolo nella biosfera. Rilancio Agric Vet Zootec 7(8/9):22–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Warkentin BP (1995) The changing concept of soil quality. J Soil Water Conserv 50:226–228

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Lehmann.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Jean Louis Morel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lehmann, A., Stahr, K. The potential of soil functions and planner-oriented soil evaluation to achieve sustainable land use. J Soils Sediments 10, 1092–1102 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-010-0207-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-010-0207-5

Keywords

Navigation