Calone Roberta, Fiore Angela, Pellis Guido, Cayuela Maria Luz, Mongiano Gabriele, Lagomarsino Alessandra, Bregaglio Simone
CREA - Council for Agricultural Research and Economics, Research Centre for Agriculture and Environment, I-40128 Bologna, Italy.
ISPRA - Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research, Via Vitaliano Brancati, 48- I-00144 Rome, Italy.
Data Brief. 2024 Dec 11;58:111226. doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2024.111226. eCollection 2025 Feb.
Farming practices such as soil tillage, organic/mineral fertilization, irrigation, crop selection and residues management influence multiple ecosystem services provided by agricultural systems. These practices exhibit complex, non-linear interrelationships that affect crop productivity, water quality, and non-carbon dioxide greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions, possibly offsetting their benefits regarding soil organic carbon (SOC) sequestration. Current methodologies from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for assessing the impacts of alternative farming practices on GHG emissions rely on global or country-specific coefficients. However, these methods often do not explicitly account for the combined effects of management practices on carbon and nitrogen cycles or productivity, as this is not required for national GHG inventories. Here we present a new dataset featuring 1.8 Mln of agronomic case scenarios, i.e., unique combinations of farming practices and pedoclimatic conditions, which have been associated with values of SOC changes, nitrous oxide emissions, nitrate-nitrogen leaching, and crop yield. To synthesize trade-offs and synergies between farming practices, each case scenario has been ranked with a ∑ommit index (∑i) value, a fuzzy-based measure ranging from 0 (bad) to 1 (good). The four trade-off components have been estimated by combining available information from i) the 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, ii) the guidelines for Green Water Footprint Accounting, iii) the Italian National Institute of Statistics, iv) and other international meta-analytic studies. The dataset presents four ∑i series, corresponding to alternative perceptions of sustainability from three potential stakeholder categories (young farmers' cooperative, agrochemical company, public agricultural policy agency) plus one equally weighted option. By providing a harmonized data source and an innovative metric, this dataset allows users to explore trade-offs associated with alternative management practices across four key agricultural components and assess their impact on perceived agroecosystem sustainability.
土壤耕作、有机/矿物施肥、灌溉、作物选择和残茬管理等农业实践会影响农业系统提供的多种生态系统服务。这些实践呈现出复杂的非线性相互关系，会影响作物生产力、水质和非二氧化碳温室气体（GHG）排放，可能抵消它们在土壤有机碳（SOC）固存方面的益处。政府间气候变化专门委员会（IPCC）目前用于评估替代农业实践对温室气体排放影响的方法依赖于全球或特定国家的系数。然而，这些方法通常没有明确考虑管理实践对碳和氮循环或生产力的综合影响，因为国家温室气体清单不需要这样做。在此，我们展示了一个新的数据集，包含180万个农艺案例情景，即农业实践和土壤气候条件的独特组合，这些情景与SOC变化值、一氧化二氮排放、硝酸盐 - 氮淋溶和作物产量相关。为了综合农业实践之间的权衡和协同效应，每个案例情景都根据一个∑ommit指数（∑i）值进行了排名，该指数是一种基于模糊的度量，范围从0（差）到1（好）。这四个权衡组成部分是通过结合以下方面可得的信息估算得出的：i）《2006年IPCC国家温室气体清单指南2019年修订版》、ii）绿水足迹核算指南、iii）意大利国家统计局、iv）以及其他国际荟萃分析研究。该数据集呈现了四个∑i系列，对应于来自三个潜在利益相关者类别（青年农民合作社、农用化学品公司、公共农业政策机构）对可持续性的不同认知，再加上一个等权重选项。通过提供一个统一的数据源和一种创新的度量方法，这个数据集允许用户探索与替代管理实践在四个关键农业组成部分之间相关的权衡，并评估它们对感知到的农业生态系统可持续性的影响。
