Soil degradation is a global concern, decreasing the soil’s ability to perform a multitude of functions. In Europe, one of the leading causes of soil degradation is unsustainable agricultural practices. Hence, there is a need to explore alternative production systems for enhanced agronomic productivity and environmental performance, such as agroforestry systems (AFS). Given this, the objective of the study is to enumerate the major benefits and challenges in the adoption of AFS. AFS can improve agronomic productivity, carbon sequestration, nutrient cycling, soil biodiversity, water retention, and pollination. Furthermore, they can reduce soil erosion and incidence of fire and provide recreational and cultural benefits. There are several challenges to the adoption and uptake of AFS in Europe, including high costs for implementation, lack of financial incentives, limited AFS product marketing, lack of education, awareness, and field demonstrations. Policies for financial incentives such as subsidies and payments for ecosystem services provided by AFS must be introduced or amended. Awareness of AFS products must be increased for consumers through appropriate marketing strategies, and landowners need more opportunities for education on how to successfully manage diverse, economically viable AFS. Finally, field-based evidence is required for informed decision-making by farmers, advisory services, and policy-making bodies.

The greatest challenge for the agriculture sector in the twenty-first century is to increase agricultural production to feed the burgeoning global population while maintaining soil health and the integrity of the agroecosystem. Currently, the application of biochar is widely implemented as an effective means for boosting sustainable agriculture while having a negligible influence on ecosystems and the environment. In comparison to traditional biochar, nano-biochar (nano-BC) boasts enhanced specific surface area, adsorption capacity, and mobility properties within soil, allowing it to promote soil properties, crop growth, and environmental remediation. Additionally, carbon sequestration and reduction of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture can be achieved with nano-BC applications, contributing to climate change mitigation. Nonetheless, due to cost-effectiveness, sustainability, and environmental friendliness, waste-derived nano-BC may emerge as the most viable alternative to conventional waste management strategies, contributing to the circular bioeconomy and the broader goal of achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, it's important to note that research on nano-BC is still in its nascent stages. Potential risks, including toxicity in aquatic and terrestrial environments, necessitate extensive field investigations. This review delineates the potential of waste-derived nano-BC for sustainable agriculture and environmental applications, outlining current advancements, challenges, and possibilities in the realms from a sustainability and circular bioeconomy standpoint.

Agroforestry systems have multifunctional roles in enhancing agronomic productivity, co-production of diversity of food and non-food products and provision of ecosystem services. The knowledge of the performance of agroforestry systems compared with monoculture is scarce and scattered. Hence, the objective of the study was to analyze the agronomic productivity and economic viability of diverse agroforestry systems in Europe. A network of five agroforestry systems integrating arable crops, livestock and biomass trees was investigated to assess the range of agricultural products in each agroforestry system. Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) was used to measure the agronomic productivity, whereas gross margin was used as an indicator for economic viability assessment. LER values ranged from 1.36–2.00, indicating that agroforestry systems were more productive by 36–100% compared to monocultures. Agroforestry gross margin was lower in Denmark (€112 ha⁻¹ year⁻¹) compared to United Kingdom (€5083 ha⁻¹ year⁻¹) and the crop component yielded higher returns compared to negative returns from the tree component in agroforestry. Hence, the study provided robust field-based evidence on agronomic productivity and economic viability assessment of agroforestry systems in diverse contexts for informed decision making by land managers, advisory services, farmers and policymakers.

The challenges of achieving both food security and environmental sustainability have resulted in a confluence of demands on land within the European Union (EU): we expect our land to provide food, fibre and fuel, to purify water, to sequester carbon, and provide a home to biodiversity as well as external nutrients in the form of waste from humans and intensive livestock enterprises. All soils can perform all of these five functions, but some soils are better at supplying selective functions. Functional Land Management is a framework for policy-making aimed at meeting these demands by incentivising land use and soil management practices that selectively augment specific soil functions, where required. Here, we explore how the demands for contrasting soil functions, as framed by EU policies, may apply to very different spatial scales, from local to continental scales. At the same time, using Ireland as a national case study, we show that the supply of each soil function is largely determined by local soil and land use conditions, with large variations at both local and regional scales. These discrepancies between the scales at which the demands and supply of soil functions are manifested, have implications for soil and land management: while some soil functions must be managed at local (e.g. farm or field) scale, others may be offset between regions with a view to solely meeting national or continental demands. In order to facilitate the optimisation of the delivery of soil functions at national level, to meet the demands that are framed at continental scale, we identify and categorise 14 policy and market instruments that are available in the EU. The results from this inventory imply that there may be no need for the introduction of new specific instruments to aid the governance of Functional Land Management. We conclude that there may be more merit in adapting existing governance instruments by facilitating differentiation between soils and landscapes.