Know more

The first step to build an International Research Consortium it to stock-take the current and forthcoming international, regional and national research projects and programs on agricultural SOC sequestration.

This study will lead us to better structure existing knowledge, networks, and projects on the field of SOC sequestration on four themes previously identified

1. Soil processes
2. Soil monitoring
3. Soil management
4. Barriers and adoption in implementation.

As well, as contribute to the stakeholders’ linkages and mapping to see how international research cooperations are organized and map EU counties with a strong presence on networks.

Understand countries’ capacity to formulate and implement soil policies related to carbon sequestration is crucial for the scientific community to complement the science base of a strategic research agenda.

Stok-take of the projects and programs on agricultural SOC sequestration

The results of this study indicate that of the 4themes, the ‘Barriers and adoption implementation” is the last studied in global literature and the orientation towards policymakers is low.

Those results are different if we observe only literature from CIRCASA Network, which shows that the consortium is clearly on the management aspects and targets specifically policymakers and farmers.

The study also takes in count the origin of the publications showing that Chinese institutes dominate the ranking in terms of publications, however, in terms of citation impact, French institutes are on top of the list.  

Mapping Networks and projects

Research Projects and regional projects related to Climate Change are organized differently. Research projects seem to be more strongly linked to national policymakers and the private sector; they are more cross-cutting and include more countries than regional projects.

Projects such as CIRCASA shows to be important to interconnect international networks and partnerships, and to allow for cross projects linkages and provide often a more programmatic approach to the more project-based funding dynamics of research institutes.

“Countries that are active in projects are assumed to be also better equipped to serve local and regional policymakers and private sector partners.”

Networks in which institutes are connected, and scientific efforts are connected are a logical strategy to create added value and avoid duplication and move away from a project-based t a more programmatic approach. Moreover, networks such as the 4p100, GSP or CIRCASA all a better visibility of science in the public and policy debates and create an enabling environment for partners to cooperate.

Download the full report https://www.circasa-project.eu/content/download/3917/38029/version/1/file/D1.1_The%20Network%20map%20and%20dialogue.pdf