Next Article in Journal
Optimization of Litchi Fruit Detection Based on Defoliation and UAV
Previous Article in Journal
Assessment of the Plant Growth-Promoting Potential of Three Pseudomonas and Pantoea Isolates to Promote Pepper Growth
Previous Article in Special Issue
Effects of Long-Term Cotton Straw Return on Soil Carbon and Bacterial Community in Topsoil and Deep Soil
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Net-Zero Emissions for Sustainable Food Production and Land Management

1
Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Low Carbon Agriculture and GHGs Mitigation, College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 211800, China
2
Key Laboratory of Arable Land Conservation in North China, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, College of Land Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2025, 15(10), 2420; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15102420
Submission received: 24 September 2025 / Accepted: 16 October 2025 / Published: 18 October 2025
In the face of global climate change, resource scarcity, and population growth, ensuring food security [1] and human well-being has become the core goal of agricultural development. However, while able to meet the increasing food demand, traditional food production and land management practices are often accompanied by greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, environmental degradation, and a reduction in biodiversity [2]. The question, therefore, is how do we ensure stable or increased food production while reducing GHG emissions and maintaining soil quality and health? To address this, a transformation of global agriculture is imperative, with a focus on promoting sustainable food production and land management practices. Achieving the “net-zero emissions” goal, which involves sequestering soil organic carbon, reducing GHG emissions, enhancing the efficiency of agricultural resource utilization, and adopting innovative technologies and green management approaches, has become a critical issue in the agricultural sector; it aims to ensure a stable food supply without increasing the carbon footprint, with one example illustrated in Figure 1 [3].
Through the proposed life cycle assessment framework, a comprehensive evaluation was conducted to optimize the system boundaries of carbon footprint, reactive nitrogen footprint (Nr footprint), and net ecosystem economic benefits for vegetable production. This approach accounted for the interrelationships between agriculture, the environment, and the economy, yielding a more nuanced framework for understanding sustainability in vegetable production systems. As an example, Bi et al. [3] found that biochar demonstrates significant potential to enhance the sustainability of vegetable production by reducing emissions, increasing yields, and improving economic benefits.
Not only the topsoil, but also deep soil shows an increasingly important role in preserving soil organic and inorganic carbon stocks. Trueman et al. [4] found that in as little as two years, carbon content in the surface soils (0–15 cm) of previously CO2-enriched plots had dropped to levels below those of the ambient and pretreatment soil. In contrast, carbon retained in response to CO2 enrichment was more durable in the deeper soil layers (>25 cm), where both organic and inorganic carbon were on average 26% and 55% greater, respectively, than the carbon content of ambient plots. Biofuel GHG emissions showed as much as a 154% difference between using only near-surface SOC stock changes and when accounting for both near-surface and sub-surface SOC stock changes [5].
Net Ecosystem Carbon Balance (NECB), which is defined as the difference between the total organic C input and output, serves as a critical indicator for evaluating ecosystem health, offering a comprehensive measure of how ecosystems respond to environmental changes [6]. As global climate change intensifies, understanding the dynamics of carbon storage and release within ecosystems has become essential. Green manure application from three cover crops increased NECB during the rice-growing season but significantly increased CH4 emissions [7]. In addition, modeling approaches are widely used to calculate NECB. Lopez et al. [8] optimized Earth System Models and integrated observations and simulated data to accurately calculate GHG fluxes and to reduce uncertainties in the evaluation of NECB in extreme Arctic regions.
Numerous meta-analyses have discovered the key drivers for improving soil carbon sequestration and GHG mitigations in agricultural fields while ensuring stable yields. These include nitrogen inputs, exogenous organic carbon (biochar, organic manure, and so on), tillage practices, irrigation methods, and planting density [9,10,11,12,13]. These optimization practices have also been thoroughly validated in numerous long-term field experiments. Zhang et al. [14] found that if the basal/topdressing fertilization rate is 50%:50%, the split nitrogen fertilizer can maintain a higher grain yield and reduce GHG emissions in winter wheat. Through a 7-year experiment in a paddy field, Chen et al. [15] found that biochar application can significantly improve SOC sequestration and reduce the carbon footprint, but it also has a negative effect on NEEB. The high cost of biochar is likely the primary reason behind this; moving forward, optimizing its production processes to improve quality and reduce costs will be crucial. After a long-term experiment, Zhang et al. [16] concluded that no tillage provides a good option for increasing SOC sequestration in a double cropping system of winter wheat and summer corn on the North China Plain. Based on a 6-year experiment, Yang et al. [17] found that winter wheat–summer maize–spring maize with irrigation was the most effective treatment for promoting SOC sequestration and mitigating GHG emissions with a relatively high yield.
While the above mitigation strategies tackle the causes of climate change (by reducing the sources or enhancing the sinks of greenhouse gases), adaptation tackles the effects of the phenomenon (the adjustment of systems to a new or changing environment) to exploit beneficial opportunities. Khan et al. [18] explored crop growth responses to future CO2 enrichment, focusing on the intricate responses of maize metabolism to varying CO2 levels; they highlighted adaptive strategies for primary and secondary metabolism and physiological and biochemical responses under changing atmospheric conditions.
As an emerging pollutant, microplastics interact with the soil organic carbon pool [19]. In a semi-arid agroecosystem, different prolonged plastic film mulching times for ridge and furrow system would threaten soil fertility due to the decreasing light fraction of organic carbon and mineral nitrogen. Organic manure is thus recommended to enhance the sustainability of the farming system in semi-arid regions [19].
Future agricultural production will be more intelligent, precise, and low-carbon. Smart agriculture leverages a wide range of advanced technologies, such as wireless sensor networks, IT, robotics, agricultural bots, drones, artificial intelligence, and cloud computing [20]. The adoption of these technologies enables all stakeholders to develop better managerial decisions and obtain higher yields. The integration of agriculture with modern biosynthetic technologies will be a key future trend. Utilizing microalgae as a bio-fertilizer pathway improves soil health and reduces greenhouse gas emissions [21,22]. With ongoing advancements in biotechnology, information technology, and other fields, the analysis and driving of agricultural production through large-scale data models is becoming increasingly prominent.
Currently, more and more industries and companies are pledging to become carbon-neutral, net-zero, or even carbon-negative in order to combat global climate changes. The close integration of agriculture with other industries is expected to garner greater attention, particularly through scientific resource allocation models that combine agriculture with aquaculture, livestock farming, and other forms of integrated farming [23,24]. Patra revealed that GHG emissions (total as well as per unit of products) from dairy and other categories of livestock could be reduced substantially through proper herd management, without compromising animal production. In addition, Fatima et al. also found an integrated farming system encompassing various enterprises, such as crops, dairy, poultry, and fisheries, can offer benefits in terms of enhanced farm productivity, profitability, and environmental sustainability (lower GHG emissions). Hence, an appropriate combination of diversified and complementary enterprises in the form of an integrated farming system provides a robust approach to sustainable food production.
This Special Issue (https://www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy/special_issues/2M878QVH49 (accessed on 31 July 2024)) was closed on 31 July 2025, having published 11 high-quality papers and been viewed 27,153 times. Due to the sustained interest in this topic from numerous authors and the continuous evolution of research, we have since launched “Net-Zero Emissions for Sustainable Food Production and Land Management—2nd Edition” (https://www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy/special_issues/E2E0HIK15S (accessed on 1 October 2025)).
Finally, we would like to extend our heartfelt appreciation to all the authors, reviewers, and editorial team members whose contributions have made this Special Issue possible. We trust that these works will foster further research and encourage interdisciplinary collaboration in the field.

Author Contributions

Z.X.: conceptualization, data curation, writing—original draft preparation, review and editing, funding acquisition; J.S.: methodology, writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Jiangsu Province Special Project for Carbon Peak and Carbon Neutral Science and Technology Innovation (BE2022309) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (42377292).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Chen, M. Food security or climate action. Nat. Clim. Change 2025, 15, 354–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Liu, B.; Guo, C.; Xu, J.; Zhao, Q.; Chadwick, D.; Gao, X.; Zhou, F.; Lakshmanan, P.; Wang, X.; Guan, X.; et al. Co-benefits for net carbon emissions and rice yields through improved management of organic nitrogen and water. Nat. Food 2024, 5, 241–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Bi, R.; Wang, B.; Xu, X.; Dong, Y.; Jiao, Y.; Xiong, Z. Biochar is superior to organic substitution for vegetable production—A revised approach for net ecosystem economic benefit. Agronomy 2024, 14, 2693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Trueman, R.J.; Taneva, L.; Gonzalez-Meler, M.A.; Oechel, W.C.; BassiriRad, H. Carbon losses in soils previously exposed to elevated atmospheric CO2 in a chaparral ecosystem: Potential implications for a sustained biospheric C sink. J. Geochem. Explor. 2009, 102, 142–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Schmer, M.R.; Jin, V.L.; Wienhold, B.J. Sub-surface soil carbon changes affects biofuel greenhouse gas emissions. Biomass Bioenergy 2015, 81, 31–34. [Google Scholar]
  6. Zhou, J.; Li, B.; Xia, L.; Fan, C.; Xiong, Z. Organic-substitute strategies reduced carbon and reactive nitrogen footprints and gained net ecosystem economic benefit for intensive vegetable production. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 225, 984–994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Hyun, Y.H.; Gil, W.K.; Sang, Y.K.; Mozammel Haque, M.; Muhammad, I.K.; Pil, J.K. Effect of cover cropping on the net global warming potential of rice paddy soil. Geoderma 2017, 292, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lopez-Blanco, E.; Vaisanen, M.; Salmon, E.; Jones, C.P.; Schmidt, N.M.; Marttila, H.; Lohila, A.; Juutinen, S.; Scheller, J.; Christensen, T.R. The net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB) at catchment scales in the Arctic. Front. Environ. Sci. 2025, 13, 1544586. [Google Scholar]
  9. Zhang, J.; Tian, H.; You, Y.; Liang, X.; Ouyang, Z.; Pan, N.; Pan, S. Balancing non-CO2 GHG emissions and soil carbon change in U.S. rice addies: A retrospective meta-analysis and agricultural modeling study. AGU Adv. 2024, 5, e2023AV001052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Jiang, L.; Li, S.; Zheng, H.; Zhang, T.; Li, J.; Tian, B.; Ma, J. Responses of soil water supply during the wheat growing season to agricultural management practice in Northern China: A meta-analysis. Field Crops Res. 2025, 321, 109686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Fan, H.; Zhang, Y.; Li, J.; Jiang, J.; Waheed, A.; Wang, S.; Rasheed, S.M.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, R. Effects of organic fertilizer supply on soil properties, tomato yield, and fruit quality: A global meta-analysis. Sustainability 2023, 15, 2556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Lei, R.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, J.; Xiang, H. Tap maize yield productivity in China: A meta-analysis of agronomic measures and planting density optimization. Agronomy 2025, 15, 861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Xu, J.; Xiong, Z. Biochar amendments mitigate trace gas emissions in organic waste composting: A meta-analysis. Nitrogen. Cycl. 2025, 1, e5. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zhang, Z.; Yu, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Shi, Y. Finding the fertilization optimization to balance grain yield and soil greenhouse gas emissions under water-saving irrigation. Soil Tillage Res. 2021, 214, 105167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Chen, Z.; Han, S.; Dong, Z.; Li, H.; Zhang, A. Trade-off between soil carbon sequestration and net ecosystem economic benefits for paddy fields under long-term application of biochar. Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy 2024, 16, e13116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zhang, M.; Wang, F.; Chen, F.; Malemela, M.P.; Zhang, H. Comparison of three tillage systems in the wheat-maize system on carbon sequestration in the North China Plain. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 54, 101–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yang, Y.; Ti, J.; Zou, J.; Wu, Y.; Rees, R.M.; Harrison, M.T.; Li, W.; Huang, W.; Hu, S.; Liu, K.; et al. Optimizing crop rotation increases soil carbon and reduces GHG emissions without sacrificing yields. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2023, 342, 108220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Khan, P.; Safiul Azam, F.M.; Lian, T.; Abdelbacki, A.M.M.; Albaqami, M.; Jan, R.; Kim, K.; Wang, W. Physiological and biochemical responses of maize to elevated CO2 concentrations: Implications for growth and metabolism. Agronomy 2024, 14, 1751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Liu, C.; Li, F.; Zhou, L.; Feng, Q.; Li, X.; Pan, C.; Le, W.; Chen, J.; Li, X.; Jia, Y.; et al. Effects of water management with plastic film in a semi-arid agricultural system on available soil carbon fractions. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 2013, 57, 9–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Shaikh, F.K.; Karim, S.; Zeadally, S.; Nebhen, J. Recent trends in internet-of-things-enabled sensor technologies for smart agriculture. IEEE Internet Things J. 2022, 9, 23583–23598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Dagnaisser, L.S.; Santos, M.G.B.D.; Rita, A.V.S.; Cardoso, J.C.; Carvalho, D.F.; Mendonca, H.V. Microalgae as bio-fertilizer: A new strategy for advancing modern agriculture, wastewater bioremediation, and atmospheric carbon mitigation. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2022, 233, 477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ikuta, Y. Microagriculture-biofixation of CO2 using nitrogen-fixing microalgae in rice fields. Greenh. Gas Control Technol. 2003, 2, 1471–1476. [Google Scholar]
  23. Patra, A.K. Estimation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from Indian livestock. J. Environ. Monit. 2012, 14, 2673–2684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Fatima, A.; Singh, V.K.; Babu, S.; Singh, R.K.; Upadhyay, P.K.; Rathore, S.S.; Kumar, B.; Hasanain, M.; Parween, H. Food production potential and environmental sustainability of different integrated farming system models in northwest India. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2023, 7, 959464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. System boundaries for the life cycle assessment of carbon footprint and Nr footprint, and the net ecosystem economic benefit of intensive vegetable production (source: adapted from Bi et al. [3]).
Figure 1. System boundaries for the life cycle assessment of carbon footprint and Nr footprint, and the net ecosystem economic benefit of intensive vegetable production (source: adapted from Bi et al. [3]).
Agronomy 15 02420 g001
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Xiong, Z.; Shang, J. Net-Zero Emissions for Sustainable Food Production and Land Management. Agronomy 2025, 15, 2420. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15102420

AMA Style

Xiong Z, Shang J. Net-Zero Emissions for Sustainable Food Production and Land Management. Agronomy. 2025; 15(10):2420. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15102420

Chicago/Turabian Style

Xiong, Zhengqin, and Jianying Shang. 2025. "Net-Zero Emissions for Sustainable Food Production and Land Management" Agronomy 15, no. 10: 2420. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15102420

APA Style

Xiong, Z., & Shang, J. (2025). Net-Zero Emissions for Sustainable Food Production and Land Management. Agronomy, 15(10), 2420. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15102420

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop