Next Article in Journal
Advancing Buffer Zone Delineation for Urban Cultural Heritage: A Risk-Based Framework
Previous Article in Journal
Water Retention and Availability in an Ultisol Under an Integrated Crop–Livestock–Forest System in the Matopiba Region, Brazil
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Land
Volume 15
Issue 3
10.3390/land15030361
land-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Maximum Carbon Sequestration from Cropland Abandonment in China over the Past Thirty Years

by
Meng Wang
1,2,3,
Xiaofang Sun
1,2,3,*,
Xin Zhu
1,2,3 and
Lixiao Lu
1,2,3
1
School of Geography and Tourism, Qufu Normal University, Rizhao 276800, China
2
Sino-Belgian Joint Laboratory of Geo-Information, Rizhao 276826, China
3
Shandong Key Laboratory of Wetland Ecology and Biodiversity Conservation in the Lower Yellow River, Qufu 273165, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2026, 15(3), 361; https://doi.org/10.3390/land15030361
Submission received: 2 February 2026 / Revised: 19 February 2026 / Accepted: 21 February 2026 / Published: 24 February 2026
(This article belongs to the Topic Global Farmland Protection, Food Security and Land Use Planning)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Cropland abandonment is a widespread phenomenon globally, including in China. However, the role of carbon sequestration on abandoned cropland in climate change mitigation remains uncertain, largely due to the dynamic interplay between abandonment and recultivation as well as inconsistencies in definitions across studies. The duration of continuous abandonment is a key determinant of carbon sequestration magnitude. In this study, the maximum continuous abandonment duration for each pixel across China was mapped using annual land-use maps from 1990 to 2025. The maximum carbon sequestration potential—expressed as cumulative Net Ecosystem Productivity (NEP)—was then estimated by integrating these duration data with corresponding annual NEP. Results show that the average maximum abandoned duration is 14.62 years, with the 6–10 years category accounting for the largest proportion of abandoned pixels (24.50%). In contrast, longer duration categories (26–30 years and >30 years) represent only 10.44% and 3.72%, respectively, indicating that most abandoned cropland is recultivated before substantial net carbon accumulation (reflected in positive NEP) can occur. Sensitivity analysis suggests that the choice of threshold duration has only a marginal influence on estimates of abandoned area and duration. The total maximum net carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment over the study period amounts to 79 Tg C, which is lower than the emission reduction potential achievable through appropriate agricultural management measures. A comparative analysis of emissions and sequestration indicates that relying solely on vegetation recovery for CO2 removal is insufficient to support carbon neutrality objectives within the cropland system. These findings underscore the need to prioritize emission-reduction strategies in agricultural management over passive reliance on abandonment-driven carbon sinks.

1. Introduction

Cropland abandonment, driven by socioeconomic development, land degradation, and disasters, is a widespread phenomenon globally [1]. Furthermore, this trend is projected to persist in the future, particularly in abandonment hotspots such as East Asia, Europe, and the Americas [2]. In China, cropland abandonment is a very common phenomenon [3]. Previous studies have indicated that nature-based solutions can effectively decelerate the accumulation of greenhouse gases and have emerged as a viable strategy for achieving global carbon neutrality [4,5,6]. Following abandonment, the carbon sink capacity of ecosystem tends to increase gradually during vegetation restoration, highlighting its potential for carbon sequestration [7,8,9]. Nevertheless, the precise magnitude of the carbon sink contributed by cropland abandonment remains uncertain, and the extent to which such abandoned lands can contribute to climate mitigation goals is still unclear [10].
Previous studies have employed the InVEST model to evaluate carbon storage benefits arising from the conversion of abandoned cropland [11]. However, the InVEST model estimates carbon storage based on land use categories and their associated carbon density parameters. Notably, the carbon coefficients assigned to each land use type remain static and do not vary across spatial contexts. Moreover, the model does not account for carbon storage variations associated with vegetation growth, thereby limiting its applicability in accessing dynamic carbon sequestration processes. The MOD17 model utilizes a static look-up table that assigns fixed physiological parameters to each biome type, independent of stand age. However, vegetation carbon sequestration is influenced by stand age [12]. While the model’s time-varying inputs—such as leaf area index and the fraction of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation—partially capture age-related effects, its underlying structural simplification may still introduce minor biases in net primary productivity estimates. Alternative approaches, such as regression models, have been used to generate carbon storage maps from field-sampled data [13]. Yet, the accuracy of regression and machine learning models inherently depends on the quality and representativeness of training data, and field samples often exhibit uneven spatial coverage [14]. To more accurately evaluate the dynamic carbon sequestration potential of abandoned cropland, the integration of process-based ecosystem models—such as the Breathing Earth System Simulator (BESS) [15], ORCHIDEE [16], and LPJ [17]—offers a more reliable methodological pathway.
Most previous studies have estimated the carbon sequestration potential of afforestation on abandoned cropland [18,19,20]. Liu et al. found that China’s abandoned cropland has the potential to sequester 4.58–6.21 Tg C yr−1 via afforestation [19]. In practice, however, implementing afforestation on such land poses significant challenges, as it requires careful consideration of ecosystem resilience and site suitability [21]. For instance, national-scale assessments indicate that the total area of cropland abandoned in China exceeded 31.2 million hectares in 2022, yet a substantial proportion of this land (approximately 83%) remains suitable for recultivation [22]. Evaluating afforestation solely based on its carbon sequestration value is scientifically insufficient. For example, large-scale reforestation on abandoned cropland may reduce regional water yield due to higher evapotranspiration than precipitation, especially in semiarid regions [23,24]. Moreover, reforestation can also induce albedo-driven biophysical feedbacks that result in net warming effects [25]. Therefore, it is essential to assess the carbon sequestration potential of natural regeneration, rather than focusing exclusively on afforestation.
In addition to carbon sequestration through vegetation regeneration, the reduction of carbon emissions through cropland management also plays a vital role in climate change mitigation. The global food system contributes approximately one-third of total anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions [26]. Consequently, agricultural management practices that lower emissions from food production constitute a critical component of international climate mitigation efforts [27]. A previous study has shown that, in the North China Plain, implementing cropland management measures can yield substantially greater carbon emission reductions than the carbon sequestration achieved through cropland abandonment [28]. Suitable cultivation practices—such as straw return, optimized nitrogen fertilization, and sprinkler irrigation—can systematically reduce carbon emissions from cultivated land. Currently, comparative studies assessing the carbon sequestration effects of natural restoration against the carbon emission reduction benefits of cropland management measures remain scarce.
The carbon sequestration capacity resulting from vegetation natural regeneration on widely occurring cropland abandonment remains uncertain in its actual contribution to climate change mitigation, primarily due to the dynamic interplay between abandonment and recultivation, among other factors. The duration of continuous abandonment is a critical determinant of its carbon sequestration potential; however, a precise nationwide assessment based on this perspective has been lacking. This study centers on carbon sequestration, with net ecosystem production serving as the operational indicator of carbon sink capacity. There are three main objectives: first, to quantify both the spatial extent and temporal persistence of cropland abandonment; second, to estimate the maximum carbon sink intensity achievable through vegetation regeneration after cropland abandonment; and third, to compare the actual carbon sequestered through vegetation regeneration with the emission reductions attainable through the implementation of improved cropland management measures.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

China is traditionally an agricultural country, situated in East and Central Asia along the western coast of the Pacific Ocean. As illustrated in Figure 1, the topography exhibits a step-like descent from west to east. The country’s territory extends more than 5000 km both from east to west and from north to south. According to the Seventh National Population Census, China’s total population reached approximately 1.41 billion in 2020. Although China accounts for 22% of the global population, it possesses only 7% of the world’s cropland. Over the past two decades, the rural population has declined by an average of 14.92 million people per year, corresponding to an annual decrease of 1.38% [29]. Cropland is primarily distributed across the eastern plains and the central plateau (Figure 1). Against the backdrop of rapid industrialization and urbanization, China’s cropland area has decreased annually since 2000.

2.2. Data Source

The annual land cover dataset for China (CLCD), derived from Landsat imagery, offers continuous land cover records spanning from 1990 to 2025 [30]. Developed by applying a random forest classifier on the Google Earth Engine (GEE) platform, this dataset achieves an overall accuracy of 80%. It demonstrates higher classification accuracy, finer spatial resolution, and better temporal resolution relative to other available datasets, while also maintaining strong agreement with products depicting impervious surfaces, surface water dynamics, and global forest cover changes. In this study, the temporal filtering and logical reasoning checks were used to mitigate the impact of misclassification errors in the land use data product on the identification of abandoned land, thereby improving the reliability of land-use change detection for the period 1991–2024. A three-year moving window was applied to the land use data series. For each target year, if a pixel value differed from both its preceding and succeeding years, and those two adjacent years shared the same class value, the target value was reassigned to that common class. No adjustment was made for the boundary years (1992 and 2024) due to the absence of data from the previous or following year.
The 0.05° resolution net ecosystem exchange (NEE) dataset spanning 1985 to 2022 was generated with BESS v2.0 (the Breathing Earth System Simulator), a coupled process model reliant on remote sensing inputs [31]. BESS v2.0 is a satellite-based model that simulates global land–atmosphere fluxes by coupling radiative transfer, photosynthesis, and energy balance equations. The model is driven by a suit of remote sensing inputs, including MODIS atmosphere and land products (post-2001), AVHRR land products (pre-2000), other satellite datasets, reanalysis climate data, and ancillary datasets such as soil organic carbon and elevation. It produces daily 0.05° resolution products of gross primary productivity, evapotranspiration, and related carbon fluxes. Key improvements in this version include the integration of a newly developed ecosystem respiration module and an optimality-based model for estimating the maximum carboxylation rate (Vcmax), enhancing the model’s capability to simulate carbon dynamics. The performance of BESS v2.0 was comprehensively evaluated through direct and functional assessments against FLUXNET observations across multiple temporal scales, as well as through comparisons with established benchmark products at both site-specific and global scales. The cropland carbon emission data was assessed using a comprehensive framework that integrates material inputs, paddy fields, straw combustion, and soil emissions [32].

2.3. Methods

2.3.1. Mapping Abandoned Land and Recultivated Land

The three-year threshold adopted in this study was based on the definition of cropland in the China Statistical Yearbook, which includes cultivated land, fallow land, newly reclaimed land, and land that has been abandoned for less than three years. Therefore, in this study, abandoned cropland is operationally defined as land previously under cultivation that has been left uncultivated for at least three consecutive years. This includes areas transitioning to grassland, shrubland, or forest. Conversions to built-up land or water area were excluded from this definition. The identification logic is illustrated in Figure 2.
A temporal moving window approach was employed to identify cropland abandonment and recultivation. In this scheme, cropland was assigned a code of 1, shrubland, grassland, and forest were classified as 0, while water and wetland were designated as 2. Cropland abandonment was detected when the pixel values for the target year and the subsequent two years were all 0 (shrubland, grassland, and forest), and the pixel values for the two preceding years are all 1 (cropland). Conversely, recultivation was identified if the pixel values for the target year and the following year were both 1 (cropland), while the pixel values for the three prior years are all 0. Based on CLCD data spanning from 1990 to 2025, annual abandoned and recultivated cropland areas were derived for the period 1993–2024. The overall workflow for detecting abandoned and recultivated cropland is illustrated in Figure 3.
To mitigate the impact of unstable cropland and land use data misclassification on abandoned cropland identification, a two-year stability criterion was applied both before abandonment and after recultivation. Specifically, a pixel was identified as abandoned only if it had been consistently classified as cropland for at least two consecutive years before transitioning to abandoned land for a minimum of three consecutive years. Similarly, recultivation was confirmed only when a pixel, after being classified as abandoned land for at least three years, was reclassified as cropland and maintained that classification for two consecutive years or longer. This conservative criterion enhances the reliability of detected abandonment events by filtering out transient land-use changes, but it also likely results in a more conservative (i.e., reduced) estimate of the total spatial extent of abandonment compared to a detection rule without such stability requirements.

2.3.2. Determination of Maximum Abandonment Duration

Cropland abandonment is frequently followed by recultivation, leading to repeated cycles of abandonment and reclamation. When previously abandoned land is recultivated, the regenerated vegetation is typically cleared, resulting in the release of previously sequestrated carbon. Consequently, the duration of abandonment critically influences the net carbon accumulation potential of such lands. To estimate the maximal carbon sequestration attributable to cropland abandonment across China over the past three decades, this study identifies the longest continuous period of abandonment for each spatial unit, along with its corresponding initiation year. In pixels experiencing multiple abandonment events, only the single longest uninterrupted abandonment interval was retained, and its starting year was recorded accordingly (Figure 2). The computations were conducted on the GEE platform. Due to the large scale, high spatial resolution, and extended temporal coverage of the dataset, the required computational load is considerable. Given that GEE imposes constraints on memory usage and processing time, it is necessary to employ iterative optimization or chunking algorithms to ensure successful execution.

2.3.3. Carbon Sequestration Calculation

The NEE data simulated by the BESS model were provided at a daily temporal resolution in units of g C m−2 day−1. These daily values were aggregated annually to obtain yearly NEE estimates. To express carbon uptake as Net Ecosystem Productivity (NEP), the NEE values were multiplied by −1. The resulting NEP data were then resampled to a spatial resolution of 30 m to match the resolution of the abandoned cropland dataset.
The abandoned cropland data consist of binary raster layers, where pixels identified as abandoned are assigned a value of 0 and all others a value of 0. For each year from 1993 to 2023, the annual NEP layer was multiplied by the corresponding abandoned cropland layer. This procedure yielded annual estimates of carbon sequestrated in abandoned cropland pixels.
Additionally, the maximum carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment was derived based on the longest continuous period of abandonment for each pixel. Starting from the initial year of this maximum abandonment duration, NEP values were accumulated over the corresponding continuous abandonment interval to estimate the total carbon sink capacity for that pixel (Figure 4).
In this study, the operational definition of “maximum carbon sequestration” differs from the theoretical concept of a reference level based on natural soil formation and natural vegetation under ecosystem natural conditions. Here, the term refers specifically to the carbon accumulated during the longest continuous abandonment period observed for each pixel over the past three decades. Rather than representing a static, absolute maximum potential derived from a theoretical natural climax state, it denotes a historically observed, dynamic upper limit. This definition was adopted because cropland abandonment is a highly dynamic process, and the associated carbon sink is often interrupted by recultivation. Therefore, estimating the carbon sequestration achievable within the finite and realistic abandonment periods that have occurred is more directly relevant for quantifying the real historical contribution of abandonment to the carbon budget.
The carbon sequestration estimated in this study is based on NEP, which represents the net carbon flux between the ecosystem and the atmosphere, encompassing the balance of photosynthesis and total ecosystem respiration. While this flux-based measure inherently integrates changes across all major carbon pools—including above-ground biomass, below-ground biomass, and soil organic carbon—it does not involve direct, separate modeling or inventorying of the stock changes in below-ground biomass or soil organic carbon. Our analysis therefore estimates the net ecosystem-level carbon sink/source strength rather than partitioning it into specific pool contributions. The BESS model’s ecosystem respiration module accounts for heterotrophic respiration from the soil, which includes decomposition of SOC. However, the model’s primary focus and validation are on the surface-atmosphere exchange. Consequently, while NEP captures the net flux resulting from dynamics in surface and near-surface layers, it may not fully represent slower, long-term processes of carbon stabilization and accumulation in deeper soil horizons (e.g., 30–100 cm depth).

2.3.4. Carbon Emission Through Cropland Management Measures

China’s cropland carbon emissions from actively cultivated land were quantified using a bottom-up estimation method that integrates multi-source statistical and remote sensing data with spatial analysis and machine learning [32]. The results indicated that cropland emission in China from active cultivation was 890.87 Tg in 2020. This study evaluated three cropland management measures [28]:
(1)
reducing nitrogen fertilizer application by 30%, which is estimated to lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 21.40%;
(2)
shifting to sprinkler irrigation, projected to reduce GHG emissions by 21.43%; and
(3)
increasing the straw return rate to 50%, expected to decrease GHG emissions by 30.95%.

2.3.5. Sensitivity Analysis

In this study, abandoned cropland is defined as land that has not been used for crop cultivation for three consecutive years or more. Furthermore, we conducted a sensitivity analysis to assess the robustness of our results under alternative abandonment definitions. Specifically, thresholds of two, four, and five years in addition to the original three-year criterion were tested. The resulting estimates of abandoned area under each definition were compared.

3. Results

3.1. Spatial Patterns of Observed Maximum Cropland Abandonment Duration

Abandoned cropland is frequently subject to recultivation, a process that removes regenerated vegetation. To estimate the maximum potential carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment, this study identified the longest continuous period of abandonment for each location. The spatial distribution of the observed maximum abandonment durations and the corresponding start years are presented in Figure 5. The specific years comprising each maximum abandonment period can subsequently be derived.
The mean value of the observed maximum abandoned duration in China is 14.6 years. This study categorized the observed continuous maximum abandonment duration into seven classes: <5 years, 6–10 years, 11–15 years, 16–20 years, 21–25 years, 26–30 years, and >30 years. The proportional distribution across these classes was 14.78%, 24.53%, 19.03%, 15.27%, 12.23%, 10.44%, and 3.72%, respectively.
The results indicate that the 6–10 years class represents the largest proportion of maximum abandonment durations. The proportion generally decreases with longer durations, with the 21–25 years and >30 years classes constituting substantially smaller shares compared to other short-term categories. These findings suggested that a large proportion of abandonment events do not persist for extended periods.
Over the period 1993–2023, the annual extent of abandoned cropland in China exhibited a clear declining trend (Figure 6). The annual abandonment area estimated in this study is greater than values reported in some previous research. This discrepancy stems from the broader operational definition of abandonment adopted here, which intentionally did not exclude areas potentially under the grain-for-green project to avoid introducing classification errors. The observed downward trend coincides with the period during which enhanced national cropland protection policies were in effect.
Abandoned cropland is defined as land that has remained uncultivated for a continuous period exceeding a specific threshold. To assess the sensitivity of the delineation method, we calculated the annual abandoned cropland area using threshold of 2, 3, 4, and 5 years (Figure 6a,c–e). A generalized additive model (GAM) was fitted to the time series of abandoned area derived each threshold (Figure 6b). The time series data based on the 2- and 3-year thresholds were highly similar, while the 4-year threshold resulted in a smaller identified area, and the 5-year threshold produced the smallest area. Despite these differences, the variation among the four threshold-based results was modest. The maximum relative difference, observed between the 3-year and 5-year thresholds, corresponded to 19.79% of the area estimated using the 3-year threshold.

3.2. Observed Maximum Carbon Sequestration from Cropland Abandonment

The mean annual carbon sequestration resulting from cropland abandonment between 1993 and 2023 was estimated at 2.63 Tg C yr−1. As illustrated in Figure 7, the annual total carbon sequestration attributable to abandoned cropland exhibited an upward trend prior to 2017, after which this trend stabilized. Specifically, carbon sequestration peaked in 2014 at approximately 6 Tg C yr−1, making the highest annual value recorded during the study period. Cumulatively, total carbon sequestration over the entire study period is amounted to 79.0 Tg C. According to the sensitivity analysis, the time-series data of total carbon sequestration based on 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year thresholds were highly similar.
The spatial distribution of observed maximum carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment over the past three decades is shown in Figure 8a. For each pixel, maximum carbon sequestration was calculated using the longest abandoned duration, the associated years of maximum abandonment, and the corresponding annal NEP data. Concurrently, the annual carbon sequestration from abandoned cropland during the study period was also computed for each agricultural zone (Figure 8b–j). The highest carbon sequestration levels are concentrated in the central-eastern agricultural regions, whereas the arid northwest and tropical south exhibit comparatively lower sequestration. Agricultural zones NASR, LP, SBSR, and YGP show a sustained increase in annual carbon sequestration over the three decades. In contrast, NCP and QTP experienced a gradual decline. Regions such as HP, MLYP, and SC initially exhibited rising sequestration that stabilized after 2010. These trends, mapped to their respective geographic zones in Figure 8k, highlight the significant spatial heterogeneity in the carbon sink effects of cropland abandonment, which is closely linked to regional climate, soil conditions, and land-use history.
Table 1 quantifies the proportional distribution of maximum cropland abandonment duration classes and the corresponding maximum carbon sequestration intensity across China’s nine major agricultural regions. Across all regions, the 6–10 year and 11–15 yr abandonment duration classes accounted for the largest proportions. The >30 yr class consistently made up the smallest share, ranging from 3.14% (SC) to 5.05% (QTP). The Loess Plateau (LP) had the largest share of 21–30 yr abandonment (28.95%). In terms of maximum carbon sequestration intensity, the Northeast China Plain (NCP) recorded the highest value at 3247.59 g C m−2, followed by the Huan–Huai–Hai Plain (HP) at 3109.83 g C m−2 and the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau (QTP) at 3026.21 g C m−2. In contrast, the Sichuan Basin and Surrounding Region (SBSR) exhibited the lowest intensity at 1094.11 gC m−2. These findings highlight a clear spatial disparity in both abandonment duration patterns and carbon sequestration potential, which may be driven by regional differences in climate, soil properties, and post-abandonment vegetation succession rates. Climate is a primary controller, with warmer and wetter conditions in regions like HP and NCP generally supporting higher net primary productivity and thus greater potential NEP, compared to NASR or the high-altitude QTP. Soil type further modulates this potential; fertile, deep soils (e.g., in the NCP) can support more vigorous vegetation regrowth and offer greater capacity for soil organic carbon stabilization than the thin, rocky, or sandy soils found in parts of LP or SBSR. Finally, land-use history and pre-abandonment management intensity influence the baseline soil carbon stock and degradation level, which affects the rate and magnitude of carbon recovery. Regions with a history of intensive cultivation may experience a larger initial carbon debt and potentially a slower recovery trajectory. The interaction of these factors—climate productivity, soil carbon storage capacity, and legacy effects—explains the observed ranking, with the highest sequestration intensities in the fertile, productive plains (NCP, HP) and the lowest in regions constrained by moisture, temperature, or soil limitations (SBSR, NASR).

3.3. Carbon Sequestration from Cropland Abandonment Versus Emission Reduction Under Cropland Management Measures

This study compares an empirically derived, historical estimate of carbon sequestration resulting from abandonment with a modeled, scenario-based projection of emission reduction potential from agricultural management. Achieving carbon neutrality relies on two fundamental pathways: reducing carbon emissions and enhancing carbon sequestration through vegetation photosynthesis [33,34]. Accordingly, this study evaluates the relative contributions of these two pathways—namely, emissions reductions through improved agricultural management practices and carbon sequestration through cropland abandonment. According to recent estimates, China’s cropland emissions were 890.87 Tg in 2020 [32]. Three key agricultural management practices were evaluated for their mitigation potential: reducing nitrogen fertilizer application by 30%, which could lower GHG emissions by 190.64 Tg; adopting sprinkler irrigation, projected to reduce emissions by 190.91; and increasing the straw return rate to 50%, which could decrease emissions by 275.72 Tg.
The total carbon sequestration resulting from cropland abandonment between 1993 and 2023 amounted to 79.0 Tg C, substantially lower than the emission reductions achieved through agricultural management measures. A comparative budget of emissions and sequestration indicates that relying solely on vegetation recovery for CO2 sequestration is insufficient to effectively support carbon neutrality goals within the cropland system. The results suggested that, in this context, reducing carbon emissions is more critical than enhancing carbon sequestration through vegetation regeneration on abandoned cropland. These findings highlight the need to prioritize emission reduction strategies in agricultural management alongside ecological restoration efforts.

4. Discussion

4.1. The Extraction of Cropland Abandonment

This study estimated the maximum abandonment duration and the corresponding maximum carbon sequestration in China at 30 m spatial resolution for the past three decades. Although there are several global or national level abandonment studies, most of the studies are regional scale research [35,36,37]. It is emphasized that context-specific information at local scales must be integrated with nationally derived research findings, thereby ensuring that knowledge on the optimized and coordinated utilization of abandoned cropland can be translated into concrete actions that also benefit local communities [18].
Cropland abandonment is generally defined as agricultural land that has been left uncultivated for a specified period. However, there is currently no consensus regarding the precise duration that constitutes abandonment [38]. For instance, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) defines abandonment as the cessation of cultivation for 2 to 5 years [39]. In the literature, the minimum cessation period used to identify abandonment varies, with definitions including more than 2 years [40], 3 years [41], 4 years [3], or 5 years [42]. Consequently, even when studies examine the same spatial scale—such as global or national analyses—the estimated extent of abandoned cropland often differs considerably due to these divergent temporal criteria. Adopting a longer threshold (e.g., 4–5 years or more) can help distinguish abandonment from short-term fallow rotation, yet it may also overlook the spatial patterns and dynamic characteristics of shorter-term abandonment-reclamation cycles.
To assess the sensitivity of abandoned cropland area and maximum abandonment duration to alternative definitions of abandonment, this study tested multiple threshold durations. In addition to the baseline three-year criterion, thresholds of two, four, and five years were applied. Results indicate that the variation in estimated abandoned area across the four thresholds was modest. The maximum abandonment durations for the 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year thresholds were 12.92, 14.62, 15.02, and 15.19 years, respectively. These findings suggest that the choice of threshold has a minor influence on the estimated maximum abandonment duration.

4.2. Contributions of Carbon Sequestration from Cropland Abandonment

The cropland abandonment is typically accompanied by spontaneous vegetation recovery. However, abandoned croplands that experience natural recovery may face intense threats of being recultivated unless policy interventions are implemented. The recultivation would clear the regenerated vegetation. If the abandonment happened again, and the vegetation recovered again, the recovery process still requires considerable time to reach a climax community, a process that takes even longer in mid-high latitude regions [43]. The accumulated aboveground biomass carbon via natural regeneration is reported to take more than 60 years to recover to 90% of the old-growth forest level [44]. Therefore, this study estimated the maximum continuous abandonment duration, and the corresponding maximum carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment. The variability in the maximum duration of abandonment has key implications for the capacity of abandoned land to address climate and food crises [5]. Studies comparable to the assessment of maximum continuous abandonment duration and its carbon sequestration potential are scarce. The work by Crawford et al. (2022) is a valuable point of reference [45]. Their research, which analyzed abandonment and recultivation across 11 sites on four continents using annual land-cover maps (1987–2017), reports findings that are remarkably consistent with ours. They similarly concluded that abandonment is largely transient, with an average duration of 14.22 years, and that recultivation within 30 years is prevalent, which consequently constrains substantial carbon sequestration. This congruence with an independent, multi-continental study reinforces the robustness of our results.
This study classified the maximum abandonment duration across all abandoned pixels into seven distinct classes spanning short to long timeframes. The results indicate that the short duration classes (6–10 years) accounted for the largest proportion of abandoned cropland pixels, whereas the longest duration class (>25 years) constituted the smallest share. This observed pattern of abandonment impermanence is generally consistent with the limited number of studies that have previously examined this phenomenon [45,46]. Such temporal dynamics suggested that a significant portion of abandoned cropland may be subject to recultivation or other land-use changes within a relatively short to medium timeframe, highlighting the transient nature of many abandonment events in contemporary agricultural landscapes. Abandoned cropland can realize only a limited portion of its carbon storage potential if abandonment durations are short. In practice, however, many abandoned parcels are recultivated or otherwise reused before substantial vegetation biomass and soil carbon can accumulate. These findings suggest that the actual carbon sink contribution of abandoned cropland may be constrained by the predominance of short- to medium-term abandonment, underscoring the importance of considering persistence when estimating the long-term climate mitigation benefits of land-use changes.
This study estimated the contributions of carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment, and the results indicate that relying solely on vegetation recovery for CO2 sequestration is insufficient to effectively support carbon neutrality goals within the cropland system. Agricultural management measures are more effective at reducing carbon emissions. However, their implementation is subject to economic constraints and must be adapted to local environmental conditions. Previous studies on regional carbon balance have examined the extent to which carbon emissions from local energy consumption are offset by carbon sequestration through vegetation photosynthesis. Luo et al. [47] studied the tradeoff between vegetation carbon sequestration and fossil fuel-related emissions, concluding that sequestration levels were substantially lower than emissions—a finding consistent with the results of the present study. In contrast, other regional analyses have reported that vegetation carbon sequestration can fully offset energy-related carbon emissions [34]. This discrepancy likely arises because such studies account for carbon sequestration by all forest and non-forest vegetation, whereas the area of vegetation recovered from cropland abandonment is relatively limited in comparison.

4.3. Practice Implications

While previous research has recognized the potential of abandoned cropland for carbon sequestration, the ecological and management implications of continuous abandonment duration have received limited attention [48]. Our results demonstrate that a large proportion of abandoned cropland is subsequently recultivated, and that abandonment durations are typically short. This finding underscores the critical role of recultivation management. In the absence of new policies or incentives aims at discouraging recultivation, abandoned areas are unlikely to deliver substantial carbon benefits, despite their theoretical potential and anticipated importance for achieving climate goals. If cropland abandonment continues to be as short-lived as observed in this research, the prospective carbon storage benefits from habitats regeneration will remain largely unrealized. Without policy interventions to reduce recultivation or provide incentives for ecological regeneration, abandonment will represent a missed opportunity for climate change mitigation. The finding that management practices offer greater potential than land withdrawal suggests that climate action plans for the land-use sector should prioritize the integration of emission reducing technologies into agricultural extension services and sustainability standards. Appropriate management measures such as enhanced nitrogen fertilizers, sprinkler irrigation, and straw return can systematically reduce carbon emissions within cropland system.
The findings of this study have direct relevance for considering natural regeneration on abandoned cropland as a source of carbon offsets within the Chinese Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). The credibility of such offsets hinges on permanence and accurate quantification. the observed impermanence of abandonment—with an average maximum duration of only 14.6 years and a high likelihood of recultivation—poses a fundamental barrier. Carbon credits require long-term guaranteed storage, whereas the carbon sequestered during a short-to-medium abandonment period is at high risk of reversal upon recultivation, as assumed in our analysis.
The limited and transient carbon sequestration potential quantified here suggests that, under current land-use dynamics, relying on vegetation recovery from cropland abandonment is unlikely to be a major or reliable contributor to enhancing China’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) sink targets. In contrast, the substantial emission reduction potential identified for improved cropland management practices aligns directly with the NDC’s objective to mitigate emissions from the agricultural sector. This comparative analysis implies that, within the cropland system, greater emphasis should be placed on reducing emissions from active cropland through the widespread adoption of practices such as optimized nitrogen fertilization, efficient irrigation, and straw return, rather than on passive or uncertain sink creation from land withdrawal.
Our biophysical assessment of cropland abandonment’s limited carbon sink potential contributes to a broader, interdisciplinary discourse on the role of land-based sinks in climate mitigation. As highlighted in reviews such as Beljan (2024) [49], the effectiveness of forest and other land-sector strategies is determined not only by their biophysical potential but also by complex economic, institutional, and policy factors that govern implementation and market integration. Our findings—specifically the transient nature of abandonment and its scale relative to agricultural emissions—directly inform several key challenges outlined in this broader framework. They underscore the permanence and additionality risks associated with crediting natural regeneration on spontaneously abandoned land within carbon markets. Furthermore, they highlight the critical need for policy design that prioritizes cost-effective and durable mitigation pathways across the land-use sector. By quantifying the comparative scale of two major pathways within the cropland system, our analysis provides empirical evidence that can help navigate trade-offs between sequestration-focused and emission-avoidance-focused strategies, a central theme in optimizing land-based contributions to climate goals within both national policy and international market mechanisms.

4.4. Uncertainty Analysis

Several limitations exist in this study. First, cropland abandonment was detected using a five-year sliding time window. This method determines abandonment for a given year based on land use data from two preceding and three subsequent years. Consequently, despite using land use data spanning 1990–2025, the algorithm produced abandonment data for the period 1993–2023. Furthermore, the analysis was performed using 30 m resolution annual land use data. While suitable for national-scale assessment, this resolution inevitably misses finer-scale abandonment patterns occurring at sub-pixel or field levels, especially in fragmented or intensively managed landscapes [50].
Second, this study focused on comparing the maximum carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment with emission reductions from agricultural management. To minimize additional classification errors, the grain-for-green program was not algorithmically excluded from the abandonment dataset. While this inclusive approach increases the estimated abandonment area, it does not weaken our finding; rather, it reinforces the conclusion that carbon sequestration from post-abandonment vegetation recovery remains substantially lower than the emission reductions attainable through appropriate farming practices.
Third, recultivation was assumed to result in a near-complete reversal of accumulated carbon. However, a portion of soil carbon may persist, especially under conservation practices such as reduced tillage, straw return, and cover cropping. Relying on the assumption may overestimate net carbon loss, especially in areas where conservation tillage is adopted after recultivation. Nevertheless, this simplification was necessary to model the net carbon consequence of the abandonment–recultivation cycle at a national scale over decades. Given the scope of this study and the absence of spatially explicit historical data on post-recultivation management practices for each pixel, we adopted a conservative baseline assumption: that recultivation resets the ecosystem carbon stock to a level comparable to that of actively managed cropland.

5. Conclusions

This nationwide-scale research focuses on the maximum duration of continuous abandonment—a key yet often overlooked variable—to assess the carbon sequestration potential of abandoned cropland. By analyzing annual land-use data from 1990 to 2025, this study maps the maximum continuous abandonment duration for each pixel across China and estimates the maximum carbon sequestration potential accordingly. Furthermore, this research compares the net carbon budgets resulting from cropland abandonment with these being achievable through improved agricultural management practices. The results show a mean maximum abandonment duration of 14.6 years, with the 6–10 years class accounting for the largest proportion. The maximum carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment between 1993 and 2023 is lower than the emission reduction potential achievable through agricultural management measures. These results elucidate the limited role of vegetation recovery on abandoned cropland in achieving national carbon neutrality, underscoring the potential of emission reductions through optimized farming practices. The findings pertain to evaluating strategies within the cropland sector and that achieving broader carbon neutrality will require integrated efforts across all land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) sectors and beyond. In the future, there is a need for higher spatial resolution monitoring of cropland abandonment and recultivation dynamics, to better capture fine-scale patterns and short-term fallow cycles. Integrated socio-ecological studies are crucial to quantify the economic costs, barriers to adoption, and co-benefits (e.g., biodiversity, water conservation) of the recommended agricultural management measures versus land abandonment, informing more holistic policy design.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, X.S.; methodology, X.S.; software, X.S., X.Z., L.L.; validation, M.W.; formal analysis, M.W.; investigation, X.S.; resources, X.S. and M.W.; data curation, M.W.; writing—original draft preparation, M.W.; writing—review and editing, X.S.; visualization, X.Z., L.L.; supervision, X.S.; project administration, X.S.; funding acquisition, X.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Humanities and Social Sciences Foundation of the Ministry of Education in China, grant number 20YJCZH140.

Data Availability Statement

The derived 30 m resolution maximum abandonment duration, and other result data is available via https://figshare.com/s/b2827ec387b42a9f83b2 (accessed on 17 February 2026). The code used to calculate the maximum cropland abandonment duration map can be accessed on Google Earth Engine via https://code.earthengine.google.com/a7afd64d03bc03f548bdbd139e5bf6ef (accessed on 17 February 2026). The R codes used to calculate carbon sequestration can be accessed via https://figshare.com/s/b2827ec387b42a9f83b2 (accessed on 17 February 2026).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
NEENet ecosystem exchange
NEPNet ecosystem productivity
GEEGoogle Earth Engine
GHGGreenhouse gas
GAMGeneralized additive model
NCPNortheast China Plain
NASRNorthern Arid and Semi-Arid Region
HPHuan–Huai–Hai Plain
LPLoess Plateau
QTPQinghai–Tibet Plateau
SBSRSichuan Basin and surrounding areas
MLYPMiddle and Lower Yangtze Plain
YGPYunnan–Guizhou Plateau
SCSouth China region
LULUCFLand use, land-use change and forestry

References

  1. Yin, H.; Butsic, V.; Buchner, J.; Kuemmerle, T.; Prishchepov, A.; Baumann, M.; Bragina, E.; Sayadyan, H.; Radeloff, V. Agricultural Abandonment and Re-Cultivation during and after the Chechen Wars in the Northern Caucasus. Glob. Environ. Change 2019, 55, 149–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Popp, A.; Calvin, K.; Fujimori, S.; Havlik, P.; Humpenöder, F.; Stehfest, E.; Bodirsky, B.L.; Dietrich, J.P.; Doelmann, J.C.; Gusti, M.; et al. Land-Use Futures in the Shared Socio-Economic Pathways. Glob. Environ. Change 2017, 42, 331–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Wang, H.; Guo, Z.; Xie, Y.; Zhang, X.; Xi, G.; Huang, H. Is Abandoned Cropland Continuously Growing in China? Quantitative Evidence and Enlightenment from Landsat-Derived Annual China Land Cover Dataset. Land 2023, 13, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ruehr, S.; Keenan, T.F.; Williams, C.; Zhou, Y.; Lu, X.; Bastos, A.; Canadell, J.G.; Prentice, I.C.; Sitch, S.; Terrer, C. Evidence and Attribution of the Enhanced Land Carbon Sink. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 2023, 4, 518–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Daskalova, G.N.; Kamp, J. Abandoning Land Transforms Biodiversity. Science 2023, 380, 581–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pyles, M.V.; Magnago, L.F.S.; Maia, V.A.; Pinho, B.X.; Pitta, G.; de Gasper, A.L.; Vibrans, A.C.; dos Santos, R.M.; van den Berg, E.; Lima, R.A.F. Human Impacts as the Main Driver of Tropical Forest Carbon. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8, eabl7968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhu, Y.; Xia, X.; Canadell, J.G.; Piao, S.; Lu, X.; Mishra, U.; Wang, X.; Yuan, W.; Qin, Z. China’s Carbon Sinks from Land-Use Change Underestimated. Nat. Clim. Change 2025, 15, 428–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Bell, S.; Barriocanal, C.; Terrer, C.; Rosell-Mele, A. Management Opportunities for Soil Carbon Sequestration Following Agricultural Land Abandonment. Environ. Sci. Policy 2020, 108, 104–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Singh, A. Restoring the Inventory of Biomass and Soil Carbon in Abandoned Croplands: An Agroforestry System Approach in India’s Eastern Himalayas. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2024, 362, 108843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bell, S.M.; Raymond, S.J.; Yin, H.; Jiao, W.; Goll, D.S.; Ciais, P.; Olivetti, E.; Leshyk, V.O.; Terrer, C. Quantifying the Recarbonization of Post-Agricultural Landscapes. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 2139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liao, Y.; Luo, C.; Wang, X.; Liu, J.; Huang, X.; Xu, X.; Qin, R.; Qin, Y.; Liu, L. Abandonment Duration Shapes Reuse Strategies and Benefits of Abandoned Cropland in China. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2026, 118, 108281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Tian, L.; Tao, Y.; Joanna, S.; Mäkelä, A.; Li, M. How Forest Age Impacts on Net Primary Productivity: Insights from Future Multi-Scenarios. For. Ecosyst. 2024, 11, 100228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Guo, B.; Fang, M.; Yang, L.; Guo, T.; Ma, C.; Hu, X.; Guo, Z.; Ma, Z.; Li, Q.; Wang, Z.; et al. Remapping Carbon Storage Change in Retired Farmlands on the Loess Plateau in China from 2000–2021 in High Spatiotemporal Resolution. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 2026, 18, 429–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wang, J.; Zhang, Z.; Li, J.; Shao, M.; Wei, X. Disentangling the Effects of the Grain for Green Project on Ecosystem Carbon Sequestration on the Loess Plateau. CATENA 2026, 263, 109668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ryu, Y.; Berry, J.A.; Baldocchi, D.D. What Is Global Photosynthesis? History, Uncertainties and Opportunities. Remote Sens. Environ. 2019, 223, 95–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Goll, D.S.; Vuichard, N.; Maignan, F.; Jornet-Puig, A.; Sardans, J.; Violette, A.; Peng, S.; Sun, Y.; Kvakic, M.; Guimberteau, M.; et al. A Representation of the Phosphorus Cycle for ORCHIDEE (Revision 4520). Geosci. Model Dev. 2017, 10, 3745–3770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Calle, L.; Poulter, B. Ecosystem Age-Class Dynamics and Distribution in the LPJ-Wsl v2.0 Global Ecosystem Model. Geosci. Model Dev. 2021, 14, 2575–2601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zheng, Q.; Ha, T.; Prishchepov, A.V.; Zeng, Y.; Yin, H.; Koh, L.P. The Neglected Role of Abandoned Cropland in Supporting Both Food Security and Climate Change Mitigation. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 6083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Liu, T.; Yu, L.; Wu, X.; Qi, W.; Zheng, Q.; Wu, H.; Chen, X.; Peng, D.; Shao, C.; Zhou, Y. Releasing the Compound Potential of Abandoned Cropland through Recultivation, Afforestation, and Photovoltaic Solutions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2026, 227, 108760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ma, Y.; Huang, L.; Li, J.; Cao, W.; Cai, Y. Carbon Potential of China’s Grain to Green Program and Its Contribution to the Carbon Target. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2024, 200, 107272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Strassburg, B.B.N.; Iribarrem, A.; Beyer, H.L.; Cordeiro, C.L.; Crouzeilles, R.; Jakovac, C.C.; Braga Junqueira, A.; Lacerda, E.; Latawiec, A.E.; Balmford, A.; et al. Global Priority Areas for Ecosystem Restoration. Nature 2020, 586, 724–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Wu, X.; Zhao, N.; Wang, Y.; Ye, Y.; Wang, W.; Yue, T.; Zhang, L.; Liu, Y. The Potential Role of Abandoned Cropland for Food Security in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2025, 212, 108004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Teo, H.C.; Raghavan, S.V.; He, X.; Zeng, Z.; Cheng, Y.; Luo, X.; Lechner, A.M.; Ashfold, M.J.; Lamba, A.; Sreekar, R.; et al. Large-scale Reforestation Can Increase Water Yield and Reduce Drought Risk for Water-insecure Regions in the Asia-Pacific. Glob. Change Biol. 2022, 28, 6385–6403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Zan, B.; Ge, J.; Mu, M.; Sun, Q.; Luo, X.; Wei, J. Spatiotemporal Inequality in Land Water Availability Amplified by Global Tree Restoration. Nat. Water 2024, 2, 863–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Rohatyn, S.; Yakir, D.; Rotenberg, E.; Carmel, Y. Limited Climate Change Mitigation Potential through Forestation of the Vast Dryland Regions. Science 2022, 377, 1436–1439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Crippa, M.; Solazzo, E.; Guizzardi, D.; Monforti-Ferrario, F.; Tubiello, F.N.; Leip, A. Food Systems Are Responsible for a Third of Global Anthropogenic GHG Emissions. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 198–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Liu, D.; Song, C.; Xin, Z.; Fang, C.; Liu, Z.; Xu, Y. Agricultural Management Strategies for Balancing Yield Increase, Carbon Sequestration, and Emission Reduction after Straw Return for Three Major Grain Crops in China: A Meta-Analysis. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 340, 117965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Shi, Z.; Li, M.; Cui, Y.; Deng, X. Carbon Emissions Reduction of Cropland Management Is Substantially Greater than Carbon Sequestrations of Cropland Abandonment in the North China Plain. Clim. Policy 2025, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ji, Y.; Zhao, X.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, C.; Wu, Y.; Jiang, P. Spatiotemporal Dynamics and Influencing Factors of Rural Settlement Reclamation in China from 2000 to 2020. Habitat Int. 2025, 166, 103597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yang, J.; Huang, X. The 30 m Annual Land Cover Dataset and Its Dynamics in China from 1990 to 2019. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 2021, 13, 3907–3925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Li, B.; Ryu, Y.; Jiang, C.; Dechant, B.; Liu, J.; Yan, Y.; Li, X. BESSv2.0: A Satellite-Based and Coupled-Process Model for Quantifying Long-Term Global Land–Atmosphere Fluxes. Remote Sens. Environ. 2023, 295, 113696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Li, H.; Jin, X.; Zhao, R.; Han, B.; Liang, X.; Sun, R. Decoding the Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Cropland Carbon Emission Drivers in China: A Machine Learning-Based Analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2025, 526, 146675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. He, X.; Zhang, F.; Zhou, T.; Jim, C.Y.; Ma, X.; Wang, B.; Tan, M.L.; Wei, L.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, X. Remote Sensing Assessment of Carbon Balance Vis-a-Vis Energy-Related Emissions and Vegetation Sequestration in a Typical Arid Region of China from 2001 to 2020. Int. J. Digit. Earth 2025, 18, 2544964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Yang, W.; Pan, J. The Role of Vegetation Carbon Sequestration in Offsetting Energy Carbon Emissions in the Yangtze River Basin, China. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2023, 26, 22689–22714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Gelabert, P.J.; Rodrigues, M.; Vidal-Macua, J.J.; Ameztegui, A.; Vega-Garcia, C. Spatially Explicit Modeling of the Probability of Land Abandonment in the Spanish Pyrenees. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2022, 226, 104487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Li, X.; Wu, K.; Qian, J.; Long, H. Spatial Simulation of Cropland Abandonment Risk and Grain Production Losses in China. Land Degrad. Dev. 2025, early view. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Song, W.; Yang, D.; Wang, Y. Integrating an Abandoned Farmland Simulation Model (AFSM) Using System Dynamics and CLUE-S for Sustainable Agriculture. Agric. Syst. 2024, 219, 104063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Liu, T.; Yu, L.; Liu, X.; Peng, D.; Chen, X.; Du, Z.; Tu, Y.; Wu, H.; Zhao, Q. A Global Review of Monitoring Cropland Abandonment Using Remote Sensing: Temporal–Spatial Patterns, Causes, Ecological Effects, and Future Prospects. J. Remote Sens. 2025, 5, 0584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Han, Z.; Song, W. Abandoned Cropland: Patterns and Determinants within the Guangxi Karst Mountainous Area, China. Appl. Geogr. 2020, 122, 102245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Hou, D.; Meng, F.; Prishchepov, A. How Is Urbanization Shaping Agricultural Land-Use? Unraveling the Nexus between Farmland Abandonment and Urbanization in China. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 214, 104170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wei, Z.; Gu, X.; Sun, Q.; Hu, X.; Gao, Y. Analysis of the Spatial and Temporal Pattern of Changes in Abandoned Farmland Based on Long Time Series of Remote Sensing Data. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 2549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zhang, M.; Li, G.; He, T.; Zhai, G.; Guo, A.; Chen, H.; Wu, C. Reveal the Severe Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Abandoned Cropland in China over the Past 30 Years. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 857, 159591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Chazdon, R.L.; Lindenmayer, D.; Guariguata, M.R.; Crouzeilles, R.; Rey Benayas, J.M.; Lazos Chavero, E. Fostering Natural Forest Regeneration on Former Agricultural Land through Economic and Policy Interventions. Environ. Res. Lett. 2020, 15, 043002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Poorter, L.; Bongers, F.; Aide, T.M.; Almeyda Zambrano, A.M.; Balvanera, P.; Becknell, J.M.; Boukili, V.; Brancalion, P.H.S.; Broadbent, E.N.; Chazdon, R.L.; et al. Biomass Resilience of Neotropical Secondary Forests. Nature 2016, 530, 211–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Crawford, C.L.; Yin, H.; Radeloff, V.C.; Wilcove, D.S. Rural Land Abandonment Is Too Ephemeral to Provide Major Benefits for Biodiversity and Climate. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8, eabm8999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Chazdon, R.L.; Broadbent, E.N.; Rozendaal, D.M.A.; Bongers, F.; Zambrano, A.M.A.; Aide, T.M.; Balvanera, P.; Becknell, J.M.; Boukili, V.; Brancalion, P.H.S.; et al. Carbon Sequestration Potential of Second-Growth Forest Regeneration in the Latin American Tropics. Sci. Adv. 2016, 2, e1501639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Luo, Z.; Wu, Y.; Zhou, L.; Sun, Q.; Yu, X.; Zhu, L.; Zhang, X.; Fang, Q.; Yang, X.; Yang, J.; et al. Trade-off between Vegetation CO2 Sequestration and Fossil Fuel-Related CO2 Emissions: A Case Study of the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area of China. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 74, 103195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Jain, A.N.; Harris, L.; Moyer, N.; Brock, C.; Roehrdanz, P.R.; Larsen, A. Assessing Future Environmental Benefits of Agricultural Abandonment and Recultivation. Environ. Res. Lett. 2025, 20, 074035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Beljan, K.; Pavković, F.; Teslak, K.; Matošević, M. Forests and the Economics of Climate Change: A Review of Knowledge, Challenges and Future Directions. Nova Meh. Šumarstva 2025, 46, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sun, X.; Wang, M.; Wang, J.; Li, G.; Hou, X. Deep Learning Classification of Winter Wheat from Sentinel Optical-Radar Image Time Series in Smallholder Farming Areas. Adv. Space Res. 2025, 75, 2683–2695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Land 15 00361 g001
Figure 1. Study area.
Figure 1. Study area.
Land 15 00361 g001
Land 15 00361 g002
Figure 2. The rule of cropland abandonment.
Figure 2. The rule of cropland abandonment.
Land 15 00361 g002
Land 15 00361 g003
Figure 3. Identification of cropland abandonment and recultivation.
Figure 3. Identification of cropland abandonment and recultivation.
Land 15 00361 g003
Land 15 00361 g004
Figure 4. The flowchart of carbon sequestration calculation.
Figure 4. The flowchart of carbon sequestration calculation.
Land 15 00361 g004
Land 15 00361 g005
Figure 5. (a) Maximum duration of cropland abandonment; and (b) start year of the corresponding maximum abandonment period. The bar chart in the lower-left corner of (a) displays the proportion of abandoned pixels across the seven duration categories, which correspond to the classes shown in the legend.
Figure 5. (a) Maximum duration of cropland abandonment; and (b) start year of the corresponding maximum abandonment period. The bar chart in the lower-left corner of (a) displays the proportion of abandoned pixels across the seven duration categories, which correspond to the classes shown in the legend.
Land 15 00361 g005
Land 15 00361 g006
Figure 6. Trend in China’s abandoned cropland area under different abandonment definitions based on consecutive years of non-cropland: (a) 3 years, (b) comparison of thresholds, (c) 2 years, (d) 4 years, and (e) 5 years.
Figure 6. Trend in China’s abandoned cropland area under different abandonment definitions based on consecutive years of non-cropland: (a) 3 years, (b) comparison of thresholds, (c) 2 years, (d) 4 years, and (e) 5 years.
Land 15 00361 g006
Land 15 00361 g007
Figure 7. Trend in China’s annal carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment under different abandonment definitions based on consecutive years of non-cropland: (a) 3 years, (b) comparison of thresholds, (c) 2 years, (d) 4 years, and (e) 5 years.
Figure 7. Trend in China’s annal carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment under different abandonment definitions based on consecutive years of non-cropland: (a) 3 years, (b) comparison of thresholds, (c) 2 years, (d) 4 years, and (e) 5 years.
Land 15 00361 g007
Land 15 00361 g008
Figure 8. (a) Spatial distribution of the observed maximum carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment (1993–2023); (b–j) trends in total annal carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment (1993–2023 across China’s nine agricultural zones; and (k) spatial distribution of the nine agricultural zones in China. Abbreviations: NCP—Northeast China Plain; NASR—Northern Arid and Semi-Arid Region; HP—Huan–Huai–Hai Plain; LP—Loess Plateau; QTP—Qinghai–Tibet Plateau; SBSR—Sichuan Basin and surrounding areas; MLYP—Middle and Lower Yangtze Plain; YGP—Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau; and SC—South China region.
Figure 8. (a) Spatial distribution of the observed maximum carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment (1993–2023); (b–j) trends in total annal carbon sequestration from cropland abandonment (1993–2023 across China’s nine agricultural zones; and (k) spatial distribution of the nine agricultural zones in China. Abbreviations: NCP—Northeast China Plain; NASR—Northern Arid and Semi-Arid Region; HP—Huan–Huai–Hai Plain; LP—Loess Plateau; QTP—Qinghai–Tibet Plateau; SBSR—Sichuan Basin and surrounding areas; MLYP—Middle and Lower Yangtze Plain; YGP—Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau; and SC—South China region.
Land 15 00361 g008
Table 1. Proportion of maximum abandonment duration classes and maximum carbon sequestration intensity by agricultural region.
Table 1. Proportion of maximum abandonment duration classes and maximum carbon sequestration intensity by agricultural region.
Proportion of the Maximum Abandonment Duration (%)Maximum Carbon
Sequestration (g C/m2)
≤56–1011–1516–2021–2526–30>30(yr)
NCP16.1924.5818.2315.3511.9610.423.273247.59
NASR16.6927.8918.7113.1111.039.323.251353.49
HP13.5422.3218.6916.9414.7410.033.743109.83
LP10.6621.6318.3516.4716.0812.873.951860.18
QTP13.8023.6818.6312.5413.5912.725.053026.21
SBSR15.6627.0518.8814.9110.339.443.731094.11
MLYP16.0726.2020.9612.6411.199.413.531692.73
YGP14.8426.2820.0915.908.7010.243.942565.29
SC15.4524.2718.9519.9810.627.583.142028.92
The abbreviations for each agricultural region are provided in the caption of Figure 7.
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

Wang, M.; Sun, X.; Zhu, X.; Lu, L. Maximum Carbon Sequestration from Cropland Abandonment in China over the Past Thirty Years. Land 2026, 15, 361. https://doi.org/10.3390/land15030361

AMA Style

Wang M, Sun X, Zhu X, Lu L. Maximum Carbon Sequestration from Cropland Abandonment in China over the Past Thirty Years. Land. 2026; 15(3):361. https://doi.org/10.3390/land15030361

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Meng, Xiaofang Sun, Xin Zhu, and Lixiao Lu. 2026. "Maximum Carbon Sequestration from Cropland Abandonment in China over the Past Thirty Years" Land 15, no. 3: 361. https://doi.org/10.3390/land15030361

APA Style

Wang, M., Sun, X., Zhu, X., & Lu, L. (2026). Maximum Carbon Sequestration from Cropland Abandonment in China over the Past Thirty Years. Land, 15(3), 361. https://doi.org/10.3390/land15030361

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