This study in Nature Food claims that widespread efforts to sequester carbon on agricultural land could offer farmers around the world extra income and allow net zero emissions in agriculture by 2050 for a lower cost than other options. To achieve this, the study argues that it requires deploying highly efficient institutions and monitoring systems across the world in the next five years. 

Seaweed is an overlooked, but highly versatile climate solution, says Forbes in its coverage of a new study by investors. The article highlights the numerous co-benefits of seaweed; it’s a low-carbon food crop that requires few inputs, it has the potential to replace fossil fuel-derived plastics, and, the article even touts the crop as “the largest carbon sinks in the world”, although research disputes this claim. 

Seaweed farming is being championed as a magic bullet for food systems and the environment, promising to capture carbon, rehabilitate ecosystems and feed the world. Recent reporting from the Guardian investigates one seaweed enterprise, the Climate Foundation, and its mission to win Elon Musk’s $100m Xprize. 

Soil carbon sequestration involves carbon dioxide being removed from the atmosphere and stored in the soil as soil organic carbon (SOC). This process has been shown to help mitigate climate change; however exactly how SOC forms and persists remains uncertain. This study aims to uncover the role soil microorganisms play in SOC formation, preservation and loss.

This report by Friends of the Earth United States and the Open Markets Institute criticises US policies aimed at creating agricultural carbon markets where farmers can be paid for carbon sequestration. It argues that the scheme is unlikely to generate genuine emissions reductions because there is no cap on the emissions allowed, unlike in cap-and-trade schemes, and because the science around soil carbon sequestration is not yet fully settled. Furthermore, it notes that in some cases, farmers are paid by large companies to adopt farming practices that rely on data platforms or proprietary technology owned by those companies, potentially entrenching both their market power and “chemical-dependent” farming methods.

This paper critiques the narrative of soil carbon sequestration as a win-win solution offering climate mitigation as well as improving multiple “soil functions” such as fertility, biodiversity and water retention. It argues that accounting for the likely saturation of soil organic carbon over time significantly reduces the estimated potential contribution of soil carbon sequestration to climate mitigation. Furthermore, it finds that the literature does not show a general positive association between soil organic carbon sequestration and improved crop yields - rather, the effects on yields can be positive, neutral or negative depending on the situation.

Current climate mitigation pledges made as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change rely on unrealistic amounts of land-based carbon sequestration, according to this report. 1.2 billion hectares of land would be needed - almost as much as the current global extent of cropland - and there could be significant negative impacts on food production, sustainable livelihoods for smallholder farmers, and indigenous peoples’ rights.

The Science Based Targets initiative has published guidance for companies in land-intensive sectors on how to set science-based targets for reducing emissions from agriculture, forestry and other land use in line with the Paris Agreement’s climate goals. The key components include: setting near-term emissions reduction targets for the next 5-10 years; account for carbon sequestration options such as forest management and soil carbon sequestration; set long-term targets of cutting emissions by 74% by no later than 2050; set zero deforestation targets for no later than 2025; and set emissions reduction targets for both land use and fossil fuel use.

This paper presents a “roadmap” towards achieving net zero in global food systems by 2050 - a plan which has recently been called for by institutional investors. The authors explore 64 pathways to net zero based on implementing varying levels of four major food systems interventions: increasing production efficiency through shifting to low-emissions practices; sequestering carbon in croplands and grasslands; changing diets to reduce the global production of protein from livestock; and adopting a diverse range of “new-horizon” - i.e. emerging - technologies such as methane inhibitors and perennial row crops.