Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Tier 1 — Meta-analysis / systematic reviewPeer-reviewedConventional

Policy instruments for soil protection among the EU member states: A comparative analysis

Silvia Ronchi, Stefano Salata, Andrea Arcidiacono, Erika Piroli, Luca Montanarella

Land Use Policy · 2019

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

This systematic comparative analysis examines how European Union member states address soil protection in the absence of a binding EU Soil Framework Directive. Using gap analysis methodology, the authors reviewed regulatory, economic, informational, and monitoring instruments across all MS, finding substantial heterogeneity and lack of coordination in national approaches. The study demonstrates that the withdrawal of the proposed Directive has resulted in fragmented, autonomous legislative frameworks that undermine coherent management of soil resources and progress toward 2030 sustainability targets.

Regional applicability

This analysis directly addresses UK policy context, particularly relevant given post-Brexit regulatory autonomy in soil protection. The findings suggest that without supranational coordination frameworks, individual countries face challenges in harmonising soil management standards and achieving transnational environmental goals—considerations pertinent to UK soil policy development and alignment with SDG commitments.

Key measures

Inventory and classification of regulatory instruments, economic instruments, information tools, monitoring systems, and research/innovation activities by member state; assessment of coherence with Sustainable Development Goals targets for 2030

Outcomes reported

Systematic review of current EU policies for soil protection across all member states, identifying regulatory instruments, economic tools, information systems, monitoring mechanisms, and research activities. Gap analysis revealing absence of common EU strategy and inconsistencies in subsidiary approaches to soil management.

Theme
Policy, governance & rights
Subject
Food & agricultural policy
Study type
Systematic Review
Study design
Comparative policy analysis with gap analysis
Source type
Peer-reviewed study
Status
Published
Geography
Europe
System type
Other
DOI
10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.01.017
Catalogue ID
SNmvhocm8n-ijltkp

Topic tags

Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Ask about this record, its theme or its relevance to UK farming and policy. Pulse AI uses selected catalogue evidence and cites the sources it draws on.