Soil health is a cornerstone of sustainable agriculture, underpinning crop productivity, ecosystem stability, and ultimately human well-being. Recent research published in Science brings nuanced insight into the often-polarized debate between organic and conventional farming systems. Contrary to popular belief, the study reveals that the intensity of management practices deployed on agricultural lands plays a far more determinative role in soil functionality than whether a farm identifies as organic or conventional. This pioneering work reframes how we evaluate farming systems by spotlighting “productive deintensification” — the pursuit of optimizing crop yields while scaling back management intensity — as a promising strategy to safeguard and enhance soil health across diverse agricultural contexts.
The multifunctionality of soil — its capacity to perform multiple ecological functions simultaneously, including nutrient cycling, water retention, carbon sequestration, and microbial biodiversity support — is vital for long-term farm sustainability. Intensive agricultural management, characterized by heavy inputs such as synthetic fertilizers, aggressive tillage, and monoculture practices, has long been criticized for compromising soil quality. These interventions can erode soil organic matter, diminish microbial diversity, and curtail natural nutrient cycling, thereby impairing the intricate balance necessary for resilient soils. While organic farming is broadly perceived as an antidote, enhancing soil quality through natural amendments and diverse crop rotations, this new study provides compelling evidence that the benefits commonly attributed to organic agriculture may be more intricately linked to specific soil management techniques than the organic label itself.
Sophie van Rijssel and colleagues conducted their investigation by sampling soils from 53 agricultural fields across the Netherlands, meticulously selecting both organic and conventional farms that span a wide spectrum of management intensities. Through comprehensive soil health assessments, including indicators of organic carbon content, bacterial biomass, nutrient cycling potential, and moisture retention, the team quantified soil multifunctionality — an integrated measure of soil’s ecological performance. Equally important was the rigorous evaluation of management intensity, obtained through detailed farmer interviews capturing variables such as fertilizer application rates, tillage depth, crop rotation diversity, and the incorporation of cover crops. This dual-pronged approach allowed for a more granular analysis that transcends simplistic organic-conventional binaries.
The analysis uncovered striking patterns: management intensity emerged as a stronger predictor of soil multifunctionality than farming system classification. Soils in farms practicing intensive management consistently exhibited reduced multifunctionality, regardless of whether they were organic or conventional. Notably, this relationship was more pronounced in organic systems, challenging assumptions that organic designation inherently guarantees superior soil health outcomes. This counterintuitive result underscores the potential pitfalls of equating certification or labeling systems with environmental stewardship without dissecting underlying management practices.
Central to the improvement of soil multifunctionality were two specific management practices: minimizing inversion tillage and increasing the use of grass-legume cover crops. Inversion tillage, which involves turning over the soil layers, disrupts microbial habitats and accelerates organic matter decomposition, thereby depleting soil carbon reserves. Reducing or eliminating this tillage method helps preserve soil structure, organic carbon, and microbial communities essential for nutrient cycling and disease suppression. Meanwhile, grass-legume cover crops contribute nitrogen fixation, organic matter inputs, and root diversity that support soil microbial biomass and improve water retention. Their seasonal presence fosters dynamic interactions within the soil ecosystem, fostering resilience and enhancing multifunctionality.
The study further identified total soil organic carbon and bacterial biomass as key mechanistic drivers mediating the effects of management intensity on soil multifunctionality. Soil organic carbon acts as the fundamental energy source for microbial communities and is closely linked to soil aggregation, nutrient availability, and moisture regulation. Bacterial populations contribute to a host of soil functions including organic matter breakdown, nitrogen transformations, and pathogen suppression. The combined health of these components underpins the multifaceted services that soils provide. Thus, strategies that promote these biological and chemical soil properties are crucial for maintaining and restoring soil functions in agricultural landscapes.
By conceptualizing management intensity as a continuous variable rather than a categorical one, the researchers advocate for a more precise and actionable framework to assess farming practices. This perspective acknowledges the heterogeneity and complexity of real-world agriculture, emphasizing that the sustainability of farming systems cannot be fully captured by simplistic dichotomies. It calls for nuanced, site-specific interventions tailored to reduce unnecessary inputs and disruptive practices while enhancing biological and structural soil health parameters. Such a reframing has significant implications for policy, extension services, and farmer decision-making, encouraging a move beyond labels toward evidence-based stewardship.
Importantly, this research challenges prevailing narratives in agricultural policy and consumer perceptions, which often dichotomize organic and conventional systems in terms of sustainability and environmental impact. While organic farming incorporates many beneficial components, such as reduced synthetic chemical usage and enhanced biodiversity, it is not inherently immune to management intensification pressures that degrade soil quality. Conversely, conventional farms adopting low-intensity strategies — such as reduced tillage and diversified rotations — may achieve similar or superior soil multifunctionality outcomes. This nuanced understanding encourages cross-system learning and innovation to scale sustainable soil management broadly.
The notion of “productive deintensification” introduced by van Rijssel and colleagues captures the balance between maintaining high crop yields while reducing the negative consequences of management intensity. It suggests that farmers can both meet food production demands and improve soil health by optimizing inputs and adopting practices that foster soil biological integrity. This paradigm aligns with global sustainability goals that emphasize resource efficiency, ecosystem service preservation, and climate resilience, positioning soil health management as a linchpin for sustainable agriculture worldwide.
Crucially, the integration of socio-economic factors, via farmer interviews, highlights the practicality and real-world applicability of recommendations. Understanding farmer motivations, constraints, and knowledge is essential for designing interventions that are adoptable and effective. This human dimension ensures that scientific findings translate into on-the-ground changes that enhance soil health, not only in controlled experimental settings but across diverse agricultural systems.
This research thereby provides a roadmap for rethinking sustainable agriculture. By shifting focus from categorical farming systems to the continuum of management intensity and emphasizing specific, biologically-centered practices, it opens pathways for improving soil health globally. The findings offer a compelling evidence base supporting policies and extension programs that prioritize soil conservation and multifunctionality, critical for long-term food security, climate mitigation, and environmental stewardship.
In sum, the study by van Rijssel and colleagues dismantles oversimplified dichotomies, revealing that the true determinant of soil functionality lies in the practices farmers adopt rather than the labels they bear. It advocates for a tailored, evidence-driven approach to soil management that balances productivity with ecological sustainability, underscoring the need to reexamine traditional paradigms in agricultural science and practice. As soils worldwide face mounting pressures from intensified land use, these insights offer hope and guidance for restoring the foundational resource upon which agriculture and ecosystems depend.
Subject of Research: Impact of farming management intensity versus farming system type (organic vs. conventional) on soil multifunctionality and soil health.
Article Title: Conventional and organic farms with more intensive management have lower soil functionality
News Publication Date: 25-Apr-2025
Web References: 10.1126/science.adr0211
Keywords: soil health, soil multifunctionality, agricultural management intensity, organic farming, conventional farming, sustainable agriculture, soil organic carbon, bacterial biomass, inversion tillage, cover crops, productive deintensification
Tags: ecological functions of soilimpacts of synthetic fertilizersintensive farm managementmicrobial biodiversity in agriculturenutrient cycling and water retentionorganic versus conventional farmingproductive deintensification strategyreduced soil functionalityresilience of agricultural ecosystemssoil health and crop productivitysoil organic matter erosionsustainable agriculture practices
