link to page 1  link to page 1 

 
 
December 3, 2020
Agricultural Soils and Climate Change Mitigation
Policymakers, scientists, farmers, and other stakeholders 
(derived from nonliving material, such as minerals). Soil 
have debated the potential of agricultural soils to sequester 
organic carbon (SOC) measures the carbon in soil organic 
(store) carbon and help mitigate future climate change. This 
matter (SOM), which consists largely of soil microbes (i.e., 
discussion includes various approaches to agriculture—
bacteria and fungi), and decaying and decayed plant and 
referred to as carbon farming, regenerative agriculture, 
animal material. In addition to its role sequestering carbon, 
farming for soil health, and farming for soil carbon 
SOM is important to soil health and agricultural 
sequestration—and their potential to increase agriculture’s 
productivity. Photosynthesis, decomposition, and 
role as a greenhouse gas (GHG) sink and reduce its role as a 
respiration are the major factors in determining SOC levels 
GHG  source. GHG sinks remove and store GHGs from the 
(Figure 1). Photosynthesis fixes atmospheric CO2 into plant 
atmosphere, and GHG sources emit (release) them.  
material, which can lead to increased SOC. Decomposition 
Figure 1. Carbon Cycling in Agricultural Soils 
of SOM releases CO2 into the atmosphere and leaves a 
small amount of carbon in the soil. Respiration of plants 
and microbes releases CO2 into the atmosphere as a by-
product of using organic materials for energy and growth; 
this process returns to the atmosphere some of the carbon 
fixed through photosynthesis. 
Agricultural practices have generally increased net GHG 
emissions, but certain practices can reduce GHG emissions 
in the atmosphere and increase net carbon storage in soils. 
Such practices generally reduce soil exposure to air and 
increase plant root growth. These practices include no-till 
or reduced-till land management and use of cover crops, 
compost, and manure. The combination of multiple 
 
practices may further increase carbon storage in soils. The 
Source: Figure created by CRS. 
adoption of carbon-sequestering practices depends on 
Agriculture: A GHG Source and Sink 
factors that include requirements for equipment and labor 
and vary widely in the United States (Table 1). 
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 
the agriculture sector is a net emitter of GHGs ; agricultural 
Table 1. Selected Carbon-Sequestering Management 
practices, including crop and livestock operations, currently 
Practices in Use in U.S. Croplands (2017) 
emit more GHGs than they remove. The EPA’s annual 
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 
Acres 
% of Total 
reports estimates of anthropogenic GHG emissions and 
Management  Practice 
(millions) 
Cropland 
sinks in the United States, using internationally 
No-Til  (includes Rotational Til ) 
105 
27% 
standardized sectors. On the source side, the agriculture 
sector’s GHG emissions—primarily methane and nitrous 
Reduced-Til  
98 
25% 
oxide—include those from livestock and soil management. 
Cover Crops 
15 
4% 
The 2020 Inventory shows that in 2018, the agriculture 
Source: USDA, 2017 Census of Agriculture (COA), 2019, Table 47. 
sector contributed about 10% of total U.S. GHG  emissions . 
Note: Total U.S. cropland = 396 mil ion acres (COA, Table 1).  
The Inventory reports estimates of net emissions (emissions 
Scientific Debate 
minus removals) from the Land Use, Land-Use Change, 
The carbon sequestration potential of agricultural soils has 
and Forestry sector (LULUCF)—primarily carbon dioxide 
been an active research area for decades. Some scientists 
(CO2) emissions and carbon storage. LULUCF includes net 
are optimistic and others advise caution when considering 
emissions for forestlands, agricultural croplands, 
agriculture’s potential to measurably mitigate global GHG 
grasslands, and other land types. Data from 2018 and prior 
emissions. 
years indicate that U.S. croplands are a net GHG source and 
grasslands are a net sink. Land-use change, rather than land 
The utility and effectiveness of mitigating GHG emissions 
use, largely shapes these patterns—the conversion of other 
via agriculture depends in part on the 
land-use types to croplands (net emissions) and to 
  carbon-storage potential of agricultural soils, 
grasslands (net removals). 
  carbon-storing potential of agricultural practices, and 
Agricultural Practices That Store Carbon 
  carbon storage over time. 
Soils store carbon in two basic forms: organic (derived 
Carbon-storage potential of agricultural soils. Recent 
from living material, such as plant roots) and inorganic 
estimates suggest that over the past 12,000 years, human 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
Agricultural Soils  and Climate  Change  Mitigation 
land use has resulted in a cumulative global loss of about 
Public sector. Some legislation introduced in the 116th 
116 gigatons (GT) of SOC. Some researchers assert that 
Congress would support farmers that implement carbon-
today’s soils have the technical potential to achieve the 
sequestering practices. For example, the Growing Climate 
amount of SOC that they held prior to these losses, and that 
Solutions Act of 2020 (S. 3894/H.R. 7393) would create a 
today’s soils have the attainable potential to store some 
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) program to certify 
proportion of the lost amount. Scientists’ estimates of the 
third parties as GHG technical assistance providers and 
attainable potential vary considerably. 
verifiers of carbon sequestration protocols. Such a program 
Differences between the technical and attainable potentials 
might facilitate farmer and forest owner participation in 
derive from many factors, including socioeconomic and 
carbon markets but would not create them. 
policy constraints. As examples, farmers who rent rather 
The Agriculture Resilience Act (H.R. 5861) would promote 
than own their land may not have long-term economic 
voluntary, incentive-based conservation measures. Among 
incentives to implement soil management changes; farmers 
proposed actions, the bill would amend the USDA 
may not have the equipment needed to adopt new 
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP, 16 
management practices; or existing agricultural policies may 
U.S.C. §3839aa et seq.) to add reducing GHGs and 
incentivize management decisions that align with goals 
sequestering carbon to existing program considerations. 
other than carbon sequestration (e.g., maximizing 
production or reducing labor and other inputs). 
State-level initiatives also provide public sector 
opportunities to encourage GHG mitigation through 
Carbon-storing potential of agricultural practices. A 
agricultural soils. California’s mandatory emissions trading 
2019 report by the National Academies of Sciences, 
system and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative both 
Engineering, and Medicine reviewed a variety of 
allow agricultural offsets, though not for soil carbon.  
technologies aimed at reducing and eliminating GHG 
emissions and evaluated agricultural carbon sequestration 
International. Most observers argue that addressing 
as among the most cost-effective. It estimated that 
climate change will involve some degree of internationally 
agricultural practices could sequester up to 0.25 GT of CO
coordinated efforts. Specific to soil carbon, France 
2 
(0.07 GT of carbon) per year in the United States—
launched the 4 per 1000 Initiative in 2015,  with the premise 
equivalent to about 4% of total U.S. emissions from all 
that increasing the carbon in global agricultural soils by 
sectors in 2018—for a cost of less than $20 per ton of CO
four parts per thousand (~3.5 GT) per year would mitigate 
2. 
The report’s estimate for agricultural carbon sequestration 
the annual increase of atmospheric CO2 due to human 
assumes full adoption of soil conservation practices. 
activity. The initiative invites its stakeholders (e.g., national 
governments, private companies) to declare or implement 
Carbon storage over time. Ongoing questions include how 
practical actions related to soil carbon storage. Some 
long sequestered carbon remains in the soil and how long 
nonfederal U.S. entities (e.g., private companies, 
management practices designed to store carbon continue to 
foundations) are members, but the U.S. government is not. 
sequester carbon. Research shows that some practices store 
carbon only while they are in use. For example, carbon 
Policy Challenges 
accumulated through no-till management is released when 
Many initiatives to increase soil carbon sequestration 
the field is tilled again. Research suggests that no-till 
through agriculture are predicated on accurately quantifying 
management may increase net soil carbon sequestration for 
SOC. Scientists recognize this as  a technical challenge, as 
an estimated 20 years before plateauing and declining to 
such quantification needs to be extrapolated from remote 
near-zero in later decades. 
sensing data or discrete sampling over space and time. 
Improving measurement accuracy may need additional 
Selected Initiatives and Policy Proposals 
research, innovation, investment, and technical assistance. 
Existing and proposed approaches in the U.S. private and 
If carbon-storing agricultural practices cost more than 
public sectors, and internationally, may encourage climate 
alternative practices (e.g., in terms of labor, equipment, 
change mitigation in agriculture. Some cite climate change 
productivity, or sale price), farmers are unlikely to adopt 
mitigation as a goal, while others identify increased 
them absent requirements or incentives. Various incentives, 
economic opportunities for the agriculture sector. Selected 
such as those provided through carbon markets, may 
current examples are discussed below. 
change the economic calculus. 
Private sector. A number of private and nonprofit entities 
Lack of awareness among agricultural producers of carbon-
are attempting to use markets to create business incentives 
storing agricultural practices—what they are, what costs 
to reduce net CO2 emissions in agriculture. For example, 
and benefits they may provide, and how to implement 
IndigoAg, a U.S.-based private company, launched its 
them—may also impede adoption. USDA programs, such 
Terraton Initiative in 2019. The initiative aims to remove 1 
as the USDA Climate Hubs, cooperative extension, and 
trillion tons of CO2 (~272 GT of carbon) from the 
Natural Resource Conservation Service technical assistance 
atmosphere by bringing 12 billion acres of global farmland 
programs, may play a role in increasing awareness of these 
under regenerative agriculture practices (e.g., no-till, 
practices, as may other state and private efforts. 
reduced synthetic fertilizers, and incorporating livestock 
into croplands). The initiative includes a domestic carbon 
Genevieve K. Croft, Analyst in Agricultural Policy   
mark et focused solely on agriculture. Carbon markets 
enable entities to buy or sell credits or offsets for GHG 
IF11693
emissions reductions. Carbon markets may pay farmers for 
the reduced emissions resulting from the use of specific 
management practices or measures of soil carbon over time. 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
Agricultural Soils  and Climate  Change  Mitigation 
 
 
Disclaimer 
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to 
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. 
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has 
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the 
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be 
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include 
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permissio n of the copyright holder if you 
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. 
 
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11693  · VERSION  1 · NEW