Each month, the open access team of the University of Groningen Library (UB) puts a recent open access article by UG authors in the spotlight. This publication is highlighted via social media and the library’s newsletter and website.

The article in the spotlight for the month of January 2022 is titled Planetary limits to soil degradation, written by Clarisse Kraamwinkel, Anne Beaulieu (both from Campus Fryslân), Teresa Dias (Universidade de Lisboa) and Ruth Howison (Faculty of Science and Engineering).

Abstract

In 2009, the planetary boundaries framework identified nine processes key to Earth system stability, with the aim of finding a safe operating space for humanity within these boundaries. Ever since, scientists, policymakers, and entrepreneurs have used this framework to help achieve global sustainability. Yet four planetary boundaries have already been crossed and there is a threat of reaching a state of severe environmental change. Although strongly interlinked with other Earth system processes, such as land-system change, the crucial role of soil in water, energy, and biogeochemical cycles is not explicitly recognized by the current framework. Soil, the ~1-m-thick layer of biogeochemically altered rock and sediment at Earth’s surface, provides essential ecosystem services, such as producing 98.8% of our food and hosting ~25% of Earth’s biodiversity. Based on the current evidence, we argue that soil degradation should be considered the 10th Earth system process in the planetary boundaries framework.

We asked first and corresponding author Clarisse Kraamwinkel a few questions about the article:

This article was published open access, was open access a deliberate choice?

Yes, for us it is very important to publish all of our articles open access in order to contribute to making scientific knowledge more publicly available. Within our research group, Knowledge Infrastructures for Sustainability, we are working on finding ways to improve the way we create and distribute knowledge. Publishing open access is an important part of this, as it increases the transparency of and access to the research and can help exchanges between science and society.

This article is a ‘comment’. What triggered you to write this comment?

The main idea discussed in this paper emerged from a question that came to mind during a course in soil ecology: “if soil degradation is such a serious global issue, why is it not mentioned in the planetary boundaries framework*?”. Initially, we did not plan to write a paper on the topic. We sent several emails to the scientists involved in developing the framework, to understand why soil health is not included. Unfortunately we never received a reply, so we decided to kickstart a debate on the position of soil in the planetary boundaries framework by publishing a provocative paper on the topic. The comment style is great for this purpose, as it is a flexible format that does not require primary research data. It allows you to formulate and argue a standpoint based on existing insights and to stimulate people to reflect on a specific topic.

*The planetary boundaries framework is a way for scientists to communicate about the state of our planet.

Your article received a lot of attention on Twitter, so far more than 200 people have tweeted about it. What role does Twitter play in your field, how important is Twitter as a communication tool?

I am relatively new to Twitter, so I am not sure how important it is as a communication tool in my field. Some colleagues are very active on Twitter and reach a lot of people with their tweets. However, I also have many colleagues who don't have a Twitter account.

Based on my limited number of tweets and small group of followers, I did not expect the article to receive so much attention on Twitter. The main reason it did, was that a colleague from our research group tweeted about the article through a large and active Twitter channel with many followers interested in global sustainability. From there, it spread very quickly. In my personal tweets I tried to use specific Twitter handles to get the Stockholm Resilience Centre to notice our paper, but I am not sure if this really worked. I think that if you are active on Twitter and build a strong network of active followers, Twitter can be a very powerful communication tool to reach people both in and outside of academia.

Could you reflect on your experiences with open access and open science in general?

My experience publishing open access so far has been great. It is easy to check if the UG has agreements with the journal of your choice and if you run into problems, the open access support responds very quickly and effectively. Unfortunately, the UG did not have any agreements with the journal we selected, but through the open-access budget of our faculty (Campus Fryslân), we were still able to publish in this journal. This has given our paper a great platform that will hopefully result in many reads and increased awareness of soil degradation and planetary health.

Useful links:

Altmetrics: traces metrics and qualitative data that are complementary to traditional, citation-based metrics. UG staff can register to get access to the Altmetrics Explorer. 

Open access journal browser: search engine that can be used to check if a discount on the article processing charge (APC) is available for a specific journal. UG corresponding authors can publish with an APC discount (mostly 100%, so for free) in more than 12.000 journals!

openaccess rug.nl: ask all your open access-related questions to the library’s open access team

Citation:

Kraamwinkel, C.T., Beaulieu, A., Dias, T. et al. Planetary limits to soil degradation. Commun Earth Environ 2, 249 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-021-00323-3

If you would like us to highlight your open access publication here, please get in touch with us.