370 DEGRADATION
DEGRADATION
C J Ritsema, Alterra, Wageningen, The Netherlands
G W J van Lynden, ISRIC, Wageningen,
The Netherlands
V G Jetten and S M de Jong, Utrecht University,
Utrecht, The Netherlands
ß 2005, Elsevier Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
Introduction
Soil is under increasing threat from a wide range of
human activities that are undermining its long-term
availability and viability. One third of the world’s
agricultural soils, or approximately 2 billion hectares
of land are affected by soil degradation. Water and
wind erosion account for most of the observed dam-
age, while other forms such as physical and chemical
degradation are responsible for the rest. Appropriate
soil and water conservation strategies are needed to
prevent and combat the effects of soil degradation in
the field and at the planning level.
Soil degradation is ‘‘a process that describes human-
induced phenomena which lower the current and/or
future capacity of the soil to support human life.’’ In a
general sense, soil degradation could be described as
the deterioration of soil quality, or in other words: the
partial or entire loss of one or more functions of
the soil. Quality should be assessed in terms of the
different potential functions of the soil.
Land degradation is the reduction in the capability
of the land to produce benefits from a particular
land use under a specified form of land management.
Seven main groups of land-degradation processes are
normally distinguished: (1) mass movement (such as
debris flows and avalanches), (2) water erosion (sheet,
rill, gully erosion), (3) wind erosion, (4) excess of salts
(salinization, sodification), (5) chemical degradation
(acidification, contamination, toxicity), (6) physical
degradation (crusting, compaction, oxidation), and
(7) biological degradation (loss of soil biodiversity).
An important aspect of many soil and land deg-
radation processes are the so called off-site effects;
for example, dust storms or eroded sediment cause
problems such as damage by mudflows, siltation of
dams, or pollution of drinking water in downwind or
downstream areas.
Factors and Processes Affecting
Degradation of Soils
Various types of human activities may lead to soil
degradation. Although some degradation processes
may also occur naturally, many degradation types
are the result of human disturbance of either a natural
or anthropogenic state of equilibrium. Some of these
are:
Agricultural causes: Defined as the improper man-
agement of cultivated arable land. It includes a wide
variety of practices, such as insufficient or excessive
use of fertilizers, shortening of the fallow period in
shifting cultivation, use of poor quality irrigation
water, absence or bad maintenance of erosion-control
measures, improper use of heavy machinery, etc. Deg-
radation types commonly linked to this causative
factor are erosion (water or wind), compaction, loss
of nutrients, salinization, and pollution (by pesticides
or fertilizers).
Deforestation or removal of natural vegetation:
Defined as the near complete removal of natural vege-
tation (usually primary or secondary forest) from
large stretches of land, for example by converting
forest into agricultural land (hence sometimes fol-
lowed by agricultural mismanagement), large-scale
commercial forestry, road construction, urban devel-
opment, etc. Deforestation often causes erosion and
loss of nutrients.
Overexploitation of vegetation for domestic use:
Contrary to ‘deforestation or removal of natural
vegetation,’ this causative factor does not necessarily
involve the (near) complete removal of the ‘natural’
vegetation, but rather a degeneration of the remain-
ing vegetation, thus offering insufficient protection
against erosion. It includes activities such as excessive
gathering of fuel wood, fodder, (local) timber, etc.
Overexploitation of natural water resources: This
leads to water shortages for the natural ecosystem and
in the long term to the removal of the natural vegeta-
tion cover. The result is an increased vulnerability of
the land for surface runoff, soil erosion, and soil sur-
face crusting. As soon as the process of vegetation
deterioration starts, it normally has a self-enhancing
effect which is difficult to stop or to reverse.
Overgrazing: Besides actual overgrazing of the
vegetation by livestock, other phenomena of exces-
sive livestock amounts are also considered here, such
as trampling. The effect of overgrazing usually is soil
compaction and/or a decrease in plant cover, both of
which may in turn give rise to water or wind erosion.
Industrial activities: All human activities of an
industrial or bioindustrial nature are included: indus-
tries, power generation, infrastructure and urban-
ization, waste handling, traffic, etc. It is most often
linked to pollution of different kinds (either point
source or diffuse) and loss of productive function.

Types of Soil Degradation
The type of soil degradation refers to the nature of the
degradation process. Soil particles may be displaced
by the action of water or wind (erosion and sedi-
mentation), which may cause damage to crops, infra-
structure, buildings, and the environment in general.
Erosion can be linear, i.e., concentrated along certain
channels (rill or gully erosion and mass wasting such
as landslides), sometimes creating very deep scars in
the landscape (Figure 1). Less conspicuous, but often
even more detrimental to crops is the gradual removal
of the topsoil layer (sheet erosion). Off-site effects of
erosion may consist of siltation of reservoirs and river
beds and/or flooding, or dune formation and ‘over-
blowing’ in the case of wind erosion. Degradation
in situ, i.e., without movement of soil particles, can
be chemical (soil pollution by chemical wastes or ex-
cessive fertilization; fertility decline due to nutrients
being removed by harvesting, erosion and leaching;
salinization due to irrigation with saline groundwater
and/or without proper drainage in semiarid and arid
areas, acidification due to pH-lowering additions to
the soil from fertilizers or from the atmosphere), or
physical (compaction due to the use of heavy machin-
ery; deteriorating soil structure such as crusting of the
soil surface; waterlogging due to increased water
table or its opposite, aridification).
Assessment of Degradation
Approaches
The status of soil degradation can be assessed in a
qualitatively broad manner or in a more detailed
quantitative manner. The former generic approach is
better suited for small-scale assessments, such as for
entire countries, continents, or global overviews.
A quantitative approach is required for more specific
and detailed assessments, e.g., to determine the
Figure 1 Severely degraded soils on the Loess Plateau of
China.
DEGRADATION 371
erosion status for a watershed or the pollution status
for a province. Qualitative assessments are based on
expert judgement and hence more liable to subjectiv-
ity than quantitative methods. A method does not
have to be fully qualitative or quantitative, mixtures
may occur. Some frequently used methods or tools are:
1. Expert opinion: Qualitative assessment on a
controlled mapping base and semiquantitative de-
finitions, as employed for instance in the Global
Assessment of Human-induced Soil Degradation
(GLASOD) survey. GLASOD and related methods
are based on an assessment of land suitability by na-
tional experts that use defined, semiquantitative class
limits on a given mapping base. Its major disadvan-
tage is the inevitable degree of subjectivity. Its major
advantage is its capacity to produce results, such as
achieving complete world coverage (Figure 2), in a
short time and on a small budget. Costs per unit area
are relatively low. In Figure 3 an integrated global soil
degradation severity map is shown, indicating areas
with different degradation rates;
2. Remote sensing: Analysis of low- and high-
resolution satellite data and airborne imagery (e.g.,
analysis of composite indices such as the Normalized
Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI)). Remote sensing
always includes linkages with ground observations.
The basis of this method is comparison of remotely
sensed imagery of different dates, for regional cover-
age, mainly low-resolution imagery; and, specifically,
comparison of the NDVI, derived from imagery col-
lected by the sensor aboard the National Oceano-
graphic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
satellite, and more detailed imagery. This method
was tested amongst others in Saudi Arabia and
shows areas where vegetation response to rainfall is
decreasing (degradation of resources) or increasing
(rehabilitation of resources). It has been applied par-
ticularly to early warning systems. For longer-term
comparisons, some form of calibration for preceding
rainfall is needed. Costs are relatively low. It is recog-
nized that remote sensing cannot be used alone.
Spectral mixture analysis (SMA): Since 1985 hyper-
spectral remote sensing has been developed, opening
new methods to survey and assess degradational state
of the soil surface. Hyperspectral remote sensing
refers to the collection of images in the solar spec-
trum, with many narrow spectral bands allowing the
collection of very accurate spectra of objects and the
earth surface and identification of absorption features
of plants and of soil minerals in these spectra. SMA is
a technique to unravel the spectral information in the
remote-sensing images by assuming that the spectral
variation is caused by a limited number of surface
material (green vegetation, senescent vegetation, a
372 DEGRADATION

Degradation
severity
(Extent + Degree)

Water erosion Wind erosion

Low Low
Medium Medium
High High
Very high Very high

Chemical deterioration Physical deterioration

Low Low
Medium Medium
High High
Very high Very high

Stable terrain Other

Stable Nonused wasteland
Ocean, inland water

Figure 2 Global assessment (in 1990) of the status of human-induced soil degradation. (Reproduced with permission from Oldeman
LR, Sombroek WG, and Hakkeling R (1991) World Map on the Current Status of Human-Induced Soil Degradation. An Explanatory Note, 2nd edn.
Wageningen, the Netherlands: ISRIC/Nairobi, Kenya: UNEP.)

Figure 3 Global soil degradation severity map as produced by the GLASOD initiative.

number of soil types, and water). A reference library
of these surface materials collected in the field or in
the laboratory yields the basis for SMA of the remote-
sensing images. This approach has been applied suc-
cessfully in a number of case studies to survey soil
conditions and to identify classes of degradation. The
SMA approach normally improves on results using the
NDVI but requires more spectral bands: SMA is suc-
cessfully applied to separate, in images, bare soil sur-
faces from senescent vegetation and yellow vegetation
from green vegetation. These three factors are
important inputs in soil-erosion models because they
act differently with respect to raindrop interception.
3. Field monitoring: Stratified soil sampling and
analysis, and field observation of vegetation and bio-
diversity under certain land-use or management prac-
tices and climate variability. To date, soil monitoring
has been applied mainly in developed countries, and
tests are needed of its cost-effectiveness in developing
countries. In areas where baseline studies have

been established, monitoring of changes will be
undertaken; in other areas, establishment of a base-
line will be a priority. Stratified soil-sampling with
analysis, and/or benchmark sites, repeated over 5- to
10-year intervals, has been advocated as a basic activ-
ity for national soil survey organizations. Examples of
application to date (2003) are few, but successful:
the method has been applied to 20 000 sites over a
25-year period in Japan; is currently being used for
a national 16-km-grid in France; and has been started
in Denmark and Switzerland. The same approach has
been applied to field observations of vegetation, along
transects or in sampling plots, and to biodiversity.
Costs per unit area are relatively high, but could be
reduced by application to priority areas only, on
a stratified sampling basis.
4. Productivity changes: Observation of changes
in crop yields, biomass production, and livestock
output, which directly apply to the definition of land
degradation in terms of lowered productivity, al-
though they are influenced by many other factors.
There is a range of possibilities: At national level,
use might be made of national yield statistics (of
which the reliability is still under debate), adjusted
for fertilizer use and climate. At local level, yield
monitoring is possible by comparisons with a stand-
ard crop, either without fertilizer or with standard
fertilizer and management. Substantial problems
arise in that productivity decline could be due to fac-
tors other than land degradation, e.g., removal of fer-
tilizer subsidy or civil strife. The same cost constraints
apply as for soil monitoring.
5. Sample studies at farm level, based on field cri-
teria and the expert opinion of land users. Even at
national level, such detailed studies are essential on a
sample basis, to obtain grass roots views both of the
severity of degradation and its causes, together with
practicable remedies (Stocking and Murnaghan,
2001). Field indicators of soil degradation were de-
veloped about 20 years ago, and could be extended to
condition of vegetation. Talking with farmers means
getting the views of farmers, and other land users, on
whether things have got worse – which are of course,
subjective and perhaps systematically biased, but still
essential to get grass roots view at local level. The
method is clearly applicable only at a local scale, and
thus on a selective sampling basis. Observations of
the state of the land can be combined with assessment
of driving factors and impacts.
6. Modeling: Based on data obtained by other
methods, modeling can be used in many ways,
such as: (1) prediction of degradation hazard; (2)
operational definition of degradation in terms
of unfavorable changes in plant productivity, soil
properties, and hydrology; (3) design of conservation
DEGRADATION 373
measures using climatic data with a specific return
period (worst-case scenario modeling); (4) extending
the range of applicability of results; (5) integrating
biophysical with socioeconomic factors. Much re-
search has been put into devising models for the pre-
diction of soil-erosion hazard. There are established
methods for the modeling of both water and wind
erosion, which have been widely applied, in part be-
cause it is vastly cheaper than any form of field obser-
vation. The modeling approach is mainly relevant to
degradation hazard, but can be applied to actual deg-
radation first, as a means of calibration of the model
to the specific requirements of an area, optimizing
sampling design, or to extrapolate the applicability
of results obtained on a sampling basis. Risk reflects
a potential development in the future, while status
reflects the development to date. Models vary widely
in complexity and data requirements, depending on
the type of degradation they are addressing and the
size of the area under investigation. Models are useful
to learn and understand degradation processes, but
both the model and input data are a simplification of
reality, hence extrapolation of models should be done
with care. Very often models are developed for experi-
mental plots or pilot zones of a restricted size and
under more or less controlled conditions, which
should be taken into account when applying the
model elsewhere. The data requirements and structure
of a model, and the type of processes included in it,
depend on many things: (1) the temporal scale of the
research objectives: Is an annual, daily, or event-based
result required? (2) the spatial scale: Are predictions
needed for a single plot, a field, complex spatial catch-
ment, or an entire region? (3) Is the emphasis on the
on-site effects of land degradation (e.g., soil erosion or
crop yield changes) or on the off-site effects such as
water sediment levels and pollution? Spatial and tem-
poral scales are often linked, as, for example, is the
case for physically based spatial erosion models
(Figure 4) that simulate single events for first-order
catchment with a high level of detail. They can be used
to answer subtle questions about the effects of specific
land-use changes or soil and water conservation meas-
ures in the catchment upon reducing runoff and
erosion (Figure 5). On the other hand there are less-
complex empirical models that can simulate continu-
ous periods mostly for fields or hillslopes, but they can
only show the change in annual erosion or soil loss.
Potentials and Limitations
It is useful to emphasize some potentials and limita-
tions of land degradation assessments. It is obvious
that an assessment at a small scale (e.g., 1:1 M) does
not have a direct value for activities at the field level,
374 DEGRADATION
but can be highly useful (if well done) to planners,
government agencies, legislative bodies, educational
institutions, nongovernment organizations (NGOs),
and the general public in highlighting (potential) prob-
lem areas and decision-making for further action.
Besides geographic coverage and scale, another
factor that determines the usefulness of an assessment
methodology is the range of degradation issues the
assessment tries to cover. Land degradation is a very
broad issue, covering a wide range of degradation
Figure 4 Model structure of a physically based spatial hydro-
logic and soil-erosion model, in which water and sediment are
routed to the outlet of a catchment and produced as discharge.
Input var, input variable; LAI, leaf area index; Cov, soil cover;
Ksat, hydraulic conductivity; theta, moisture content; RR, surface
roughness; ldd, runoff network; n, flow resistance; slope, terrain
slope; As, aggregate stability; COH, Cohesion; D50, median grain
size of suspended sediment.
Present land use
Negligible erosion
Slight erosion
Moderate erosion
Serious erosion
Severe erosion
Figure 5 Computed soil losses in a first-order watershed for the current land use and management conditions and for an
alternatively defined land-use distribution.
issues, which makes its assessment a rather generic
or alternatively highly unwieldy exercise. It is already
quite complicated to assess one specific type of soil
pollution, not to mention the various other types of
soil degradation, which in itself is just one aspect of
land degradation. This also means that the frequently
observed desire to have ‘simple’ assessment methods
is not entirely realistic, if this is supposed to be any-
thing more than just a general awareness-raising tool.
Two types of assessments have been identified one
is ‘backward-looking’ and determines the result of
degradation over a recent past period. The other ap-
proach is forward-looking in the sense that it makes
predictions for the future based on models and scen-
arios. Although the backward-looking approach con-
siders the current status, it does not necessarily reflect
the result of the degradation process over that period,
but the net result of a number of acting and counter-
acting factors. Degradation is one of these, but re-
medial activities compensating the degradation effect
to some extent is another one.
Though the wish to have ‘simple’ degradation as-
sessment methods is often expressed, it should be
realised that soil degradation is a complex process,
determined by a range of factors of a natural and
socioeconomic character. Hence a simple method
will tend to correspond less with reality than a more
complex and comprehensive one.
Degree and Impact of Degradation
Degree of Degradation
Degree is defined as the intensity of the soil degrad-
ation process, e.g., in the case of erosion, the amount
Changed land use
with external support
(0−2.5 t ha−1)
(2.5−10 t ha−1)
(10−25 t ha−1)
(25−100 t ha−1)
(100−2000 t ha−1)

of soil washed or blown away. The FAO has proposed
values for maximum acceptable limits of soil loss by
erosion with respect to decreased agricultural prod-
uctivity. Four classes are distinguished, ranging from
no loss of productivity to severe loss of productivity.
The classes are <12, 12–25, 25–50, and >50 t ha 1
year 1. Relative changes of the soil properties are
other good indicators of soil degradation: the percent-
age of the total topsoil lost, the percentage of total
nutrients and organic matter lost, the relative decrease
in soil moisture-holding capacity, changes in buffering
capacity, etc. However, although such data may exist
for experimental plots and pilot areas, precise and
actual information is often lacking at a regional scale.
Rate of Soil Degradation
The recent rate of degradation relates to the rapidity
of degradation over the past 5–10 years or, in other
words, the trend of degradation. A severely degraded
area may be quite stable at present (i.e., low rate,
hence no trend toward further degradation), while
other areas that are now only slightly degraded may
show a high rate, hence a trend toward rapid further
deterioration. From a purely physical point of view,
the latter area would have a higher conservation pri-
ority than the former. Areas where the situation is
improving (through soil conservation measures, for
example), can also be identified. A comparison of the
actual situation with that of the preceding decade
may suffice, but often it is preferable to examine the
average development over the last 5–10 years to level
out irregularities. Whereas the degree of degradation
only indicates the current, static situation (measured
by decreased or increased productivity compared
with some 10–15 years ago) the rate indicates the
dynamic situation of soil degradation, namely the
change in degree over time.
Impact of Degradation
Impact refers to the effects of soil degradation on the
various soil functions. Changes in soil and terrain
properties (e.g., loss of topsoil, development of rills
and gullies, exposure of hardpans in the case of ero-
sion) may reflect the occurrence and intensity of soil
degradation but not necessarily the seriousness of its
impact. Removal of a 5-cm layer of soil may have a
greater impact on a poor shallow soil than on a deep
fertile soil. The impact depends on the function and/
or use of the soil: a heavily compacted soil is unsuit-
able for agriculture, but may be an appropriate basis
for road construction.
Whereas the degree of degradation mainly refers to
the degradation process, the impact of degradation
can be manifold, depending on the current function
DEGRADATION 375
(or use) of the soil. In many cases, the impact of
degradation types will be on its biotic functions, or
more specifically on its productivity. A significant
complication in indicating productivity losses caused
by soil degradation is the variety of reasons that may
contribute to yield decline. Falling productivity may
be caused by a wide range of factors such as erosion,
fertility decline, improper management, drought, or
waterlogging, quality of inputs (seeds, fertilizer),
pests, and plagues, often in combination with each
other. However, if one considers a medium- to long-
term period (e.g., 25 years), large aberrations resulting
from fluctuations in the weather pattern or pests
should be leveled out.
The effects of soil degradation can be partially
hidden by various management measures such as
soil conservation, use of improved varieties, fertil-
izers, and pesticides. Some of these inputs are used
to compensate for the productivity loss caused by soil
degradation, for example application of fertilizers to
compensate for lost nutrients. In other words, yields
could have been much higher in the absence of soil
degradation (and/or costs could have been reduced).
Therefore, productivity changes should be seen in
relation to the degree of input or level of manage-
ment. The latter may include use of fertilizers, bio-
cides, improved varieties, mechanization, various soil
conservation measures, and other important changes
in the farming system.
Changes in productivity should be expressed in
relative terms, i.e., the current average productivity
compared with the average productivity in the non-
degraded situation and in relation to inputs. For in-
stance, if previously an average yield of 2 t of wheat
ha 1 was attained while at present only 1.5 t is real-
ized in spite of high(er) inputs – and all other factors
being equal – this would be an indication of strong soil
degradation. Sometimes the impact may be ranked as
negligible, even when degradation occurs, because of
the capacity of the soil to resist a certain amount of
degradation. Although for most degradation types the
dominant impact is on productivity, some types (pol-
lution in particular) may have additional or different
impacts, e.g., on human or animal health or on entire
ecosystems.
Preventing and Combating Degradation
There are a wide variety of measures to prevent or
combat land degradation. These measures are gener-
ally known as soil conservation or soil and water
conservation (SWC), especially when related to
aspects like erosion, soil-moisture problems and soil
fertility. More broadly applicable are names such as
land husbandry or sustainable land management.
376 DEGRADATION
Figure 6 Categorization of soil and water conservation meas-
ures according to the World Overview of Conservation Ap-
proaches and Technologies (WOCAT) initiative: (a) agronomic
measures such as mixed cropping, contour cultivation, mulching,
etc. which: (1) are usually associated with annual crops, (2) are
repeated routinely each season or in a rotational sequence,
(3) are of short duration and not permanent, (4) do not lead to
changes in slope profile, (5) are normally not zoned, (6) are
normally independent of slope; (b) vegetative measures such as
grass strips, hedge barriers, windbreaks, etc. which: (1) involve
the use of perennial grasses, shrubs, or trees, (2) are of long
duration, (3) often lead to a change in slope profile, (4) are often
zoned on the contour or at right angles to wind, (5) direction,
The WOCAT (World Overview of Conservation
Approaches and Technologies) network, which con-
stitutes an international consortium of institutions
and individuals from all over the world, provides an
evaluation tool for SWC activities, an information-
management system designed to collect, analyze,
present, and disseminate SWC knowledge and a deci-
sion-support system designed to assist in the search for
SWC options appropriate to the prevailing biophysical
and socioeconomic settings. WOCAT was initated in
1992 and has developed a common framework and
methodology, consisting of three comprehensive ques-
tionnaires (in English, French, and Spanish) for the
documentation and evaluation of SWC.
The WOCAT methodology consists of three major
modules:
1. Questionnaire and database on SWC technolo-
gies;
2. Questionnaire and database on SWC ap-
proaches;
3. Questionnaire and database on the geographic
distribution of SWC (mapping).
The first two modules aim at a comprehensive and
detailed description of specific technologies, i.e., agro-
nomic, vegetative, structural, and/or management
measures used in the field (Figure 6), and the ways
and means used to implement an SWC technology on
the ground. The mapping module is more or less simi-
lar to the qualitative methodology for degradation
assessment described earlier. In this approach, infor-
mation is collected for individual units of a (physio-
graphic or other) base map on the following items:
. Land use: type, extent, trend in area, trend in
intensity;
. (Per land use type) degradation, as above, but
only for water and wind erosion and fertility
decline in erosion-prone areas;
(6) are often spaced according to slope; (c) structural measures
such as terraces, banks, bunds, constructions, palisades, etc.
which: (1) often lead to a change in slope profile, (2) are of long
duration or permanent, (3) are carried out primarily to control
runoff, wind velocity, and erosion, (4) require substantial inputs of
labour or money when first installed, (5) are often zoned on the
contour/against wind direction, (6) are often spaced according to
slope, (7) involve major earth movements and/or construction
with wood, stone, concrete, etc.; (d) management measures
such as land use change, area closure, rotational grazing, etc.
which: (1) involve a fundamental change in land use, (2) involve
no agronomic and structural measures, (3) often result in im-
proved vegetative cover, (4) often reduce the intensity of use;
(e) combinations in conditions where they are complementary
and thus enhancing each other. Any combinations of the above
measures are possible, e.g.: structural: terrace, with vegetative:
grass and trees, with agronomic: ridges.
 DEGRADATION 377

WOCAT data available

Preliminary WOCAT data

Agronomic SWC measure:

1 − conservation tillage
Vegetative and management SWC measure:
2 − agroforestry
3 − afforestation, forest protection
4 − rotational system
5 − grazing land management: control stocking rates,
enclosure, reseeding
Combination of structural and vegetative SWC measure:
6 − contour bunds, grass strips, forward-sloping terraces
Structural SWC measure:
7 − irrigation terraces
8 − stone terraces
9 − water-harvesting: microbasin, small ponds, ditches

Figure 7 Reported soil conservation measures as recently compiled by the WOCAT initiative.

. (Per land use type) conservation: type, extent,
period of implementation, effectiveness, trend
in effectiveness, and reference to a corresponding
questionnaire in the technology database for
more detailed information;
. (Per land use type) productivity: trend, contribu-
tion of SWC or degradation to this trend, aver-
age production value, average input value.
An overview of soil and water conservation measures
applied in different geographic regions of the world is
shown in Figure 7.
See also: Desertification; Erosion: Water-Induced;
Wind-Induced; Salination Processes
Further Reading
Blaikie PM and Brookfield HC (1987) Land Degradation
and Society. London, UK: Methuen.
Blum WEH (1988) Problems of Soil Conservation. Nature
and Environment Series 39. Strasbourg, France: Council
of Europe.
Crosson P (1997) The on-farm economic costs of erosion.
In: Lal R, Blum WEH, Valentin C, and Stewart BA (eds)
Methods for Assessment of Soil Degradation. Boca
Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Dregne HE (1997) Desertification assessment. In: Lal R,
Blum WH, Valentin C, and Stewart BA (eds) Methods
for Assessment of Soil Degradation. Boca Raton, FL:
CRC Press.
Lal R, Blum WH, Valentine C, and Stewart BA (eds) (1997)
Methods for Assessment of Soil Degradation. Boca
Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Liniger HP, van Lynden GWJ, and Schwilch G (2002)
Documenting field knowledge for better land manage-
ment decisions – Experiences with WOCAT tools in
local, national and global programs. Proceedings of
ISCO Conference 2002, vol. I, pp. 259–267, Beijing,
China: Tsinghua University Press.
Oldeman LR, Sombroek WG, and Hakkeling R (1991)
World Map on the Current Status of Human Induced
Soil Degradation. An Explanatory Note, 2nd edn.
Wageningen, the Netherlands: ISRIC/Nairobi, Kenya:
UNEP.
Ritsema CJ (ed.) (2003) Soil erosion and participatory land
use planning on the Loess Plateau in China. (Special
issue.) Catena 754.
Stocking M and Murnaghan N (2001) Handbook for the
Field Assessment of Land Degradation. Sterling, VA:
Earthscan Publications.
Van der Meer FD and de Jong SM (eds) (2001) Imaging
Spectrometry: Basic Principles and Prospective Applica-
tions. Bookseries Remote Sensing and Digital Image
Processing, vol. 4. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Van Lynden GWJ (1995) European soil resources. Current
status of soil degradation, causes, impacts and need for
action. Nature and Environment Series 71. Strasbourg,
France: Council of Europe.