FAO’s Second Global Soil Assessment Finds Degradation Worsening

The Food and Agriculture Organization’s second comprehensive assessment of the world’s soils delivers a clear warning: soil management is poor or very poor in more than half of the assessed regions, and conditions are worsening far more often than they are improving. The report’s central message is not that restoration techniques are unknown. It is that proven practices are not being adopted quickly or widely enough. 2526

The headline figures

The assessment classifies soil management as poor or very poor in 52.5% of regional and subregional assessments. About a third were rated fair, while only 14% were considered good or very good. These figures describe the assessments reviewed, not a direct percentage of the planet’s total land area. 25

The direction of travel is equally concerning. Since the first global assessment in 2015, 58% of assessments reported deteriorating soil conditions, compared with only 10% reporting improvement. More than half of the assessments also indicated low or very low adoption of sustainable soil-management practices. 2426

More people and cropland are increasing the pressure

The decade since the first assessment has brought additional demand for productive land. The global population grew by approximately 800 million people, while the harvested area for major crops expanded by about 80 million hectares. 24

That growth does not make soil degradation inevitable, but it raises the cost of poor management. When soil loses structure, organic matter or nutrients, farmers must work harder to maintain production, while communities become more exposed to drought, flooding and food-price shocks.

Why soil health matters beyond farming

Soil is not merely a growing medium. It supports approximately 95% of global food production, contains around 59% of terrestrial biodiversity, and is described in the supplied assessment coverage as the planet’s second-largest carbon store after the oceans. 49

Degraded soil can therefore create several problems at once: lower productive capacity, weaker habitats, poorer water regulation and reduced carbon storage. The consequences extend from farms to food systems, ecosystems and climate policy.

Erosion remains the most widespread threat

The assessment identifies erosion as the leading soil threat. It was reported as poorly managed in 81% of assessments, making it the most widespread management problem in the findings. 47

Other pressures include:

• loss of soil organic carbon;
• nutrient imbalance and poorly targeted fertilizer use;
• declining soil biodiversity;
• salinization and alkalinization;
• contamination and pollution;
• compaction and poor water status; and
• soil sealing linked to urban expansion.

These pressures often interact. Removing vegetation or disturbing soil can increase runoff and erosion; erosion can remove nutrient-rich topsoil; and declining organic matter can reduce the soil’s ability to retain water and support biological activity. The result is a cycle that can make production less resilient to climate extremes.

From soil exploitation to soil stewardship

FAO’s policy message is a shift from soil exploitation to soil stewardship. That means treating soil as a finite, living resource whose functions must be maintained over time, rather than as an expendable input in a production system. Earlier FAO and Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils material similarly calls on people who use or manage soil to act as stewards and urges governments to promote sustainable management. 21

This framing matters because soil recovery is usually slower than soil damage. Protecting existing soil is therefore as important as restoring land that has already deteriorated.

The solutions are established

The report does not point to a single universal technique. It highlights a toolbox that must be adapted to local soils, climates and farming systems. Common measures include:

• reduced or zero tillage;
• permanent soil cover using residues, mulch or cover crops;
• more diverse crop rotations;
• agroforestry and integration of trees into production systems;
• rebuilding organic matter; and
• better-targeted fertilizer and nutrient management.

FAO defines conservation agriculture around three linked principles: minimal mechanical soil disturbance, permanent soil cover and crop diversification. 3334 Cover crops and surface residues can help protect soil from rainfall impact and reduce runoff, while less disturbance and more diverse plantings can support soil structure and organic matter. 3537

Why adoption remains slow

The gap is largely an implementation problem. Farmers may face the cost of new equipment, inputs and temporary changes in yields or workflow. They may also lack secure land tenure, reliable markets, credit, extension advice, practical training or locally relevant data. FAO materials identify barriers including limited access to markets, credit and extension services, while guidance on drought-resistant soils emphasizes training, equipment, input supply and technical support. 3638

This means that asking farmers to change practices without changing the surrounding incentives and support systems is unlikely to be enough. Scaling soil restoration requires finance, dependable advisory services, suitable machinery, usable local monitoring and policies that reward long-term stewardship.

Why the COP17 context matters

FAO presented the assessment in the context of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification’s COP17, where land restoration and resilient landscapes were central concerns. FAO’s COP17 material calls for action to avoid, reduce and reverse agricultural land and soil degradation. 3950

The timing underscores how closely soil, drought, food security and climate policy are connected. Hotter conditions, drought, intense rainfall and wildfire can accelerate erosion and organic-carbon loss. In turn, degraded soils generally retain less water and provide less protection against climate shocks. The assessment therefore strengthens the case for treating soil management as part of climate adaptation, biodiversity protection and food-policy planning—not as a narrow agricultural issue.

The practical takeaway

The second assessment’s most important finding is the gap between what is known and what is being implemented. With 52.5% of assessed regions rated poor or very poor, 58% reporting deterioration and only 10% improvement since 2015, the priority is to make sustainable management achievable at scale. 2425

Protecting soil will require both farm-level practice changes and wider investment in finance, equipment, land security, advice, monitoring and policy. The report’s warning is severe, but its implication is actionable: the tools exist, and the next challenge is stewardship backed by sustained implementation.