Ting Hua
Yi Han
Yang Yu
Miguel Inácio
Paulo Pereira- 1Industrial Ecology Programme, Department for Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
- 2Key Laboratory of Poyang Lake Wetland and Watershed Research (Ministry of Education), School of Geography and Environment, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, China
- 3School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, China
- 4Department of Agricultural Sciences, Institute of Agronomy, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria
- 5Environmental Management Research Laboratory, Mykolas Romeris University, Vilnius, Lithuania
Editorial on the Research Topic
Integrating nature-based solutions for land degradation neutrality and deriving co-benefits
Land degradation remains one of the most significant challenges of the 21st century, undermining ecosystem integrity, agricultural productivity, biodiversity, and human well-being (Prăvălie, 2021). Global economic losses associated with land degradation, arising from declines in multiple ecosystem services, could total 6.3–10.6 trillion US dollars annually (UNCCD, 2017). In response to growing policy momentum and scientific consensus, Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN) has gained prominence as a unifying global objective to achieve ‘zero net land degradation’ (UNCCD, 2015). In parallel, Nature-based Solutions (NbS), actions that protect, restore, and sustainably manage natural or modified ecosystems, have attracted increasing attention as a practical approach toward LDN, while delivering substantial environmental and social co-benefits (IUCN, 2016). However, the effectiveness of NbS is shaped by complex interactions among intervention types, biophysical conditions, climate, and management practices, resulting in substantial heterogeneity in ecosystem service provision across different contexts (Griscom et al., 2017; Seddon et al., 2020). Multidisciplinary approaches and governance perspectives could strengthen both micro- and macro-level understanding of how NbS can most effectively support LDN and other co-benefits (Griscom et al., 2017; Seddon et al., 2020). Against this backdrop, this Research Topic of Frontiers in Plant Science features 11 papers that span forests, grasslands, croplands, coastal ecosystems, and urban landscapes. Collectively, they demonstrate the potential of NbS to mitigate and reverse land degradation, while navigating complex interactions among climate change, hydrological processes, soil dynamics, and social constraints.
Diagnosing degradation risks and climate pressures as a foundation for NbS
Several papers in this Research Topic provided critical diagnostics that help shape effective NbS strategies to mitigate degradation risks and guide restoration efforts. Rui et al. quantified the joint effects of climate change and human activities on grassland growth in Xinjiang, showing that vegetation greening is mainly attributable to a warming, humidifying climate. In contrast, local plant loss is more strongly associated with human pressures such as overgrazing and urbanisation. Hai et al. investigated the mechanisms by which precipitation frequency and amplitude influence forest growth in Northeast China, identified degradation hotspots in areas with high-frequency but low-amplitude fluctuations, and provided key climate-ecological insights for NbS-informed forest management. Zhu et al. compared multiple deep soil moisture profiles on the Loess Plateau and demonstrated that long-term artificial planting can substantially deplete deep soil water relative to farmland and native grassland, highlighting the hydrological trade-offs of restoration in water-scarce regions.
In cropland landscapes, Liao et al. mapped cultivated land degradation in southern China and disentangled the relative contributions of natural factors and management interventions (e.g., straw incorporation, fertilisation). The authors then translate these diagnostics into targeted restoration options, including deep-rooted crops, crop rotations and straw incorporation. In rapidly urbanising regions, Liu et al. analysed invasive alien plant species distributions across urban green spaces, rural areas and croplands, showing that native plant diversity and socio-economic conditions jointly shape invasion patterns and underscoring the need for differentiated NbS approaches in urban and peri-urban landscapes. Together, these studies highlight robust diagnostics of degradation and associated abiotic and biotic pressures to guide the design of NbS and support avoiding unintended consequences.
NbS for enhancing ecosystem functioning and services in diverse environments
A second group of contributions focused on how NbS interventions can stabilise ecosystem functioning and enhance ecosystem multifunctionality, such as soil quality and carbon stocks. In an ecologically vulnerable region of the Taihang Mountains, Zhang et al. demonstrated, across 72 sites, that land-use transition (from barren hills to cropland to pear orchards) combined with intercropping (ryegrass and winter rape) can substantially increase soil carbon and nutrient levels. That is because cover crops and root systems increase carbon input, optimise soil structure, and form a nutrient-carbon pool synergy. On the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau, Li et al. investigated long-term cultivation of Kentucky bluegrass as both a restoration intervention and alternative forage species, improving soil fertility and microbial community structure over time, thereby informing sustainable management practices to support soil health and ecosystem stabilisation.
Complementing these soil-focused studies, Xue et al. found that simulated warming and litter removal in alpine grassland generate opposite above- and below-ground responses. Warming reduces vegetation cover and above-ground multifunctionality while enhancing below-ground functions. In contrast, litter removal partly buffers the warming-induced declines. Zhan et al.extended ecological process understanding to management by developing zoning-based adaptive strategies for Tibetan Plateau grasslands using the “quality–pressure–resilience” framework. Their approach delineates zones for protection, selective enhancement and active intervention, thereby providing an illustrative roadmap for conserving and restoring alpine grassland.
Beyond terrestrial systems, this Research Topic also expands the NbS focus to coastal ecosystems. Marletta et al. evaluated the use of different growth promoters in seagrass (Cymodocea nodosa) restoration, comparing synthetic plant growth regulators with plant growth-promoting bacteria in controlled aquarium experiments. This study showed that applying plant growth-promoting bacteria markedly improves survival and vegetative propagation, whereas synthetic hormones provide only limited additional benefits. Collectively, these studies demonstrate the diverse mechanisms through which NbS can reinforce ecosystem functioning and multifunctionality in both terrestrial and coastal environments, delivering actionable evidence to support more resilient management.
Social and biophysical constraints on scaling NbS
Finally, the Topic included contributions that reflect on the multiple biophysical and social constraints for NbS deployment. Zha and Zhang synthesised diverse empirical evidence on the mitigation and adaptation benefits of agroforestry, while emphasising that biophysical and social constraints strongly shape both its deployment and performance. Their perspective aligns with recent research pointing to constraints on NbS deployment, posed by biodiversity conservation and water scarcity (Gvein et al., 2023); the influences of carbon pricing on NbS economic feasibility (Lu et al., 2022); and competition with demands for food, timber, and bioenergy production (Fuhrman et al., 2020). Overcoming these challenges will require coordinated, multi-level engagement involving farm-level practitioners, policymakers, and a broad set of stakeholders (Pereira and Zhao, 2025).
Concluding remarks
Together, these papers in this Research Topic provide practical evidence on when, where and how NbS can support long-term benefits across the land-water-climate-people nexus. Such insights are particularly timely, as decision-makers urgently need to understand the role that NbS can play in advancing LDN and limiting further global temperature increases. These papers also highlight the necessity of multidisciplinary approaches—spanning ecology, remote sensing, agronomy, economics, and the social sciences—to design effective and context-appropriate interventions. Future research will need to build on this foundation by integrating long-term monitoring, co-designed interventions with local stakeholders, and comparative analyses across regions and ecosystem types, so that NbS can more reliably support progress toward LDN and broader co-benefits.
Author contributions
TH: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. YH: Writing – review & editing. YY: Writing – review & editing. MI: Writing – review & editing. PP: Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declared financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. YY was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 42377331).
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. ChatGPT 5.1 was used exclusively to improve clarity and language quality, while all scientific content, analyses, and interpretations were developed entirely by the authors.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Fuhrman, J., McJeon, H., Patel, P., Doney, S., Shobe, M., and Clarens, A. (2020). Food–energy–water implications of negative emissions technologies in a +1.5 °C future. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 920–927. doi: 10.1038/s41558-020-0876-z
Griscom, B., Adams, J., Ellis, P., Houghton, R., Lomax, G., Miteva, D., et al. (2017). Natural climate solutions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 114, 11645–11650. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1710465114
Gvein, M., Hu, X., Næss, J., Watanabe, M., Cavalett, O., Malbranque, M., et al. (2023). Potential of land-based climate change mitigation strategies on abandoned cropland. Commun. Earth Environ. 4, 39. doi: 10.1038/s43247-023-00696-7
IUCN (2016). Nature-based Solutions for societal challenges: Policy brief (Gland: International Union for Conservation of Nature).
Lu, N., Tian, H., Fu, B., Yu, H., Piao, S., Chen, S., et al. (2022). Biophysical and economic constraints on China’s natural climate solutions. Nat. Clim. Change 12, 847–853. doi: 10.1038/s41558-022-01432-3
Pereira, P. and Zhao, W. (2025). Geography and geographical knowledge contribute decisively to all Sustainable Development Goals targets. Geogr. Sustain. 2025, 100267. doi: 10.1016/j.geosus.2025.100267
Prăvălie, R. (2021). Exploring the multiple land degradation pathways across the planet. Earth-Sci. Rev. 220, 103689. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103689
Seddon, N., Chausson, A., Berry, P., Girardin, C., Smith, A., and Turner, B. (2020). Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philos. Trans. R. Soc B 375, 20190120. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0120
UNCCD (2015). Land degradation neutrality: resilience at the land degradation neutrality target setting programme (Bonn: United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification).
Keywords: climate change, ecological restoration, ecosystem service, land degradation neutrality (LDN), nature-based solution
Citation: Hua T, Han Y, Yu Y, Inácio M and Pereira P (2026) Editorial: Integrating nature-based solutions for land degradation neutrality and deriving co-benefits. Front. Plant Sci. 17:1766472. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2026.1766472
Received: 12 December 2025; Accepted: 13 January 2026; Revised: 13 January 2026;
Published: 29 January 2026.
Edited and reviewed by:
Lucian Copolovici, Aurel Vlaicu University of Arad, RomaniaCopyright © 2026 Hua, Han, Yu, Inácio and Pereira. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Ting Hua, aHVhdGluZ2NuQDEyNi5jb20=