Sérgio Lousada1,2,3,4,5,6*- 1Department of Civil Engineering and Geology (DECG), Faculty of Exact Sciences and Engineering (FCEE), University of Madeira (UMa), Funchal, Portugal
- 2CITUR—Madeira—Research Centre for Tourism Development and Innovation, Funchal, Madeira, Portugal
- 3VALORIZA—Research Centre for Endogenous Resource Valorization, Polytechnic Institute of Portalegre (IPP), Portalegre, Portugal
- 4Research Group on Environment and Spatial Planning (MAOT), University of Extremadura, Badajoz, Spain
- 5RISCO—Civil Engineering Department of the University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal
- 6OSEAN—Outermost Regions Sustainable Ecosystem for Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Funchal, Portugal
Editorial on the Research Topic
The sustainable management of land systems
1 Introduction
The sustainable management of land systems is central to addressing some of the most pressing global challenges of our time, including climate change, food security, biodiversity loss, and sustainable urbanization (Abduljabbar et al., 2025; Jayawardana et al., 2025; Juarez-Quispe et al., 2025). Land systems—defined as intertwined socio-ecological networks shaped by land use, governance, biophysical characteristics, and institutional arrangements—are impacted by and drive environmental and social change (Babli et al., 2025; Xiao et al., 2025). As such, their management plays a pivotal role in achieving multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), from zero hunger (SDG 2) and clean water (SDG 6) to climate action (SDG 13) and life on land (SDG 15) (Lambin and Meyfroidt, 2010; United Nations, 2025).
Land systems are inherently dynamic and multifaceted due to the intricate relationships that exist between ecological processes, human activities, economic demands, and policy frameworks (Pissourios et al., 2025; Wei S. et al., 2025). Whether due to urbanization, agricultural growth, infrastructure development, or deforestation, changes in land cover and land use have profound effects that cut across administrative and spatial borders (Huang and Lin, 2025; Min et al., 2025; Wei L. et al., 2025). These changes lead to habitat fragmentation, resource depletion, land degradation, and social injustices in many areas, necessitating integrated, place-based, and adaptive management approaches (Baldi et al., 2013; Loures et al., 2019; Naranjo Gómez et al., 2020).
Recognizing the need to better understand and guide these transformations, the Research Topic “The Sustainable Management of Land Systems” was launched to provide a platform for interdisciplinary research focused on identifying pathways, tools, and governance mechanisms that promote sustainability in land systems (Hashed et al., 2025; Ishiwatari et al., 2025; Zhao X. et al., 2025). This Research Topic sought to attract contributions from across disciplines, including geography, ecology, environmental engineering, agriculture, urban planning, remote sensing, economics, and social sciences, as well as from different world regions and institutional contexts (Matuk and Calka, 2025; Wang X. et al., 2025; Zhou et al., 2025).
This editorial synthesizes and reflects upon the findings of the 24 peer-reviewed articles published in this Research Topic. These contributions cover a wide range of case studies, conceptual analyses, and methodological approaches applied to various land-related issues, such as trade-offs between ecosystem services, interactions between urban and rural areas, neutrality of land degradation, stakeholder engagement, and the incorporation of technological innovations such as remote sensing, GIS, and modeling tools. These articles highlight the global significance of sustainable land system governance by representing geographic diversity across Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
By organizing the contributions thematically, this editorial aims to highlight not only the scientific advances made but also the broader insights into policy, planning, and practice. We begin by examining how the published works contribute to key thematic areas—such as ecosystem restoration, sustainable agriculture, urban dynamics, and land-use modeling—and conclude by identifying common lessons, ongoing gaps, and opportunities for future research and action.
2 Insights from research: the sustainable management of land systems
The articles published in the Research Topic The Sustainable Management of Land Systems offer a comprehensive overview of how diverse regions and disciplines address the challenge of managing land systems in a sustainable way. These 24 contributions employed a broad range of methodologies—from spatial modeling and ecological assessment to stakeholder surveys and optimization tools—to explore land use change, ecosystem services, agricultural sustainability, urban expansion, and land degradation. Despite their diversity, these studies collectively emphasized the need for integrated and adaptive land management approaches informed by both scientific evidence and socio-cultural realities.
Several studies applied spatially explicit modeling techniques to assess ecosystem functions and land-use dynamics under different scenarios. For instance, articles based in China (e.g., the Min River Basin, the Yangtze River Economic Belt, and Huize County) used tools such as PLUS, InVEST, and the Human Footprint Index to evaluate habitat quality, ecological security, and karst desertification over time. These models allow researchers to compare future land-use trajectories under competing policy scenarios, thereby supporting decision-makers in selecting pathways that prioritize ecological integrity and long-term sustainability. Their findings underscore the potential of integrated simulation frameworks for large-scale land planning and restoration. Embedding ecosystem services into planning processes is essential to ensure holistic outcomes, as highlighted in previous research (Alves et al., 2022, 2024; Li W. et al., 2025; Zhang K. et al., 2025).
Agricultural land systems also featured prominently, with research addressing both the biophysical and socio-economic dimensions of sustainability (Diogo et al., 2025; Morán-Alonso et al., 2025; Rabelo et al., 2023). A study on wheat cultivation evaluated nitrogen fertilizer optimization as a pathway to reduce carbon emissions across different regions of China, revealing significant regional disparities in efficiency (Guo et al., 2025; Wang and Su, 2025; Xu et al., 2025). Another long-term experiment with maize-based systems highlighted the benefits of Integrated Soil-Crop System Management in enhancing yields while maintaining soil health (Gui et al., 2025; Koumaki et al., 2025; Oldoni et al., 2025). Studies conducted in tropical settings, including Benin and Latin America, proposed indicators to assess and redesign silvopastoral systems and smallholder strategies (Culqui et al., 2025; dos Santos et al., 2025; Morales-Ruiz et al., 2025). These findings align with agroecological principles that emphasize the need for agricultural systems to be both productive and regenerative, while accounting for environmental boundaries and social contexts (Gopalsamy, 2017; Gonçalves, 2020; Silva et al., 2021).
A number of contributions focused on land-use change and scenario simulation to inform policy under uncertainty (Li C. et al., 2025; Zhao R. et al., 2025; Zou et al., 2025). Articles simulating spatial development in the Yellow River Basin, Henan Province, and resource-based cities showed that ecological protection scenarios outperform economic development ones in terms of sustainability metrics. These studies support the growing consensus that scenario-based planning, when combined with stakeholder engagement, can illuminate trade-offs and synergies in complex land systems (Baldi et al., 2013; Ruzgiene et al., 2025). Similarly, studies using green land use efficiency models and ecosystem service valuations highlighted the role of education, infrastructure, and land governance in mediating regional differences in sustainability outcomes (Chen et al., 2025; Cui et al., 2025; Gong et al., 2025).
Urbanization and infrastructure development emerged as significant drivers of land system transformation, particularly in rapidly growing regions of Asia and Africa. Research on railway corridors in China and urban expansion in Ethiopia revealed alarming rates of cropland loss, spatial fragmentation, and ecological degradation that often outpace the ability of planning institutions to respond effectively (Feng et al., 2025; Song et al., 2025a; Zhang Q. et al., 2025). These patterns mirror global trends of urban sprawl and raise concerns about the future of food security and ecosystem health in peri-urban zones (Li X. et al., 2025; Wang et al., 2025; Yu J. et al., 2025). In response, some articles developed spatial frameworks—such as production-living-ecological space models—to support land-use integration and conflict mitigation in urbanizing regions (Liu J. et al., 2025; Liu S. et al., 2025; Sarfo et al., 2025).
The issue of land degradation neutrality (LDN) was addressed through case studies in Ukraine and mining-affected regions, where authors proposed land reclamation strategies based on industrial backfill and ecosystem service mapping (Ford-Learner et al., 2025; Song et al., 2025b; Zhong et al., 2025). These efforts illustrate how degraded lands can be reintegrated into productive landscapes when supported by appropriate policies and technologies, contributing to the goals of the UNCCD and LDN targets (Liao et al., 2025; Martínez-Valderrama et al., 2025; Nandi et al., 2025). Other studies analyzed trade-offs among ecosystem services in tea-growing areas, showing that forested landscapes provide higher ecological value and multifunctionality than intensive agricultural systems (Castillo-Díaz et al., 2025; Wang et al., 2024; Wang Z. et al., 2025).
Finally, a subset of articles explored the integration of technology and cultural perception in shaping land governance (Liu and Zhu, 2025; Rahmawati et al., 2025; Yang, 2025). The use of fuzzy analytic hierarchy processes (FAHP), remote sensing, and carbon accounting models demonstrated how advanced tools can support sustainable land-use decision-making (Moberg, 2025; Weerasinghe et al., 2025). However, one article cautioned that cultural diversity and psychological factors also influence land-use choices, suggesting the need for participatory tools that recognize local values and mental models. In Kazakhstan, remote sensing was used to assess pasture degradation, revealing that human activities are often more significant drivers of change than climatic variability—an insight echoed in global assessments of land degradation (Amin and Romshoo, 2024; Peng et al., 2025; Yu Z. et al., 2025).
Across these contributions, a few recurring themes emerge: the value of interdisciplinary approaches; the necessity of linking local knowledge with technical tools; and the critical role of policy in translating science into practice. Collectively, these 24 articles provide a compelling narrative about the challenges and opportunities of land system management. They demonstrate that while tools and models are important, achieving sustainability ultimately depends on aligning ecological goals with social equity, institutional capacity, and long-term vision.
3 Final remarks
The 24 articles published under the Research Topic The Sustainable Management of Land Systems illustrate the complexity and urgency of guiding land use decisions in a changing world. Together, these studies reveal that land systems are not merely physical spaces subject to human intervention, but socio-ecological systems shaped by historical trajectories, institutional arrangements, cultural values, and environmental constraints. Their sustainability depends not only on technical and scientific innovation but also on governance, participation, and contextual adaptation.
Several key insights emerge from the collective body of work. First, land system sustainability requires a strong integration of ecological processes, socio-economic conditions, and technological capabilities. Studies that employed spatial simulation tools, ecosystem service modeling, and scenario planning proved especially useful in projecting land-use outcomes and exploring trade-offs. Such tools are most effective when combined with local knowledge and stakeholder participation, ensuring that land use strategies are both scientifically sound and socially legitimate (Baldi et al., 2013; Jukneliene et al., 2021).
Second, the challenge of land degradation, whether driven by climate stress, intensive agriculture, or extractive industries, remains a global concern. However, the contributions from countries such as Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and China demonstrate that restoration and adaptive reuse of degraded land are possible with the right policy support and innovative land management approaches (Secretariat, 2018). The transition from reactive to proactive land governance—one that anticipates degradation and builds resilience—is increasingly seen as a priority in both policy and research communities (Alves et al., 2023; Zulkifli et al., 2015).
Third, agriculture continues to be a central element in sustainable land systems. The emphasis on integrated soil-crop systems, silvopastoral designs, and regionally optimized fertilization highlights a shift toward farming practices that balance productivity with long-term ecological viability. These findings resonate with the principles of agroecology and regenerative agriculture, which advocate for systems that enhance soil health, sequester carbon, and support biodiversity (Côte et al., 2022; Gliessman, 2014).
Urbanization, another recurring theme, illustrates the spatial and institutional tensions in land management. The rapid conversion of agricultural land to urban uses, especially in peri-urban zones, threatens food security and ecological connectivity. Planning tools such as production-living-ecological space (PLES) models and urban ecological security frameworks, featured in several contributions, provide important mechanisms for mediating competing demands in complex urban landscapes. However, their effectiveness relies heavily on integrated governance and intersectoral coordination—areas that remain weak in many regions (Angel et al., 2011).
Finally, many of the articles reaffirm that land systems cannot be managed in isolation from cultural, institutional, and psychological factors. The influence of community values, governance structures, and cognitive biases in shaping land-use decisions suggests that participatory, inclusive, and culturally sensitive approaches are essential. Land use transitions are rarely linear or purely rational; they are often the result of negotiations, power asymmetries, and contested meanings of sustainability (Alves et al., 2023; Lambin and Meyfroidt, 2011).
In sum, this Research Topic advances both the theoretical understanding and practical approaches to land system sustainability. It highlights the value of interdisciplinary and cross-scalar research, the need for robust decision-support tools, and the centrality of adaptive governance. As land pressures intensify due to climate change, population growth, and globalized markets, the path forward lies in cultivating land systems that are not only efficient and productive but also equitable, inclusive, and resilient.
We hope that this collection of studies serves as both a reference and an inspiration for future research, policy development, and collaborative action aimed at securing the long-term sustainability of land systems around the world.
Author contributions
SL: Visualization, Formal analysis, Project administration, Resources, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Methodology, Supervision, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Conceptualization.
Acknowledgments
The author express their gratitude to the reviewers for their valuable recommendations, which were taken into account and helped significantly improve the quality of this manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
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
Abduljabbar, R., Dia, H., and Liyanage, S. (2025). Machine learning traffic flow prediction models for smart and sustainable traffic management. Infrastructures 10:155. doi: 10.3390/infrastructures10070155
Alves, R., Lousada, S., Cabezas, J., and Gómez, J. M. N. (2022). The importance of the strategic urban rehabilitation plan in the sustainable development of the municipality of Machico. Sustainability 14:24. doi: 10.3390/su142416816
Alves, R., Lousada, S., Cabezas, J., and Gómez, J. M. N. (2023). Local housing strategy: analysis of importance and implementation in Machico Municipality, Madeira. Land 12:9. doi: 10.3390/land12091778
Alves, R., Lousada, S., Naranjo Gómez, J. M., and Cabezas, J. (2024). Maintenance challenges in maritime environments and the impact on urban mobility: Machico Stayed Bridge. Infrastructures 9:10. doi: 10.3390/infrastructures9100180
Amin, M., and Romshoo, S. A. (2024). Assessment and monitoring of land degradation indicators and processes using a geospatial approach. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 11:20. doi: 10.1007/s40808-024-02262-2
Angel, S., Parent, J., and Blei, A. (2011). Making Room for a Planet of Cities Making Room for a Planet of Cities. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Babli, M., Gebhard, T., and Brucherseifer, E. (2025). Open data-driven reconstruction of power distribution grid: a land use-based approach. Electronics 14:1414. doi: 10.3390/electronics14071414
Baldi, G., Verón, S. R., and Jobbágy, E. G. (2013). The imprint of humans on landscape patterns and vegetation functioning in the dry subtropics. Glob. Chang. Biol. 19, 441–458. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12060
Castillo-Díaz, F. J., Belmonte-Ureña, L. J., Martín-Navarro, C., and Camacho-Ferre, F. (2025). Balancing agricultural sustainability and conservation: strategies for resource intensive systems in Spain and beyond. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 60:e03633. doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2025.e03633
Chen, Y., Ge, H., and Chen, M. (2025). What drives urban land green use efficiency in China: a global meta-frontier Malmquist Index approach. Ecol. Indic. 175:113550. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113550
Côte, F. X., Rapidel, B., Sourisseau, J. M., Affholder, F., Andrieu, N., Bessou, C., et al. (2022). Levers for the agroecological transition of tropical agriculture. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 42:67. doi: 10.1007/s13593-022-00799-z
Cui, H., Cheng, L., Zheng, Y., Wang, J., Zhu, M., and Zhang, P. (2025). Analysis of the dynamic changes and driving mechanism of land green utilization efficiency in the context of Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei synergistic development. Land 14:222. doi: 10.3390/land14020222
Culqui, L., Huaman-Pilco, A. F., Pariente, E., Quilcate Pérez, P. A., Leiva Tafur, D., Juarez-Contreras, L., et al. (2025). Influence of the tree species on soil parameters and carbon sequestration in silvopastoral systems, Molinopampa district, Amazonas region, Peru. Trees Forests People 19:100748. doi: 10.1016/j.tfp.2024.100748
Diogo, V., Williams, T. G., Debonne, N., Levers, C., Herzog, F., Bürgi, M., et al. (2025). Developing an agricultural futures framework to explore the option space for agricultural change in Europe under alternative value perspectives. Sustain. Sci. doi: 10.1007/s11625-024-01612-4
dos Santos, F. C., Karvatte Junior, N., de Almeida, R. G., de Albuquerque Filho, M. R., Vilela, L., Castro, R. V. O., et al. (2025). Intensification of pasture-based livestock systems: environmental benefits, forage availability, nutritional value and Nellore cattle performance. Agrofor. Syst. 99:80. doi: 10.1007/s10457-025-01177-w
Feng, L., Sun, J., Zhai, T., Miao, M., and Yu, G. (2025). Planning for cultural connectivity: modeling and strategic use of architectural heritage corridors in Heilongjiang Province, China. Buildings 15:1970. doi: 10.3390/buildings15121970
Ford-Learner, M. A., Addison, J., and Cumming, G. S. (2025). A review of ecosystem service supply in tropical marine ecosystems and its relationship to habitats in the Great Barrier Reef. Ecosyst. People 21:2425816. doi: 10.1080/26395916.2024.2425816
Gliessman, S. R. (2014). Agroecology: The Ecology of Sustainable Food Systems, 3rd Edn. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. doi: 10.1201/b17881
Gonçalves, L. B. (2020). Análise teórico-prática do risco de cheias no Arquipélago da Madeira: O caso de estudo dos Concelhos do Funchal, Machico, Ribeira Brava e São Vicente. Available online at: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.13/2991
Gong, X., Zhang, Y., Ren, J., Chen, Y., Wang, K., and He, R. (2025). Ecological response of green spaces to land use change in the Mu Us Desert-Loess Plateau transition zone, China, since the twenty-first century. Environ. Monit. Assess. 197:435. doi: 10.1007/s10661-025-13906-w
Gopalsamy, P. (Ed.). (2017). Agroecology, Ecosystems & Sustainability in the Tropics. Delhhi: Studera press.
Gui, D., Zhang, K., and Sha, Z. (2025). Response of reactive nitrogen losses and nitrogen fate in the soil-crop system to intercropping regimes. Field Crops Res. 326:109870. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2025.109870
Guo, J., Qi, Y., Luo, J., Du, G., Sun, J., Wei, X., et al. (2025). Carbon emission status and regional differences of China: high-resolution estimation of spatially explicit carbon emissions at the prefecture level. Land 14:291. doi: 10.3390/land14020291
Hashed, A. A., Almaqtari, F. A., Elmashtawy, A., and Raweh, N. A. M. (2025). The role of governance audit mechanisms on environmental sustainability and emissions in Saudi Arabia under ESG regulations. Sustainability 17:4020. doi: 10.3390/su17094020
Huang, S., and Lin, Y. (2025). research on high-quality urbanization development and optimization pathways based on the coupling coordination perspective of “population–land–economy–environment”: a case study of Jiangsu Province, China. Land 14:435. doi: 10.3390/land14020435
Ishiwatari, M., Nagata, K., and Matsubayashi, M. (2025). Evolution of water governance for climate resilience: lessons from Japan's experience. Water 17:893. doi: 10.3390/w17060893
Jayawardana, J., Sandanayake, M., Jayasinghe, J. a. S. C., Kulatunga, A. K., and Zhang, G. (2025). Sustainability drivers and sustainable development goals-based indicator system for prefabricated construction adoption—a case of developing economies. Buildings 15:1037. doi: 10.3390/buildings15071037
Juarez-Quispe, J., Rojas-Chura, E., Espinoza Vigil, A. J., Guillén Málaga, M. S., Yabar-Ardiles, O., Anco-Valdivia, J., et al. (2025). Advancing sustainable infrastructure management: insights from system dynamics. Buildings 15:210. doi: 10.3390/buildings15020210
Jukneliene, D., Kazanavičiute, V., Valčiukiene, J., Atkocevičiene, V., and Mozgeris, G. (2021). Spatiotemporal patterns of land-use changes in Lithuania. Land 10:6. doi: 10.3390/land10060619
Koumaki, E., Konomi, A., Gkotsis, G., Nika, M.-C., Seintos, T., Statiris, E., et al. (2025). Circular water management in agriculture: screening of contaminants of emerging concern in a real-world water-soil-crop system and human health risk assessment. J. Hazard. Mater. 492:138167. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2025.138167
Lambin, E. F., and Meyfroidt, P. (2010). Land use transitions: socio-ecological feedback versus socio-economic change. Land Use Policy 27, 108–118. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.09.003
Lambin, E. F., and Meyfroidt, P. (2011). Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 108, 3465–3472. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1100480108
Li, C., Wu, Y., Qiu, B., Li, Y., Ning, L., Wang, H., et al. (2025). Study on dynamic changes in land use and ecosystem service value in the Huaihe River ecological economic belt based on multi-scenario simulations. Front. Environ. Sci. 13:1617829. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2025.1617829
Li, W., Jing, W., Tian, Y., and Deng, N. (2025). prediction and trade-off analysis of forest ecological service in hunan province on explainable deep learning. Forests 16:604. doi: 10.3390/f16040604
Li, X., Yu, K., Xu, G., Li, P., Li, Z., Shi, P., et al. (2025). Quantifying thresholds of key drivers for ecosystem health in large-scale river basins: a case study of the upper and middle Yellow River. J. Environ. Manage. 383:125480. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.125480
Liao, W., Wei, Y., and Wei, Z. (2025). Exploring innovative assessment and driving mechanisms for achieving land degradation neutrality in rocky desertification areas: a case study of Yunnan–Guangxi–Guizhou, China. Ecol. Inform. 90:103310. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2025.103310
Liu, J., Li, Y., Bai, H., Shang, K., Deng, Y., and Mao, J. (2025). Transformative aspects of agricultural modernization and its land use requirements: Insights from Chinese case studies. Land 14:352. doi: 10.3390/land14020352
Liu, J., and Zhu, J. (2025). Contested rent-based urban governance: land rent dissipation and redistribution under scalar politics in China. Land Use Policy 157:107692. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2025.107692
Liu, S., Rong, J., Zhou, C., Gao, Y., and Xing, L. (2025). Temporal heterogeneity in land use effects on urban rail transit ridership—case of Beijing, China. Land 14:665. doi: 10.3390/land14040665
Loures, L., Castanho, R. A., Gómez, J. M. N., Lousada, S. A., Fernández-Pozo, L., Cabezas, J., et al. (2019). Impactos socioculturais da cooperação transfronteiriça (CT) no Espaço Europeu. Fronteira 8:3. doi: 10.21664/2238-8869.2019v8i3.p292-312
Martínez-Valderrama, J., Valencia, J. A. P., Awad, T., Álvarez, A. J., Oliva, R. M., Cintas, J., et al. (2025). Toward resilient implementation of land degradation neutrality via systemic approaches. Systems 13:408. doi: 10.3390/systems13060408
Matuk, O., and Calka, B. (2025). Consolidating the polish land use cadastral register with the Austrian and German systems: an extension of the polish cadastre model towards sustainable land management. Sustainability 17:5783. doi: 10.3390/su17135783
Min, X., Liu, J., Liu, Y., Zhou, J., and Zhao, J. (2025). Coupling patterns between urbanization and the water environment: a case study of Neijiang City, Sichuan Province, China. Sustainability 17:6993. doi: 10.3390/su17156993
Moberg, K. R. (2025). Limits to local democracy in practice? The case of governing sustainable land use in Norwegian municipalities. Land Use Policy 152:107505. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2025.107505
Morales-Ruiz, D. E., Villanueva-López, G., Casanova-Lugo, F., Venegas-Venegas, J. A., Pinto-Ruiz, R., Guevara-Hernández, F., et al. (2025). Silvopastoral systems reduce soil CO2 emissions, enhance carbon stocks, and regulate the micro-environment in tropical grazing lands. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 393:109844. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2025.109844
Morán-Alonso, N., Viedma-Guiard, A., Simón-Rojo, M., and Córdoba-Hernández, R. (2025). Agricultural land suitability analysis for land use planning: the case of the Madrid Region. Land 14:134. doi: 10.3390/land14010134
Nandi, S., Das, S., Gorain, S., Dutta, S., Roy Choudhury, M., and Das, S. (2025). Land degradation neutrality: a pathway to achieving sustainable development goals and ecosystem resilience. Discov. Soil 2:48. doi: 10.1007/s44378-025-00078-9
Naranjo Gómez, J. M., Lousada, S., Garrido Velarde, J. G., Castanho, R. A., and Loures, L. (2020). Land-use changes in the canary archipelago using the CORINE data: a retrospective analysis. Land 9:232. doi: 10.3390/land9070232
Oldoni, H., Magalhães, P. S. G., Oliveira, A. L. G., Lima, J. P., Figueiredo, G. K. D. A., Moro, E., et al. (2025). Management zones delineation: a proposal to overcome the crop-pasture rotation challenge. Precis. Agric. 26:21. doi: 10.1007/s11119-024-10214-0
Peng, Y., Wu, Z., Shi, X., Tian, Y., and Zhang, R. (2025). Diagnosis of land degradation and analysis of its spatiotemporal evolution in the Jinghe River Basin, Xinjiang. Ecol. Indic. 171:113210. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113210
Pissourios, I., Gemenetzi, G., and Husár, M. (2025). A critical review of the implementation of the Seveso III directive in the framework of land-use planning: a comparative study of Greece, Cyprus, and Slovakia. Land 14:1194. doi: 10.3390/land14061194
Rabelo, M. C., Tonini, M., and Silvestri, N. (2023). Dynamics of agricultural land systems in western Mediterranean areas: a clustering approach based on the self-organizing map. Ital. J. Agron. 18:2199. doi: 10.4081/ija.2023.2199
Rahmawati, D., Samsura, D. A. A., and Krabben, E. van der. (2025). From policy to practice: how public land policies shape private-sector housing development—an indonesian case. Land 14:916. doi: 10.3390/land14050916
Ruzgiene, B., Kukliene, L., Kuklys, I., Jankauskiene, D., and Lousada, S. (2025). The use of kinematic photogrammetry and LiDAR for reconstruction of a unique object with extreme topography: a case study of Dutchman's Cap, Baltic seacoast, Lithuania. Front. Remote Sens. 6:1397513. doi: 10.3389/frsen.2025.1397513
Sarfo, A. K., Doe, B., and Oduro, C. Y. (2025). Harmonizing sustainability and planning: a novel perspective on sustainable land use planning for sustainable community development. Environ. Dev. Sustain. doi: 10.1007/s10668-025-06176-6
Secretariat (2018). Assessment Report on Land Degradation and Restoration | IPBES secretariat. Available online at: https://www.ipbes.net/node/28328 (Accessed January 6, 2025).
Silva, A., Gonçalves, L., Moura, A., Lousada, S., Gouveia, J., and Camacho, R. (2021). Flood hazard assessment in Madeira (Portugal) – the case Study of Machico. Am. J. Water Sci. Eng. 7:1. doi: 10.11648/j.ajwse.20210701.11
Song, C., Ding, Y., Fu, Y., and Liu, J. (2025a). International transport corridors and the growth of China's environmental goods exports: evidence from the china–europe railway express. China World Econ. 33, 98–137. doi: 10.1111/cwe.12578
Song, C., Lim, C.-H., Choi, H.-A., Kim, W., Han, D., Paia, M. T., et al. (2025b). Mapping ecosystem services based on citizen science for integrated coastal zone management in the Solomon Islands. Ecol. Inform. 88:103142. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2025.103142
United Nations (2025). Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development | Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Available online at: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda (Accessed January 6, 2025).
Wang, B., Wang, P., He, H., Zorn, C., Guo, W., Wu, J., et al. (2024). Livestock–cropland re-coupling and intensive farming: Strategies for enhancing greenhouse gas mitigation and eco-efficiency in wheat–maize production in North China Plain. Environ. Res. Lett. 20:014032. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/ad98a9
Wang, L., and Su, X. (2025). Carbon reduction decision-making in the supply chain considering carbon allowances and bidirectional option trading mode of carbon emission rights. Energy Rep. 13, 2678–2696. doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2025.01.077
Wang, X., Wang, M., Gong, L., and Yu, C. (2025). Understanding the rise and fall of rural specialty agriculture from social–ecological land system perspective: a longitudinal case study in China. Land 14:254. doi: 10.3390/land14020254
Wang, Y., Xue, H., Li, A., Ma, X., Sun, A., and Zhang, J. (2025). Spatial-temporal differentiation and influencing factors of ecosystem health in Three-River-Source national Park. Ecol. Indic. 171:113183. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113183
Wang, Z., Wei, K., Wen, B., You, K., Wang, H., Ye, C., et al. (2025). Research on the allocation level of land for agricultural facilities based on green and high-quality development: a case study of Zhejiang Province. Land 14:672. doi: 10.3390/land14040672
Weerasinghe, O., Hewage, K., Razi, F., Fatmi, M., and Sadiq, R. (2025). Applicability of land-use models for sustainable urban planning: a review. J. Urban Plan. Dev. 151:04025037. doi: 10.1061/JUPDDM.UPENG-5705
Wei, L., Cheng, Y., Wang, Z., Pan, Z., and Qi, G. (2025). Does multidimensional urbanization help reduce environmental pollution?—evidence from three major urban agglomerations in the Yangtze River economic belt. Sustainability 17:1202. doi: 10.3390/su17031202
Wei, S., Huang, J., and Zhang, Z. (2025). The impact of land development rights transfer on urban–rural spatial justice: a case study of Chongqing's Land Quota trading. Land 14:174. doi: 10.3390/land14010174
Xiao, C., Xiong, X., Bu, J., Hu, Z., Zhang, J., Yang, C., et al. (2025). Impact of parent rock and land use on the distribution and enrichment of soil selenium in typical subtropical Karst regions of Southwest China. Appl. Sci. 15:5749. doi: 10.3390/app15105749
Xu, Y., Tan, Y., Zhang, C., Sun, P., Zhang, Y., Ren, J., et al. (2025). Towards privacy-enhanced and robust clustered federated learning. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. 24, 7171–7188. doi: 10.1109/TMC.2025.3547149
Yang, Y. (2025). Politics of rural land acquisition in Africa: the evidence from Chinese agricultural investments in Tanzania and Zambia. J. Rural Stud. 119:103727. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2025.103727
Yu, J., Guo, S., Wang, S., and Luo, Y. (2025). Multi-scenario simulation of land use change and ecosystem health assessment in Chengdu metropolitan area based on SD-PLUS-VORS coupled modeling. Sustainability 17:3202. doi: 10.3390/su17073202
Yu, Z., Deng, X., Cheshmehzangi, A., and Gao, Y. (2025). Assessing future land use demands in response to land degradation risk and socio-economic impacts. Ecol. Indic. 175:113529. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113529
Zhang, K., Sun, X., Zhang, T., Zhang, X., Wang, R., Zheng, P., et al. (2025). The influences of land use and economic policy on main ecosystem services in rural East China. Sustainability 17:1529. doi: 10.3390/su17041529
Zhang, Q., Wen, H., Xia, Z., Zhao, P., and Hou, R. (2025). Goaf-induced deformation along the Chengdu-Kunming high-speed[[Inline Image]] railway and its impact on engineering stability. J. Comput. Methods Sci. Eng. 14727978251346027. doi: 10.1177/14727978251346027
Zhao, R., Kan, H., Xu, H., Chen, C., Zhang, G., Pang, Z., et al. (2025). The effects of multi-scenario land use change on the water conservation in the agro-pastoral ecotone of Northern China: a case study of Bashang Region, Zhangjiakou City. Agriculture 15:1008. doi: 10.3390/agriculture15091008
Zhao, X., Zhang, S., and Lu, F. (2025). The impact of digital environmental governance on green transformation: theoretical mechanism and empirical test from China. Sustainability 17:157. doi: 10.3390/su17010157
Zhong, J., Sun, Q., Qi, W., and Yu, X. (2025). Quantifying and mapping the effects of ecosystem services on agricultural competitiveness: a case study in Shandong Province, China. Chin. Geogr. Sci. 35, 326–342. doi: 10.1007/s11769-024-1485-y
Zhou, B.-B., Liu, J., and Wang, X. (2025). Advancing sustainability through land-related approaches: insights from NRC (1999) and a bold call to action. Land 14:756. doi: 10.3390/land14040756
Zou, B., Fan, C., Li, J., Wang, M., Liao, Y., and Zhou, X. (2025). Assessing the impact of land use changes on urban heat risk under different development scenarios: a case study of Guangzhou in China. Sustain. Cities Soc. 130:106532. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2025.106532
Keywords: biodiversity conservation and restoration, ecosystem services and valuation, land-use change and its impacts, land-use planning and spatial analysis, urban land management and green infrastructure
Citation: Lousada S (2025) Editorial: The sustainable management of land systems. Front. Sustain. Resour. Manag. 4:1676634. doi: 10.3389/fsrma.2025.1676634
Received: 30 July 2025; Accepted: 04 September 2025;
Published: 19 September 2025.
Edited and reviewed by: Jinyan Zhan, Beijing Normal University, China
Copyright © 2025 Lousada. 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: Sérgio Lousada, c2xvdXNhZGFAc3RhZmYudW1hLnB0