Soil Map Density and a Nation’s Wealth and Income

  • Alfred E. Hartemink

Abstract

Little effort has been made to link soil mapping and soil data density to a nation’s welfare. Soil map density in 31 European countries and 44 low and middle income countries is linked to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita and the number of soil scientists per country. National coverage of exploratory soil maps (>1:250 000) is generally higher in the poorest countries and decreases with increasing GDP per capita, whereas the national coverage of detailed soil maps (<1:50 000) tends to increase with increasing GDP. GDP is larger in countries with more soil scientists per unit area, likewise, the number of soil scientists increases with increasing GDP. More soil scientists per ha of agricultural land was found to be related to higher crop yields. Obviously, there are many confounding and interacting factors but this analysis illustrates how proxies for soil map density can be used; it is suggested that appropriate indicators should also be developed for spatial data infrastructures and digital soil maps to demonstrate their effectiveness for society and human welfare.

Keywords

Europe Income Turkey Auger Malaysia 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baveye, P., Jacobson, A.R., Allaire, S.E., Tandarich, J.P. and Bryant, R.B., 2006. Whither goes soil science in the United States and Canada? Soil Science, 171: 501–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bie, S.W. and Beckett, P.H.T., 1970. The costs of soil survey. Soils and Fertilizers, 33: 203–217.Google Scholar
  3. Bie, S.W., Ulph, A. and Beckett, P.H.T., 1973. Calculating the economic benefits of soil survey. Journal of Soil Science, 24: 429–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bui, E.N., 2007. A review of digital soil mapping in Australia. In: P. Lagacherie, A.B. McBratney and M. Voltz (Eds.), Digital soil mapping – an introductory perspective. Developments in Soil Science, Vol. 31. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp. 25–37.Google Scholar
  5. Commission of the European Communities, 1985. Soil map of the European Communities 1: 1000000. Directorate-General for Agriculture Coordination of Agricultural Research. EEC, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  6. Dent, D. and Young, A., 1981. Soil survey and land evaluation. E & FN Spon, London, Melbourne, 278p.Google Scholar
  7. European Soil Bureau Network of the European Commission, 2005. Soil atlas of Europe. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  8. FAO-Unesco, 1981. Soil map of the world, volume V Europe, 1: 5 000 000, Rome.Google Scholar
  9. FAO, 1965. Soil map of Europe, Carte des Sols de L’Europe, Mapa de Suelos de Europa. 6 Map sheets, explanatory text by R. Dudal, R. Tavernier and D. Osmond, Rome.Google Scholar
  10. Giasson, E., van Es, C., van Wambeke, A. and Bryant, R.B., 2000. Assessing the economic value of soil information using decision analysis techniques. Soil Science 165: 971–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Greenland, D.J., 1991. The contributions of soil science to society – past, present, and future. Soil Science 151: 19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hartemink, A.E., 2002. Soil science in tropical and temperate regions – some differences and similarities. Advances in Agronomy 77: 269–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hartemink, A.E. (Editor), 2006a. The future of soil science. IUSS, Wageningen, 165 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Hartemink, A.E., 2006b. Soil maps of Europe. Book review of: Soil Atlas of Europe, by European Soil Bureau Network of the European Commission, 2005. Journal of Environmental Quality 35: 952–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Klingebiel, A.A., 1966. Costs and returns of soil surveys. Soil Conservation 32: 3–6.Google Scholar
  16. Lagacherie, P., McBratney, A.B. and Voltz, M. (Editors), 2006. Digital soil mapping – an introductory perspective. Developments in Soil Science, Vol. 31. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  17. McBratney, A.B., 1992. On variation, uncertainty and informatics in environmental soil management. Australian Journal of Soil Research 30: 913–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McBratney, A.B., Santos, M.L.M. and Minasny, B., 2003. On digital soil mapping. Geoderma 117: 3–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nachtergaele, F.O. and Van Ranst, E., 2003. Qualitative and quantitative aspects of soil databases in tropical countries. In: G. Stoops (Editor), Evolution of tropical soil science: Past and future. Koninklijke Academie voor Overzeese Wetenschappen, Brussels, pp.107–126.Google Scholar
  20. Oldeman, L.R. and van Engelen, V.W.P., 1993. A world soils and terrain digital database (SOTER) – an improved assessment of land resources. Geoderma 60: 309–325.Google Scholar
  21. Sachs, J.D., 2005. The end of poverty – economic possibilities for our time. The Penguin Press, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Stremme, H., 1928. General map of the soils of Europe (Ogolna Mapa Gleb Europy). International Society of Soil Science, Warszawa.Google Scholar
  23. Stremme, H., 1937. International soil map of Europe, 1:2 500 000. Gea Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  24. Stremme, H.E., 1997. Preparation of the collaborative soil maps of Europe, 1927 and 1937. In: D.H. Yaalon and S. Berkowicz (Eds.), History of Soil Science: International Perspectives. Advances in Geoecology. Catena Verlag, Armelgasse 11/35447 Reiskirchen/Germany, pp. 145–158.Google Scholar
  25. van Baren, H., Hartemink, A.E. and Tinker, P.B., 2000. 75 years the International Society of Soil Science. Geoderma 96: 1–18.Google Scholar
  26. Zinck, J.A., 1995. Introduction. In: J.A. Zinck (Ed.), Soil Survey: Perspectives and Strategies for the 21st Century. ITC, Enschede and FAO, Rome, pp. 1–6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alfred E. Hartemink
    • 1
  1. 1.ISRIC – World Soil Information6700 AJ WageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations