Soil & Water Res., 2023, 18(1):1-15 | DOI: 10.17221/141/2022-SWR

Soil quality assessment using SAS (Soil Assessment System)Original Paper

Daniel Toth1, Jaroslava Janků ORCID...2, Adéla Marie Marhoul2, Josef Kozák2, Mansoor Maitah3, Jan Jehlička4, Lukáš Řeháček2, Richard Přikryl2, Tomáš Herza5, Jan Vopravil6, David Kincl6, Tomáš Khel6
1 Department of Economics, University College of Business in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
2 Department of Soil Science and Soil Protection, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
3 Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
4 Department of Environmental Geosciences, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, the Czech Republic
5 Hydrosoft Veleslavín, Limited Liability Company, Prague, Czech Republic
6 Research Institute for Soil and Water Conservation, Prague, Czech Republic

The paper proposes a new soil evaluation system using the principle of the Saaty method. The Saaty method has been modified and named Soil Assessment System (SAS). Significance weights are assigned to individual soil characteristics (indicators). This provides a more detailed differentiation of the significance of the indicator on soil quality and a more accurate assessment, especially in marginal cases where the assessment by the methods used so far has not been fully conclusive. In addition to physico-chemical properties, other criteria are taken into account to assess not only productional but also non-productional functions. The possibility of using indicators referring to a broader context (e.g., soil sealing value) is also important, thus enabling a comprehensive assessment of the quality of the land. This results in points for individual sampling locations. Soils are categorized according to the number of points and results are shown on maps.

Keywords: Saaty method; SAS - Soil Assessment System; soil ecosystem services; soil protection; soil quality indicators; soil quality scoring

Published: February 8, 2023  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Toth D, Janků J, Marhoul AM, Kozák J, Maitah M, Jehlička J, et al.. Soil quality assessment using SAS (Soil Assessment System). Soil & Water Res. 2023;18(1):1-15. doi: 10.17221/141/2022-SWR.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Bastian O., Haase D., Grunevald K. (2012): Ecosystem prop- erties, potentials and services - The EPPS conceptual framework and an urban application example. Ecological Indicators, 21: 7-16. Go to original source...
    2. Bünemann E.K., Bongiorno G., Bai Z., Creamer R.E., Deyn G.D., de Goede R., Fleskens L., Geissen V., Kuyper T.W., Mäder P., Pulleman M., Sukkel W., van Groenigen J.W., Brussaard L. (2018): Soil quality - A critical review. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 120: 105-125. Go to original source...
    3. Costanza R., d'Arge R., de Groot R., Farber S., Grasso M., Hannon B., Limburg K., Naeem S., O'Neill R.V., Paruelo J., Gaskin R.G., Sutton P., van den Belt M. (1997): The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387: 253-260. Go to original source...
    4. Dominati E., Patterson M., Mackay A. (2010): A frame- work for classifying and quantifying the natural capital and ecosystem services of soils. Ecological Economics, 69: 1858-1868. Go to original source...
    5. Drobnik T., Greiner L., Keller A., Grêt-Regamey A. (2018): Soil quality indicators - From soil functions to ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators, 94: 151-169. Go to original source...
    6. Frélichová J., Vačkář D., Pártl A., Loučková B., Hamáčková Z.V., Lorencová E. (2014): Integrated assessment of eco- system services in the Czech Republic. Ecosystem Ser- vices, 8: 110-117. Go to original source...
    7. Greiner L., Keller A., Grêt-Regamey A., Papritz A. (2017): Soil function assessment: Review of methods for quan- tifying the contributions of soils to ecosystem services. Land Use Policy, 69: 224-237. Go to original source...
    8. Herrick J.E. (2000): Soil quality: An indicator of sustain- able land management? Applied Soil Ecology, 15: 75-83. Go to original source...
    9. Janků J., Kosánová M., Kozák J., Herza T., Jehlička J., Maitah M., Vopravil J., Němeček K., Toth D., Jacko K., Vácha R., Poláková J. (2022): Using soil quality indicators to assess their production and ecological functions. Soil and Water Research, 17: 45-58. Go to original source...
    10. Karlen D.L., Ditzler C.A., Andrews S.S. (2003): Soil quality: Why and how? Geoderma, 114: 145-156. Go to original source...
    11. Kozák J., Galušková I. (2010): Urban Template 4 (Prague). Prague, Department of Soil Science and Soil Protection, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague.
    12. Kudláč Š., Štefancová V., Majerčák J. (2017): Using the Saaty method and the FMEA method for evaluation of constraints in logistics chain. Procedia Engineering, 187: 749-755. Go to original source...
    13. land. copernicus.eu (2018): Corine Land Cover 2018. Avail- able at https://land.copernicus.eu/pan-european/corine-land-cover/clc2018 (accessed Nov 8, 2021)
    14. Linstone H.A., Turoff M. (1975): The Delphi Method: Tech- niques and Applications. Newark, Addison-Wesley.
    15. McBratney A., Field D.J., Koch A. (2014): The dimensions of soil security. Geoderma, 213: 203-213. Go to original source...
    16. Merrington G. (2006): The development and use of soil quality indicators for assessing the role of soil in en- vironmental interactions. [Science Report SC030265.] Bristol, Environment agency. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/290729/scho0306bkiq-e-e.pdf (accessed Oct 5, 2022)
    17. Němeček J., Mašát K., Džatko M. (1985): System of Point Valuation of Productivity of BPEJ. [Final Report.] Prague, Research Institute for Soil and Water Conservation. (in Czech)
    18. Novák P., Kohel J., Tomiška Z., Zlatušková S. (1995): Meth- odology for Determining the Point Value of the Soil (Task Output). Prague, Research Institute for Soil and Water Conservation: 1-14. (in Czech)
    19. Saaty T.L. (2003): Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary. European Journal of Operational Research, 145: 85-91. Go to original source...
    20. Saaty T.L., Vargas L.G. (2006): Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process: Economic, Political, Social and Technological Applications with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks. New York, Springer.
    21. Sáňka M., Vácha R., Poláková Š., Fiala P. (2018): Criteria for Evaluation of Productive and Ecological Properties of Soils. Prague, Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic. (in Czech)
    22. Šauer P. (2007): The Chapters from Environmental Eco- nomics and Politics Even for Non-economists. Prague, Charles University in Prague, Center for Environmental Issues. (in Czech)
    23. Sojka R.E., Upchurch D.R. (1999): Reservations regarding the soil quality concept. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 63:1039-1054. Go to original source...
    24. Veidemane K. (2019): Contribution of ecosystem services to achievement of the sustainable development goals. Proceedings, 30: 8. Go to original source...
    25. Vogel H.J., Bartke S., Daedlow K., Helming K., Kögel-Knab- ner I., Lang B., Rabot E., Russell D., Stößel B., Weller U., Wiesmeier M., Wollschläger U. (2018): A systemic ap- proach for modeling soil functions. Soil, 4: 83-92. Go to original source...
    26. Wolff G. (2006): Das Bodenschutzkonzept Stuttgart (BOKS). Stuttgart, Amt für Umweltschutz.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content