Kettle holes are small water bodies of glacial origin which mostly occur in agricultural landscapes. They provide numerous ecosystem services (ES), but their supply may be negatively affected by agricultural management. We conducted a literature review to identify which ES are supplied by kettle holes and to analyze feedbacks with agricultural management. Taking Germany as a test case, we also analyzed how kettle holes are addressed in policy documents and for which ES they are regulated. This was done to identify the societal value officially associated with kettle holes. The literature review found eight ES attributed to kettle holes, of which hydrological cycle and flood control, chemical condition of freshwaters, nursery populations and habitats and biotic remediation of wastes were addressed most often. In contrast, only the provision of habitat service was addressed in German policy documents related to kettle holes. We identified types of agricultural management that negatively affected the supply of ES by kettle holes, in particular artificial drainage, high levels of pesticide and fertilizer application, and management where tillage and erosion result in elevated sediment inputs. Additionally, climate change may lead to an increased drying up of kettle holes. Based on our finding, we conclude that the intensity of agricultural management around kettle holes threatens the supply of all ES while only the service of providing habitats for biodiversity is addressed in German policy regulations. Further regulation is required to induce agricultural management change towards a conservation of all ES supplied by kettle holes.

Soil degradation threatens agricultural production and soil multifunctionality. Efforts for private and public governance are increasingly emerging to leverage sustainable soil management. They require consensus across science, policy, and practice about what sustainable soil management entails. Such agreement does not yet exist to a sufficient extent in agronomic terms; what is lacking is a concise list of soil management measures that enjoy broad support among all stakeholders, and evidence on the question what hampers their implementation by farmers. We therefore screened stakeholder documents from public governance institutions, nongovernmental organizations, the agricultural industry, and conventional and organic farmer associations for recommendations related to agricultural soil management in Germany. Out of 46 recommended measures in total, we compiled a shortlist of the seven most consensual ones: (1) structural landscape elements, (2) organic fertilization, (3) diversified crop rotation, (4) permanent soil cover, (5) conservation tillage, (6) reduced soil loads, and (7) optimized timing of wheeling. Together, these measures support all agricultural soil functions, and address all major soil threats except soil contamination. Implementation barriers were identified with the aid of an online survey among farmers (n = 78). Results showed that a vast majority of farmers (> 80%) approved of all measures. Barriers were mostly considered to be economic and in some cases technological, while missing knowledge or other factors were less relevant. Barriers were stronger for those measures that cannot be implemented in isolation, but require a systemic diversification of the production system. This is especially the case for measures that are simultaneously beneficial to many soil functions (measures 2, 3, and 4). Results confirm the need for a diversification of the agricultural system in order to meet challenges of food security and climate change. The shortlist presents the first integrative compilation of sustainable soil management measures supporting the design of effective public or private governance.