“…Comparing all three datasets (scores, raw indicator value and Pearson's correlation-based assessments) reveals potential negative trade-offs within the case studies from a nutrient management perspective; conflicting with generic claims that agroecological systems can foster improvements in soil quality (Reganold and Wachter, 2016), most of the systems assessed faced considerable surpluses or deficits with regard to N and/or P and K. The N surplus on most of the sites is in-line with a recent meta-analysis of nutrient budgets for agroecological farming systems (Reimer et al 2020). This surplus could relate to poor synchronicity between N supply and demand in lowinput systems relying on biological N fixation (the AF case studies in UK, DK and PL relied heavily on N fixation through clover and lucerne leys) as this can make the efficient supply and utilisation of N more difficult than a system relying on readily available N sources through manufactured fertiliser (Smith et al, 2016). Low crop yields in the year of the assessment could have also contributed, as 2017-2018 was a particularly dry and warm year, particularly southern / south-eastern parts of Europe (C3S, 2021).…”