There are no mitigation/sequestration practices that are universally applicable and effective in reducing greenhouse gases, (GHG) emissions in the land sector. Each agricultural system and associated land management practice needs to take into account climatic and edaphic parameters, current and historical patterns of land use and management, as well as their potential to create negative Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) impacts elsewhere. Change in land management leading to increased carbon in soil or vegetation must be continued indefinitely to maintain the increased stock of soil organic carbon.

Conversion of agricultural land to woody vegetation will remove carbon from atmospheric CO₂. However, carbon farming, if not implemented carefully, can create dis-benefits such as increased land clearing, monoculture plantations replacing biodiverse remnants and unintended off-site impacts. Where conversion to woody vegetation results in a loss of agricultural land, it is often only considered to be a positive carbon sequestration activity suited to surplus agricultural land or land that is of marginal productivity.

Increased productivity on existing agricultural land could avoid ILUC impacts such as deforestation and its attendant emissions. However, as the carbon and nitrogen cycles are linked, increasing productivity through increasing inputs can inadvertently lead to increased emissions of the more problematic (GHG), methane and nitrous oxide.

Where opportunities exist for carbon sequestration on agricultural land, establishing new forests, grasslands or perennial shrubs, including perennial biofuel crops, on land of limited agricultural value is commonly cited as one of the better options for implementing a carbon sequestration program. Such areas would have minimal impact on food production, avoiding ILUC and could include:

• Polluted soils affected by past industrial activity
• Salt-affected soils
• Steep land with a large erosion and landslip risk
• Land that has become degraded for other reasons.

Maintaining and enhancing carbon stored in tidal marshes, mangroves, and seagrass beds, (blue carbon) is may be more economical than terrestrial carbon sequestration activities.