Editorial: Nature-based solutions for managing soil erosion and enhancing soil stability

Soil erosion and shallow slope instabilities continue to challenge forest, rangeland, and multi-use landscapes worldwide (Xiong and Leng, 2024;DiBiagio et al., 2024;Yosef et al., 2025). Beyond the direct loss of soil, these processes disrupt hydrological regulation, compromise infrastructure stability, degrade downstream water quality, and reduce long-term land productivity (Tao et al., 2023;Flores et al., 2020;Roy, 2023;Martin et al., 2020). As climate extremes intensify and landuse pressures increase, the frequency and magnitude of these destabilizing processes are expected to rise, amplifying risks across coupled ecological and socio-economic systems. This escalating exposure highlights the need for strategies that enhance the intrinsic stabilizing capacity of landscapes rather than relying exclusively on hard-engineering solutions (Phillips et al., 20223).In this regard, Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) provide a compelling framework, using vegetation, soils, and natural materials to diminish erosion risks and strengthen slope resilience (Deljouei et al., 2023).Yet despite their growing prominence, NBS are frequently discussed as collections of individual techniques rather than as integrated systems (Lei and Saeed, 2024). In practice, components such as vegetation-based reinforcement (Deljouei et al., 2020;Bordoni et al., 2026), biodegradable materials (Song et al., 2022;Shalchian and Arabani, 2023), soil diagnostics (Bouzouidja et al., 2021;Calfapietra et al., 2025), stand management (Rodrigues et al., 2021;Ma et al., 2022), and governance mechanisms (Martin et al., 2021) are typically addressed separately within their respective disciplines. Such compartmentalized evaluation obscures the interdependencies among these components. Durable erosion control depends on the coordinated interaction of ecological processes, structural configuration, material performance, monitoring systems, and institutional continuity.Recognizing these limitations, this Research Topic seeks to move beyond technique-specific discussions and instead frame NBSs as coordinated socio-ecological systems operating across scales. Rather than providing an exhaustive review of the broader literature, this Editorial synthesizes the conceptual threads that connect the included contributions and situates them within the broader challenge of implementing erosion-oriented NBS under intensifying climatic and landuse pressures. Building on this integrative perspective, this Research Topic brings together contributions that demonstrate how stabilization processes operate across interacting spatial and institutional scales. Although the studies differ in spatial scope and methodological focusranging from root-soil interactions (Marzini et al., 2025) to natural-fiber geotextiles (Holanda et al., 2025), mineral indicators of soil development (Zhang et al., 2025), stand structural effects on soil condition (Luo et al., 2025), and national-scale erosion governance strategies (Teku and Derbib, 2025)-their findings converge on a central conclusion: soil stability emerges from the alignment of biophysical mechanisms and socio-institutional frameworks rather than from isolated technical interventions.At the scale of plant-soil interaction, Marzini et al. (2025) examine how root-system architecture governs slope stabilization processes. By jointly evaluating root area ratio (RAR) and saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks), they show that dense and well-distributed root networks enhance both infiltration capacity and subsurface mechanical reinforcement in forested slopes of Italy and Switzerland. Hydraulic performance declines with depth and distance from tree stems, demonstrating that root distribution actively regulates subsurface water movement rather than merely reflecting stand structure. This mechanistic linkage positions vegetation as a controllable design component in stabilization planning, since configuring root architecture can influence runoff redistribution and reduce shallow landslide susceptibility. However, root-mediated reinforcement operates under the hydrological conditions established at the soil surface. Before rainfall reaches the ground, a portion is intercepted by leaves, branches, and litter layers (Sadeghi et al., 2020;Sadeghi et al., 2026)-meaning it is temporarily stored or evaporated within the canopy-thereby altering both the amount and the intensity of water delivered to the soil. By reducing raindrop kinetic energy, delaying throughfall timing, and preserving litter structure (Levia et al., 2011;Sadeghi et al., 2020;Sadeghi et al., 2024), interception moderates splash erosion and controls the initial phase of runoff generation. These changes directly affect infiltration patterns and subsurface flow redistribution (Friesen, 2020), thereby influencing the effectiveness of root reinforcement (Kong et al., 2025). In this way, canopy interception and root architecture function as coupled controls over slope hydrology, regulating both water input at the surface and its redistribution belowground. This vertical coupling is not confined to slope-stabilization contexts. A study conducted in a virgin old-growth forest used as a structural benchmark (Azaryan et al., 2026), integrating canopy structure, understory composition, soil physical properties, and root traits, likewise demonstrates how vertically organized forest components jointly regulate soil moisture redistribution and structural soil condition. Together, these findings reinforce the need to evaluate forest systems as vertically integrated ecological strata rather than as isolated functional components.Extending the stabilization framework beyond biological controls, Holanda et al. (2025) examine another dimension of NBS performance: material durability. Their evaluation of natural-fiber geotextiles derived from Syagrus coronata demonstrates that treatment intensity critically influences strength retention under field exposure. A single waterproofing-resin application sustained fiber performance for 120 days, while untreated materials degraded rapidly and doubletreated fibers became brittle. These results show that the structural reliability of biodegradable materials depends not only on ecological compatibility but also on their temporal performance under environmental stress. Accordingly, biodegradable geotextiles must be aligned with rainfall regimes (de Souza Batista et al., 2024) and vegetation establishment timelines (Álvarez-Mozos et al., 2014) to remain effective during critical stabilization windows.While material durability determines whether structural interventions persist, effective implementation also requires reliable monitoring of soil condition over time. Zhang et al. (2025) address this need by introducing magnetic susceptibility (χlf) as a diagnostic indicator of soil development and iron-oxide transformations in humid forest systems. Variations in χlf reflect changes in nutrient status and soil structural stability, providing a rapid and non-destructive monitoring tool for assessing soil condition. Such indicators enhance the feedback loop between intervention and evaluation, particularly in heterogeneous landscapes where repeated soil sampling is logistically challenging (Ouallali et al., 2025). By strengthening monitoring capacity, these tools support adaptive management and enable earlier detection of soil degradation before visible erosion occurs.Moving from subsurface and material controls to forest-scale configuration, Luo et al. (2025) examine how stand structure influences soil condition. They demonstrated that canopy openness, stand density, and understory composition directly shape soil physical and chemical properties.Their findings show that moderately dense stands with healthier understories tend to support more favorable soil conditions, suggesting that structural complexity contributes to soil resilience. This reinforces a central silviculture principle: stand structure is not merely a determinant of timber yield or species composition, but a management lever capable of strengthening soil stability and mitigating erosion (Hakimi et al., 2018). When stand-level decisions are explicitly aligned with soil-health objectives, silvicultural interventions can function as proactive components of watershed protection (Hawthorne et al., 2013). Stand management thus represents a bridge between ecological processes and landscape-scale stabilization outcomes.At the broadest spatial scale, stabilization outcomes are shaped not only by ecological design but also by institutional structure. Teku and Derbib (2025) therefore highlight the necessity of coupling technical interventions with governance frameworks, policy alignment, and community participation. Their systematic review of 129 studies from the highly erosion-prone Ethiopian Highlands shows that physical measures such as terracing, agroforestry, and stone bunds are most effective when embedded within supportive local institutions and long-term stewardship arrangements. Their synthesis makes clear that NBS implementation cannot rely on technical soundness alone; durable erosion-control outcomes depend on coherence among engineering design, local land-tenure systems, and governance capacity. In many contexts, these institutional conditions ultimately determine whether technically robust interventions persist or fail over time.By situating stabilization within governance and land-tenure systems, this contribution links slopescale ecological processes-such as root reinforcement, canopy-mediated rainfall partitioning, material durability, and soil monitoring-to institutional arrangements. These arrangements ultimately determine whether such interventions are maintained and remain effective over time.Across the articles included in this Research Topic (Luo et al., 2025;Tekua dn Derbib, 2025;Holanda et al., 2025;Zhang et al., 2025;Marzini et al., 2025;), several shared scientific patterns emerge. Vegetation characteristics-particularly root-system architecture and canopy-mediated rainfall regulation-function as measurable design variables that influence both hydraulic redistribution and mechanical soil reinforcement. Structural elements, including biodegradable materials and stand configuration, determine whether stabilization measures retain functional integrity under field conditions. Monitoring tools, such as soil diagnostic indicators, provide the feedback necessary to evaluate performance and guide adaptive management. Finally, institutional coherence and long-term stewardship determine whether technically robust interventions persist beyond initial implementation.Future research should therefore prioritize long-term performance assessment under intensifying climate variability, advance integrative models that couple biophysical measurements with socioinstitutional datasets, and develop standardized performance metrics for evaluating stabilization outcomes across eco-regions. Advancing these directions will strengthen both scientific understanding and the practical implementation of integrated stabilization systems.Taken across scales, the contributions define a stabilization continuum extending from root-scale ecological processes to institutional governance. Marzini et al. (2025) analyze root-mediated reinforcement at fine spatial resolution, whereas Teku and Derbib (2025) evaluate institutional arrangements at national scales. The linkage between these levels is functional rather than merely conceptual: biophysical stabilization processes depend on sustained long-term land-use continuity, while governance frameworks must account for the ecological mechanistic that underpin slope resilience. Despite their complementarity, common constraints emerge. Most analyses rely on short-to medium-term field observations, limiting insight into long-term system performance under intensifying climate variability. Geographic specificity constrains immediate transferability across eco-regions. Moreover, integration between socio-economic datasets and biophysical measurements remains partial. Addressing these limitations will require interdisciplinary models that explicitly couple ecological reinforcement processes with institutional decision-making frameworks.On this basis, erosion-oriented NBS can be conceptualized as a multi-layer stabilization framework composed of four interdependent component:(1) a biophysical reinforcement layer (canopy processes, litter layers, soil structure, and roots),(2) a structural and material layer (stand configuration, and geotextile performance),(3) a monitoring layer (soil diagnostics and mineral indicators), and(4) an institutional layer (policy coherence, tenure systems, and stewardship capacity).Durable soil stability depends on the coordinated integration of these layers, such that biophysical reinforcement, structural interventions, monitoring systems, and governance arrangements function in mutual support rather than as isolated components.For practitioners and land managers, the findings synthesized in this Research Topic suggest that NBSs should be designed and evaluated as coordinated systems rather than as isolated interventions. Vegetation selection must be based on measurable root density, rooting depth distribution, root tensile strength, and hydraulic influence rather than solely on species availability or aesthetic criteria. Stand density and canopy structure should be intentionally managed to regulate canopy rainfall partitioning, particularly in erosion-prone slopes and infrastructure corridors. Biodegradable geotextiles and stabilization blankets must be selected and treated according to projected rainfall intensity, exposure duration, slope gradients, and the anticipated vegetation establishment timelines, ensuring that material degradation does not precede biological reinforcement. Monitoring programs should include repeatable soil diagnostic indicators capable of detecting early declines in soil structure or hydrological performance-such as infiltration capacity, bulk density, or soil cohesion-before visible erosion occurs.At the institutional and policy scale, effective implementation requires integrating stabilization planning with land-tenure clarity, long-term maintenance responsibilities, and secured multi-year funding mechanisms. Technical installations such as terracing, agroforestry systems, or slope plantings should be embedded within governance structures that guarantee continuity beyond initial project cycles. Agencies and local authorities should align engineering design standards with ecological performance metrics. Project approval and post-implementation audits should therefore require measurable indicators such as infiltration capacity, vegetation cover persistence, and soil stability. Cross-sector coordination among forestry departments, watershed managers, infrastructure planners, and community organizations is essential to prevent fragmentation of responsibilities. Durable erosion control through NBSs depends on sustained operational alignment between ecological processes, performance monitoring, and institutional accountability.