Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Review synthesizes two decades of evidence on stubble burning’s environmental impacts, highlighting policy challenges and pathways.
Stubble burning represents a critical global environmental issue, with pronounced impacts in intensive agricultural regions, including India and China. This review synthesizes evidence from 613 peer‐reviewed articles (2000–2024), systematically analyzed via the PRISMA framework, to address four interconnected research themes: (i) the evolution of global research trends and scientific collaboration in stubble burning studies; (ii) the synergistic interactions of biomass‐derived pollutants including nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, and particulate matter and their combined effects on air quality and ecosystem health; (iii) the identification and categorization of ecosystem disservices across provisioning, regulating, supporting, and cultural dimensions; and (iv) the evaluation of governance mechanisms, policy instruments, and international cooperation for mitigating socio‐environmental impacts. Bibliometric analysis reveals a sharp increase in research output after 2015, with a strong thematic focus on emission quantification, pollution characterization, and mitigation technologies. Findings indicate that pollutant interactions significantly exacerbate air quality deterioration, contribute to transboundary haze, and impair soil and water systems. Ecosystem disservices include substantial nutrient loss, soil organic carbon depletion, biodiversity decline, and severe public health consequences. Although diverse policy responses exist, their effectiveness is frequently limited by enforcement gaps, financial constraints, and inadequate access to sustainable residue management alternatives. The study concludes that transformative mitigation requires integrated, multi‐sectoral governance frameworks, farmer‐centric economic incentives, and enhanced international collaboration, aligned strategically with Sustainable Development Goals 3 (Good Health), 13 (Climate Action), and 15 (Life on Land).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dutta et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: