Transforming Crop Residue Waste into Sustainable Resources: Innovative Pathways for Enhancing Agricultural Productivity and Environmental Health
Published 2025-03-30
Keywords
- Cropping System,
- Crop Residue Burning,
- Bioenergy Production,
- Soil Health,
- Sustainable Alternatives
- Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
- Agricultural Waste Management ...More
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Advanced Research and Interdisciplinary Scientific Endeavours

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Abstract
Crop residue burning, especially of wheat and rice, is a common farming activity with serious environmental and health impacts. Crop stubble is usually burned by farmers to rapidly prepare land for the next crop season, emitting toxic pollutants, such as GHGs like carbon dioxide and methane, and particulate matter that causes air pollution. This practice also exhausts soil fertility by killing organic matter and vital microbes, causing long-term degradation of farmland. This review article discusses sustainable options to crop residue burning, emphasizing environmentally friendly and economically sound options. Some of the major alternatives are bioenergy production, in which crop residues are processed into biofuels or biochar, yielding renewable energy and mitigating GHG emissions. Composting crop residues into organic manure enhances soil fertility, increases water holding capacity, and reduces chemical fertilizer application. Mulching, covering the soil with crop residues, saves moisture, suppresses erosion, and manages weeds. Industrial applications are also mentioned in the paper, including residue conversion into biodegradable paper and packaging, animal feed, and fuel briquettes or pellets for village energy. Innovations in technology, such as the Happy Seeder and Super Straw Management System (SMS), provide no-burn options where seeds can be planted without burning the residue, helping to conserve the soil. While the advantages exist, adoption is limited by financial constraints, limited infrastructure, and limited awareness among farmers. The review recommends policy measures, incentives by the government, and education programs to promote extensive use of such alternatives.