WP2 Nutrient Management

in Farming Systems
FP7 - INEMAD project kick-off meeting
Ghent, 12.04.2012
 Preface

Why this project, what is the problem?

 the problem of nutrient cycling partly originates from the
specialisation in the primary production sector,

 specialisation happens because the economic aspects dominate the

ecological and social aspects and gaining benefits by the production
of large volume of a product is/was more important that gaining
benefits by producing a wide variety of products,

 mass production of a limited number of commodities at the farm has

been a more successful business strategy than mixed farming where
a wide range of complementary products were produced,

 lack of FP6 and FP7 projects,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 INEMAD is focusing on innovative strategies (1)

 to reconnect crop production and livestock husbandry farming

systems,

 to integrate the new flows of energy and materials inside and outside
the agricultural sector creating options with biomaterial recycling,
greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation,

 to develop new business models where material and energy flows in

the system are reconsidered e.g. recycling,

 holistic, system approach in nutrient management,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 INEMAD is focusing on innovative strategies (2)

 the result is a triangular enlargement of the traditional farming

systems with a processing system. Processing as a third pillar
linked with crop production and animal husbandry will reduce the
external energy input and will close the nutrient cycle (carbon
cycle).
 nutrient recycling can be done by bio- processing and the use of
digestate as fertilizer,

Why to include processing as the 3rd pillar?

 to restore the nutrient cycle,
 to decrease the energy input,
 to connect the flows of nutrients outside the agriculture with
the inside flows in agriculture,
 indirectly to reduce the GHG emission,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Driving principles in nutrient management

 assuring the nutrient balance in the system by nutrient flows

and nutrient cycles,
 concern to the environmental impact due to the unwanted side
effects of fertilization (on soils, weed growth, crop diseases
water and air pollution),
 assuring productivity and sustainability,
 beside the quantitative nutrient management assuring both
quantitative and qualitative aspects + efficiency in the nutrient
management+ economy,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 The NITROGEN cycle and balance in a
mixed farming system

INPUTS OUTPUTS

Feeding
Sold products
65% Plant + Animal
44%
Fertilizer and 26%
manure nitrogen Sold animals
25% recycled or 25%
lost in the
Nitrogen fixing Manure
environment
plants 4%
7%
Nitrogen rainfall
2%
FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 The PHOSPHOR cycle and balance in a
mixed farming system

INPUTS OUTPUTS

Sold products
Feeding Plant + Animal
37%
78% 13%
phosphor Sold animals
Fertilizer and
manure recycled or 37%
lost in the
22% Manure
environment
12%

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 The POTASSIUM cycle and balance in a
mixed farming system

INPUTS OUTPUTS

Sold products
Feeding Plant + Animal
43%
74% 36%
potassium Sold animals
Fertilizer and
manure recycled or 8%
lost in the
26% Manure
environment
12%

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Schematic carbon cycle

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Carbon cycle (2)

 soil organic material content:

• < 5% living organisms,

• < 10% fresh residues,
• 30-50% stabilised organic material,
• 30-50% decomposing organic material,
 the source of organic material are from photosynthesis and
chemosynthesis,

 the transformation of carbon trough anaerobe (fermentation) and

aerobe (respiration) processes due to macro and macro-
organisms,

 the main organic resources are the cellulose, lignins, pectins,

proteins other materials,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 WP2 Objectives

 to analyse the options (strategies) for efficient nutrient management

in different farming systems,
 to analyse the optimal use of new fertilisation alternatives from bio-
processing,
 evaluation of the possibilities to replace the traditional fertilizers (
e.g. by green fertilizers),

The WP2 is divided in 3 subtasks:

Task 2.1: identification and ranking the nutrient management
strategies (practices),

Task 2.2: technical and ecological evaluation of the strategies

(practices),

Task. 2.3: economical and ecological evaluation (trade offs or impact)

of the strategies + social acceptance,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Links with other deliverables

D.2.1 Report with the list of the existing and innovative strategies for
nutrient recycling (month 12),
 Receive inputs from: D.1.2, D. 1.3, D 4.1
 Working in parallel: D.3.2, D.3.2, D.6.5

D.2.2 Report with technical and ecological evaluation of the ranked

management strategies (month 36),
 Receive inputs from: D.1.4, D.4.1, D.4.3, D.4.4, D.5.1
 Working in parallel: D.3.3, D.3.4, D.3.5, D.4.5, D.4.7

D.2.3 Report with economic and ecologic trade offs (impacts) and social
acceptance of the innovative management strategies (month 44),
 Receive inputs from: as the D.2.2 + D.4.6, D.4.8, D.5.2,
 Working in parallel: D.3.7, D.6.4

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Inputs from the WP1

 MFA (material flow analysis- an analytical method of quantifying

flows and stocks of materials or nutrients in the selected agro-
systems) having the aim to describe the existing nutrient
strategies, identify the knowledge gaps in the system, establish the
system boundaries for comparing the different systems,

 indicator toolbox (based on SMART principles) concerning the

assessment of the nutrient and energy efficiency in different
farming systems e.g. carbon balance, NO2 emission,

 the toolbox serve the WP2 and WP3,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Outputs to WP3, WP4, WP5, WP6

 give inputs to the WP4 (exchange of nutrients between farms and

processing units) and WP5 (institutional framework: stakeholder
consultation, elaborating the white paper for recycling policies),

Task 3.1 Inventory of processing strategies,

Task 4.1 Stakeholder consultation (focus group),

Task 4.2 Evaluation of different types of collaboration,

Task 4.4 Optimisation models for blending organic fertilizers,

Task 4.5 Report on the economic and ecologic impact (trade offs),

Task 5.1 Stakeholder workshop,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Selecting the 6 (7) regions for case studies

Task 2.1 Nutrient management strategies (6 country X 5 strategy),

Task 2.3 Economic and ecologic impact + social acceptability of the

nutrient management strategies (focus groups) (6 countries),

Task 3.1 Inventory of processing strategies (6 countries),

Task 4.1 Focus group meetings (7 countries),

Task 5.1 Stakeholder workshop (7 countries),

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Proposed methodology for selecting the
regions and sites

1. select the target area,

2. categorize the main production practices and identify the limiting
factors (boundary analysis),
3. select the representative sites (farms),
4. consultation with the farmers in the selected sites,
5. choose the applicability of MFA toolbox indicators,
6. prepare a farm level nutrient management plan with existing practices,
7. identify the innovative management practices,
8. prepare a farm level nutrient management plan with innovative
practices,
9. identify the economic- ecologic and social sustainability indicators,
10.apply the economic- ecologic and social sustainability indicators,
11.evaluate farmers acceptance by focus groups and stakeholder
meetings,
12.extend the innovative nutrient management practices,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Task 2.1 planned activities (1)

Subtask 2.1.1:  establish the selection criteria of

Inventory of existing
European regions e.g high number of
animals in the North and a low number of
management strategies
animals in Central and South,
for nutrient cycling
 select the 6 regions in Belgium, Bulgaria,
Denmark, Germany, Hungary, The
Netherlands,
 prepare questionnaire on the present and
innovative nutrient practices,
 perform the interviews with stakeholders
in the 6 countries + summarizing the
results to be used in subtask 2.1.2,

Q: one region /country is representative or 5

regions with different practices?

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Task 2.1 planned activities (2)

Subtask 2.1.2  establish the criteria for innovative

Identifying innovative nutrient management practices,
management strategies  proceed identification: based on the
for nutrient cycling results from Subtask 2.1.1 the innovative
practices are identified in the 6 PP
countries,

Subtask 2.1.3  establish the ranking criteria,

Ranking the innovative  proceed the ranking: based on the results
management strategies from Subtask 2.1.2 the innovative
for nutrient cycling practices are ranked (prioritised)

Results: 30 strategies
Responsible partner: AUP
FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Task 2.2 planned activities (1)

Subtask 2.2.1  evaluate: based on the Task 1.1.1, MFA

Technical evaluation and Task 2.1.3 the ranked (prioritised)
of the ranked strategies (practices) are evaluated
strategies according to the nutrient management
practices and farming system,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Subtask 2.2.1 nutrient management practices

FARM BOUNDARIES
 from inside sources (nutrient self sustained),
 from outside sources (nutrient dependent),
MATERIAL INPUTS AND OUTPUTS
 inputs in the plant cropping farms,
 outputs in the plant cropping farms (flowchart and balance),
 inputs in livestock farms,
 outputs in the livestock farms (flowchart and balance),
 inputs in the mixed farms,
 outputs in the mixed farms (flowchart and balance),
NUTRIENT SOURCES
 agricultural,
 non agricultural e.g. industrial and /or rural,
NUTRIENT LOSSES
 economic: reduced profit,
 ecologic: leaching, nitrification, pest and disease, GHG emission,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Subtask 2.2.1 farming systems

PLANT CROPPING FARMS

 conventional, integrated,
 organic,
 with low input energy crops,
 no energy crops,
 location e.g. nitrate sensitive zone,
 size,
LIVESTOCK FARMS
 animal species as dairy cow, beef, pig, poultry e.g. P/N ratio,
 location e.g. close to bio- processing units,
 size,
MIXED FARMS
 plant species for cropping,
 animal species for breeding,
 size,
 location e.g. nitrate sensitive zone,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Notes to subtask 2.2.1

 in the FSS (Farm Structure Survey) 72 types of farming are

identified, having 9 economic sizes in the 140 FADN regions,
 on CORDIS 51 results in farming systems and 15 projects for
nutrient management,
 farm selection according to the closeness to the biomass processing
units and farms having GAP or quality assurance schemes,
 evaluation of the GHG contribution of different nutrient cycling
options,
 establishing the quality performance of the organic input sources
e.g. microbiology,
 beside the material input and output analysis in some cases the
energy input and outputs can be studied e.g. energy used/ha,
energy used /kg product,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Subtask 2.2.1 analysis of the farming systems
PLANT CROPPING FARMS
 use of cover crops,
 use of energy crops in non
food plots,
 using GAP practices,
 precision farming,
 using crop rotation,
 using green fertilizers e.g. bio-
char, compost,
 manure spreading practices
and techniques e.g. injections,
FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
LIVESTOCK FARMS
 feed optimisation, e.g. low
phosphor content feeds,
 housing condition e.g. solid
manure or liquid manure,
 animal health aspects,
 manure treatment (+ additives)
and storage,
 grazing species/in house
species,
 Notes to subtask 2.2.1 (2)

 using bio char produced from agricultural and food wastes could
reduce plants need for nitrogen by 20 –30% while sequestering
carbon that would otherwise end up in the atmosphere,

 carbon binding potential of composting and the use of bio-char to

mitigate the climate change contribute to 1% increase of soil
organic matter in the top 30 cm which is equivalent to 0,968 tons of
atmospheric CO2/ ha capture and storage

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Task 2.2 planned activities (2)

Subtask 2.2.2  proceed identification: based on the

Technical feasible indicator toolbox from Subtask 1.1.3 and
strategies 2.2.1 with link to Subtask 2.3.2 the
technical feasible practices are identified.
This can be different in the selected
regions.

Results: different nutrient management

strategies for plant cropping, livestock
farming and mixed farms having in focus
the possibility of using the green fertilizers
which are performed in WP3 and WP4

Responsible: SOLTUB Ltd.

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Task 2.2 planned activities (3)

Subtask 2.2.3  fill the knowledge gap in the national and

Ecological international literature and improve the
Subtask 1.1.3 (toolbox): the evaluation can
evaluation of the be extended with the PP countries
nutrient system programmes in nutrient management which
can be linked with INEMAD as in Denmark:
Ethical Account for Livestock Farms, Green
accounts, in The Netherlands: Agro-
ecological Indicators, Agricultural
Environmental Label, in France: Agro –
ecological Indicators, in Germany: Regno

 studying the fertilisation guidelines in PP

countries, fertilisation maps + nitrate
sensitive zones and buffer zones+ soil
classification+ aquifer classification,

 link with other FP6 and FP7 project results,

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Task 2.3 planned activities (1)

Subtask 2.3.1  evaluate: costs, yields, prices, inputs in

Economies of scale the selected regions (case studies in
and scope Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany,
Hungary, The Netherlands),

Subtask 2.3.2  perform the analysis: the economical

and ecological impact of the innovative
Analysis of economic- management practices e.g. using green
ecologic trade offs fertilizers in the plant cropping farms
(impact) and mixed farms, pest management,
water quality

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Task 2.3 planned activities (2)

Subtask 2.3.3  interviews: preparing the questions for the

Social acceptability of interviews,
management  organizing the focus groups in the 6
strategies by farmers countries, (Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark,
Germany, Hungary, The Netherlands),
 performing the interviews + summarizing
the results

Results: feasibility study on the economic

aspects of the different nutrition strategies
(possibility to include the green fertilizers
and biomass processed products) and
ecologic aspects of using bio- processed
products
Responsible: ILVO

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 WP2 RTD background

 PP project background e.g. Interreg project DAIRYMAN,

 FP6 projects: 22 projects in farming system e.g. livestock farming
BAT SUPPORT, and 21 projects in nutrient management e.g.
fertigation NAGREF,
 FP7 projects: using farm waste: REFERTIL, FERTIPLUS,
CANTOGETHER, RECOPHOS, farm management: FUTURE FARMS,
NUE CROPS, crops: 4FCROPS, OSCAR, dairy farms: SOLID
 Technology platforms: BIOFUELS, FABRE, GAH, PLANTS, SUSCHEM,
ORGANIC,

Other: International Fertilisation Organisation

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
 Conformance to EU rules

 water management: Directive 2000/60/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the
Community action in the field of water policy,
 soil management: Commission Report on the Thematic Strategy
for Soil Protection COM(2006)231 final and Commission report on
The implementation of the Soil Thematic Strategy and ongoing
activities COM(2012)46 final,
 waste management: Commission Communication on the Thematic
Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste COM(2011)13
final,
 natural resources: Commission Communication on the Thematic
Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources COM(2005)
670 final,
 sustainability: EUROPE 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable
and inclusive growth COM(2010) 2020 final, Roadmap to a Resource
Efficient Europe COM(2011)571 final
 bio-economy: Bio-economy for Europe COM(2012)60

FP7 INEMAD
12.04.2012
Thank you for your attention