Shared Research Questions On Soil Quality In Organic Farming Systems

"In 2018, a participatory national workshop was organized by ITAB (Organic Food and Farming Technical Institute) and INRA (National Institute for Agricultural Research) in order to highlight issues on soils in Organic Farming (OF) systems. The objectives were: i) to identify the key research questions to be addressed on soils in OF, ii) to make it possible to facilitate network and project building from interactions between academics and stakeholders.Over 150 participants from academic and professional origins attended the workshop which was designed according to The Town Hall Meeting (THM) methodology.High level discussions among participants and panel experts ended up with a list of 20 research questions which confirmed the important lack of knowledge on that topic and the needs for research on the following issues: soils functioning with a focus on biogeochemical cycling and biological interactions; long term effects of agricultural practices, more or less specific to OF; soils protection; tools for soils diagnosis and management.

Sustainable intensification in the production of grass and forage crops in the Low Countries of north-west Europe

Production of grass and fodder crops in areas under intensive production systems in the Low Countries of north-west Europe faces a number of threats related to increased regulations, scarcity of land and restricted freedom of use of the land, and from climate change. Grassland-based farmers are pushed to do more with less, i.e., to improve eco-efficiency, and this requires "more knowledge per ha." This article argues that progress in variety breeding, the application of crop rotation instead of monocultures, a proper use of catch crops, ley-arable farming and overall good management offer realistic opportunities to cope with current threats. A large capacity for mechanization also allows improvement of net yields per ha. This article highlights that progress in plant breeding has compensated for yield declines caused by nutrient-input restrictions in forage maize (Zea mays L.). Both forage maize and grass-clover can take advantages of ley-arable farming, and crop rotation provides an insurance against the effects of low-yielding years and a buffer for reduced nutrient inputs

Management, regulation and environmental impacts of nitrogen fertilization in northwestern Europe under the Nitrates Directive; a benchmark study

Implementation of the Nitrates Directive (NiD) and its environmental impacts were compared for member states in the northwest of the European Union (Ireland, United Kingdom, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, Northern France and Germany). The main sources of data were national reports for the third reporting period for the NiD (2004–2007) and results of the MITERRA-EUROPE model. Implementation of the NiD in the considered member states is fairly comparable regarding restrictions for where and when to apply fertilizer and manure, but very different regarding application limits for N fertilization. Issues of concern and improvement of the implementation of the NiD are accounting for the fertilizer value of nitrogen in manure, and relating application limits for total nitrogen (N) to potential crop yield and N removal. The most significant environmental effect of the implementation of the NiD since 1995 is a major contribution to the decrease of the soil N balance (N surplus), particularly in Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. This decrease is accompanied by a modest decrease of nitrate concentrations since 2000 in fresh surface waters in most countries. This decrease is less prominent for groundwater in view of delayed response of nitrate in deep aquifers. In spite of improved fertilization practices, the southeast of the Netherlands, the Flemish Region and Brittany remain to be regions of major concern in view of a combination of a high nitrogen surplus, high leaching fractions to groundwater and tenacious exceedance of the water quality standards. On average the gross N balance in 2008 for the seven member states in EUROSTAT and in national reports was about 20 kg N ha<sup>−1</sup> yr<sup>−1</sup> lower than by MITERRA. The major cause is higher estimates of N removal in national reports which can amount to more than 50 kg N ha<sup>−1</sup> yr<sup>−1</sup>. Differences between procedures in member states to assess nitrogen balances and water quality and a lack of cross-boundary policy evaluations are handicaps when benchmarking the effectiveness of the NiD. This provides a challenge for the European Commission and its member states, as the NiD remains an important piece of legislation for protecting drinking water quality in regions with many private or small public production facilities and controlling aquatic eutrophication from agricultural sources

Foisonnement de l'innovation agricole : quelques exemples d'initiatives en élevage herbivore

Les témoignages rassemblés pour illustrer le foisonnement des innovations agricoles émanent d'acteurs différents (agriculteurs, recherche, développement) mais sont tous caractérisés par des approches plutôt systémiques et des dynamiques de co-conception. Les thèmes abordés concernent la production (valorisation des surfaces avec des cultures dérobées, sélection d'espèce prairiales locales), l'appropriation de résultats de recherche (amélioration de la gestion des prairies), la conception d'itinéraires techniques (solutions pour limiter les pertes d'azote en rotation prairie - prairie), l'évaluation de systèmes (repérer des pratiques innovantes en mobilisant des principes de l'agroécologie) mais aussi l'amélioration des conditions de travail et la formation (communication « intergénérationnelle » entre des paysans herbagers et des élèves)

Les flux d'azote en élevage de ruminants

L'élevage transforme l'azote des végétaux en produits animaux et en rejette une partie sous forme de déjections, qui peuvent être utilisées comme engrais. Toutefois le développement des productions animales a conduit dans certains territoires à une concentration des apports et rejets d'azote, et une pollution des eaux, du sol et de l'atmosphère. Cette problématique est traitée depuis une vingtaine d'années par les politiques européennes. Que sait-on aujourd'hui de la dynamique des flux d'azote issus des élevages ? Quelles sont les pistes et les échelles pertinentes d'action pour réduire les émissions et leurs impacts sur l'environnement tout en préservant la compétitivité des productions animales ? Ces questions ont motivé de la part des ministères en charge de l'Agriculture et de l'Ecologie, au printemps 2010, une demande d'expertise scientifique collective auprès de l'INRA pour disposer d'un bilan des connaissances sur les différents flux d'azote associés aux activités d'élevage. Nous relatons ici les éléments majeurs concernant l'élevage des ruminants

ProPIG - Organic pig health, welfare and environmental impact across Europe

Organic production is perceived by consumers as being superior in animal welfare and sustainability and the demand for organic pork products is slowly increasing. Within the past ten years a variety of husbandry and management systems have been developed across the EU, ranging from farms with pigs outdoors all year round using local breeds to farms with housed pigs having concrete outside runs and using conventional breeds (CorePIG, Rousing et al, 2011). So far, mainly clinical parameters have been used to describe the health situation on organic pig farms, identifying some key problems, such as weaning diarrhoea and piglet mortality. Organic pig production is - amongst others - characterised through a holistic approach based on the EU Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 and the IFOAM principles: ‘health, ecology, fairness and care’. This clearly states that health is more than absence of clinical symptoms and, the relation between animals and their environment is identified: ‘Health’ is defined as ‘the wholeness and integrity of living systems. It is not simply the absence of illness, but the maintenance of physical, mental, social and ecological well-being’ (IFOAM; 2006). Concepts of animal welfare include physical and mental welfare as well as the concept of naturalness (Fraser 2003), which is often interpreted as the ability to perform natural behaviour. Verhoog et al (2003) describe three main approaches within organic agriculture’s concept of nature and naturalness: the no-chemicals approach, the agro-ecology approach and the integrity approach. Applying those concepts to organic pig production can highlight potential conflicts: outdoor systems are perceived as the optimal housing system for pigs, as they allow natural behaviour such as rooting. However, this behaviour can cause damage to the grass cover and furthermore the manure fate in outdoor areas needs to be considered. A few studies on outdoor pig production have shown a clear N and P surplus and a high degree of distribution heterogeneity in outdoor areas, increasing the risk of N and P losses (Watson et al. 2003). Robust and competitive organic pig production needs to encompass low environmental impacts and good animal health and welfare. So far few studies have quantified both aspects in different pig husbandry systems. In addition, the theory that improving animal health and welfare reduces environmental impacts through decreased medicine use, improved growth rate and feed conversion efficiency has still to be verified. The aim of the CoreOrganic2 project ProPIG (2011-2014; carried out in eight European countries) is to examine the relationship between health, welfare and environmental impact. On-farm assessment protocols will be carried out on 75 farms in three pig husbandry systems (outdoor, partly outdoor, indoor with concrete outside run). Environmental impact will be assessed using both Life Cycle Assessment and calculations of nutrient balances at farm and outdoor area level. Animal health and welfare will be evaluated from animal based parameters including clinical and selected behavioural parameters. Results will be fed back and used by the farmers to decide farm specific goals and strategies to achieve these goals. As an outcome, all farms will create their individual health, welfare and environmental plan, which will be reviewed after one year to allow continuous development. This will provide the opportunity not only to investigate, but also improve the influence of organic pig farming systems on animal welfare and environmental impact. This fulfils the fourth IFOAM principle of care: ‘Organic Agriculture should be managed in a precautionary and responsible manner to protect the health and well-being of current and future generations and the environment’ (IFOAM, 2006)