Groundwater Protection Legislation in Slovenia: Theory and Practice

As an EU member, Slovenia implemented the Water Framework Directive (WFD) guidelines into national legislation quite successfully, but in many parts of the country, groundwater is still under threat, mainly from nitrate. The problematic areas, as is the case in many other EU countries, are mostly shallow-soiled alluvial plains. Their groundwater is the country’s biggest source of drinking water, but at the same time, the fertile soil on their flat surface is considered to be the most suitable for agricultural activities. We are aiming to provide an overview of groundwater protection practices in Slovenia. To evaluate the “theory,” we will take a close look at the national legislation concerning the subject. From the “practical” perspective, we will research what guidelines and solutions were drawn from legislation to comply with WFD objectives. Furthermore, we will also discuss the current activities aimed at improving Slovenia’s groundwater status

Economic Impacts of the Establishment of Alternative Water Retention Habitats on the Agricultural Holdings

The municipal spatial plan of the city of Ljubljana determined the location for the expansion of the Ljubljana Regional Waste Management Centre. The environmental condition for the expansion is the establishment of alternative water retention habitats (267.1 ha) on the northern edge of the Ljubljana Marsh. The study aimed to analyze possible mitigation measures for agriculture due to the envisaged changes in land use. The plan envisaged a change in the use of conventional agricultural land, overgrowth vegetation and forest for extensive grassland (172 ha), forest (86 ha), and water surfaces (8.9 ha). Results indicate that the income from subsidy payments will be higher due to establishing additional wetland meadows (28 ha) in the currently overgrown areas. The intervention will decrease the value of the crop produce (−61 to −71%) and thus the farm revenue (−34 to −43%). However, variable costs are lower due to the expected extensive land use. A larger area of protected habitats on agricultural land returns lower variable costs (−60 to −69), a positive balance of gross margin for the total area (+5 to +15%), and a lower gross margin per hectare of agricultural land (−4 to −12%), and thus the income of most agricultural holdings

Modelling Impact of Adjusted Agricultural Practices on Nitrogen Leaching to Groundwater

The aim of the research was to determine how changes in the management of agricultural land (cultivation techniques, fertilisation, type of crop and crop rotation) influence on the leaching of nitrogen from the soil profile. Research was conducted in the Drava River plain in Slovenia. The impact of 31 different scenarios of potential change in agricultural land management was evaluated using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model. The research was located on the shallow aquifer with alluvial bedrock composite from carbonate and silicate layers, which is the main source of drinking water in the area. The results of the SWAT model version 2009 showed that with the constant climate and land management technology, the magnitude of nitrogen leaching from the soil profile is mainly influenced by soil properties. The most drastic effect on the increase of nitrogen leaching showed vegetable production technology, followed by cereals (corn, wheat and barley). Vegetable production even in ecological production by Slovenian standards can result in similar leaching potential as conventional farming, due to unfavourable conditions originating from soil properties (shallow soil profile). Effects of grassland production may lead to 76–98% reduction in nitrogen loss from soil profile in comparison to current practices

Modelling Agri‐Environmental Measures for Minimizing Soil Erosion While Protecting Valuable Agricultural Land

Erosion processes in river basins and the consequent transport of sediment and sediment‐bound pollutants to reservoirs cause hydromorphological changes and eutrophication, as well as the loss of reservoir storage capacity. This chapter deals with the optimal selection and implementation of agri‐environmental measures in river basins to reduce sediment yield and load. The main aim of this was to contribute to more efficient river basin management by minimizing soil erosion, while protecting valuable agricultural land. This includes implementing measures at the most critical source areas, where they are most effective and necessary. The river Ledava basin was selected as the study area. It covers an area of 105 km2 in northeast Slovenia and southeast Austria. The results of monitoring the river Ledava discharge reveal that the average annual concentration of sediment in the water body exceeded the recommended value of 25 mg/l by 46.7%. Using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), we were able to determine critical source areas and simulate the effects of eight different agri‐environmental scenarios on sediment yield reduction. The results show that critical source areas comprise 12% of the river basin. Most of the scenarios reduced sediment load in the river Ledava where steeper slopes in the sub‐basin prevail and where high average annual sediment transport from hydrologic response units (HRUs) has been identified. The impact of the scenarios on the average annual sediment load (ton/year) in the river was lower than for the sediment yield (ton/ha) at the HRU level

Perspectives of Hydrologic Modeling in Agricultural Research

For decades agricultural research was done in the field or laboratories, but with the rise of computer science, hydrologic modeling became another essential tool for environmental impact studies. Many types of models can be used, each with its strengths and weaknesses in terms of accuracy, speed, and amount of input data needed. Models can be used on different scales and simulate very different processes. Based on a literature review, APEX (Agricultural Policy Extender) and SWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) models are the most popular for environmental research in agronomy. An important share of modeling work in agronomic studies is focused on pollution research, mainly nutrient and pesticide leaching and soil erosion processes. Other topics include simulating the effects of irrigation and other agricultural practices and studying the impact of extreme weather events and climate change. When working with model results, it is crucial to be mindful of inevitable uncertainties and consider them during interpretation. Modeling is gaining importance in agronomic research in Slovenia, with many studies done in the recent decade and more underway

Urban Gardening: From Cost Avoidance to Profit Making — Example from Ljubljana, Slovenia

In this study, we compare two economic models of urban gardening in Ljubljana, Slovenia. First is an avoided costs model (ACM) and the second one is a business model (BM). Comparison is made to exemplify the main economic differences between the two models. The difference is that producers under the BM sell surplus products, which is not the case under the ACM. The main aim of this study is to present an analysis of the phenomenon of urban gardening as a BM for small family home or allotment gardens. The survey was performed through Internet questionnaires and in some cases also with on-site interviews. Totally 127 urban gardeners from Ljubljana municipality participated in the research. The average ACM urban gardeners had on 1 m2 revenue of 4.86 EUR/m2, costs of 1.48 EUR/m2 and gross margin (savings) of 3.38 EUR/m2. Altogether, ACM brings savings of approximately 462.7 EUR per average size garden (136.69 m2) or 203 EUR per median size garden (60 m2) to the average gardener. The average BM gardener sold to the wholesale company approximately 107.0 kg of vegetables per year from 32.48 m2 of production area for an average retail price of 1.46 EUR/kg and earning revenue of 156.44 EUR/year. Costs were approximately 21.27 EUR/year. Therefore, the gross margin or earning from surpluses sold was approximately 135.17 EUR/year for the average BM gardener, which was 4.29 EUR/m2 or 1.26 EUR/kg of produce. The study offers evidence that the ACM can be upgraded with the BM. For example, if a family of two retired members have an average garden of 136 m2, they can produce vegetables for four people. Consequent surpluses for two family members can be sold for extra money. The BM should be more promoted among urban gardeners as it can offer additional income and in certain cases, when a hobby becomes a profession, also a full-time job

The economic performance of urban gardening in three European cities – examples from Ljubljana, Milan and London

Urban gardening is not a new phenomenon but it has received considerably more practical and academic interest in recent years. Studies on economic aspects such as crop yields, inputs and outputs of production, productivity, gross margins and the contribution to home economics are rare, especially in Europe. While urban gardening plays an important role in the Global South, its role in Western Europe for food productivity and home eco- nomics is currently under-researched. The aim of this study is to analyse European urban gardeners\u2019 economic performance and self-sufficiency on a household level, as well as to reach a better understanding of their con- tribution to food self-provision and food security in the metropolitan areas. In a study carried out in 2014 with on-site personal and with online questionnaires participated 180 urban gardeners from three case study cities (Ljubljana, Milan, and London). Results from the economic analysis showed that although for most urban gar- deners, profit is not their main motivation, the economic calculation shows that productivity in small urban plots can be comparable to market garden production. Urban gardeners are saving money, especially when, compared to retail prices for regular produce or organic produce, their input is included in the gross margin calculation. We conclude that, in the case-study cities, the self-provisional potential of urban gardeners\u2019 households to ade- quately cover the annual vegetable need of five-a-day servings can be met under three conditions: (1) sufficient garden size; (2) increased area productivity, and (3) sufficient labour-hour inputs

How to enhance the role of science in European Union policy making and implementation: The case of agricultural impacts on drinking water quality

Throughout the European Union (EU), high concentrations of nitrates and pesticides are among the major polluting components of drinking water and have potential long-term impacts on the environment and human health. Many research projects co-funded by the European Commission have been carried out, but the results often do not influence policy making and implementation to the extent that is duly justified. This paper assesses several issues and barriers that weaken the role of science in EU policy making and EU policy implementation in the case of agricultural impacts on drinking water quality. It then proposes improvements and solutions to strengthen the role of science in this process. The analysis is conceptual but supported empirically by a desk study, a workshop, and complementary individual interviews, mostly with representatives of organizations working at the EU level. The results indicate that perceived barriers are mostly observed on the national or regional level and are connected with a lack of political will, scarce instruction on the legislation implementation process, and a lack of funding opportunities for science to be included in policy making and further EU policy implementation. In response to that, we suggest translating scientific knowledge on technological, practical or environmental changes and using dissemination techniques for specific audiences and in local languages. Further, the relationship between data, information and decision making needs to change by implementing monitoring in real-time, which will allow for the quick adaptation of strategies. In addition, we suggest project clustering (science, policy, stakeholders, and citizens) to make science and research more connected to current policy challenges and stakeholder needs along with citizen involvement with an aim of establishing sustainable long-term relationships and communication flows.</p