A computer-based informal environmental management system for agriculture

Lewis, Kathleen; Bardon, Keith

doi:10.1016/s1364-8152(98)00010-3

Cited by 55 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other systems present indicators that are transformed to a standard scale and often these indicators were based on a combination of practise and farm account data compared with norms for good agricultural practices (GAP). Scaled indicators are reported to promote clearer understanding by farmers (Lewis and Bardon, 1998) but this study provided no supporting evidence for this. The amount of information required to run the systems varied considerably even between systems which were ostensibly using the same indicators.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 56%

Input output accounting systems in the European community—an appraisal of their usefulness in raising awareness of environmental problems

Goodlass

Halberg

Verschuur³

2003

European Journal of Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Input Output Accounting systems (IOAs) can be used to identify farming practices which are not 'environmentally neutral' and thus unlikely to be sustainable in the long term. In an EU sponsored project, European countries were surveyed and over 50 farm level IOAs identified. The subjects covered by the IOAs included nutrients, pesticides, energy, soil/habitat, conservation, wastes (e.g. packaging and tyres) and other items such as veterinary products. Nearly half the IOAs covered more than one subject and nutrient budgets were the most commonly included (91% of the IOAs studied). Looking at the 30 single subject systems, most (26) were nutrients with only three pesticide and one energy based system. In total 50 systems covered nutrients. Overall, where specified, nutrient budgets covered nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) in 13 cases, N and P in 12 cases, N only in nine and P only in four cases. The most common indicators for nutrient budgets were calculation of a balance followed by nitrate leached. The method by which indicators were evaluated and presented to farmers varied. Farming sectors were not equally represented with systems for the arable, dairy and pig sectors the most common. Farmers received a detailed interpretation of their results in two thirds of the systems, most commonly related to official limits or targets. Most of the systems were developed to reduce adverse environmental impacts and 65% of the systems were considered by the respondents to have had a positive environmental impact by reducing surpluses or improving waste disposal. Use of five of the systems could lead to a marketing advantage via certified produce with a recognised quality label. Where factual evidence as to effectiveness was available, the benefits varied between subject types (nutrients, energy and pesticides) and between sectors. Farmers' responses to the systems were generally positive and they appear to be a useful way of raising awareness of environmental problems. However, economic issues need to be considered, if the costs to the farmer outweigh the benefits, uptake will not be sustained. The type and nature of the interpretation is also important as the most successful IOAs in terms of continued use and interest appeared to be those where there was regular technical input from an adviser. Overall IOAs could offer a useful tool for voluntary improvement in agri-environmental performance on topics that are not already strongly regulated. But more studies are needed to ensure that farmers in reality change their behaviour and to develop the use of reference values. #

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 56%

Input output accounting systems in the European community—an appraisal of their usefulness in raising awareness of environmental problems

Goodlass

Halberg

Verschuur³

2003

European Journal of Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The comparison focused on the type and application of indicators designated for each tool, comparing indicators intended for national-scale policy development to indicators intended to improve farm-specific performance. Only two of the six tools (environmental management for agriculture [Lewis & Bardon, 1998] and DIALECTE [Solagro, 2000]) appeared to address manure use on-farm, and those tools did not include aspects associated with reducing nitrifying air emissions or reducing emissions linked to aquatic ecotoxicity. One of these two tools appeared to address water quality (as opposed to systems, such as natural biodiversity and soil quality).…”

Section: Other Similar Environmental Assessment Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

CLEANEAST™ Comprehensive Environmental Assessment Tool for Livestock and Poultry Farms: Design, Utility, and Performance for Adoption of Sustainable Agri-Environmental Practices

Deerhake¹,

Mosley²,

Rice

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RTI’s Environmental Assessment (EA) Tool enables livestock and poultry farmers to evaluate their operations for environmental challenges and identify practical ways to address those challenges. Between 2007 and 2011, the Comprehensive Livestock Environmental Assessment and Nutrient Management Planning (CLEANEAST™) Project provided confidential, no-cost EAs and nutrient management planning (NMP) assistance to more than 400 livestock and poultry operations. During 2007 and 2008, RTI, our sub-agreement partner, North Carolina State University, and subcontractor, Agri-Waste Technology, Inc., designed the EA Tool, which contains over 400 questions in 12 topical areas. We pilot tested the EA Tool at two livestock operations before full-scale application. We used the EA Tool at more than 290 livestock and poultry operations in 20 states east of the Mississippi River. In total, operators received 385 EA-related recommendations for improving on-farm, environmentally related practices. We used our results to inform both livestock and poultry sectors, as well as the US Department of Agriculture and US EPA, of nutrient management practices observed; to predict potential environmental releases from technologies and practices; to measure adoption rates of recommendations, technologies, and practices; to evaluate behavioral response to outreach; and to identify future needs for water and air quality program improvements and policy. The EA Tool remains in the public domain, and as interest grows in mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to climate variability, the EA Tool can be readily expanded to inform farmers about their emissions from manure management and guide them in obtaining carbon credits for mitigation measures.

show abstract

“…This approach seems to be generally applicable and Sveinsson et al (1998) have discussed methodological differences in the calculation of N-balances. The systems agro-ecological indicators (AEI, Bockstaller et al, 1997) and environmental management of agriculture (EMA, Lewis and Bardon, 1998) focused on the crop or field level and compare fertilizer use with standard recommended use (crop needs) and modeled risks of N-losses. This may be relevant for cash crop productions, but on mixed farms, the indicator must include the livestock production, because managers take decisions for the whole farm system including feeding strategy and handling of manure (Halberg et al, 1995).…”

Section: What Are the Indicators That Have Been Used In The Ioa Systems?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Farm level environmental indicators; are they useful?

Halberg

Verschuur

Goodlass

2005

Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Green accounts or input-output accounting systems (IOA) have been developed in countries with intensive agricultural production to facilitate voluntary improvements in farm environmental performance. There is a need for an overview of indicators used and a review of results and experiences reported. Ten IOA systems covering the topics of the farm's use of nutrients, pesticides and energy were selected from a survey of 55 systems and compared in this paper. The approaches and indicators used vary from systems based on good agricultural practices (GAP) to accounts based systems that use physical input-output units. Many IOA systems use farm gate nutrient balances, pesticide use per hectare and energy use per kilogram product. These indicators are easy to calculate but the resulting value needs separate interpretation for the farmer. Other systems include modeled emissions and rate the yearly farm results using closed scales, which allows for easy interpretation but builds on implicit normative assumptions of best practices. Participating farmers were most often reported to be motivated for the use of IOA but empirical evidence of improved environmental farm performance was scarce. IOA systems should be linked with production planning tools used by the advisory services. Farmers and advisors needs better reference values to evaluate the indicator levels (environmental performance) on the individual farm possibly based on analysis of a larger number of farms. The statistical properties of IOA indicators need to be researched regarding: (1) the relation between changed management practice and changes in indicator values on a given farm over a period of time; (2) the relative importance of systematic versus coincidental differences in environmental performance of a set of farms. It is concluded that IOA systems could become effective tools for agri-environmental improvement of European farms given further development and standardization.

show abstract

A computer-based informal environmental management system for agriculture

Cited by 55 publications

References 17 publications

Input output accounting systems in the European community—an appraisal of their usefulness in raising awareness of environmental problems

Input output accounting systems in the European community—an appraisal of their usefulness in raising awareness of environmental problems

CLEANEAST™ Comprehensive Environmental Assessment Tool for Livestock and Poultry Farms: Design, Utility, and Performance for Adoption of Sustainable Agri-Environmental Practices

Farm level environmental indicators; are they useful?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About