Is the food produced in Europe produced without polluting the soils, air, and water?
The following section describes the metrics on Clean air, soil and water that were embedded in Deliverable 6.3.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Performance metric 2: Clean air and water
Clean air and water resources are essential for the functioning of ecosystems, enabling them to provide the services for the benefit of society, and avoiding health impacts. The benefits derived from ecosystem services cover various dimensions of human well-being, namely basic human needs, economic needs, environmental needs and subjective happiness (Maes et al. 2016).
Aggregate indicators considered include therefore the reduction of emissions to the atmosphere and to the hydrosphere, as well as the reduction of toxic substances. Main pollutants of relevance in agri-food supply chains are emission of N and P compounds. A main concern for the quality of drinking is the presence of nitrates, while a balance between N and P determines the risk of fresh- and coastal water bodies to eutrophication (Garnier et al. 2010; Leip et al. 2015b). In SUSFANS, the following aggregate indicators are therefore considered:
- Reduction of N surplus
- Reduction of N emissions to the atmosphere (air pollution)
- Reduction of N emissions to the hydrosphere (water pollution)
- Reduction of P surplus
- Reduction of Toxic substances use
Reduction of N emissions to the atmosphere (air pollution)
Description: Emissions of ammonia (NH3) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) are affecting air quality with direct health effect, for example through the formation of particulate ammonium nitrates, and contributing to multiple ecosystem damages through deposition. They are precursors of the greenhouse gas N2O and thus also contributing to global warming. However, in areas with little nitrogen deposition, additional input of nitrogen through atmospheric deposition might also lead to an increase of biomass growth (fertilization effect) (De Vries et al. 2011). Also atmospheric nitrogen compounds might be, ‘filtered’ out with landscape elements protecting more sensitive (semi)natural ecosystems.
Policy vision: Policy vision is to eliminate emissions of harmful atmospheric pollutants. If possible the ‘net’ emissions shall be calculated, which means that recovered nitrogen emissions are subtracted from total emissions and emissions not contributing to any adverse effect are not accounted for. For the purpose of SUSFANS, we assume that in Europe nitrogen saturation of ecosystems is predominant thus all emissions are to be considered. In addition, landscape structural elements for reducing nitrogen pollution are not yet in place and are assumed irrelevant. Therefore, the policy visions translate to zero NH3 and NOx emissions from agricultural supply chains. In analogy to the policy vision ‘climate stabilization’ we select the target year 2100.
Policy targets: The National Emission Ceilings Directive (NECD) (EC 2001) has the objective to limit emissions of acidifying and eutrophying pollutants and ozone precursors in order to improve the protection in the Community of the environment and human health against risks of adverse effects from acidification, soil eutrophication and ground-level ozone and to move towards the long-term objectives of not exceeding critical levels and loads and of effective protection of all people against recognised health risks from air pollution by establishing national emission ceilings. The emission ceilings are defined at the national level, for the agriculture sector emissions of ammonia (NH3) are most relevant, as more than 90% of NH3 emissions originate from agricultural sources. The directive requires Member States to draw up a National Programme which includes information on adopted and envisaged policies and measures and quantified estimates of their effects on the emissions. Parallel to the development of the EU NEC Directive, the EU Member States together with Central and Eastern European countries, the United States and Canada have negotiated the “multi-pollutant” protocol under the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (the so-called Gothenburg protocol, agreed in November 1999). The emission ceilings in the protocol are equal or less ambitious than those in the NEC Directive.
The NECD was being reviewed as part of The Clean Air Policy Package (European Commission 2013) and the new National Emissions Ceilings Directive entered into force in December 2016 (EU 2016) as the main legislative instrument to achieve the 2030 objectives of the Clean Air Programme. This Directive sets national reduction commitments for the five pollutants (sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, ammonia and fine particulate matter) responsible for acidification, eutrophication and ground-level ozone pollution which leads to significant negative impacts on human health and the environment.
Reduction commitments are given for ‘any year from 2020 and 2029’ and for ‘any year from 2030’ compared to the emission level in the year 2005. For EU28, the targets are -42% and -63% for NOx, and -6% and -19% for NH3. However national targets vary considerably among countries, for the example of NH3 emission reductions from 2030 onwards, they are between -1% for Estonia and -30% for Slovakia (EU 2016).
Aggregated variables: Emissions of NH3 and NOx are aggregated to the unit of total N emissions.
Reduction of N emissions to the hydrosphere (water pollution)
Description: Anthropogenic increase of nitrogen in water poses direct threats to human and aquatic ecosystems. High nitrate concentrations in drinking water pose a risk for human health (van Grinsven et al. 2010, 2006). In aquatic ecosystems, the nitrogen enrichment can contribute to eutrophication events, which are responsible for toxic algal blooms, water anoxia, fish kills and habitat and biodiversity loss. (Grizzetti et al. 2011). Pressure of nitrogen loads in water comes from point sources (sewage systems), diffuse sources through leaching and runoff from agricultural production or diffuse input from (semi)natural ecosystems. For the year 2002, Leip et al. (2011a) estimate a share of agricultural sources to be 57%, sewage systems 22%; however the authors include also a large contribution from nitrogen input through atmospheric deposition on land or continental shelf regions. As sewage treatment considerably improved during the last decade, the share of agricultural nitrogen is likely to be higher today. Contribution to eutrophying emissions from aquaculture mainly comes from the grow-out site where the species is farmed, even if feed in aquaculture to a large extent originate from crop production.
Marine Strategy Framework Directive (EU 2008) aims to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) of the EU’s marine waters by 2020 and to protect the resource base upon which marine-related economic and social activities depend. The directive has a special descriptor for eutrophication with the goal “Human-induced eutrophication is minimised, especially adverse effects thereof, such as losses in biodiversity, ecosystem degradation, harmful algae blooms and oxygen deficiency in bottom waters”.
Policy vision: Policy vision is to eliminate emissions of nitrogen emissions to the hydrosphere. If possible the ‘net‘ emissions shall be calculated, which means that recovered nitrogen emissions are subtracted from total emissions and emissions not contributing to any adverse effect are not accounted for. Even though buffer zones and artificial wetlands are already used for the restoration of water courses, no suitable data is available allowing the quantification of the magnitude of their impact. Therefore, for the purpose of SUSFANS, we use zero nitrogen leaching and run-off as the policy vision. Again, in analogy to the policy vision ‘climate stabilization‘ we select the target year 2100.
Policy targets: The Nitrates Directive (EC 1991) forms an integral part of the Water Framework Directive (EU 2000) and is one of the key instruments in the protection of waters against agricultural pressures. It has the objective reducing water pollution caused or induced by nitrates from agricultural sources and preventing further such pollution. The directive requires the Member State to monitor nitrate concentrations in surface water and groundwater, identify waters affected by pollution and waters that could be affected by pollution if no measures are taken and designate vulnerable zones where action programmes containing measures to reduce and prevent nitrate pollution must be developed, implemented and revised every four years. The corner stones of the directives are (i) the designation of vulnerable zones; (ii) the establishment of a Code of Good
Agricultural Practice, and (iii) the implementation of Action Programmes describing required measures. Such Action Programmes can vary regionally depending on local conditions and pollution levels. The only pre-scribed quantitative measure given in Annex III of the ND is the limit of applied livestock manure of 170 kg ha-1 yr-1. However, some countries have asked derogation. Currently there are eight derogations in force. As such, it is difficult to formulate a concrete policy target for the reduction of emissions of nitrogen to water. Furthermore,
- There is a strong regional variability in the effect of nitrogen emissions to water, also reflected in the designation of ‘nitrate vulnerable zones’
- The nitrates directive focuses on the impact of nitrates on drinking water, while other effects linked other effects such as eutrophication of coastal zones are regulated in regional policies, such as the OSPAR convention, where 15 Governments and the EU cooperate to protect the marine environment of the North-East Atlantic.10
In 2015, the EU court of justice ruled in a case (“Weser case”) that a country must refuse authorisation for projects that may cause deterioration of the status of a water body, unless derogation is granted. Deterioration of the status is given as soon as one quality element (Annex V of the directive) falls by at least one class.11 For SUSFANS, we therefore suggest use the linear interpolation of the emission level in the reference year and zero emissions by 2030 to the policy target year.
Aggregated variables: Emissions of nitrates and organic nitrogen to the water are aggregated to the unit of total N emissions.
Reduction of N surplus
Description: The Gross nitrogen balance (or nitrogen surplus) is regarded as key indicator in many agri-environmental frameworks aiming at monitoring the effectiveness of agricultural and environmental policies. The Gross nitrogen balance is calculated from total N in manure excreted by animals and/or imported to a farm and other inputs such as biological nitrogen fixation, atmospheric deposition and other applied fertilizers, and N in outputs (crop and livestock products) (Eurostat 2013; Leip et al. 2011b). The N surplus therefore includes all losses to the environment (atmosphere and hydrosphere) from livestock and crop production systems.
Despite this ‘overlapping’ with the aggregate indicators ‘Reduction of N emissions to the atmosphere’ and ‘Reduction of N emissions to the hydrosphere’, the aggregate indicator ‘Reduction of N surplus’ is still important because N surplus is a very common indicator; it includes losses of N2, which are not included in the other aggregate indicators and are relevant for resource use efficiency (Pelletier & Leip 2013). Closing of the nitrogen cycle – that is reduction of the need for new nitrogen fixation is seen also as one big challenge for the global planetary boundaries (Rockström et al. 2009; Steffen et al. 2015a)
The monitoring of Nitrogen balances is required for each Member State’s RDP 2007-2013 as part of the EU’s Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF, EU 2013b). The monitoring of Nutrient balances is relevant also in other policy domains such as: the Water Framework Directive (EU 2000) requiring Member States to protect and restore the quality of their waters; and the Nitrates Directive (EC 1991), aiming to reduce water pollution caused or induced by nitrates from agricultural sources and prevent further such pollution.
In contrast to the other aggregate indicators, the N surplus is calculated per area of utilized agricultural land required for the production of a food product (including land for feed) and represents thus not the total absolute emissions in kg N yr-1 cause by the food chain, but the average losses of nitrogen to the environment per hectare of land used [kg N ha-1 yr-1].
Policy vision: Due to the overlapping of the N surplus with emissions of nitrogen to atmosphere and water, no separate policy goal vision is formulated. The N surplus has no influence on the performance metrics ‘clean air and water’ (weight=0) as it is already covered by the mentioned aggregate indictors.
Policy targets: not applicable.
Aggregated variables: Balance of total N inputs and total N outputs: Inputs: mineral fertilizer, manure imported to the farm or excreted by animals, other organic fertilizers applied, atmospheric deposition, biological nitrogen fixation. Outputs: N in crop products harvested and livestock biomass and livestock products sold.
Reduction of P surplus
Description: Phosphorus and phosphates contribute to aquatic (freshwater and marine) eutrophication and to coastal water eutrophication by providing limiting nutrients to algae and aquatic vegetation in excess of natural rates, leading to an alteration of aquatic species composition and productivity (Henderson 2015). Leip et al. (2015b, see Supplementary Information S4) assessed the limiting factor for a total of 24 European watersheds with the GREEN model (Grizzetti et al. 2012) on the basis of the ICEP approach (Garnier et al. 2010) and found most watersheds being P rather than N limited. Emissions of P to the atmosphere are usually considered negligible and occur mainly via wind erosion processes. Therefore, the P surplus aggregated indicator can be used for describing P losses to the aquatic system. P is less mobile in soils than N and might be ‘sorbed’ to soil minerals and thus become unavailable to plant uptake, but also not being at risk of contributing to water eutrophication (Redding et al. 2016). However, in contrast to N, P is a scarce resource, which needs to be ‘refilled’ from natural deposits if it is dispersed in to the environment. In SUSFANS, this ‘resource’ dimension is integrated into the aggregate indicator ‘reduction of P surplus’ which is therefore measured as the input of ‘new’ P to the food supply chain as mineral fertilizer, while recycled sources of P (in manure, compost, sewage sludge etc.) are not included.
Policy vision: Policy vision is a full recovery of P into the agro food system with zero P surplus and thus zero addition of new P. We select the target year 2100 in analogy to the climate stabilization aggregate indicator.
Policy targets: In the absence of quantified policy target for mineral P fertilizers, we use the linear interpolation of the emission level in the reference year and zero emissions by 2100 to the policy target year.
Aggregated variables: P application in mineral fertilizers.
Reduction of Toxic substances use
Description: Toxic substances, heavy metals and pesticides and other plant protection chemical substances and substances given to livestock pose a threat to organisms in the environment. Some substances are regulated, other are permitted to be use because sufficient evidence for the adverse effect has not been found, or because the benefit of the substances is believed to outweigh their risk. In SUSFANS, we focus on pesticides and plant protection chemicals for which data are available in the models.
Policy vision: We set the policy vision is zero application of harmful substances by 2030. Ideally this takes into consideration the different levels of toxicity of different chemical agents if this information is available.
Policy targets: In the absence of quantified policy targets for the application of toxic substances, we use the linear interpolation of the emission level in the reference year and zero emissions by 2030 to the policy target year.
Aggregated variables: The aggregate indicator is derived from the individual variable on the usage of substances in the scope of plant protection and crop growth regulatory measures. In SUSFANS, no differentiation is made between different chemical products, as information on efficiency and harmfulness of the different agents used is not available. Therefore, all application of herbicides, fungicides, insecticides, as well as growth regulatory measures are considered. Aggregation is done based on a monetary value obtained e.g. from the Economic Accounts of Agriculture provided by Eurostat. The data is the sum of expenditures for all non-mechanical plant protection measures and is corrected by the inflation rate to account for price changes between the reference and the target year.