Summary and conclusions, Miljøstyrelsen

Voluntary agreements on cultivation of crops in high priority areas

Summary and conclusions

When the Danish Water Supply Act was changed in 1998, the counties were ordered to prepare action plans in areas where special efforts are necessary in order to protect the drinking water resources. As part of the action plan the water works can make voluntary agreements with the farmers that they change the methods of cultivation in these high priority areas.

The purpose of this project is to identify and discuss methods and tools for entering into cultivation agreements in practice, including sociological methods and technical tools for calculation of the nitrate leaching. The project applies to specialists in the Danish Environmental Protection Agency, counties, municipalities, water works and agricultural advisers.

The project includes collection of experience gained in the cultivation agreements already made. The basis for the agricultural activities on which the voluntary cultivation agreements are entered is described. Two basically different types of agreements, which can be entered, are explained – the action oriented and the goal oriented. Various tools, which can be used as a basis for each type of agreement, are described. Furthermore, the report contains a calculation section in which the N-accounts of the two tools and the DAISY based model SKEP are used on data from six farms near Lemvig.

Until now only a few cultivation agreements with the purpose to protect the groundwater have been entered. The cases often end up with "all or nothing solutions", i.e. the area is either taken out of cultivation (e.g. changed into woods or laid fallow) or the farmers refuse to participate. Important barriers are lack of flexibility, a poor economic incentive and inscrutability. However, there are also examples of successful projects, where it has been of central importance that the agreement is voluntary and an offer, which makes the farmer an "actively participating" party.

A farm is organised around some basic values deciding how the farm should be run and developed, and this also implies an inner production logic. If a voluntary cultivation agreement is to work in practice, it is important that it is meaningful to the farmer and that the agreement is compatible with the values and strategies on which the production is organised.

Two basic types of agreements, which can be used when entering voluntary cultivation agreements in high priority areas are practised: Cultivation agreements based on certain behavioural restrictions attached to the areas, and cultivation agreements based on indirect target figures for nitrate leaching. In the report these types of agreements are called action oriented and goal oriented agreements.

Seen from an agronomic point of view, agreements based on goal figures are often preferred rather than behavioural restrictions attached to the field. The resources of the farmer are mobilised, and it is up to the farmer himself to choose and organise his actions in accordance with his personal values and the actual conditions of the farm. This means that regulation is flexible and adapted to each farmer in question.

The models DAISY and N-LES are examples of tools that can be used as a basis for cultivation agreements based on certain behavioural restrictions attached to the areas. Preparation of N-accounts can be used as a basis for entering a goal oriented cultivation agreement, since the N-accounts generate an N-balance, which can be used as indirect leaching target figures.

The report reveals a big difference between the calculated N-balances on models and the use of N-accounts on each farm. Much work is still to be done to develop and improve the models in this respect.

The dynamic and empirical models are well suited for determination of the actual nitrate leaching at field level as an effect of local conditions and as alternative to the present operation of the farm, so that the nitrate leaching requirements are met. It can, however, be difficult to adjust the steps to the actual farm and to the values of the farmer.

The N-accounts are well suited to determine the N-balance at farm level, and there also well suited as a tool of communication, operation and control at farm level.

Work should be directed towards the creation of a tool that can be used to estimate the loss of nitrogen at single posts in the N-accounts, taking as the starting point the information about the structure of each farm. Thus, this can be used as a basis for determination of the targets of acceptable N-loss at farm level, taking account of local conditions.

Documented experience is still insufficient. We recommend that development projects are launched in one or more action areas and the actual parties are involved in the development and testing of the different bases of agreement. In the further work it is important that a balancing is provided between the scientific certainty that the goals are achieved and the practical execution and follow-up on the agreements.