Main authors: Matjaž Glavan, Gregor Kramberger and Katarina Kresnik 
FAIRWAYiS Editor: Jane Brandt
Source documents: »Oenema, O. et al. 2018. Review of measures to decrease nitrate pollution of drinking water sources. FAIRWAY Project Deliverable 4.1, 125 pp
»Commelin, M. et al. 2018. Review of measures to decrease pesticide pollution of drinking water sources. FAIRWAY Project Deliverable 4.2, 79 pp
»Velthof, G. et al. 2020. Identification of most promising measures and practices. FAIRWAY Project Deliverable 4.3, 72 pp

 

One of FAIRWAY's major research themes is the identification and assessment of most promising measures and practices to decrease nitrate and pesticide pollution of drinking water supplies by agriculture (see »Farming practices: review and assessment).

Data and information collected from the Dravsko polje case study was used in the research tasks as described here.


Contents table
1. Measures to decrease nitrate pollution
2. Measures to decrease pesticide pollution
3. Effectiveness of nitrate and pesticide measures

1. Measures to decrease nitrate pollution

In »Review of measures to decrease nitrate pollution of drinking water sources we describe how FAIRWAY built on insights and results gathered in EU-wide and global projects and studies. We provide an overview and assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of measures aimed at decreasing nitrate pollution of drinking water sources. As part of the review, the Dravsko polje case study provided information about the measures that have been implemented in the local area.

Name of measure Limit on N input
Target Quality surface and groundwater
Description Limits N input from organic fertilisers all over Slovenia to 170 kg/ha and on narrowest water protection zones to 140 from composted organic manure.
Mode of action Reduction / substitution of contaminant input
Expected effectiveness Unknown
Expected cost Unknown
Underpinning No (≤ 1 report)
Applicability Yes (on more than 75% of the agricultural land)
Adoptability Yes (more than 75% of the addressees)
Other benefits Yes, decreases ammonia emissions
Disadvantages No
References
Additional comments Monitoring results show that concentrations on Nitrate in groundwater are falling or are stable after the fall. However certain boreholes are still problematic with high concentrations. Expected effectiveness is nitrate below 50 mg/l in groundwater and falling. Costs were never estimated and impacts of measure examined and reported only to the level of state monitoring results. Measure is highly applicable and adoptable as it is obligatory for all farmers. Scientific literature in Slovene and English language is quite limited for our case study - practically non-existent.
Name of measure Timing manure application
Target Quality surface and groundwater
Description Sets time limits for the application of organic and mineral fertilisers.
Mode of action Reduction / substitution of contaminant input
Expected effectiveness Unknown
Expected cost Unknown
Underpinning No (≤ 1 report)
Applicability Yes (on more than 75% of the agricultural land)
Adoptability Yes (more than 75% of the addressees)
Other benefits Yes, decreases ammonia emissions
Disadvantages No
References
Additional comments Study was made from Slovenian Agricultural Institute in 2016/17 ordered by Ministry for Environment. However data to evaluate effectiveness or costs are not available. Not published in scientific literature. Open link (in Slovene): http://www.mediafire.com/folder/iq8wxkyv5qnzc/WP4_-_Measures_results Scientific literature in Slovene and English language is quite limited for our case study - practically non-existent.
Name of measure Buffer zones
Target Quality surface and groundwater
Description A safe zone used to reduce N entering surface waters and modify pollution pathways.
Mode of action
  1. Reduction / substitution of contaminant input;
  2. Modification of pollution pathway
Expected effectiveness Unknown
Expected cost Unknown
Underpinning No (≤ 1 report)
Applicability No (on <25% of the agricultural land)
Adoptability No (on <25% of the addressees)
Other benefits No
Disadvantages Yes, decreases crop yield
References
Additional comments Study was made from Slovenian Agricultural Institute in 2016/17 ordered by Ministry for Environment. However data to evaluate effectiveness or costs are not available. Not published in scientific literature. Open link (in Slovene): http://www.mediafire.com/folder/iq8wxkyv5qnzc/WP4_-_Measures_results Scientific literature in Slovene and English language is quite limited for our case study - practically non-existent
Name of measure Five year crop rotation
Target Quality surface and groundwater
Description Used to improve soil health. One of the positive effect is also reduced use of N - introduction of legumes crops (beans/peas/clovers).
Mode of action Reduction / substitution of contaminant input
Expected effectiveness Unknown
Expected cost Unknown
Underpinning No (≤ 1 report)
Applicability Partly (on 25-75% of the agricultural land)
Adoptability Partly (on 25-75% of the addressees)
Other benefits Positive for soil health, reduces plant pests and disease
Disadvantages No
References
Additional comments Data to evaluate effectiveness or costs are not available. Detailed applicability and adoptability can be retrieved from national agricultural payments database. Scientific literature in Slovene and English language is quite limited for our case study - practically non-existent.
Name of measure Cover crops
Target Quality surface and groundwater
Description Protects soil from weather impacts. Plants prevent erosion and nutrient leaching. They can act as catch-crops and save N in plants biomass.
Mode of action Reduction / substitution of contaminant input
Expected effectiveness Unknown
Expected cost Unknown
Underpinning No (≤ 1 report)
Applicability No (on <25% of the agricultural land)
Adoptability No (on <25% of the addressees)
Other benefits Positive for soil physical properties, organic matter
Disadvantages No
References
Additional comments Data to evaluate effectiveness or costs are not available. Detailed applicability and adoptability can be retrieved from national agricultural payments database. Scientific literature in Slovene and English language is quite limited for our case study - practically non-existent.
Name of measure Plants for green manure
Target Quality surface and groundwater
Description Protects soil from weather impacts. Plants prevent erosion and nutrient leaching. They can act as catch-crops and save N in plants biomass.
Mode of action Reduction / substitution of contaminant input
Expected effectiveness Unknown
Expected cost Unknown
Underpinning No (≤ 1 report)
Applicability No (on <25% of the agricultural land)
Adoptability No (on <25% of the addressees)
Other benefits Other benefits contributes to higher soil organic matter
Disadvantages No
References
Additional comments Data to evaluate effectiveness or costs are not available. Detailed applicability and adoptability can be retrived from national agricultural payments database. Scientific literature in Slovene and English language is quite limited for our case study - practically non-existent.

2. Measures to decrease pesticide pollution

In »Review of measures to decrease pesticide pollution of drinking water sources we describe how FAIRWAY also built on insights and results gathered in EU-wide and global projects and studies. We provide an overview and assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of measures aimed at decreasing pesticide pollution of drinking water sources. Again, as part of the review, the Dravsko polje case study provided an overview of the measures that have been implemented in the local area.

Name of measure Buffer zones
Target Quality surface and groundwater
Description A safe zone used to reduce N entering surface waters and modify pollution pathways
Mode of action
  1. Reduction / substitution of contaminant input;
  2. Modification of pollution pathway
Expected effectiveness Unknown
Expected cost Unknown
Underpinning Underpinning No (≤ 1 report)
Applicability No (on <25% of the agricultural land)
Adoptability No (on <25% of the addressees)
Other benefits No
Disadvantages Yes, decreases crop yield
References
Additional comments Study was made from Slovenian Agricultural Institute in 2016/17 ordered by Ministry for Environment. However data to evalute effectivness or costs are not available. Not published in scientific literature. Open link (in slovene): http://www.mediafire.com/folder/iq8wxkyv5qnzc/WP4_-_Measures_results Scientific literature in Slovene and English language is quite limited for our case study - practicaly non-existent.
Name of measure Prohibition of problematic PPP
Target Quality surface and groundwater
Description Prohibits the use for the health and environment harmful PPPs. Has to be scientificly confirmed. In use all over the country with stricter list of prohibited PPP on drinking water protection zones.
Mode of action Reduction / substitution of contaminant input
Expected effectiveness Unknown
Expected cost Unknown
Underpinning No (≤ 1 report)
Applicability Yes (on more than 75% of the agricultural land)
Adoptability Yes (more than 75% of the addressees)
Other benefits Positive effect on biodiversity
Disadvantages No
References
Additional comments Monitoring results show that concentrations of pesticides and their products from red list (e.g. atrazine) have droped after inplementaion of this measure in all groundwaters. Scientific literature in Slovene and English language is quite limited for our case study - practicaly non-existent.

Additional comments

3. Effectiveness of nitrate and pesticide measures

The information about 34 different nitrate mitigation measures, implemented locally in 10 different FAIRWAY case studies, was collected and analysed. The measures were aggregated by type and the average/overall scores for effectivity, cost, applicability, and adoptability were assessed from the individual records and comments. See »Management practices that reduce nitrate transport - Results and discussion - Case studies.

Similarly, information about 17 different pesticide mitigation measures, implemented locally in 7 different FAIRWAY case studies, was collected and analysed. The measures were evaluated for their cost and effectiveness for reducing pollution of groundwater and surface water. See »Management practices that reduce pesticide transport - Results - Case studies

 


Note: For full references to papers quoted in this article see

» References

 

Go To Top