Main authors: F.A. Nicholson, J.R. Williams, R. Cassidy, D. Doody, A. Ferriera, A. Jamsek, Ø. Kaste, S., Langas, R. K. Laursen, P. Schipper, N. Surdyk, L. Tendler, J. van Vliet and K.Verloop
Editor: Jane Brandt
Source document: Nicholson, F.A. et al. (2018) Survey and Review of Decision Supports Tools. FAIRWAY Project Deliverable 5.1 166 pp

A classification scheme was devised to better understand the target users of the DSTs and the types of support they were intended to provide. The shortlisted DSTs were separated into those developed to support water quality/agri-environment policy makers operating at a regional or national level, and those intended to support sustainable nutrient management at the farm level. The DSTs were further divided into groups depending on whether they provided support for :

  • evaluation of current practices;
  • strategic advice for farm management and implementation of measures;
  • on-farm operational management  

Table 1. Classification scheme for nutrients, with examples of how DSTs in each category could be used

  Support for:  
Target  Evaluation of current practices Strategic advice on farm management and implementation of measures Operational management (climate smart, innovations for equipment, IT-apps, instructions / rules for sustainable application)
To support regional (water quality, agri-environment) policy makers    • Current nutrient loads to waterbodies (catchments)
• Quantification of the drivers, sources and pathways
• Regional in- en output of fertilizers
• (on-line) surveys
• Where and how to focus support? Where most needed with regard to diffuse pollution
• What measures are possible and effective in the catchment / drinking water protection zone? (e.g. Suitability or effectivity mapping, quantification effects measures on nitrate leaching, N and P loads to surface water bodies)
• How to stimulate wider implementation (communication to increase awareness/ understanding)
• How to monitor implementation and effects? (e.g. via participative monitoring)
• Where and how to focus support? Where most needed with regard to diffuse pollution
• What farm practices are most critical for diffuse pollution?
CTtools
BEST Kemi
STONE
Catchment Lake Modelling Network
OENBA
GROWA-SI
SNGMP
FARMSCOPER
SCIMAP
TargetEconN
STONE
Catchment Lake Modelling Network
OENBA
FARMSCOPER
 
To support sustainable farm (nutrient) management    • Nutrient efficiency
• Current losses to soil and water
• Risks for surface runoff at the farmyard and in the field
• Nutrient (mineral) efficiency, identification of measures for improvement
• Sustainable soil management: identification of measures for improvement
• Quantification of load reduction measures
• Costs-effectiveness estimates of measures
• Right time, place, amount application, based on weather forecast, soil quality, soil moisture, growing stage crop etc.
• Best management practices for the farmyard (prevent surface runoff of minerals, organic matter etc.)
Düngeplanung
ISIP
Mark Online
ANCA
BWW
Bodemconditiescore
SSG-GPBF
Düngeplanung
ISIP
Mark Online
Dyrkningsvejledninger
Teagasc NMP Online
ANCA
BWW
NG-FP
SSG-GPBF
PLANET
Farmhedge
CBGV
BeregeningsWijzer
NDICEA
Skifteplan
PLANET

 

Table 2. Classification scheme for pesticides, with examples of how DSTs in each category could be used

  Support for:  
Target  Evaluation of current practices Strategic advice on farm management and implementation of measures Operational management (climate smart, innovations for equipment, IT-apps, instructions / rules for sustainable application)
To support regional (water quality, agri-environment) policy makers    • Current pesticide emission to waterbodies (catchments)/ concentrations compared to environmental levels
• Quantification of the sources (crops, application types) and pathways
• Regional use and expected emission of pesticides
• (on-line) surveys on adoption of best practices in IPM
• Where and how to focus support? Where most needed with regard to diffuse pollution
• What measures are possible and effective in the catchment / drinking water protection zone? (e.g. Suitability or effectivity mapping, quantifying effects of measures on leaching to ground water, direct spray drift, run off etc to surface water bodies)
• How to stimulate wide implementation (communication to more awareness, understanding, targeted subsidies)
• How to monitor implementation and effects?
• Decide where and how to focus support
• Draw up implementation instructions and/or rules
BEST Kemi
PHYTOPIXAL
SIRIS
Environmental Yardstick
SNGMP
Phytopixal
SIRIS
FITO-INFO
 
To support sustainable farm crop protection (Integrated Pest Management)   • Efficient and effective use of pesticides
• Current losses to soil and water
• Risks for surface runoff at the farmyard and in the field
• Spraying efficiency, identification of measures for improvement
• Identification of alternatives to pesticide spraying through prevention, non-chemical control
• Quantification of reduction measures (in kg active ingredient or environmental impact)
• Costs-effectiveness estimates of measures
• Choice of best practices crop protection methods (preferably non-chemical)
• If chemical - choose pesticide with lowest environmental impact
• Right time and dosage for application, based on weather forecast, soil and crop moisture, infection chances of certain pests
• Identification of risks for runoff / leaching from farmyard and best practices to remediate these risk
Mark Online
Phytopixal
SIRIS
Environmental Yardstick
FITO-INFO
Mark Online
Dyrkningsvejledninger
Plant Protection Online
Environmental Yardstick
Plant Protection Online
FarmHedge
Check it Out
Procheck.
Sentinel Online
Water Aware

 


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

» References

 

Go To Top