Search

Our planet suffers from humankind’s impact on natural resources, biogeochemical cycles and ecosystems. Intensive modern agriculture with inappropriate inputs of fertilisers, pesticides and fossil fuel –based energy has increasingly added to human pressure on the environment. As a key element of our natural capital, soils are also under threat, despite being essential to provide food, feed, fibre and fuel for an increasing global population. Moreover, soils play a key role in carbon, water and energy cycles, highlighting their importance for biomass provision and the circular bioeconomy. Evidently, these new and complex challenges cannot be resolved effectively with existing knowledge and experience alone. These challenges require scientific research, interdisciplinary collaboration and networking to find context-specific and tailored solutions addressing societal issues of our time and facilitating the adoption of these solutions. The most effective approaches are based on the involvement of multiple actors from science, policy, economy, civil society and farming that have the same goal, work on the same societal issue, but have complementing backgrounds, expertise and perceptions. The European Joint Programme (EJP) SOIL is a European network of research institutes in the field of soil science and agricultural soil management that will provide science-based advice to practitioners and policymakers, at local, national and European level. The EJP SOIL aims to align and boost research, training and capacity building through joint programming activities co-funded by the European Commission and national research programs. This will reduce current fragmentation and help to find synergies in order to make a leapfrog in research on good agricultural soil management in three main areas: climate change mitigation and adaptation, production capacity in healthy food systems, and environmental sustainability. By joint programming, training and capacity building, EJP SOIL will also take into account the need for effective policy solutions, as well as the socio-economic conditions of all stakeholders in the agricultural value chain. Thus, a key focus of the EJP SOIL is to build and strengthen a framework for an integrated community of research groups working on related aspects of agricultural soil management. As part of this effort, EJP SOIL will co-construct with stakeholders a roadmap for agricultural soil research. To develop a structured roadmap, EJP SOIL works with a version of the knowledge management framework of Dalkir (2005). The EJP version uses four compartments: (i) Knowledge development, (ii) knowledge harmonisation, organisation and storage (iii) knowledge sharing and transfer, and (iv) knowledge application. The four segments are part of a cyclic process to enhance the development and use of knowledge on agricultural soils. Knowledge development comprises assessing new knowledge needs to achieve the expected impacts of EJP SOIL. Therefore, by involving multiple stakeholders, knowledge gaps across Europe will be identified to work towards the adoption of Climate-Smart Sustainable Agricultural Soil Management (CSSASM). Within the knowledge sharing and transfer compartment, the capacity of scientists, advisors, policy makers, farmers and other stakeholders will be strengthened. EJP SOIL will work to support networks and co-creation of new knowledge with stakeholder groups, stimulating innovation in CSSASM. The knowledge harmonization, organization and storage compartment of the knowledge framework ensures linkages with all stakeholders to guarantee data harmonization and standardization. The last compartment, application of knowledge, will be facilitated by creating better guidelines, awareness and capacity for Climate-Smart Sustainable Agricultural Soil Management adoption and by strengthening science-to-policy processes at EU and Member State level.

The ICROFS (International Centre for Research in Organic Food Systems) has conducted an analysis of the effects of organic research in Denmark (1996-2010) on the Danish organic sector and on society in general. Over these 15 years, three national programs and one program with European collaboration have been implemented in Denmark, financed via special government grants that amounted to just over 500 million DKK (approx. € 67 million—or approximately $ 80 million). The analysis itself was carried out as a compilation of information from three perspectives, each of which has been independently documented: Interviews with (representatives of) end-users of results from research and development (R&D) investigating their assessment of the challenges in the sector and solutions developed from 1996-2010 Assessment of the R&D endeavours in different thematic areas (dairy/milk, pigs, crops, etc.) as they related to end-users and the stated challenges at that time Documentation of the dissemination of R&D results in relation to themes and challenges in the sector The results showed very good correspondence between end-users’ perceptions of the challenges overcome in the sector, the R&D initiated in the research programmes, and the dissemination of research results and other forms of knowledge transfer. The analysis documented direct effects of the research initiatives targetting the challenges in the sector such as higher yields, weed and pest control, animal health and welfare, the potential for phasing out the use of antibiotics in Danish dairy herds and reducing the problems caused by seedborne diseases. It also describes where research did not contribute as much to overcoming challenges. In contrast, the analysis showed that the effects of the research in the organic processing industry and among relevant governmental and non-governmental organisations were of a more indirect character. Research has helped stabilize the supply and quality of raw materials at a time of growing demand and sales. Organic research also generates new knowledge and leads to new opportunities that can provide inspiration for a green conversion, product diversification and growth also in conventional agriculture. The analysis showed that research under the national research programs overall have been very applied and directed at the barriers in the sector in order to support the general market and growth conditions for the organic sector. Having laid a solid foundation, the private sector has been able to take advantage of commercial opportunities when demand grew, while adhering to the organic policy objectives of the market-driven growth in the organic sector.

There is an increased understanding that the challenges of producing enough food and biomass while preserving soil, water and biodiversity necessary for ecosystem services can not be solved by prevalent types of conventional agriculture and that agro-ecological approaches and ecological intensification is fundamental for our future food production. FAO has stated that “Ecosystem services sustain agricultural productivity and resilience” and advocates production intensification through ecosystem management. Terminologies such as agro-ecology and ecological/ eco-functional/sustainable intensification are being proposed for agricultural development, which builds on higher input of knowledge, observation skills and management and improved use of agro-ecological methods. Contrary, increased global demand for food, and non-food biomass has increased the pressure for intensifying land use and increasing crop yields based on conventional inputs, while still aiming at reducing environmental impact. There is a battle of discourse between these approaches in competition for – among others – research and development funding. The examples of improved local food security from introducing agro-ecological and low external input agriculture practices among smallholder farmers are many. However, upscaling remains a challenge and the ability of such eco-functional intensification to feed the increased urban populations in emerging economies remains an open question. A broader view of what is organic and conventional farming is necessary and the use of new understandings from ecology and molecular biology will be needed to create and profit from synergies between preserving and building on eco-systems services and providing increased food and biomass.

Organic agriculture is one of the best developed multifunctional production strategies in agriculture, and yet is not widely understood in terms of its full potential for contributing to food security, economic development, and environmental health. This special edition of the journal Sustainable Agriculture Research explores the knowledge, innovations, potentials, and research needs that will strengthen the links between organic food systems, sustainable production, and enhanced ecosystem services. The following articles are from an international conference titled “Innovations in Organic Food Systems for Sustainable Production and Ecosystem Services,” held on 1-2 November 2014 in Long Beach, California. The conference was co-sponsored by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Co-operative Research Programme on Biological Resource Management for Sustainable Agricultural Systems, the International Centre for Research in Organic Food Systems (ICROFS), the United Stated Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and Agriculture (USDA-NIFA), and the American Society of Agronomy (ASA).

In consideration of: • the lack of organic juveniles reported by some MS; • the restriction on the movement of live animals between countries and regions based on the Council Directive (EC) No 88/20062; • the reluctance of farmers to introduce on their farms animals which could be unsuitable for the local (geographical) environment (e.g. genetic or population traits, resistance to different diseases, growth performances, reproductive cycle, behavioural characteristics, etc.); and • the lack in the Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/20083 of specific organic rules for managing the life cycle stage between the hatching and the weaning of juveniles, the Group supports the use of non-organic juveniles, for on-growing purposes, when organic aquaculture juvenile animals are not available, subject to the following restrictions/recommendations: a) Organic juveniles should be used when available. b) At least the latter two thirds of the duration of the production cycle shall be managed under organic management (Article 25(e)(2) of Commission Regylation (EC) No 889/2008). c) After the approval of specific organic rules for the life cycle stage between hatching and weaning of juveniles, a transitional period may be established to allow farmers to comply with the new rules. Furthermore, the Group supports the creation of a database on the availability of organic juveniles produced in each country, comparable to the seed database (Article 48 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008). Transparency of the use of non-organic juveniles should be ensured in such a database.

The number of Quality Assurance Systems (QAS) for food products is increasing and so is the topics they cover, from traditional intrinsic product characteristics such as percent meat in slaughtered pigs and protein content in milk to food safety issues such as zoonoses and pesticide residues and in some cases aspects of animal welfare. This development is linked to de-mands for risk controlling systems such as HACCP and traceability systems that would allow food safety problems to be traced to a small number of producers or farms. The large retail companies (supermarkets) are an important driving force for this development because of their efforts to build consumer trust in food products and loyalty to the companies own brands. Envi-ronmental characteristics of food products and information on their production methods are be-coming part of some QAS but not mostly in the form of qualitative information e.g. certification that the farmers have used Good Agricultural Practice (GAP). The paper gives examples of this and then discuss this development in relation to LCA based environmental appraisal of food products. The development of quantitative (tools for) environmental appraisal of agriculture and food production is becoming more productoriented improving the possibilities of assessing the regional and global impacts of food production chains and consumption. But these systems building on LCA does not so far seem to be linked with the development of QAS for food. The paper finally discuss the possibilities for linking the food safety related traceability systems and gives an example of on-going work to establish LCA based QAS in a meat processing system.

The expert group for technical advice on organic production (EGTOP; thereafter called „the Group‟) in replying to point a) of the mandate concerning substances assessment concludes on the basis of the knowledge available in the group and information provided with the dossiers and by the Commission that: E 535 Sodium ferrocyanide anti-caking material, should be approved for use as a feed additive in salt for organic animal feed, subject to: - a maximum dose rate of 20 mg/kg NaCl (the maximum defined for human food) and - a limited time period, in order to provide a legal basis for current practice in the short term and to encourage the adoption of preferred carbonate alternatives longer term. E 566 Natrolite-Phonolite anti-caking material should be approved for use as a feed additive in organic animal feed, subject to the limit of 25,000 mg/kg complete animal feed specified in EC Reg. 739/2000. E 551a Silicic acid by precipitation anti-caking material should not be approved for use as a feed additive in organic animal feed on the basis of available information about need given the available, more natural alternatives. Further information on this issue should be provided to support the application. E 568 Clinoptilolite anti-caking material should be approved for use as a feed additive in organic animal feed, subject to the limit of 20,000 mg/kg complete animal feed and the livestock classes specified in EC Reg. 1810/2005. E 237 Sodium formate preservative should be approved for use as a feed additive in organic silage, subject to the outcome of the review of the authorisation of this product under Articles 4 and 7 of Regulation 1831/2003 currently in progress. If approved: - it should be considered whether formic and propionic acids should be deleted from Annex VI to Commission Regulation (EC) 889/2008; - the same restrictions relating to weather conditions and silage quality as currently apply to formic and propionic acids under the organic regulations should apply; o the concept of „difficult‟ silages and/or „poor‟ weather conditions‟ that would determine eligibility to use the products should be clarified. Initial dry matter content or sugar content of the forage might be a basis for this. Humic acid substances are not currently authorised as a feed additive under EU regulations so they cannot be considered for use as such in organic farming. Their classification as feed material was not considered to be appropriate by the Group, which also noted their current designation as pharmacologically active substances with possible implications for animal health. In reaching these conclusions, the Group considered that compliance with the organic regulation needs to be assessed according to several criteria which are summarised in Annex 1. The Group in replying to point b) of the mandate concerning the template for the member states dossier with respect to animal feed materials, feed additives, certain products used in animal nutrition and processing aids, developed the document presented in Annex 2 to this report. This includes a section incorporating the criteria for assessment of consistency with the EU organic regulations. The Group considered that it would be helpful to develop some interpretative guidelines to support the dossier template. The Group in replying to point c) of the mandate concerning technical aspects of transition to 100% organic feed requirements for non-ruminants concluded that while there are technical solutions that can be implemented in the short to medium term, there is a need for further research on alternatives and knowledge transfer, a need to reflect on the nature and principles of organic non-ruminant production (whether semi-industrial or extensive), and a need to consider continuing with derogations for a short period limited to specific ages and types of non-ruminants and specific feedstuffs.

The expert group for technical advice on organic production (EGTOP; thereafter called „the Group‟) has discussed whether the use of the substances/products/techniques mentioned below is in line with objectives, criteria and principles as well as the general rules laid down in Council Regulation (EC) 834/2007 and whether they can therefore be authorised in organic production under the EU legislation. The Group concluded the following: - Hydrolysed proteins from animal by-product origin are in line with the objectives, criteria and principles of organic farming and should be included in Annex I to Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008, with the following restrictions: (i) Chemical hydrolysis only exceptionally acceptable in cases where it is required by Regulation 142/2011; (ii) not to be applied to edible crop parts. - Leonardite is in line with the objectives, criteria and principles of organic farming and should be included in Annex I with the following restriction: only, if obtained as a by-product of other mining activities. - Chitin is in line with the objectives, criteria and principles of organic farming and should be included in Annex I. The Group recommends that only chitin products originating from sustainable fisheries or organic aquaculture should be used. - Sapropel, as well as similar organic sediments from fresh water bodies, are in line with the objectives, criteria and principles of organic farming and should be included in Annex I, with the following restrictions: (i) Only organic sediments that are by-products of water body management, and which are extracted in ways that cause minimal negative impact on the aquatic ecosystem, should be used; (ii) Same limits for heavy metals, as given in Annex I for household waste, should be applied; (iii) Sediments rich in contaminants such as petrol-like substances should not be used. - Animal (including wild animals) by-products of category 3 and digestive tract content (category 2), co-digested with organic materials included in Annex I, are in line with the objectives, criteria and principles of organic farming and should be included in Annex I with the following restrictions: (i) animal by-products must not be from factory farming; (ii) not to be applied to edible crop parts. - The technique of carbon dioxide enrichment should be considered in general discussions on a set of standards for organic protected cropping. In the opinion of the group, carbon dioxide rebalancing, as well as enrichment to elevated levels, is not in contradiction to the Council regulation. The group concluded that certain forms of carbon dioxide enrichment techniques could be in line with organic farming principles. However, the group has not concluded whether carbon dioxide from all origins should be acceptable. The Group has also drafted the template for the dossier mentioned in Art. 16(3)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) 834/2007 in relation to fertilizers and soil conditioners. Finally, the Group noted that the compositional requirements in Annex I of Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 for „composted or fermented household waste‟ and for „products and by-products of animal origin […]‟ require a limit of “0” for Cr (VI). The group agreed that it would be more appropriate to write "not detectable" instead of “0”.