Ex-post evaluation of N2O reductions co-benefits ensuing from nitrogen

management policiesBased on study commissioned by DG Clima

Support collection and assessment of information and data on climate and energy policies in the context of the European Semester and the

Energy Union governance, including ex-post policy evaluation

Introduction

• Starting point• EEA database on climate change mitigation policies and

measures in Europe (PAM database)

• Previous studies • Detailed EU-wide assumptions based scenario modelling for

2000-2008• Various approaches used in country or regional analyses

• Aims1) Gather evidence on policy effects2) Consider relevance of econometric analysis to GHG policies in

agriculture

Approach: qualitative and quantitative

• Single geographic area: time series • Multiple geographic areas: panel analysis

Policy intervention

Fertiliser manufacture

Crop biological fixation

Nitrous Oxide

(N2O)

IPPC

(secondary)

Crop for food

and animal

feed &

grassland

Livestock

farming

Leached & runoff

nitrate (NO3-)

Water pollution

Nitrate

Directive

IPPC

(primary)

Further emission of

N2O and NOx

Ammonia

(NH3)

Nitrogen

Oxides (NOx)

Natural

Ecosystems

Ammonium

nitrate in

rain

N2 → Nr

N2 → Nr

Nr in feed

Manure Nr

Sources: adapted from DLO, et al. (2011) and own assessment.

Co-benefit pathway: nitrogen management and N2O emissions

Variable of interest: direct soil N2O emissions

• Relatively uncertain estimate

• International reporting convention limitations

Variable of interest: Gross Nitrogen Balance

• Indirect link: affects multiple pollutants

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

'85 '87 '89 '91 '93 '95 '97 '99 '01 '03 '05 '07 '09 '11 '13

Gross Nitrogen Balance, kg N/hectare/year

Austria Denmark Hungary Ireland Italy Netherlands UK

Variable of interest: synthetic fertiliser consumption

• More data available

• Contribution to direct soil

emissions ranges between

26%-57% across sample countries

and study years.0

50

100

150

200

250

300

'85 '87 '89 '91 '93 '95 '97 '99 '01 '03 '05 '07 '09 '11 '13

Fertiliser consumption

Austria Denmark Hungary Ireland

Italy Netherlands UK

'85 '86 '87 '88 '89 1990 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 2000 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 2010 '11 '12 '13 '14

Nitrate Directive

N2O & GNB

“Before policy” data, crowded policy space and attribution challenges

Fertiliser consumption

CAP de-couplingCross-compliance

IPPC Bref

ATDKNL

DK AT IRNL

UK IT

Other factors:

-Livestock and dairy production

-Changes in crop patterns

-∆ fertiliser prices compared to ∆ agricultural product prices

-Weather

-Funding streams

-etc.

Cross country analysis

• Should, in principle, provide the advantage of assessing different levels of policy stringency, e.g.:• % of NVZ coverage and

• a more complex analysis including parameters such as manure N limit on grass and nutrient management planning.

• However, sample size and reverse causality between starting nitrogen surplus and policy stringency in our sample does not allow conclusions to be drawn.

Within country analysis: time series

• Time trend and lag approach

• Analysis “per hectare” on average per country. Ideally should include relevant agricultural production aspects such as livestock, dairy and crop production as well as weather; within the analysis time-frame this would require more data-points, possibly in the form of regional analysis.

• Only control for fertiliser prices.

• Despite the limitations, overall, the nature of the results is as expected on basis of our literature review.

Denmark

Gross Nitrogen Balance and Inorganic fertiliser in kg N / hectare / y; Direct soil N2O in 100g / hectare / y

Negative significant coefficient of impact of Nitrate Directive on all three variables of interest.

The Netherlands

Negative significant coefficient of impact of Nitrate Directive on all three variables of interest.

Gross Nitrogen Balance and Inorganic fertiliser in kg N / hectare / y; Direct soil N2O in 100g / hectare / y

Ireland

Negative significant coefficient of impact of Nitrate Directive on all three variables of interest, but some policy attribution limitations due to timing.

Gross Nitrogen Balance and Inorganic fertiliser in kg N / hectare / y; Direct soil N2O in 100g / hectare / y

The UK

Negative significant coefficient of impact of Nitrate Directive on synthetic fertiliser use and on gross nitrogen balance but not on direct soil N2O, timing affects attribution.

Gross Nitrogen Balance and Inorganic fertiliser in kg N / hectare / y; Direct soil N2O in 100g / hectare / y

Austria

Negative significant coefficient of impact of Nitrate Directive on all three variables of interest: regression controlling for time, but not significant when controlling for lagged variable.Increasing trends from 2007 onwards.

Gross Nitrogen Balance and Inorganic fertiliser in kg N / hectare / y; Direct soil N2O in 100g / hectare / y

Italy

Negative coefficients, but estimation limited by patchy fertiliser price data. Negative coefficients, but results more uncertain than for other Member States

Gross Nitrogen Balance and Inorganic fertiliser in kg N / hectare / y; Direct soil N2O in 100g / hectare / y

Conclusions

• Individual country success stories depend on awareness and measurement, including through nutrient management planning at farm level. Implementing such nutrient planning does not come without associated costs.

• Both national instruments and ND implementation can lead to nitrogen surplus and fertiliser use reductions.

• Regional breakdown recommended for econometric ex-post evaluation approaches.

• Cross-country comparison: requires further methodological consideration and standardisation of N2O data estimation.

Thank you!