Literature DB >> 23706481

Modelling the cost-effectiveness of mitigation methods for multiple pollutants at farm scale.

R D Gooday1, S G Anthony, D R Chadwick, P Newell-Price, D Harris, D Duethmann, R Fish, A L Collins, M Winter.   

Abstract

Reductions in agricultural pollution are essential for meeting nationally and internationally agreed policy targets for losses to both air and water. Numerous studies quantify the impact of relevant mitigation methods by field experimentation or computer modelling. The majority of these studies have addressed individual methods and frequently also individual pollutants. This paper presents a conceptual model for the synthesis of the evidence base to calculate the impact of multiple methods addressing multiple pollutants in order to identify least cost solutions for multiple policy objectives. The model is implemented as a farm scale decision support tool that quantifies baseline pollutant losses for identifiable sources, areas and pathways and incorporates a genetic algorithm based multi-objective procedure for determining optimal suites of mitigation methods. The tool is generic as baseline losses can be replaced with measured data and the default library of mitigation methods can be edited and expanded. The tool is demonstrated through application to two contrasting farm systems, using survey data on agricultural practices typical of England and Wales. These examples show how the tool could be used to help target the adoption of mitigation options for the control of diffuse pollution from agriculture. The feedback from workshops where Farmscoper was demonstrated is included to highlight the potential role of Farmscoper as part of the farm advisory process.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Diffuse pollution; Farmscoper; Mitigation methods; Modelling

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23706481     DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.04.078

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  5 in total

1.  Does cattle and sheep grazing under best management significantly elevate sediment losses? Evidence from the North Wyke Farm Platform, UK.

Authors:  S Pulley; L M Cardenas; P Grau; S Mullan; M J Rivero; A L Collins
Journal:  J Soils Sediments       Date:  2021-03-13       Impact factor: 3.308

2.  Tackling unintended consequences of grazing livestock farming: Multi-scale assessment of co-benefits and trade-offs for water pollution mitigation scenarios.

Authors:  Yusheng Zhang; Bruce Griffith; Steve Granger; Hadewij Sint; Adrian L Collins
Journal:  J Clean Prod       Date:  2022-02-15       Impact factor: 9.297

3.  Assessing the potential impacts of a revised set of on-farm nutrient and sediment 'basic' control measures for reducing agricultural diffuse pollution across England.

Authors:  A L Collins; J P Newell Price; Y Zhang; R Gooday; P S Naden; D Skirvin
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 7.963

Review 4.  Small Water Bodies in Great Britain and Ireland: Ecosystem function, human-generated degradation, and options for restorative action.

Authors:  William D Riley; Edward C E Potter; Jeremy Biggs; Adrian L Collins; Helen P Jarvie; J Iwan Jones; Mary Kelly-Quinn; Steve J Ormerod; David A Sear; Robert L Wilby; Samantha Broadmeadow; Colin D Brown; Paul Chanin; Gordon H Copp; Ian G Cowx; Adam Grogan; Duncan D Hornby; Duncan Huggett; Martyn G Kelly; Marc Naura; Jonathan R Newman; Gavin M Siriwardena
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 7.963

5.  Current advisory interventions for grazing ruminant farming cannot close exceedance of modern background sediment loss - Assessment using an instrumented farm platform and modelled scaling out.

Authors:  A L Collins; Y Zhang; H R Upadhayay; S Pulley; S J Granger; P Harris; H Sint; B Griffith
Journal:  Environ Sci Policy       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 5.581

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.