Håvard Steinshamn
Research Professor
(+47) 906 82 643
havard.steinshamn@nibio.no
Place
Tingvoll
Visiting address
Gunnars veg 6, 6630 Tingvoll
Biography
Authors
Kristian Hansen Matthias Koesling Håvard Steinshamn Bjørn Gunnar Hansen Tommy Dalgaard Sissel HansenAbstract
In this study, 200 Norwegian dairy farms were analyzed over three years to compare greenhouse gas emissions, nitrogen (N) intensity, gross margin, and land use occupation between organically and conventionally managed farms. Conventionally managed farm groups were constructed based on propensity matching, selecting the closest counterparts to organically managed farms (n=15). These groups, each containing 15 farms, were differentiated by an increasing number of matching variables. The first group was matched based on geographical location, milk quota, and milking cow units. In the second match, the proportion of milking cows in the total cattle herd was added, and in the third, the ratio of milk delivered to milk produced and concentrate usage per dairy cow were included. The analysis showed that the conventionally managed farms (n=185) had higher greenhouse gas emissions (1.42 vs 0.98 kg CO2 per 2.78 MJ of edible energy from milk and meat, calculated as GWP100-AR4) and higher N intensity (6.9 vs 5.0 kg N input per kg N output) compared to the organic farms (N=15). When comparing emissions per kg of energy-corrected milk (ECM) delivered, conventional farms also emitted more CO2 (1.07 vs 0.8 kg CO2 per kg ECM). Furthermore, conventionally managed farms showed lower gross margins both in terms of NOK per 2.78 MJ edible energy delivered (5.8 vs 6.5 NOK) and per milking cow unit (30 100 vs 34 400 NOK), and they used less land (2.9 vs 3.6 m² per 2.78 MJ edible energy delivered) compared to organic farms. No differences were observed among the three conventionally managed groups in terms of emissions, N intensity, land use occupation, and gross margin.
Authors
Martha Irene Grøseth Linda Karlsson Håvard Steinshamn Marianne Johansen Alemayehu Kidane Egil PrestløkkenAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Martha Irene Grøseth Linda Karlsson Håvard Steinshamn Marianne Johansen Alemayehu Kidane Sagaye Egil PrestløkkenAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Division of Food Production and Society
Potential of biorefining fresh and preserved forages for year-round green protein supply in Norway
This YeRoP-project (Potential of biorefining fresh and preserved forages for
Division of Forest and Forest Resources
#Amazing grazing - bærekraftig kjøtt og ull fra sau som beiter i norsk utmark
Kjøtt og ull fra norske sauer kommer fra gårder med ulikt ressursgrunnlag, ulike driftsopplegg og ulik ressursbruk. I dette prosjektet skal vi undersøke sauebonden sitt driftsopplegg, forbrukeren sin innsikt, og rammevilkårene som både bonden og forbrukeren må forholde seg til. Hvordan kan produksjonen forbedres, og hvordan kan forbrukeren få mer kunnskap og nærhet til hva beitebruk bidrar med gjennom produktene?
Division of Food Production and Society
Visions and the consequences - analysing visions for Norwegian agriculture and its consequences for food security
In the FOSIP project (Visions and the consequences - analysing visions for Norwegian agriculture and its consequences for food security) we will assess and evaluate the foundation, support, opportunities, and limitations for the goal of increased agri-food self-sufficiency in Norway and assess how far an increase will contribute to improved national food security.
.jpg?quality=60)
Division of Food Production and Society
Cultivating sustainable changes in livestock feed production and feeding practices (Feed&Feeding)
The project will evaluate various strategies for feed production and feeding practices to enhance the sustainability of Norway's food system and support national agricultural policy goals. These strategies include adjusting livestock diets, improving breeding and animal health, and introducing new protein sources for feed. The project will assess environmental impacts, such as land use changes, greenhouse gas emissions, soil carbon levels, nutrient balances, and biodiversity, as well as socioeconomic impacts, including food security, economic and social sustainability, and the viability of rural communities.