Publications
NIBIOs employees contribute to several hundred scientific articles and research reports every year. You can browse or search in our collection which contains references and links to these publications as well as other research and dissemination activities. The collection is continously updated with new and historical material.
2025
Authors
Micheloni, Cristina Oudshoorn, Frank Willem Raigon Jimenez, Maria Dolores Autio, Sari Beste, Andrea Blanco Penedo, María Isabel Bourin, Marie-Christine Goracci, Jacopo Matthias Koesling Kretzschmar, Ursula Malusá, Eligio Speiser, Bernhard van der Blom, Jan Wäckers, Felix Amador, Alberto Auranmaa, Kirsi Brugger, Harald Burkart, Crinna Cozzo, Riccardo Hansen, Max Milan, Marlene Molteni, Roberto Perez Calvo, Maria del Mar Raffaitin, Pauline Rauch, Thomas Sossidou, Evangelia Waidelich, AnneAbstract
Considering the most recent technical and scientific information available to the experts, the Group is requested: (5) to agree on the criteria for evaluation of substances for cleaning and disinfection to be applied to all fields of organic production where the use of such agents is necessary to maintain a high level of food hygiene. (6) to make a proposal for a negative list of substances with unwanted properties based on the above defined criteria. (7) to carry on some worked examples of evaluation of prioritized dossiers submitted by the Member States on products for cleaning and disinfection based on the criteria agreed: i. Hydrogen peroxide (DK) ii. Sodium percarbonate (hydrogen peroxide released from sodium percarbonate, DK) iii. Sodium hydroxide (NL) iv. Glutaraldehyde (SE) v. Chlorine dioxide (NO) vi. Calcium hypochlorite (FR) vii. Peracetic acid (FR) viii. Formic acid (FR) ix. Sodium hypochlorite (FR) x. Iodophors (FR) xi. Dipotassium peroxodisulfate + potassium peroxomonosulfate (SE) xii. Fatty acid potassium salt (SE) xiii. Methane sulfonic acid (probably GER, the request was made by BASF Ludwigshafen) (8) to schedule the work for evaluating the rest of the substances on the Commission priority list. For the preparation of its report the Group was invited to examine technical dossiers provided to the Commission by the Member States and suggest amendments to the Annex IV to the Regulation (EU) 2021/1165.
Authors
Micheloni, Cristina Oudshoorn, Frank Willem Raigon Jimenez, Maria Dolores Autio, Sari Beste, Andrea Goracci, Jacopo Matthias Koesling Kretzschmar, Ursula Malusá, Eligio Raigon Jimenez, Maria Dolores Speiser, Bernhard van der Blom, Jan Wäckers, Felix WAIDELICH, Anne AMADOR, Alberto AURANMAA, Kirsi BRUGGER, Harald BURKART, Corinna COZZO, Riccardo HANSEN, Max MOLTENI, Roberto PEREZ CALVO, Maria Del Mar RAFFAITIN, Pauline RAUCH, Thomas SOSSIDOU, Evangelia WÖLBITSCH-MILAN, MarleneAbstract
The Expert Group for Technical Advice on Organic Production (EGTOP, thereafter called ‘the Group’) was asked to prepare a technical advice about the applicability of detergents (referred to in the organic legislation as ‘products for cleaning’) and biocidal products (referred to in the organic legislation as ‘products for disinfection’) in organic production. The use of biocidal products and detergents in organic production must be compliant with the Biocidal Products Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 and the Regulation (EC) No 648/2004 on Detergents.
Authors
Micheloni, Cristina Oudshoorn, Frank Willem Blanco Penedo, María Isabel Autio, Sari Beste, Andrea Goracci, Jacopo Matthias Koesling Kretzschmar, Ursula Malusá, Eligio Raigon Jimenez, Maria Dolores Speiser, Bernhard van der Blom, Jan Wäckers, Felix ROINSARD, Antoine ESKILDSEN, MariaAbstract
This report responds to the European Commission’s request for technical advice from EGTOP on the compliance of innovative building systems for pigs with organic farming principles and regulations, particularly those outlined in Regulation (EU) 2018/848 and implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/464 . These systems integrate indoor barns with covered outdoor areas but generally lack direct access to open air areas, preferable pasture. The Group assessed these systems in light of organic principles, animal welfare standards, environmental impacts, structural design, biosecurity risks, farmer working conditions, and consumer expectations. The assessment considered scientific literature, existing EU legislation, and the core values of organic production: health, ecology, fairness, and care. The Group acknowledges that these innovative modular systems may offer improvements in thermal comfort, increased outdoor area, manure management, and labor efficiency in confined conditions. In the system under assessment, the available indoor surface appears reduced compared to the requirements outlined in organic standards (Regulation (EU) 2020/464, Articles 11 and 12), while outdoor access would not be guaranteed during adverse weather conditions. The limited indoor area risks compromising animal welfare, falling below the minimum standards of organic production, as animals may be left without sufficient space or opportunities to express natural behaviours under such circumstances.
Authors
Tuanjit Sritongchuay Michael Beckmann Bo Dalsgaard Alexandra Maria Klein Angela Lausch Anders Nielsen Julia Osterman Peter Selsam Kanuengnit Wayo Ralf SeppeltAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Åsa Maria Olofsdotter Espmark Endre Grimsbø Sonal Patel Espen Rimstad Kristin Opdal Seljetun Marco Vindas Erik Georg Granquist Grete H. M. Jørgensen Janicke Nordgreen Ingrid Olesen Amin Sayyari Tor Atle MoAbstract
VKM has assessed animal welfare during stunning and killing of farmed fish in Norway. This report gives an overview of species differences which have significance for the slaughter procedures. The general conclusion is that there is a general lack of scientific documentation to meet the legislation stating that fish must remain unconscious after stunning until death by exsanguination. VKM also finds a risk of reduced animal welfare due to lack of documentation of the time from gill or cardiac cutting to cessation of brain activity. Further research and documentation are needed to understand how different behavioural and physical measurements conducted at the slaughter facility, correspond with the electroencephalogram (EEG) measurements of unconsciousness.
Abstract
Organic farming has sparked discussions about environmental sustainability, conservation, health and community involvement. In essence, it represents a broader shift in societal values, paving the way for a more sustainable and socially responsible future that includes all segments of society. This chapter thoroughly investigates the multi-faceted socio-economic impacts of organic agriculture, including economic, social and cultural dimensions. It also addresses the difficulties that farmers face when transitioning to organic farming methods and offers solutions to these difficulties. Its primary goal is to provide readers with the necessary knowledge to capitalize on the socio-economic benefits of organic farming while effectively addressing the associated challenges. The chapter focuses on how organic agriculture can promote sustainable livelihoods, boost economic well-being, and increase social and environmental resilience. It also highlights the potential of organic farming to drive long-term growth and revitalize rural landscapes.
Abstract
The literature shows that organic farming has become the centre of policies aiming to achieve sustainable agriculture due to its environmental benefits, such as increased biodiversity, reduced greenhouse emissions, etc. However, there is a gap in the literature on the productivity effects of organic farming over and above the conventional method to understand whether widely converting conventional farms pays off. The current study estimated the productivity function using a semi-parametric smooth-coefficient (SPSC) approach based on unbalanced panel data set from Norwegian dairy and crop farms during 1991 to 2020. The results show that organic farming, compared to conventional farming, increase productivity for most of the dairy farms, while for crop farms the effect is mixed. This finding suggests that organic farming for many farms can yield a productivity higher than or equal to conventional farming. However, the results depend on the farm under consideration, and there exists a large degree of heterogeneity among the farms. Likewise, the technical change is heterogeneous, indicating that some farms underwent technical progress (regress) or a neutral change during the study period. Finally, the returns to scale (RTS) are at the mean about 0.89 and 1.05 for dairy and crop farms, respectively, implying that these farms operate at a decreasing (increasing) returns to scale and can improve their productivity by decreasing (increasing) the current scale of operation.
Abstract
Case study
Authors
Narta ElshaniAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered