Hopp til hovedinnholdet

Publikasjoner

NIBIOs ansatte publiserer flere hundre vitenskapelige artikler og forskningsrapporter hvert år. Her finner du referanser og lenker til publikasjoner og andre forsknings- og formidlingsaktiviteter. Samlingen oppdateres løpende med både nytt og historisk materiale. For mer informasjon om NIBIOs publikasjoner, besøk NIBIOs bibliotek.

2011

Til dokument

Sammendrag

On small dairy farms, high investment costs and lack of investment capital may delay the modernising of facilities. The aim of this study was to investigate the importance of economics of scale in building costs of barns compared to other sources of variation in costs. The study includes 44 farms with a mean herd size of 49.5 ± 15.1 cows, built between year 1999 and 2006 and with a mean total area in the barns of 896 ± 454 m2. Building cost data were obtained from farmers and merged with construction, mechanisation and layout data from the same barns. Construction costs decreased up to approximately 1250 m2 while mechanisation costs and total building costs decreased up to approximately 1000 m2. A further increase in building area had only limited effect on the building costs per m2. Models including explanatory variables showed that milking and service area was significantly more expensive than other areas. AMS-barns were all together not significantly more expensive than other barns, since the increased mechanisation cost is offset by a lower requirement for milking area. Farmers remodelling their barns were able to realise a modernised building for a certain herd size for a lower cost compared to a completely new building. The use of their own effort varied considerably between projects. In many cases, farmers would be able to find alternative income sources with a higher hourly rate than the value of their own effort suggested by the model.

Sammendrag

The recent flooding episode in Norway from May this year shows the necessity of understanding the processes of water discharge from small tributaries feeding the larger river systems. The major objective of the recently started ExFlood project is to define and analyze measures to combat negative impact of extreme weather events on infrastructure in small watershed areas in Norway and to incorporate this in a land use planning tool. Urban, agriculture, nature, and forest areas and infrastructure elements demands different approaches concerning impacts of and opportunities for extreme weather events. The approach of the ExFlood project is to reduce the peak flow and delay the peak time to avoid damages on infrastructure. Three municipalities from different climate regions in Norway contribute to the project where the planning tool will be tested, and an experimental catchment site is selected to conduct in depth process studies.

Til dokument

Sammendrag

This paper analyzes the capabilities of three different governance regimes for adequately handling uncertain and unknown effects of genetically modified (GM) crops. Adequate handling requires the development of sound procedures for identification of uncertainty and ignorance (U&I), reduction of U&I, decisions on how to treat irreducible U&I and monitoring of unexpected effects. The nature of U&I implies, however, that these procedures will be highly incomplete. Governance mechanisms that facilitate cooperative adaptation and communicative rationality are therefore needed. The three governance regimes (GRs) compared are: GM-crops are produced by private firms and these firms are made liable for harm (GR1); GM-crops are produced by private firms and the government decides whether the crops should be marketed (GR2); and GM-crops are produced and the government decides whether the crops should be marketed (GR3). The effect of bringing the civil society into the decision-making process is also analyzed. GR3 will be stronger in cooperative adaptation and communicative rationality than GR2. Public research organizations have fewer conflicts of interest with the government than private firms, and academic norms are important. Difficulties in proving harm and identifying the responsible firm will make GR1 weak in cooperative adaptation and communicative rationality.