| Title | Effectiveness of ecotechnologies in agriculture for the recovery and reuse of carbon and nutrients in the Baltic and boreo-temperate regions: a systematic map |
|---|---|
| ID_Doc | 27542 |
| Authors | Macura, B; Piniewski, M; Ksiezniak, M; Osuch, P; Haddaway, NR; Ek, F; Andersson, K; Tattari, S |
| Title | Effectiveness of ecotechnologies in agriculture for the recovery and reuse of carbon and nutrients in the Baltic and boreo-temperate regions: a systematic map |
| Year | 2019 |
| Published | Environmental Evidence, 8.0, 1 |
| Abstract | Background Agriculture is the main sector responsible for nutrient emissions in the Baltic Sea Region and there is a growing pressure to identify cost-effective solutions towards reducing nitrogen and phosphorus loads originating from farming activities. Recycling resources from agricultural waste is central to the idea of a circular economy, and has the potential to address the most urgent problems related to nutrients use in the food chain, such as depletion of natural phosphorus reserves, water pollution and waste management. This systematic map examined what evidence exists relating to the effectiveness of ecotechnologies in agriculture for the recovery and reuse of carbon and/or nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) in the Baltic Sea region and other comparable boreo-temperate systems. Methods We searched for both academic and grey literature. English language searches were performed in 5 bibliographic databases and search platforms, and Google Scholar. Searches in 36 specialist websites were performed in English, Finnish, Polish and Swedish. The searches were restricted to the period 2013 to 2017. Eligibility screening was conducted at two levels: title and abstract (screened concurrently for efficiency) and full text. Meta-data was extracted from eligible studies including bibliographic details, study location, ecotechnology name and description, type of outcome (i.e. recovered or reused carbon and/or nutrients), type of ecotechnology in terms of recovery source, and type of reuse (in terms of the end-product). Findings are presented here narratively and in a searchable database, and are also visualised in a web-based evidence atlas (an interactive geographical information system). In addition, knowledge gaps and clusters have been identified in the evidence base and described in detail. Results We found 173 articles studying the effectiveness of 177 ecotechnologies. The majority of eligible articles were in English, originated from bibliographic databases and were published in 2016. Most studies with reported locations, and given our boreo-temperate scope, were conducted in Europe and North America. The three most prevalent ecotechnologies in the evidence base (collectively 40.7%) were; soil amendments, anaerobic digestion and (vermi)composting. Manure was the principal waste source used for recovery of nutrients or carbon, making up 55.4% of the all studies in evidence base, followed by a combination of manure and crop residues (22%). There were 51 studies with 14 ecotechnologies that reported on recovery of carbon and nutrients together, predominantly via (vermi)composting and anaerobic digestion. Only 27 studies focused on reuse of recovered nutrients and carbon through soil amendments. Conclusions This systematic map report provides an evidence base that can be useful for researchers and decision-makers in policy and practice working on transformation from linear to circular economy in the agricultural waste sector. Three potential topics for future systematic reviews are: (1) effectiveness of products recovered from different types of agricultural wastes as soil amendments or fertilizers; (2) effectiveness of anaerobic digestion as an ecotechnology used for recovery of nutrients and carbon; (3) effectiveness of composting and/or vermicomposting as ecotechnologies used for recovery of nutrients and carbon. |
Similar Articles
| ID | Score | Article |
|---|---|---|
6235
|
Haddaway, NR; Piniewski, M; Macura, B What evidence exists relating to effectiveness of ecotechnologies in agriculture for the recovery and reuse of carbon and nutrients in the Baltic and boreo-temperate regions? A systematic map protocol(2019)Environmental Evidence, 8, 1 | |
| 26352
|
Johannesdottir, SL; Macura, B; McConville, J; Lorick, D; Haddaway, NR; Karczmarczyk, A; Ek, F; Piniewski, M; Ksiezniak, M; Osuch, P What evidence exists on ecotechnologies for recycling carbon and nutrients from domestic wastewater? A systematic map(2020)Environmental Evidence, 9, 1 | |
| 21493
|
Haddaway, NR; Johannesdottir, SL; Piniewski, M; Macura, B What ecotechnologies exist for recycling carbon and nutrients from domestic wastewater? A systematic map protocol(2019)Environmental Evidence, 8.0, 1 | |
| 6201
|
Callesen, GM; Pedersen, SM; Carolus, J; Johannesdottir, S; López, JM; Kärrman, E; Hjerppe, T; Barquet, K Recycling Nutrients and Reducing Carbon Emissions in the Baltic Sea Region-Sustainable or Economically Infeasible?(2022)Environmental Management, 69, 1 | |
| 25335
|
Barquet, K; Järnberg, L; Rosemarin, A; Macura, B Identifying barriers and opportunities for a circular phosphorus economy in the Baltic Sea region(2020) | |
| 23546
|
Smol, M; Preisner, M; Bianchini, A; Rossi, J; Hermann, L; Schaaf, T; Kruopiene, J; Pamakstys, K; Klavins, M; Ozola-Davidane, R; Kalnina, D; Strade, E; Voronova, V; Pachel, K; Yang, XS; Steenari, BM; Svanström, M Strategies for Sustainable and Circular Management of Phosphorus in the Baltic Sea Region: The Holistic Approach of the InPhos Project(2020)Sustainability, 12, 6 | |
| 16523
|
Hosseinian, A; Pettersson, A; Ylä-Mella, J; Pongrácz, E Phosphorus recovery methods from secondary resources, assessment of overall benefits and barriers with focus on the Nordic countries(2023)Journal Of Material Cycles And Waste Management, 25, 5 | |
| 1633
|
Aarikka-Stenroos, L; Kokko, M; Pohls, EL Catalyzing the circular economy of critical resources in a national system: Case study on drivers, barriers, and actors in nutrient recycling(2023) |