1. Ecological footprint of different production systems (conventional, integrated, organic, biodynamic) Prof. Dr. Martina Bavec and Prof. Dr. Franc Bavec “International Seminar on Sustainable Technology Development” Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) Vilanova i la Geltrú, Spain June 20 2013 2011

2. Content Introduction (production methods) Organic farming Standards Ecological footprint Methods Results Earthworms C content LCA – ecological foot print Conclusions Agriculture in the future

3. 3 Technological development in agriculture and food processing in the last century… World food security is threatened, More and more civilisation illnesses in developed world, Model of industrial agriculture brought numeurous environmental problems. TODAY TOMORROW? consumers market producers consumers producers market Globalisation Not fair payments Environmental problems Local food for local market Working places in the region Lower transport costs Less pollution New partner- ship, CSA

4. BAN of synthetic pesticides, mineral fertilizers, GMO BAN of preventive veterinary treatments, tied animals, GMO feed What is organic farming? EC Regulation 834/2007, 889/2008 Bavec M. et al. Sredstva in smernice za ekološko kmetijstvo. Maribor, p.15

5. 5 Organic Agriculture is also interesting for an export Organic agricultural products are based on traditional production techniques Cost efficiency and labor-intensive character New stringent environmental and health-related requirements in key export markets for conventional agricultural products: – Mandatory traceability of all agricultural products – Mandatory HACCP – Hazard Analysis of Critical Control Points – Very stringent MRL – Maximum Residue Levels for Pesticides Ulrich HOFFMANN, 2004 UNCTAD

6. “Output”s of organic agriculture Tasty and healthy food from the highest quality Environment protection (soil, water, air) Preserving biodiversity Animal welfare Short food supply chains Healthy working place Organic agriculture is the only realy sustainable agriculture production system!

7. Definition: Standard = A document approved by a recognized body, that provides for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines or characteristics for products or related processes and production methods, with which compliance is not mandatory. It may also include or deal exclusively with terminology, symbols, packaging, marking or labelling requirements as they apply to a product, process or production method. 7

8. Standard can assure safety tracebility quality 8

9. Position of the product on the market depends 20% of demands is covered by standards 80% of demands is covered by legislation 20% 80% 9

10. 10 Private associations started to develop organic standards more than 40 years ago, and today at least 100 regional or national organic standards have been developed worldwide.

11. Standard examples Based on state regulations, rules,… – Organic farming (EU834/2007) – Geographical domain,… – Integrated production in Slovenia Chains standards – EUREP GAP = GLOBAL G.A.P. – BCR British Retail Consortium – IFS International Food Standard Voluntary national and/or producers groups guidelines – AMA Gütesiegel - Austia, – QS Qualität und Sicherheit GmbH - Germany, – Thema TQM - Finland, – Swedish Seal - Sweden, – Agri Confiance in Quali'Terre - France, – Kvalitetssystem i landbruket - Norway, – Keten Kwaliteit Melk - Nederland, – More independent schemes in Denmark defined by export markets of food GMO “free erzeugt” in Austria 11

12. Standards The importance of the Regulation, bearing in mind that many Member States and private institutions may have their own standards in place, is that it establishes common requirements across the EU and does not discriminate between different areas or bodies. This offers greater confidence to consumers when they buy organic produce from another Member State to their own. World level (FAO and WHO) Codex Alimentarious – 170 states members EU level (2092/91 from 1st of Jan.2009 834/2007 and 889/2008) National OF legislation (also in EU members, NOP, JAS,…) Standards on international level: IFOAM, DEMETER Standards on the national level: Biodar (Slovenia), Naturland, Bioland (Germany), BioSuisse, BioAustria,…. 12

13. Agriculture evaluations? 70% of water is used in agriculture and rest for industry and for people!

14. Environmental impacts of production systems (PS) Earthworms number and mass as indicator of living soils C content in the soil Ecological foot print calculation as a tool for evaluating sustainability of production system Energy consumption of PS

15. Materials and methods University Agriculture Centre Pohorski dvor (UKC) near Maribor in NE Slovenia, 2007 – 2010, (46°28N, 15°38E, 282 m a.s.l.) “Food quality dependent on agricultural production method” (national basic research project, leader of project M. Bavec): –Conventional (CON), integrated (INT), organic (ORG), and bio-dynamic (BD) + control –Crop rotations: typical crops for region: two years red-clover grass, winter wheat, white cabbage (cv. Kranjsko okroglo) and oil pumpkins); alternative crops: two years of red-clover grass mixture, spelt, red beet (cv. Rote kugel) and false flax). Complete-block split-plot design, 4 repl.

16. Production system Soil cultivation and basic operations Weed managementPest managementManure application Conventional farming according to the Slovene agriculture act and GAP Plowing, seedbed preparation, sowing, harvesting Preventive use of herbicides according to GAP, harrowing when needed Preventive use of pesticides according to GAP NPK and N mineral fertilizers used according to GAP and nutrient removal estimates Integrated farming according to Slovene standards for Integrated farming Plowing, seedbed preparation, sowing, harvesting Use of herbicides according to the rules of INT management, harrowing at least once Curative use of pesticides according to the rules of INT management NPK and N mineral fertilizers used based on soil analysis and nutrient removal estimates Organic farming according to the EC regulation on Organic Farming Plowing, seedbed preparation, sowing, harvesting Harrowing 2-5 times/season, cover crops after cereals Use of some natural pesticides (Neem-oil, BT extract) on vegetable crops when needed 1,4 LU of cattle manure /ha Biodynamic farming according to Demeter International production standards and EC regulation on Organic Farming Plowing, seedbed preparation, sowing, harvesting Harrowing 2-5 times/season, cover crops after cereals Use of BD preparations, some natural pesticides (Neem-oil, BT extract) on vegetable crops when needed 1,4 LU of composted cattle manure /ha with added BD compost preparations Control plotsPlowing, seedbed preparation, sowing, harvesting Harrowing 1-3 times/season none Some our results comparing 4 production systems – (Quality of food dependent on agriculture production method - basic national research project 2007 – 2010)

17. Earthworms number and mass as indicator of living soils

18. Earthworms number (light colour) and mass (dark colour) as indicator of living soils Control Conventional Integrated Organic Bioynamic

19. C content in the soil

22. Ecological footprint …aims to estimate the biologically productive area needed to produce materials and energy used by the population of a certain region (city, state, world). The calculated area is compared to the area available to a certain population or individual, called the biocapacity. In cases where the ecological footprint is greater than the biocapacity, we are in a state where human consumption exceeds the natural carrying capacity. http://www.bestfootforward.com/media/bff/img/splitfoot.gi f Haberl H., Erb K. and Krausmann F. 2001. How to calculate and interpret ecological footprints 25 for long periods of time: the case of Austria 1926-1995. Ecological Economics 38:25-45.

23. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/ecological_footprint_atlas_2010

26. Global ecological footprint in 2007 United Arabian Emirates 10.7, DK 8.3 and USA 8.0 gha/person Increase from 1,7 gha/person in 1961 to 2,7 gha/person in 2007. Global Footprint Network 13. 10. 2010

27. Ecological foot print, biocapacity and ecological defficit in some states Vir: GFN, Footprint for Nations, 2010

28. Slovenia http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/ecological_footprint_atlas_2010 Find some details of your country and compare it to USA and India!

29. LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) … assesses the environmental burden caused by a product, a production process, or any activity to provide services (Curran 2008). It takes into account the technological processes of all activities along the life cycle, from the provision of basic materials to transportation into and from the production unit to the production process itself and finally the use phase of any product and its safe disposal. It is based on an eco-inventory identifying all material and energy flows exchanged with the environment along the whole life cycle. These flows are then evaluated with an appropriate ecological evaluation method. The result can be interpreted on a per unit of product basis (kg) or equivalent area (ha), where areas used outside of the production unit are included (van den Werf et al. 2007). Curran M. 2008. Life-Cycle Assessment. In Encyclopedia of Ecology. Oxford: Academic Press. pp. 2168-2174 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B9636-4SY6CH0-4 65/2/2e654cee8012428556d25f07fb80fb49. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B9636-4SY6CH0-4 65/2/2e654cee8012428556d25f07fb80fb49 van der Werf H. M., Tzilivakis J., Lewis K. and Basset-Mens C. 2007. Environmental impacts of farm scenarios according to five assessment methods. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 118:327-338.

30. Sustainable process index – SPI combines LCA and ecological footprint (Narodoslawsky and Krotscheck, 1995, 1996, 2000,...) http://fussabdrucksrechner.at/ (http://spionexcel.tugraz.at/) Narodoslawsky M. and Krotscheck C. 1995. The sustainable process index (SPI): evaluating processes according to environmental compatibility. Journal of Hazardous Materials 41:383- 397.

31. SPI SPIonExcel tool The Sustainable Process Index (SPI), developed by Krotscheck and Narodoslawsky (1996), is based on the assumption that a sustainable economy builds only on solar radiation as natural income. Most natural processes are driven by this income and the earth’s surface acts as the key resource for the conversion of solar radiation into products and services. Global surface area is a limited resource in a sustainable economy, and anthropogenic as well as natural processes compete for this resource. Therefore area to embed a certain process sustainably into the ecosphere is a convenient measure for ecological sustainability; the more area a process needs to fulfil a service, the more it “costs” from an ecological sustainability point of view. Krotscheck C. and Narodoslawsky M. 1996. The Sustainable Process Index a new dimension in ecological evaluation. Ecological Engineering 6:241-258.

32. SPI Human activities exert impacts on the environment in different ways. On the one hand they need resources, energy, manpower and area for installations. On the other hand they produce emissions and waste besides the intended goods. Consequently the SPI includes all these different aspects of ecological pressure on the environment and translates them into surface area required by the process. The conversion of mass and energy flows into area is based on two general “sustainability principles”: Principle 1: Anthropogenic mass flows must not alter global material cycles; as in most global cycles (like the carbon cycle) the flow to long-term storage compartments is the rate-defining step of these dynamic global systems; flows induced by human activities must be scaled against these flows to long-term stores. Principle 2: Anthropogenic mass flows must not alter the quality of local environmental compartments; here the SPI method defines maximum allowable flows to the environment based on the natural (existing) qualities of the compartments and their replenishment rate per unit of area.

33. The modified SPIonExcel tool calculates a total ecological footprint (Atot) that is the area necessary to embed the whole life cycle generating a product (e.g. wheat) into the ecosphere. Atot is calculated from “partial footprints” using the following equation: Atot=Al+A fp+Am+As (m 2) (1) Al stands for the footprint of direct land use, Afp for the footprint fertilizer and pesticide, Am for the footprint derived for machinery use and As for the footprint of seed use. Partial footprints were calculated directly from the experimental field trial data, except for the footprints of seed use, which were determined by using Eq. (2) from the intermediate footprint (up to seed) of a production system: As= Al+A fp+Am / Y a × QSa (m 2) (2) Ya stands for quantity (yield) of a crop produced in one year and QSa for the quantity of seed used in a year. From the attained total ecological footprint, an additional overall footprint per unit was calculated,namely: atot = Atot /Y a (m2/kg) (3) atot gives an appraisal of the “cost” in terms of ecological sustainability of a given product or service by indicating how much surface area is needed to produce one unit of a product, in our case wheat or spelt grain.

34. The area derived from the above calculation can be related to the area that is statistically available to a person. This relation then represents the fraction of the “sustainable ecological budget” for a person consuming the product in question provided by a particular production system. This value is called the SPI: SPI = atot / ainh × 1000 (4) As the number would be too small if given on a per-kg basis, it was multiplied by 1000 to give it on a per-ton basis and to better visualize differences between production systems. The efficiency of a production system in providing a good or service is however better expressed through the Ecological Efficiency of Production (EEP) calculated in Eq. (5). It provides us with the information on how much of a good or service can be produced on one hectare of surface area in one year with the process or system under study, embedding the provision of this good or service totally and sustainably in the ecosphere. EEP= Y a / Atot × 10 000 (kg/ha) (5)

35. BAVEC, Martina, NARODOSLAWSKY, Michael, BAVEC, Franc, TURINEK, Matjaž. Ecological impact of wheat and spelt production under industrial and alternative farming systems. Renewable agriculture and food systems, 2012, letn. 27, št. 3, str. 242-250, doi: 10.1017/S1742170511000354. 10.1017/S1742170511000354

36. Primerjava 30 ekoloških in 81 konvencionalnih kmetij v Nemčiji ( Küstermann & Hülsbergen, 2008) 1.Emisije TGP 785 kg CO 2 eq./ha/leto 2. Input energije 5.6 GJ/ha 3. Vezava v humusu 415 kg CO 2 eq/ha 1.Emisije TGP 2.162 kg CO 2 eq./ha/leto 2. Input energije12.6 GJ/ha 3. Razkroj – mineralizacija iz organske snovi tal 150 kg CO 2 eq/ha Ekološko kmetijstvo Konvencionalno kmetijstvo 2,75x manj BAVEC, Martina, NARODOSLAWSKY, Michael, BAVEC, Franc, TURINEK, Matjaž. Ecological impact of wheat and spelt production under industrial and alternative farming systems. Renewable agriculture and food systems, 2012, letn. 27, št. 3, str. 242-250, doi: 10.1017/S1742170511000354.10.1017/S1742170511000354 Ecological footprint (gha/ha)

37. BAVEC, Martina, NARODOSLAWSKY, Michael, BAVEC, Franc, TURINEK, Matjaž. Ecological impact of wheat and spelt production under industrial and alternative farming systems. Renewable agriculture and food systems, 2012, letn. 27, št. 3, str. 242-250, doi: 10.1017/S1742170511000354.10.1017/S1742170511000354

38. BAVEC, Martina, NARODOSLAWSKY, Michael, BAVEC, Franc, TURINEK, Matjaž. Ecological impact of wheat and spelt production under industrial and alternative farming systems. Renewable agriculture and food systems, 2012, letn. 27, št. 3, str. 242-250, doi: 10.1017/S1742170511000354. 10.1017/S1742170511000354

39. BAVEC, Martina, NARODOSLAWSKY, Michael, BAVEC, Franc, TURINEK, Matjaž. Ecological impact of wheat and spelt production under industrial and alternative farming systems. Renewable agriculture and food systems, 2012, letn. 27, št. 3, str. 242-250, doi: 10.1017/S1742170511000354. 10.1017/S1742170511000354

40. Climate change – organic agriculture has for 40-60% less GHG emissions compared to integrated and conventional farming Ecological foot print of 5 plants in different production systems Ecological foot print of production systems Source: Basic research projct “Food quality dependent on different production system.” done on UM in collaboration with TU Graz

41. Cabbage http://www.bestfootfor ward.com/edia/bff/im g/splitfoot.gif Production area Machinery Fertilizers and pesticides BDORGIPCONNO

42. Ecological foot print Ecological footprint of beetroot and cabbage in different production systems. Opatija 2010. Matjaž Turinek, Maja Turinek, Silva Grobelnik Mlakar, Franc Bavec, Martina Bavec

43. Ecological efficiency of production systems From the attained footprint an additional ecological efficiency of production systems was calculated using the following equation: Ecological efficiency of production = The SPI as calculated by Eq. (1) gives an indication of the “cost” in terms of ecological sustainability of a given product or service (Sandholzer and Narodoslawsky, 2007). The number indicates what fraction of the overall “ecological budget” of a production system is used to provide this good or service. Lower values indicate better ecological efficienccy. Ecological footprint of beetroot and cabbage in different production systems. Opatija 2010. Matjaž Turinek, Maja Turinek, Silva Grobelnik Mlakar, Franc Bavec, Martina Bavec

44. Ecological efficiency of production systems – oil pumpkins (m2/kg yield) Source: Basic research projct “Food quality dependent on different production system.” done on UM in collaboration with TU Graz - Diploma work of M. Turinek (2009)

45. Ecological footprint of PS of two vegatables in Dolenci 2009-2011 CabbageRed beat ŠTRAUS, Saša. Potencialni indikatorji za ocenjevanje trajnosti v pridelavi hrane na njivah : doktorska disertacija = Potential indicators for sustainability assessment of food production on the field level : ph. d. thesis. Maribor: [S. Štraus], 2012. XVIII, 184, [5] f., ilustr. http://dkum.uni-mb.si/Dokument.php?id=52423.http://dkum.uni-mb.si/Dokument.php?id=52423

46. Conclusions PS with lower agricultural inputs (NO, BD, ORG) has mainly better quality performance. The importance of seasonal variability is noted and a need for detailed PS comparisons in successive years under controlled conditions is discussed. Ecological footprints of PS are not significantly different between CON and IP, but significantly lower in ORG and BD production of vegetables whereas also ecological efficiency was higher. Organic vegetables are demanded among consumers also as guarantee for less exposure to the pesticides and have special importance due to the fact that they are eaten mostly fresh But, in organic vegetable production are needed inventive, new technologies based on traditional knowledge to assure high, stable, high quality and also profitable yields on organic farms! Results are an output of the research project J4-9532 “The quality of food depended on the agricultural production method” funded by the Slovenian Research Agency.

47. Agriculture in the future? Food - energy "The limits of growth are met and spoken to a thinking in circles again. Agriculture is facing a profound change because of biological resources can be described only with the paradoxical concept of a 'limited infinity'. They will in time be available indefinitely, but can not substitute for continued growth in business just fossil fuels. An estimated net primary production of about 50-60 Gt / a is of biogenic carbon compared with an estimated consumption of about 45 Gt / a of carbon in 2050, when energy, chemical raw materials and food will be covered so that would serve virtually the whole of nature for man” (Narodoslawsky, nov. 2007, Alpe Adria Biosymposium). What areas of supply (food, energy, raw materials) should be to covered agriculture? Where are the limits of demands in order to ensure long-term fertility of the soil (water, humus, nutrients)? What is the contribution of agriculture in reducing the dangerous ecological problems (fixation of carbon in the soil to reduce the greenhouse effect) and what should be paid for these services? What logistics should be created to permit the return of remains?

48. Some open questions of organic farming? How can organic farmers produce enough food in ecologically, environmentally and socially sustainable ways without adopting a specialized industrial model of production and distribution? How can advocates of organic farming promote an agriculture that is local, small-scale and family operated, biologically and culturally diverse, humane, and socially just? Is it possible to replace the industrial agriculture model with a new vision of farming deeply rooted in the original precepts of organic agriculture? Altieri and Nicholls, 2005. Agroecology and the Search for a Truly Sustainable Agriculture

49. Necessary changes include the following: Increase public investments in agroecological research methods with active participation of organic farmers, thus replacing top-down transfer of standardized technology model with participatory technology development and farmer-centred research and extension, emphasizing principles rather than recipes or technological packages. Changes in policies to stop subsidies of conventional technologies and to provide support and incentives for agro ecological approaches. Appropriate equitable market opportunities including fair market access and expand local farmers markets and CSAs (Community Supported Agriculture or subscription farming) with pricing systems accessible to all. Create policies that intervene in the market by opening opportunities for local organic producers (i.e. ordinances that mandate all food served in school and university cafeterias should be organic). Democratize and provide flexibility to the certification process, encouraging appearance of solidarious (no-cost certification, based on mutual trust) locally adapted certification. Include farm size and social-labour considerations in organic standards, and limit certification against operations that leave a large ecological footprint. Therefore, a major challenge for the future entails promoting institutional and policy changes to realize the full potential of a truly organic approach. Altieri and Nicholls, 2005. Agroecology and the Search for a Truly Sustainable Agriculture

50. Developement dilemas? industral or sustainable - organic

51. Some new trends

52. Thank you! Welcome to visit University of Maribor Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences 52

53. Further readings - from our research group(1) 1.01 Original scientific articles BAVEC, Martina, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, ROZMAN, Črtomir, PAŽEK, Karmen, BAVEC, Franc. Sustainable agriculture based on integrated and organic guidelines: understanding terms : The case of Slovenian development and strategy. Outlook Agric., 2009, letn. 38, št. 1, str. 89-95. [COBISS.SI-ID 2762028], [JCR, WoS,]2762028JCRWoS TURINEK, Matjaž, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, BAVEC, Martina, BAVEC, Franc. Biodynamics agriculture research progress and priorities. Renewable agriculture and food systems, 2009, letn. 24, št. 2, str. 146-154, doi: 10.1017/S174217050900252X. [COBISS.SI-ID 2777644], [JCR, WoS, citations 4]10.1017/S174217050900252X 2777644JCRWoS BAVEC, Martina, TURINEK, Matjaž, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, SLATNAR, Ana, BAVEC, Franc. Influence of industrial and alternative farming systems on contents of sugars,organic acids, total phenolic content, and the antioxidant activity of red beet (Beta vulgaris L. ssp. vulgaris Rote Kugel). J. agric. food chem., 2010, letn. 58, str. 11825- 11831, doi: 10.1021/jf103085p. [COBISS.SI-ID 3023916], [JCR, WoS]10.1021/jf103085p3023916JCRWoS

54. (2) HECZKO, Jiří, GSELMAN, Anastazija, TURINEK, Matjaž, BAVEC, Martina, KRISTL, Janja. Organic carbon content in soils of long-term field trial : comparison of analytical methods. Agricultura. [Print ed.], 2011, letn. 8, št. 1, str. 17-22. [COBISS.SI-ID 3203116]3203116 BAVEC, Martina, NARODOSLAWSKY, Michael, BAVEC, Franc, TURINEK, Matjaž. Ecological impact of wheat and spelt production under industrial and alternative farming systems. Renewable agriculture and food systems, v tisku, 2011, doi: 10.1017/S1742170511000354. [COBISS.SI-ID 3184428], [JCR] 10.1017/S17421705110003543184428JCR PREVOLNIK, Maja, OCEPEK, Marko, ČANDEK POTOKAR, Marjeta, BAVEC, Martina, ŠKORJANC, Dejan. Growth, carcass and meat quality traits of pigs raised under organic or conventional rearing systems using commercially available feed mixtures = Rastnost, klavne lastnosti in kakovost mesa prasičev, vzrejenih v ekološkem ali konvencionalnem načinu reje z uporabo komercialno dostopnih krmnih mešanic. Slov. vet. res.. [English ed.], 2011, vol. 48, no. 1, str. 15-26. [COBISS.SI-ID 3573352], [JCR, WoS]3573352JCRWoS

55. (3) 1.02 Review scientific articles (2) TURINEK, Matjaž, TURINEK, Maja, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, BAVEC, Franc, BAVEC, Martina. Ecological efficiency of production and the ecological footprint of organic agriculture. Revija za geografijo, 2010, št. 5-2, str. 129-139. [COBISS.SI-ID 2969132]2969132 BAVEC, Franc, TURINEK, Matjaž, ŠTRAUS, Saša, BAVEC, Martina. How to rich a 'greener' CAP beyond 2013 based on organic farming. Ecologica, 2011, letn. 18, št. 63, str. 373-382. [COBISS.SI-ID 3213868]3213868 1.06 Invited lectures (1) BAVEC, Franc, BAVEC, Martina. Situation, experiances and expectation in agriculture and agri- environmental measures after acceptance of European common agricultural policy (CAP) in Slovenia. V: POSPIŠIL, Milan (ur.). 46th Croatian and 6th International Symposium on Agriculture, Opatija, Croatia, February 14-18, 2011. Proceedings. Zagreb: University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture: = Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Agronomski fakultet, 2011, str. 19-29. [COBISS.SI- ID 3089708]3089708

56. (4) 1.08 Published lectures(11) BAVEC, Martina, BAVEC, Franc. Organic agriculture in Slovenia. V: HORVAT, Uroš (ur.), GOSAR, Anton (ur.), LORBER, Lučka (ur.), VOVK KORŽE, Ana (ur.). New challenges for sustainable rural development in the 21st century, Sustainable development in Slovenian regions. Maribor: Department of Geography, Faculty of Arts, 2009, str. 74-82, ilustr. [COBISS.SI-ID 17044232]17044232 BAVEC, Martina, ROBAČER, Martina, REPIČ, Polonca, POŠTRAK, Nevenka, TURINEK, Maja, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, TURINEK, Matjaž, BAVEC, Franc. Ekološko kmetijstvo kot trajnostna razvojna priložnost za Slovenijo = Organic agriculture as a sustainable development opportunity for Slovenia. V: LISEC, Andrej (ur.). III. mednarodni posvet Logistika v kmetijstvu, Sevnica, Slovenija, 18. 11. 2009. Zbornik referatov. V Mariboru: Fakulteta za logistiko, 2009, 18 f. [COBISS.SI-ID 2874412]2874412 TURINEK, Matjaž, TURINEK, Maja, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, BAVEC, Franc, BAVEC, Martina. Ecological footprint of oil pumpkin and false flax production - the case for organic and biodynamic farming. V: International conference on Organic agriculture in scope of environmental problems, Famagusta, Cyprus Island, 3-7 February 2010. Book of proceedings, (EMCC Publications). 2nd ed. Famagusta: European Mediterranean Conferences Conventions, 2010, str. 161-163. [COBISS.SI-ID 3102764]3102764 TURINEK, Matjaž, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, BAVEC, Franc, BAVEC, Martina. Sensory properties of red beet from different farming systems. V: International conference on Organic agriculture in scope of environmental problems, Famagusta, Cyprus Island, 3-7 February 2010. Book of proceedings, (EMCC Publications). 2nd ed. Famagusta: European Mediterranean Conferences Conventions, 2010, str. 164-167. [COBISS.SI-ID 3103020]3103020

57. (5) TURINEK, Matjaž, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, BAVEC, Franc, BAVEC, Martina. Sensory properties of red beet from different farming systems. V: International Conference on Organic Agriculture in Scope of Environmental Problems, Famagusta, Cyprus Islands, 03-07 February 2010. Book of proceedings. Famagusta: [s. n.], 2010, str. 158-161. [COBISS.SI-ID 3042348]3042348 ŠTRAUS, Saša, BAVEC, Franc, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, TURINEK, Matjaž, BAVEC, Martina. Sensory evaluation of beetroot juice from organic, intergrated and conventional production systems. V: 2nd International conference on horticulture post-graduate study, Lednice, 30 - 31 August 2010. Conference proceedings. Brno: Mendel University, 2010, str. 107-110. [COBISS.SI-ID 3013420]3013420 ŠTRAUS, Saša, BAVEC, Franc, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, TURINEK, Matjaž, BAVEC, Martina. Sensory evaluation of sauerkraut from organic, integrated and conventional production systems. V: WERY, Jacques (ur.). 11th ESA Congress, Montpelier, France, August 29th - 3rd September, 2010. Proceedings of the Agro 2010. Montpellier: Agropolis international editions, 2010, str. 653-654. [COBISS.SI-ID 2991404] 2991404 TURINEK, Matjaž, TURINEK, Maja, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, BAVEC, Franc, BAVEC, Martina. Ecological footprint of beetroot and cabbage in different production systems. V: MARIĆ, Sonja (ur.), LONČARIĆ, Zdenko (ur.). 45th Croatian and 5th International Symposium on agriculture, Opatija, Croatia, 15th-19th February 2010. Zbornik radova. Osijek: Poljoprivredni fakultet Sveučilišta Jurja Strossmayera u Osijeku: =Faculty of Agriculture University of Josip Juraj Strossmayer in Osijek, 2010, str. 147-151. [COBISS.SI-ID 2907180] 2907180

58. (6) VOLK, Marko, MALENŠEK, Jernej, PREVOLNIK, Maja, ŠEGULA, Blaž, ŠKRLEP, Martin, ČANDEK POTOKAR, Marjeta, BAVEC, Martina. Differences in carcass and meat quality between organically reared cocks and capons. V: KAPŠ, Miroslav (ur.). Animal science days, (Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus, vol. 76, Number 3, 4). [Zagreb]: Universities of the quadrilateral agreement, 2011, str. 153-155. [COBISS.SI-ID 3656040]3656040 BAVEC, Martina, PRAŠNIČKI, Miha, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, TURINEK, Matjaž, ROBAČER, Martina, BAVEC, Franc. Influence of different production systems on body mass and number of earthworms. V: POSPIŠIL, Milan (ur.). 46th Croatian and 6th International Symposium on Agriculture, Opatija, Croatia, February 14-18, 2011. Proceedings. Zagreb: University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture: = Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Agronomski fakultet, 2011, str. 61-65. [COBISS.SI-ID 3090732]3090732 OCEPEK, Marko, PREVOLNIK, Maja, ČANDEK POTOKAR, Marjeta, BAVEC, Martina, ŠKORJANC, Dejan. Možnosti reje ekoloških prašičev v Sloveniji in primerjava z konvencionalno rejo glede na proučevane rastne, pitovne, klavne lastnosti in kakovost mesa = Organic pig production opportunities in Slovenia and comparison with conventional rearing on growth, carcass and meat quality. V: VOMBERGAR, Blanka (ur.), GRGAN, Vesna (ur.). Zbornik. Maribor: Izobraževalni center Piramida, Višja strokovna šola, 2011, str. 139-149. [COBISS.SI- ID 3200044]3200044

59. (7) TURINEK, Matjaž, TURINEK, Maja, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, BAVEC, Franc, BAVEC, Martina. Energy efficiency and the ecological footprint of organic agriculture. V: MOHAR, Tjaša (ur.), LORBER, Lučka (ur.). New challenges for sustainable rural development in the 21st century, Abstracts. Maribor: Department of Geography, Faculty of Arts, 2009, str. 76. [COBISS.SI-ID 2799660]2799660 PREVOLNIK, Maja, OCEPEK, Marko, ČANDEK POTOKAR, Marjeta, BAVEC, Martina, ŠKORJANC, Dejan. The effect of housing (conventional vs. organic) on growth, carcass and meat quality in pigs. V: VÁCLAVKOVÁ, Eva (ur.). Research in pig breeding : International workshop, Kostelec nad Orlici, September 9th 2009. Kostelec nad Orlici: Výzkumný ústav živočišné výroby, 2009, str. 15-16. [COBISS.SI-ID 3094376]3094376 BAVEC, Martina, TURINEK, Matjaž, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, MIKOLA, Nadja, BAVEC, Franc. Some internal quality properties of white cabbage from different farming systems. V: RALLO, Luis (ur.). 28th International Horticultural Congress, Lisbon, August 22-27, 2010. Science and Horticulture for people : abstracts. [S. l.]: International Society for Horticultural Science, 2010, str. 674, S14.301. [COBISS.SI-ID 3054380]3054380

60. (8) ŠTRAUS, Saša, BAVEC, Martina, BAVEC, Franc. Content of mineral components in red beet (Beta vulgaris L. ssp. vulgaris Rote Kugel) from different production systems. V: PULKRABOVÁ, Jana (ur.), TOMANIOVÁ, Monika (ur.), KAHL, Johannes (ur.), HAJŠLOVÁ, Jana (ur.). Book of abstracts. Prague: Institute of Chemical Technology, ICT Prague Press, 2011, str. 111. [COBISS.SI-ID 3143212]3143212 BAVEC, Martina, ROBAČER, Martina, GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, MARINC HRŽENJAK, Virgilija, LAPAJNE, Lara, SIMONOVIČ, Zoran, TURK, Karl, MLAKAR, Boštjan, BAVEC, Andrej, BAVEC, Franc. Organic and conventional diet influenced organophosphorous pesticide metabolites in urine. V: PULKRABOVÁ, Jana (ur.), TOMANIOVÁ, Monika (ur.), KAHL, Johannes (ur.), HAJŠLOVÁ, Jana (ur.). Book of abstracts. Prague: Institute of Chemical Technology, ICT Prague Press, 2011, str. 133. [COBISS.SI-ID 3143468]3143468 GROBELNIK MLAKAR, Silva, TURINEK, Matjaž, MLASKO, M., BAVEC, Franc, BAVEC, Martina. Decomposition of cabbage as affected by different production systems. V: Postharvest storage of vegetables and fruits in western Balkan countries : Book of abstracts. Novi Sad; Skopje; Lešak; Sombor: Faculty of agriculture: Faculty of agricultural sciences and food: Faculty of agriculture: Agricultural extension service, 2011, str. 26. [COBISS.SI-ID 3210028]3210028