Main authors: R.K. Laursen, F. Bondgaard, P. Schipper, K. Verloop, L. Tendler, R. Cassidy, L. Farrow, D. Doody, F. A. Nicholson, J. R. Williams, I. Wright, J. Rowbottom, I. A. Leitão, A. Ferreira, B. Hasler, M. Glavan, A. Jamsek, N. Surdyk, J. van Vliet, P. Leendertse, M. Hoogendoorn and L. Jackson-Blake.
Editor: Jane Brandt
Source document: »R.K. Laursen et al. (2019) Evaluation of Decision Supports Tools. FAIRWAY Project Deliverable 5.2 216 pp


Contents table
1. Approach and methodology
2. Decision support tools evaluated in the case study sites
[Note: The Appendix referred to below is included in the »full report

1. Approach and methodology

The selecting, testing and implementation of the evaluation of the DSTs was carried out in three phases.

  1. Selection and planning During Phase 1 each FAIRWAY case study site focused on finalising the selection of DSTs they would test and/or demonstrate. To help this process the participating case study sites were asked to fill out Evaluation Scheme 0 (See Appendix). This required the participating case study sites to re-evaluate the 36 DSTs (see Table 5 in report D5.1, Nicholson et al., 2018) identified as of national importance to the project partner countries for managing nitrate and pesticide losses to water as part of Task 5.1, and identify barriers for transferring a DST into a new context. Once the case study sites had selected a set of DSTs for testing, the planning of the 2nd and 3rd phases started, and each case study site produced a workplan for the testing and/or demonstration of the DSTs (the workplans are presented in Part 2 of this report).
  2. Testing and demonstration In Phase 2, the participating case study sites established bilateral contact with the owners of the DSTs and obtained access to the software. Pre-testing of the DSTs then started, and any necessary test datasets were prepared. At the beginning of this phase, Evaluation Scheme 1 (See Appendix) was completed. The evaluation scheme was designed to help the MAP leaders evaluate the selected DSTs further with regard to scale, data requirements, level of experience/training required, stakeholders etc. Once the pre-testing of a DST had proven successful (i.e. the case study site could obtain software access, get support from the owner of the DST and provide the required input data), the testing of the DST and evaluation of results started. In many case study sites this also included demonstration of the DST to relevant stakeholders and recording of the outcomes.
  3. Implementation In Phase 3, the participating case study sites evaluated the possibilities for implementation of each the DSTs (or parts of the DST) in a national or federal state context, based on the results and findings of the testing. This was further discussed during a workshop held the 12th of March 2019 at Aarhus University, Roskilde, DK. At the workshop the results of the testing of the DSTs were demonstrated and implementation discussed.

2. Decision support tools evaluated in the case study sites

The DSTs selected for testing and/or demonstration by the participating FAIRWAY case study sites are listed in Table 1, which also notes the target application in terms of nitrate or pesticides and the scale of application.

Table 1. DSTs selected for test and/or demonstration by the participating FAIRWAY case study sites.

No. Case study site DSTs selected for test and/or demonstration Scale Target N: Nitrate Pe: Pesticide
1 Island Tunø (DK) A historical case study where testing of a DST is not relevant as the problem has been solved    
2 »Aalborg (DK) Environmental Yardstick for Pesticides* (NL);
SIRIS ** (FR);
TargetEconN ** (DK)
On-farm use (*);
catchment scale and regional scale (**)
3 »Anglian Region (UK) Environmental Yardstick for Pesticides (NL) On-farm use Pe
4 »La Voulzie (FR) SIRIS (FR) Catchment scale Pe
5 »Lower Saxony (DE) Mark Online (DK);
On-farm use N
6 North Greece (GR) Not involved in this task.    
7 »Derg catchment (IE) SCIMAP** (UK)
Phytopixal** (FR);
Farmscoper* (UK)
On-farm use (*);
catchment and regional scale (**)
8 »Overijssel (NL) Düngeplanung (DE) On-farm use N
9 »Noord Brabant (NL) Plant Protection Online (DK) On-farm use Pe
10 Vansjø (NO) Not involved in this task    
11 »Baixo Mondego (PT) MANNER-NPK (UK) On-farm use N
12 Arges-Videa (RO) Not involved in this task    
13 »Dravsko Polje (SI) ANCA (NL) On-farm use N

The main results and conclusions of the testing and demonstration of the DSTs (and any mitigation measures incorporated within them) in the participating FAIRWAY case study sites are discussed in »DST evaluation results and discussion.



For full references to papers quoted in this article see »References

Download the full report for the Annex and original figures and tables


Go To Top