This article was downloaded by: [Arif Setya]

On: 27 January 2015, At: 06:43

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Environmental Sciences
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nens19

The quality of European (EU-15)

greenhouse gas inventories from
agriculture
a

Adrian Leip , Ulrich Dmmgen , Peter Kuikman & Andr Van

Amstel

Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Joint Research

Centre European Commission , Ispra, (VA), Italy
b

Federal Agricultural Research Centre, Institute of Agroecology ,

Braunschweig, Germany
c

Soils Centre Alterra , Wageningen, UR, The Netherlands

Environmental Systems Analysis , Wageningen University , The

Netherlands
Published online: 16 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: Adrian Leip , Ulrich Dmmgen , Peter Kuikman & Andr Van Amstel (2005) The
quality of European (EU-15) greenhouse gas inventories from agriculture, Environmental Sciences,
2:2-3, 177-192, DOI: 10.1080/15693430500393177
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15693430500393177

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

Environmental Sciences
June-September 2005; 2(2-3): 177 192

The quality of European (EU-15) greenhouse gas

inventories from agriculture

MMGEN2, PETER KUIKMAN3, &

ADRIAN LEIP1, ULRICH DA
VAN AMSTEL4
ANDRE

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Joint Research Centre European Commission, Ispra
(VA), Italy, 2Federal Agricultural Research Centre, Institute of Agroecology, Braunschweig, Germany,
3
Soils Centre Alterra, Wageningen UR, The Netherlands, 4Environmental Systems Analysis,
Wageningen University, The Netherlands

Abstract
The European Community is the only regional economic integration organization that has joined the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as a party. The EU-15 has
committed itself to report annually on greenhouse gas inventories within the area covered by its EU-15
Member States. The quality of the EC-inventory depends strongly on the quality of the national
greenhouse gas inventories, including the comparability of the methodologies used and the definitions
applied. This paper reviews the actual quality of the national inventory reports of the EU-15 Member
States submitted in 2005 and the resulting quality of the EU-inventory, focusing on the sector
agriculture of the Common Reporting Format. For this sector, a workshop to improve inventory
quality was organized at the Joint Research Centre (European Commission). The most uncertain source
category in the majority of greenhouse gas inventories is N2O emissions from agricultural soils. Even
though the body of information on factors influencing the magnitude of this emission source is already
considerable, well designed experimental studies, particularly in southern and eastern European climate
regions are needed. Still, it will be unlikely that measurement programmes alone will be sufficient to
reduce the uncertainty in this source category. Rather the use of process based models will have to play a
role in the future in the inventory process for estimating N2O emissions directly or in the frame of a
broader modelling framework that ensures a holistic view of the impact of agriculture on the
environment.

Keywords: EC greenhouse gas inventory, agriculture, methodologies, uncertainty, correlations

1. Introduction
The European Union stated in 1996 that it believes that global average temperatures should
not exceed 2 K above pre-industrial level (EU Council 1996). This target has since then been
re-affirmed on several occasions. Recent research indicates, however, that an increase of 2 K
above pre-industrial times might not be regarded as safe, as local temperature increases can be

Correspondence: Adrian Leip, Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Joint Research Centre European Commission, Ispra
(VA), I-21020, Italy. E-mail: adrian.leip@jrc.it
ISSN 1569-3430 print/ISSN 1744-4225 online 2005 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/15693430500393177

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

178

A. Leip et al.

higher and cause dangerous effects such as the melting of the Greenland ice-sheet (e.g. Hare
& Meinshausen 2004). In view of these findings, the European Commission recently issued a
communication to parliament Winning the Battle against Climate Change describing the
major elements as part of a future climate change strategy (Commission of the European
Communities 2005). These must be based on adequate political and economic instruments,
sound scientific results on the effects and impacts of climate change, the opportunities for
mitigation, and a robust knowledge of the strength of anthropogenic sources of greenhouse
gases.
According to the emission inventory of the European Community, greenhouse gas
emissions from the 15 Member States of the European Communities in 2003 decreased by
1.7% with respect to baseline conditions in 1990 (EEA 2005). The inventory of the European
Community (EC-inventory) has some peculiarities as it is built on the national inventories of
the 15 countries (EU-15) that were members of the European Union in 2002 when the EC
signed the Kyoto Protocol. It formed the so-called European bubble with individually
assigned quantified emission limitations or reduction commitments (Council of the European
Union 2002). Each Member State has its own history and structure of the inventory system.
This offers an advantage as it represents a natural disaggregation into regions, each of them
focusing on the most important categories. It stimulates exchange of experience between the
experts. But it also poses problems as in each Member State the availability of statistical
information is based on national traditions and classifications. These may not be congruent.
The relative contribution of agriculture as reported in sector 4 agriculture of the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) common reporting format
to total European anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions is comparatively small (10%). The
majority (99.5%) of agricultural emissions is CH4 and N2O emissions from enteric
fermentation, manure management and agricultural soils; 0.5% is CH4 emissions from rice
cultivation. However, the uncertainty of agricultural emissions has a significant impact on the
overall uncertainty of national greenhouse gas inventories; N2O from agricultural soils in
particular is dominating the national uncertainty estimates for most countries (Monni et al.
2004, Rypdal and Flugsrud 2001).
In order to improve the greenhouse gas inventory in the EU for agriculture, a workshop on
the quality of estimates for N2O emissions from agricultural soils was organized at the Joint
Research Centre, Ispra, Italy, 21 22 October 2004. Specific objectives of the workshop were
(i) the links between different source categories in agriculture and the inventory for ammonia
emissions, (ii) the use of Tier 3 approaches (process-based models), and (iii) recommendations to improve comparability, transparency and completeness of reporting of N2O emissions
from agricultural soils.
Discussions resulted in a list of specific recommendations, both directed at the EU Member
States for improving current reporting and the current process of the 2006 revision of the
IPCC guidelines.
2. Aspects of quality for inventories
An inventory is usually regarded as being of high quality, if the uncertainty of the estimates is
low. But the quality of an inventory includes other criteria as well, such as transparency and
documentation, consistency in time series, and a well established system for quality assurance
and quality control. The uncertainty of an inventory is determined by the choice of methods,
combined with the use of accurate, applicable and representative emission factors, an
adequate disaggregation of the activities, and appropriate collation and use of activity data. It
is further affected by factors that are beyond the control of the inventory agency, such as a lack

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

Greenhouse gas inventories

179

of data or errors in experimental data, or insufficient insight into the processes. Thus, an
inventory associated with low uncertainty can still be of poor quality, and, more frequently, it
is possible that an inventory is of high quality in spite of high uncertainty (Rypdal and
Winiwarter 2001).
In principle, uncertainty is composed of systematic errors (bias) and random errors.
Oenema et al. (2003) identified five sources of bias (personal, sampling, measurement, data
manipulation and fraud) and two sources of errors (sampling and measurement). Random
errors lead to a stochastic variation of the results around the true mean, while this mean is
shifted in biased distributions.
Operationally, the sources of uncertainty might be related to structural inaccuracy, which is
inherent to the calculation procedure and to the input value inaccuracy (Van Aardenne 2002).
Input value inaccuracy can be caused by lack of data and knowledge, and spatial and temporal
variability. All of these can be active both at the plot or field scale as well as at a regional
or national scale, being introduced in the upscaling process (e.g. Kroeze et al. 2003). These
are related to (i) uncertainty in the input data as (statistical) information on activities;
(ii) insufficient information on the relationship between input data and emission fluxes due to
either lack of experimental data or process understanding to support emission factors or
functions; and (iii) inadequate representation of the regional circumstances not covering the
whole range of the spatial variation.
2.1. National emission inventories for agriculture in Europe
Within the EC the reported data on agricultural emissions are considered rather complete
(EEA 2005). Yet, in the national inventories underlying the EC inventory, activities may be
overlooked, disaggregated differently, calculated with different methodologies or using
different emission factors in similar circumstances. For example, certain activities are not
necessarily reported by all countries (i.e. emissions from crop residues are incomplete),
inconsistent values are used (e.g. nitrogen content in crop residues), the implied emission
factor spreads over a wide range even under similar conditions (e.g. N2O emissions from
manure management), or methodologies may vary (e.g. for CH4 fluxes in soils).
For the 2003 EC-inventory, several categories in agriculture are key sources (IPCC 2000),
i.e. CH4 emissions from enteric fermentation of cattle and sheep, CH4 emissions from
manure management of cattle and pigs, as well as direct and indirect emissions of N2O from
agricultural soils and emissions of N2O from grazing animals (EEA 2005). According to the
IPCC Guidelines (IPCC 1997), for these categories, emission estimates should be done using
methodologies higher than Tier 1 and/or using country-specific emission factors. For the
compiled EC inventory 2003, Tier 2 or higher estimates are available for only 39% of
agricultural emissions; national data are used for enteric fermentation (60%), yet a much
smaller fraction of emissions from agricultural soils (22%) is based on national Tier 2
approaches (see Table I). Due to a lack of good experimental data and clear relationships
between emission fluxes and site-specific parameters (i.e. weather, soil type, crop type,
management), most countries rely on the default IPCC emission factors with their associated
high uncertainty. For the categories direct soil emissions and animal production, the
methodology is considered national only if a country-specific emission factor has been used.
This is the case for 8% of the EC direct emissions of N2O from agricultural soils and includes
Sweden (Benediktsson et al. 2005) and The Netherlands (Klein Goldewijk et al. 2005). An
overview of the national factors used in this category is presented in Table II.
In the case of indirect N2O emissions, the parameters for volatilization of nitrogen gases
and nitrogen leaching and run-off are considered as important as the emission factors.

180

A. Leip et al.

Table I. Contribution of emission estimated with country-specific information to the total EC emission estimates
for key sources in the agriculture sector. Source: Common Reporting Format Tables and National Inventory
Reports of EU-15 Member States.

Category

Emissions
(Gg CO2-eq)

Percentage estimated with

country-specific approach

44471
65343
14665
28982
30066
20364
100401
28566
64473
397332
17096

88
37
73
19
42
13
8
1
53
39

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

4.A.1.a: Dairy cattle (CH4)

4.A.1.b: Non-dairy cattle (CH4)
4.A.3: Sheep (CH4)
4.B.1: Cattle (CH4)
4.B.8: Swine (CH4)
4.B.12: Solid storage and dry lot (N2O)
4.D.1: Direct soil emissions (N2O)
4.D.2: Animal production (N2O)
4.D.3: Indirect emissions (N2O)
Total key sources
Total non-key sources

Therefore, we regarded also those estimates as being country-specific, where the volatilization
or leaching fraction are country-specific or calculated on the basis of the national fertilizermix. It should be noted that even though the majority of countries use country-specific
fractions for volatilization of NH3 and NOx or for leaching and runoff of nitrogen (Table III),
this does not significantly reduce the very high uncertainty of this sub-category. Volatilization
would have to include N2 emissions, the amounts of which are highly uncertain.
Several papers presented at the Fourth Conference on Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases
(NCGG-4) (van Amstel 2005) suggest that the default emission factor value for indirect N2O
emissions following leaching and run-off of nitrogen applied (EF5; see IPCC 1997) could very
well be too high (Well & Weymann 2005). Especially in those cases where nitrogen ends up in
surface water or groundwater bodies relatively quickly, the emission of N2O would probably
be very low due to full anaerobic conditions. In the classic riparian zones this would not be the
case. However, a recent model run for global N2O emissions from rivers and estuaries
confirm the high estimate of the IPCC guidelines (Kroeze et al. 2005). An analysis of the
indirect N2O emissions caused by the volatilization of NH3 and NOx from agricultural
sources within a country suggested that the default emission factor underestimates the
fluxes as new data suggest higher emissions from forest soils (Denier van der Gon & Bleeker
2005). Moreover, indirect N2O emissions depend also strongly on the land cover where the
nitrogen re-deposits and different emission factors should be applied for e.g. forests and
arable land.
2.2. Uncertainty of emission inventories for agriculture
As mentioned above, uncertainties in the agriculture sector are contributing considerably to
the total uncertainty of emission inventories (EEA 2005). The total estimated uncertainty
of the national greenhouse gas inventories of the EU-15 Member States ranges from 2.5%
to 22.1% (Table IV). The Tier 1 uncertainty assessment suggested in the IPCC Good
Practice Guidance (IPCC 2000) includes the estimation of the uncertainty associated with
activity data and associated with emission factor by category, which are combined and
expressed relative to the total greenhouse gas emissions applying simple rules for error
propagation.

Greenhouse gas inventories

181

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

Table II. Methodologies and calculation of emissions of nitrous oxide across a selection of the EU-15 countries.
EF1 is the emission factor for direct emissions of N2O from nitrogen inputs.*
Country

Activity/category

Methodology

Reason

Sweden

Direct N2O

EF1 for fertilizer at

0.8% (less than
default) but for
manure higher
at 2.5%

High N2O from

animal manure
due to combination
of C and N; low
N2O from fertilizer
based on poor
relation of mineral
N and N2O in
literature

Sweden

Direct N2O

In addition to EF1,
Sweden defines a
background
emission of 0.5 kg
N2O-N ha71 a71

This background
emission is due to
previous and long
term fertilization
of soils

Netherlands

Direct N2O

EF1 for fertilizer

at 1.0% based
on measurements
available

Animal manure is
incorporated into
the soil to reduce
NH3 emissions at
the expense of
more denitrification
with N2O as result

Netherlands

Direct N2O

EF1 varies for

mineral soils (1%)
and organic
soils (2%)

Denmark, Finland,
Netherlands,
Portugal and
Sweden

Direct N2O
from
grazing

Volatilization of NH3
and NOx (e.g. 7%
for Denmark)

Reference
Kasimir-Klemedtsson
and Klemedtsson
(2002)

Kroeze (1994)

Klein Goldewijk
et al. (2005)

Some countries
correct for NH3
and NOx volatilized
before application
in the field of the
manure to make
calculations consistent
with those for N
application and NH3
volatilization

Illerup et al. (2005)

Jarvis et al. (1989)

*Default IPCC value: 0.0125 kg N2O-N/kg N (range 0.0025 0.0225).

This method is based on the assumptions that (i) the probability density functions (pdfs)
follow a normal distribution, (ii) the standard deviation of the pdfs is less than 30% and
(iii) the variables are uncorrelated. These conditions will, in practice, not always be fulfilled,
and the methodology may then be used as an approximation (IPCC 2000). Detailed
calculations with Monte Carlo analysis (Tier 2 methodology) have shown that the results of
more complicated and labour intensive uncertainty analysis methods are often not very
different (Brandes et al. 2005).
The uncertainties of the main agricultural categories in the EC inventory (enteric
fermentation, manure management and agricultural soils) relative to the total national
emissions are of the same magnitude as the uncertainty of the overall inventory for many
countries (Table IV). The latter is calculated applying the rule for combining uncertainties

3.1%
def
def

Australia

2.2%
22%
34%

Denmark

0.6%
31%
15%

Finland
def
def
def

France
5.7%
29%
def

Germany
def
def
def

Greece

Default IPCC value: 0.1 kg NH3-N NOx-N/kg of synthetic fertiliser N applied.

Default IPCC value: 0.2 kg NH3-N NOx-N/kg of N excreted by livestock.
c
Default IPCC value: 0.3 kg N/kg of fertiliser or manure N (range 0.1 0.8).

FracGASF
FracGASM
FracLEACH

Country
3.9%
17%
10%

Ireland
def
39%
def

Italy

6.2%
16%
def

Portugal

7.3%
21%
15%

Spain

1.1%
33%
21%

Sweden

def
def
def

UK

Table III. Fractions used to calculate indirect N2O emissions from agricultural soils in the inventories of the EU-15 Member States. Adapted from (EEA 2005).
FracGASF: fraction of synthetic fertiliser nitrogen applied to soil that volatilizes as NH3 and NOxa; FracGASM: fraction of livestock nitrogen excretion that volatilizes as
NH3 and NOxb; FracLEACH: fraction of nitrogen input to soils that is lost through leaching and run-off c. No information is available for EU-15 countries that are not listed
in the table (def default IPCC factor used).

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

182
A. Leip et al.

Greenhouse gas inventories

183

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

Table IV. Quantitative uncertainty estimates for greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture as estimated in the
official national inventory using the Tier 1 approach. The uncertainty estimates are expressed in 2

(standard deviation), relative to the total national greenhouse gas emissions. Adapted from EEA (2005).

Country

Year

National
total (%)

4A
CH4 (%)

4B
CH4 (%)

Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Finland
France
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Spain
Sweden
Netherlands
UK

2003
2003
2003
2003
2002
2003
2003
2001
2002
2003
2003
2002

5.5
8.1
6.8
15.9
22.1
10.8
12.2
2.5
15.8
7.2
6.0
17.96

0.31
1.2
0.5
0.7
2.3
0.6
2.83
0.7
0.8
1.2
0.54
0.5

0.7
0.0
1.3
0.1
1.4
0.2
1.2
0.4
4.4
0.3
0.85
0.1

4B
4D
N2O (%) N2O (%)
0.6
0.0
0.8
0.6
0.3
0.2
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.3
0.9

0.72
7.2
1.6
0.0
20.9
0.0
11.5
0.0
0.0
6.1
0.0
17.67

4D1
N2O (%)
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.8
0.0
5.1
0.0
0.5
8.0
0.0
1.3
0.0

4D2
4D3
N2O (%) N2O (%)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.9
0.0
0.4
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
2.9
0.0
1.2
0.0
0.7
11.8
0.0
3.1
0.0

4A: enteric fermentation; 4B: manure management; 4D: agricultural soils; 4D1: direct; 4D2: animal production;
4D3: indirect
1
Relative uncertainties: Cattle: +8%; Horses: +10%; Swine: +42%; Sheep, Goats: +62%.
2
Relative uncertainty: 24%.
3
Dairy: 0.7%; Non-dairy: 2.6%; Other livestock: 0.8%.
4
Cattle:0.5%, other livestock: 0.1%.
5
Cattle: 0.7%, swine 0.4%.
6
Total uncertainty resulting from Tier 2: analysis: 15%.
7
For Tier 2 calculation: lognormal distribution with 97.5 percentile 100 times the 2.5 percentile.

under addition. Using a simple back-calculation, Leip (2005b) separated the total uncertainty
into the (given) uncertainty associated with an agricultural category and the remaining
greenhouse gas inventory. This analysis reaffirmed clearly the importance of N2O emissions
from soils for the overall uncertainty of the greenhouse gas inventories (Monni et al. 2004,
Rypdal and Zhang 2000, Winiwarter and Rypdal 2001); this category accounts for 40 80%
of the total uncertainty for half of the countries with a quantitative Tier 1 uncertainty
assessment with the highest reduction of uncertainty in the case of the UK.
Most of this uncertainty can be related to the emission factors rather than to the activity
data. European and national statistical surveys report uncertainties for the activity data on
numbers of animals in the range from 5% to 10% (only Italy estimates a higher relative
uncertainty of 20%). This is in line with other developed countries (Dammgen 2005b).
The uncertainty of nitrogen-excretion values is expected to be of the order of 15%. The
uncertainty of the calculation of the energy requirements of the animals, at the basis of Tier 2
calculation for enteric fermentation and manure management, is expected to be of the order
of 20%. Regarding the emission factors, the uncertainty ranges from 8% to 40% for CH4 from
enteric fermentation and from 16% to 200% for CH4 emissions from manure management,
but higher uncertainties are reported for N2O emissions from manure management (50% to
400%). The highest uncertainty is associated with direct and indirect N2O emission factors
for agricultural soils of up to 900%.
Indeed, despite the high uncertainty particularly related to N2O emissions from manure
management, only the uncertainty associated to the N2O emissions from agricultural soils has
significant impact on the overall uncertainty for EC Member States (Leip 2005b).

184

A. Leip et al.

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

3. Improving greenhouse gas emission estimates from agriculture

In view of the high uncertainty of N2O emissions from agricultural soils and the current
process of the 2006 revision of the IPCC Guidelines, three main questions were discussed at a
workshop on the quality of the EC inventory for agricultural N2O emissions: (i) How and to
which extent can this uncertainty be reduced? (ii) How can consistency and coherence of
estimating agricultural emissions be improved and how can mitigation options be identified
and triggered also in the reporting guidelines? (iii) What is or will in the future be the role of
process-based models for reporting of N2O emissions? A list of 29 specific recommendations,
both directed at the EU Member States for improving current reporting and to the current
process of the 2006 revision of the IPCC guidelines were formulated1. These recommendations express the need to look at nutrient cycling in agriculture with a holistic view by
considering all chemical species and all emission routes, towards the atmosphere with
relevance for climate change and for air pollution but also towards the hydrological system in
a consistent and comprehensive way. Such an approach would improve the quality of
emission inventories, reduce biases, and create synergies between policies (e.g. under the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on LongRange Transboundary Air Pollution). It would facilitate the assessment of trade-off effects
between environmental problems and provide a backbone for mitigation policies. Still, a
major challenge is the quality of emission factors; while there is already some evidence for
relative differences between, for example, cultivation systems and fertiliser types, substantial
research and monitoring is still required. In the long term, process-based models can be
useful tools.
3.1. Reducing uncertainty
Variability of N2O fluxes in space and in time, and variability in indirect emissions pathways is
one of the largest sources of uncertainty for estimating N2O emissions from agricultural soils.
In single field studies for direct N2O fluxes, coefficients of variation up to 200% have been
observed and the variability in fluxes can be explained with the major soil parameters, such as
soil organic carbon, pH, and soil moisture (e.g. Granli & Bckman 1994, Yanai et al. 2003).
Also year-to-year variability is very high and is mainly driven by the weather (e.g. Baggs et al.
2003). This variability is overlaid with effects that are active at a larger scale, such as climatic
differences, management systems, variations in soils type and landscape morphology at a
medium to large scale.
High N2O emissions are frequently observed related to springtime freezing/thawing events
(e.g. Flessa et al. 1995, Maljanen et al. 2004). These emissions are typically very large and can
represent about half of the annual total emissions (Regina et al. 2004). These high emissions
are mainly explained by the increased availability of organic material due to the death of
microorganisms (Granli & Bckman 1994). A similar effect is given for cylces of wetting and
drying (e.g. Davidson 1991, Zheng et al. 2004). Skiba and Smith (2000) point out that the
main cause for deviations of N2O fluxes from the predictions with the IPCC model are
inadequate accounting of factors affecting levels of soil mineral nitrogen, such as freeze thaw
cycles, but also tillage, and size and timing of rainfall events in relation to land management
practices. Nevertheless, looking at the geographical distribution of available experimental
studies in Europe, large gaps especially in southern and central eastern Europe become
evident (Jungkunst & Freibauer 2005).
Soil type is an important driver for N2O emissions from soils (Skiba & Smith 2000). The
parameters that influence most emissions are soil organic carbon content, soil drainage

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

Greenhouse gas inventories

185

determining soil water content, water-filled pore space (WFPS) and redox potential
(e.g. Dobbie & Smith 2001), and soil compaction influencing also oxygen availability (e.g.
Sitaula et al. 2000, van Groenigen et al. 2005). Studies by Dobbie et al. (1999) and Dobbie
and Smith (2003) show that for conditions encountered in Scotland, higher emissions are
observed from the production of vegetables than of cereals. Similar observations have been
made in other countries of Western Europe, but have not been confirmed for other main
regions of the world (Skiba & Smith 2000). The authors assume that regional crop
requirements or climatic and soil conditions are the main drivers for these differences. Where
crop types are not related to specific conditions, no different N2O emissions are observed.
Other effects studied include different N2O emissions from peat soils with grass and cereals
(Nykanen et al. 1995, Regina et al. 2004), and higher emissions originating from urine
patches than for evenly spread manure (van Groenigen et al. 2005).
To overcome these problems, Jungkunst and Freibauer (2005) propose an eco-systemic
approach: disaggregation according to distinctive settings of ecosystems and management
systems in combination with regression models. A possible set of categories for European
conditions could be climate categories (warm-temperate, cool-temperate and cold-temperate)
and a distinction between maritime and continental; soil type (based on aeration: well aerated,
intermediately aerated and poorly aerated); and management.
The regression model for European agricultural soils developed by Freibauer (2003) on the
basis of all experimental data available in 2001 includes soil carbon or nitrogen content and
soil texture in the analysis of direct N2O emissions. The estimated uncertainty is only half of
the one in inventories based on the default IPCC methodology. For soils in the UK, Sozanska
et al. (2002) developed a regression model that requires information on nitrogen input, soil
moisture, soil temperature, and land use to estimate N2O emissions. Their model resulted in
N2O losses from agricultural soils twice as high as compared to the emissions predicted with
the IPCC model, which is in accordance with other studies (Flynn et al. 2005), but contradict
simulation results that calculated a smaller N2O emission factor for direct soil emissions,
albeit emissions not attributable to activities of the current year are found to be higher than
assumed in the IPCC methodology (Brown et al. 2002).
There is increasing evidence that application of nitrogen alone cannot explain the observed
variability in N2O flux rates (e.g. Jungkunst & Freibauer 2005, Syvasalo et al. 2004) and
occasional observations report even decreasing N2O emissions with higher nitrogen
applications (Kasimir-Klemedtsson & Klemedtsson 2002). The multitude of the relationships
calls for a replacement of a pure emission factor approach with an approach that is able to
reflect also simple interactions between drivers, thus going beyond a simple stratification.
Smith (2005) points out that the development of regional or country-specific emission factors,
based on local monitoring and possibly simple regression models will greatly improve emission
inventories, complemented, where the data do not allow extrapolation of the model to the
whole region/county, with default factors. A tight link between measurements and experimental designs along the lines sketched above and modelling must help to close some gaps in
our process-understanding and to assess the interactions between the carbon and the nitrogen
cycles, the feedbacks between nitrogen deposition and greenhouse gas fluxes. Suggestions for
improved methodologies should take on board the effects of management practices.
3.2. Consistency and coherence
Emissions of CH4, N2O and NH3 from manure management occur at all stages, i.e. from
buildings housing livestock, during manure storage, following application of manure on land,
and from manure deposited on land by grazing animals and subsequently from atmospheric

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

186

A. Leip et al.

deposition and leaching and run-off. Thus emissions and measures aiming at reductions are
interdependent and the cumulative reduction achieved by combinations is not simply additive
(Webb et al. 2005b). Also, the emissions of the different gases are linked and mitigation
measures reducing one gas can have adverse effect on another gas. Emission reductions in
housing and storage systems (for example, through tied systems, covered storage of manure)
increase the availability of nitrogen in the following stages and increased emissions of
ammonia from spreading of manure will be the consequence (Dammgen 2005a). In this
context it is also important not to overlook N2 emissions, which might have a significant
impact on the nitrogen balance under certain conditions.
Several countries have already put in place an agricultural assessment model, which is
based on the mass-flow approach such as the GAS-EM model in Germany (Dammgen 2003),
the INTEGRATOR model for The Netherlands (De Vries et al. 2003), the DYNAMO model
in Switzerland (Reidy et al. 2005), and the NARSES model (National Ammonia Reduction
Strategy Evaluation System) for the UK (Webb & Misselbrook 2004, Webb et al. 2005a). The
mass-flow approach has also been introduced in the EMEP/CORINAIR Atmospheric Emission
Inventory Guidebook for reporting under the UN Convention on Long-Range Transboundary
Air Pollution (AEIG, Dammgen & Hutchings 2005, EMEP 2003). The combination of good
agricultural statistics, a spatially and temporally resolved agricultural model (DIEMA), which
is based on a mass-conserving approach linking nitrogen and carbon fluxes with ammonia and
greenhouse gas emissions and which considers the main relevant processes, practices and
policies, allowed the reproduction of a very good fit between observed and modelled ammonia
emissions in Denmark (Gyldenkrne & Hjorth Mikkelsen 2005, Gyldenkrne et al. 2005).
These tools offer the opportunity to have a holistic view of agricultural emissions. For
example, a most cost-effective measure for mitigating NH3 emissions is the rapid
incorporation of applied manure into arable land and the covering of manure storage
systems. In The Netherlands, the policy to decrease NH3 emissions led to the incorporation
of all manure applied to land between 1990 and 1995 with an increase of direct N2O
emissions as a consequence. At the same time, indirect emissions due to re-deposition of
volatilized NH3 decreased (Klein Goldewijk et al. 2005). Reduction of fertilizer use is only
achieved with an adequate fertilizer plan, taking into consideration the nitrogen contained in
crop residues and manures and filling the gap for a carefully evaluated crop requirement with
synthetic fertilizers, which must be applied at a time of plant needs and with the best available
application techniques (EFMA 1997).
3.3. Process-based models
Process-based models have been used already in several countries to estimate national N2O
emissions from agricultural soils. For example, Brown et al. (2002) obtained a mean emission
factor for fertilizer-induced emissions in UK agriculture of 1% of applied nitrogen, smaller
emissions from nitrogen deposited by grazing animals (0.5%), and smaller indirect emissions
(FracLEACH of 0.14%). Large emission factors were simulated for vegetables, potatoes, and
sugarbeets (see Skiba & Smith 2000 and references therein). Butterbach-Bahl and Werner
(2005) estimated that approximately 50% of the total estimated N2O emissions from German
agricultural soils are fertilizer-induced, which implicates an N2O emission factor approximately one third lower than the IPCC default value. For Italy, Mulligan (2004, 2005)
assigned simulated N2O emissions into portions induced by synthetic fertilizer application,
manure application, biological nitrogen fixation, and emissions due to crop residues. The sum
of these emissions gave a total direct emission estimate one fourth lower than the estimate
based on the IPCC methodology, but also higher background emissions were calculated. The

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

Greenhouse gas inventories

187

linear comparison between model result and emission factors does not capture interdependencies between different anthropogenic inputs, which need to be carefully assessed by the
models (Leip & Mulligan 2005). True background emissions can be obtained by simulating
the cultivated area assuming native vegetation (US-EPA 2005). Li et al. (2001) simulated for
China in 1990 a total N2O emission of 0.31 Tg a71 N2O-N, from which 0.13 Tg a71 N2O-N
was induced by the addition of synthetic fertilizers (42%) and only 0.02 Tg N2O-N was
induced by the application of manure (6%). The direct emission factor for synthetic fertilizer
that they derived from the model results varied greatly across the counties from less than
0.25% to more than 4%.
The uncertainty of these model results is strongly dependent on the quality and the
representativeness of the input datasets. It can be estimated by running the model with a
combination of input data leading to low and high emissions, respectively (Kesik et al. 2005,
Li et al. 2004, Mulligan, 2004). In practice, this requires detailed knowledge of the
distribution of cultivation patterns (Kempen et al. 2005, Koeble et al. 2005).
In the US greenhouse gas inventory (US-EPA 2005), the ecosystem model DAYCENT
(Del Grosso et al. 2005) has been used to estimate N2O emissions for about 90% of cultivated
crops (corn, soy, wheat, alfalfa hay, non-alfalfa-hay, cotton and sorghum), both directly and
indirectly. The biggest difference between the DAYCENT results and the IPCC approach
were direct and indirect N2O emissions from N-fixing crops as most nitrogen fixed by the
plant is immediately harvested without entering the soil system and the simulated emissions
are thus lower than predicted with the IPCC model. On the other hand, biological nitrogen
fixation is not included in the IPCC calculation for the indirect emissions through leaching,
but simulations and experimental evidence indicate that this assumption may be incorrect
(Del Grosso et al. 2005).
Process-based models have already been seen as the next step for improving national
greenhouse gas inventories during the development of the current IPCC methodology
(Mosier et al. 1998). Beside the possibility of using the models directly to obtain national
inventories, De Vries et al. (2005) suggest the use of models for generating empirical
relationships between main drivers/activity data (various land use categories, soil type,
management practices etc.) or for developing simplified process models that capture the
main interdependencies of the complex model but are less demanding in input data and could
be applied at a finer spatial resolution. If the models are carefully validated, the use of
geographical information systems would ensure that the simulated contribution of different
environmental and management conditions reflect the national circumstances better than
would be possible on the basis of experimental studies only. As process-based models are
capable of coping with the complex interactions between nitrogen and carbon cycles in
agricultural soils, they are well suited to identify most promising areas for applying mitigation
measures (Li et al. 2001), to detect gaps in current monitoring programs (Butterbach-Bahl
and Werner 2005), and to evaluate interdependencies between different forms of nitrogen
input. Examples are the synchronous input of synthetic and mineral fertiliser (see also
Bouwman et al. 2002, Laegreid & Aastveit 2002), the relevance of nitrogen additions in
excess of the crops need (see also Galbally et al. 2005), or to evaluate emissions from
nitrogen input through deposition, which is relevant to the emission factor for indirect
emissions (see also Denier van der Gon & Bleeker 2005).
4. Conclusions
For most countries, the overall uncertainty of the national greenhouse gas inventory is
dominated by the estimated uncertainty for N2O emissions from agricultural soils, which is

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

188

A. Leip et al.

also a key source in many cases. Despite this fact and the well known very high spatial
variability of emissions from agricultural soils, most countries are relying on the default
methodology because a sound scientific basis for national emission factors appears still to be
missing. Accordingly, the recommendations of the workshop, which was the basis of the
present paper, aim mainly at improving the knowledge of emission factors and fractions used
for estimating N2O emissions from agricultural soils and to look for ways that might lead to
more accurate emission estimates.
Regarding direct N2O emissions from agricultural soils, reducing the uncertainty can be
achieved by an eco-systemic stratification according to climate, soil type and management and
by increasing general knowledge with targeted studies combining experimental measurements
and modelling. It is unlikely that a reduction of the uncertainties will be possible with
continued measurements alone. Most likely a measurement strategy in combination with
process studies would be necessary to link emissions to specific environmental conditions or
management decisions.
Process-based models are improving quickly and have already been used in different
countries for comparing or even generating emission inventories. Even though some
discrepancies with field studies must still be resolved, they offer a tool that recognizes the
main drivers for emissions can be efficiently used for scenario analysis, including also socioeconomic aspects, and for the evaluation of trade-off effects.
Well validated process models in combination with geographical information systems are
capable of coping with the broad range of environmental and management conditions
encountered in countries and can produce a realistic proportion of high- or low-emitting
situations. They can also be used to derive empirical relationships between the major drivers
and emission fluxes, which can also be incorporated in a broader modelling framework that
allows a consistent and coherent assessment of agricultural emissions, including also
ammonia and methane emissions at different stages of agricultural production systems, as
well as groundwater pollution. In future it will be essential that all environmental impacts of
agriculture are considered within a holistic view.
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to the other participants of the expert meeting on improving the quality of
greenhouse gas emission inventories for category 4D, in alphabetic order: Michael Anderl,
Lorna Brown, Pascal Boeckx, Klaus Butterbach-Bahl, Laura Cardenas, Gunars Civjans,
Rocio Danica Condor Golec, Juan Manuel de Andres Almeida, Guillaume Gaborit, Vitor
Gois Ferreira, Steen Gyldenkrne, Jo Halliday, Mette Hjorth Mikkelsen, Nick Hutchings,
Hermann Jungkunst, Vittorio Mazzotta, Declan Mulligan, Luis Orodea, Paula Perala, Ignacio
Perez, Frank Raes, Kristiina Regina, Juan Jose Rincon, David Scholefield, Gunther Seufert,
Keith Smith, Hakan Staaf, Janka Szemesova, John van Aardenne, Laura Valli, and Wilfried
Winiwarter.
Note
1. For extended abstracts of the presentations and the recommendations see Leip (2005a).
References
Baggs EM, Richter M, Hartwig UA, Cadisch G. 2003. Nitrous oxide emissions from grass swards during the eighth
year of elevated atmospheric pCO2 (Swiss FACE). Glob. Change Biol. 9(8):1214.

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

Greenhouse gas inventories

189

sterberg K. 2005.
Benediktsson G, Feldhusen K, Mjureke D, Petterson S, Sandberg TA, Staaf H, Svensson U, O
Swedens National Inventory Report 2005. Stockholm: Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
Bouwman AF, Boumans LJM, Batjes NH. 2002. Modeling global annual N2O and NO emissions from fertilized
fields. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 16(4):1080 1090.
Brandes LJ, Olivier JGJ, Vreuls HHJ. 2005. Improvement of uncertainty due to improvements of the Netherlands
Greenhouse Gas inventory? In Amstel Av, editor. Non-CO2 greenhouse gases (NCGG-4). Rotterdam:
Millpress, pp. 257 264.
Brown L, Syed B, Jarvis SC, Sneath RW, Phillips RL, Goulding KWT, Li C. 2002. Development and application
of a mechanistic model to estimate emission of nitrous oxide from UK agriculture. Atmos. Environ. 36:917
928.
Butterbach-Bahl K, Werner C. 2005. Upscaling of national N2O emissions from soils with biogeochemical models
Germany. In Leip A, editor. N2O emissions from agriculture. Report on the expert meeting on improving
the quality for greenhouse gas emission inventories for category 4D, Joint Research Centre, 21 22
October 2004, Ispra. Vol. EUR 21675. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, pp. 138 144.
Commission of the European Communities. 2005. Winning the Battle Against Global Climate Change.
Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic
and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM(2005) 35 final.
Council of the European Union. 2002. Coucil Decision of 25 April 2002 concerning the approval, on behalf of the
European Community, of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change and the joint fulfilment of commitments thereunder (2002/358/CE). Official Journal of the European
Communities L 130/1. Available: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2002/l_130/l_13020020515en000
10020.pdf.
Dammgen U (ed.). 2003. Nationaler Inventarbericht 2004 Berichterstattung unter Klimarahmenkonvention der
Vereinten Nationen Teilbericht fur die Quellgruppe Landwirtschaft Vol. Special Issue 260: Landbauforschung
Volkenrode.
Dammgen U. 2005a. Indirect emissions from agricultural soils: GAS-EM (Germany). In Leip A, editor. N2O
emissions from agriculture. Report on the expert meeting on improving the quality for greenhouse gas emission
inventories for category 4D, Joint Research Centre, 21 22 October 2004, Ispra. Vol. EUR 21675.
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, pp. 113 117.
Dammgen U. 2005b. Statistical Data for Animal Numbers in German Emission Inventories. Landbauforschung
Volkenrode Special Issue, in press.
Dammgen U, Hutchings NJ. 2005. The assessment of emissions of nitrogen species from agriculture using the
methodology of the Atmospheric Emission Inventory Guidebook. In Kuczynski T, Dammgen U, Webb J,
Myczko A, editors. Emissions from European Agriculture. The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers,
pp. 51 62.
Davidson EA. 1991. Fluxes of nitrous oxide and nitric oxide from terrestrial ecosystems. In Rogers JE, Whitman WE,
editors. Microbial Production and Consumption of Greenhouse Gases. Washington DC: Am. Soc. Microbiol.,
pp. 219 235.
De Vries W, Kros J, Oenema O, de Klein J. 2003. Uncertainties in the fate of nitrogen II: a quantitative assessment of
the uncertainties in major nitrogen fluxes in the Netherlands. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 66(1):71 102.
De Vries W, Kros H, Kuikman P, Velthof G, Voogd JC, Wieggers R, Butterbach Bahl K, Denier van der Gon H, van
Amstel A. 2005. Use of measurements and models to improve the national IPCC based assessments of soil
emissions of nitrous oxide. Environmental Sciences this issue.
Del Grosso SJ, Mosier AR, Parton WJ, Ojima DS. 2005. DAYCENT model analysis of past and contemporary soil N2O and net greenhouse gas flux for major crops in the USA. Soil and Tillage Research 83(1):
9 24.
Denier van der Gon H, Bleeker A. 2005. Indirect N2O emission due to atmospheric N deposition for the
Netherlands. Atmos. Environ. 39(32):5827 5838.
Dobbie KE, Smith KA. 2001. The effects of temperature, water-filled pore space and land use on N2O emissions
from an imperfectly drained gleysol. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 52:667 673.
Dobbie KE, Smith KA. 2003. Impact of different forms of N fertilizer on N2O emissions from intensive grassland.
Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 67(1):37 46.
Dobbie KE, McTaggart IP, Smith KA. 1999. Nitrous oxide emissions from intensive agricultural systems: variations
between crops and seasons, key driving variables, and mean emission factors. J. Geophys. Res. 104:26891
26889.
EEA. 2005. Annual European Community greenhouse gas inventory 1990 2003 and inventory report 2005.
Submission to the UNFCCC secretariat, European Environment Agency.

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

190

A. Leip et al.

EFMA. 1997. EFMA Code of Best Agricultural Practice Nitrogen. European Fertilizer Manufacturers Association.
Available: http://www.efma.org/publications/nitrogen/index.asp.
EMEP. 2003. Joint EMEP/CORINAIR Emission Inventory Guidebook. 3rd edition October 2002, updated 2003.
Available: http://tfeip-secretariat.org/unece.htm.
EU Council. 1996. Community strategy on climate change council conclusions, CFSP Presidency statement,
Luxembourg (25/6/1996) Press:188 Nr: 8518/96.
Flessa H, Dorsch P, Beese F. 1995. Seasonal variation of N2O and CH4 fluxes in differently managed arable soils in
southern Germany. J. Geophys. Res. 100(D11):23115 23124.
Flynn HC, Smith J, Smith KA, Wright J, Smith P, Massheder J. 2005. Climate- and crop-responsive emission factors
significantly alter estimates of current and future nitrous oxide emissions from fertilizer use. Glob. Change Biol.
11(9):1522 1536.
Freibauer A. 2003. Regionalised Inventory of Biogenic Greenhouse Gas Emissions from European Agriculture. Eu. J.
Agronomy 19:135 160.
Galbally I, Meyer M, Bentley S, Weeks I, Leuning R, Kelly K, Phillips F, Barker-Reid F, Gates W, Baigent R, Eckard
R, Grace P. 2005. A study of environmental and management drivers of non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions
in Australian agro-ecosystems. In Amstel Av, editor. Non-CO2 greenhouse gases (NCGG-4). Rotterdam:
Millpress, pp. 47 55.
Granli T, Bckman OC. 1994. Nitrous oxide from agriculture, Porsgrunn, Norway. Norwegian Journal of
Agricultural Sciences, Supplement No. 12, Norsk Hydro Research Centre.
Gyldenkrne S, Hjorth Mikkelsen M. 2005. Comparison of national statistics with detailed farmdata The Danish
Integrated Emission Model of Agriculture (DIEMA). In Leip A, editor. N2O emissions from agriculture. Report
on the expert meeting on improving the quality for greenhouse gas emission inventories for category 4D, Joint
Research Centre, 21 22 October 2004, Ispra. Vol. EUR 21675. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publication of
the European Communities, pp. 86 89.
Gyldenkrne S, Skjth CA, Hertel O, Ellermann T. 2005. A dynamical ammonia emission parameterization for use
in air pollution models. J. Geophys. Res. 110: doi:10.1029/2004JD005459.
Hare B, Meinshausen M. 2004. How much warning are we committed to and how much can be avoided? File Report
No. 93. Potsdam: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.
Illerup JB, Lyck E, Nielsen M, Winther M, Mikkelsen MH, Hoffmann L, Gyldenkrne S, Srensen P, Versterdal L,
Fauser P, Thomsen M. 2005. Denmarks National Inventory Report 2005, Ministry of Envirionment, Denmark
and National Environmental Research Institute.
IPCC. 1997. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Houghton JT, Meira Filho
LG, Lim B, Treanton K, Mamaty I, Bonduki Y, Griggs DJ, Callander BA, editors. Paris, France: IPCC/OECD/
IEA.
IPCC. 2000. Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.
Penman J, Kruger D, Galbally I, Hiraishi T, Nyenzi B, Emmanuel S, Buendia L, Hoppaus R, Martinsen T,
Meijer J, Miwa K, Tanabe K, editors. Hayama, Japan: IPCC/OECD/IEA/IGES.
Jarvis SC, Hatch DJ, Lockyer DR. 1989. Ammonia fluxes from grazed grassland annual losses from cattle production
systems and their relation to nitrogen inputs. J. Agric. Sci. 113:99 108.
Jungkunst HF, Freibauer A. 2005. Overview on emissions observations in Europe. In Leip A, editor. N2O emissions
from agriculture. Report on the expert meeting on improving the quality for greenhouse gas emission inventories
for category 4D, Joint Research Centre, 21 22 October 2004, Ispra. Vol. EUR 21675. Luxembourg: Office for
Official Publication of the European Communities, pp. 48 54.
, Klemedtsson L. 2002. A critical analysis of nitrous oxide emissions from animal manure.
Kasimir-Klemedtsson A
Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences Report. Plant Prod. 81:122 134.
Kempen M, Heckelei T, Britz W. 2005. A Statistical Approach for Spatial Disaggregation of Crop Production in the
EU. Proceedings of the 89th EAAE Seminar, Modelling agricultural policies: state of the art and new challenges.
Parma: Faculty of Economics.
Kesik M, Ambus P, Baritz R, Bruggemann N, Butterbach-Bahl K, Damm M, Duyzer JH, Horvath L, Kiese R,
Kitzler B, Leip A, Li C, Pihlatie M, Pilegaard K, Seufert G, Simpson D, Skiba U, Smiatek G, Vesala T,
Zechmeister-Boltenstern S. 2005. Inventories of N2O and NO emissions from European forest soils.
Biogeosciences 2:353 357.
Klein Goldewijk K, Olivier JGJ, Peters JAHW, Coenen PWHG, Vreuls HHJ. 2005. Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the
Netherlands 1990 2003. National Inventory Report 2005, RIVM report 773201009/2005.
Koeble R, Leip A, Kempen M. 2005. Mapping agricultural land cover and land use for Europe. In Amstel Av, editor.
Non-CO2 greenhouse gases (NCGG-4). Rotterdam: Millpress.
Kroeze C. 1994. Nitrous oxide. Emission inventory and options for control in the Netherlands, RIVM report 773001004, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

Greenhouse gas inventories

191

Kroeze C, Dumont E, Seitzinger SP. 2005. New estimates of global emissions of N2O from rivers, estuaries and
continental shelves. In Amstel Av, editor. Non-CO2 greenhouse gases (NCGG-4). Rotterdam: Millpress,
pp. 145 151.
Kroeze C, Aerts R, Breemen Nv, Dam Dv, Hoek Kvd, Hofschreuder P, Hoosbeek M, de Klein J, Kros H, van Oene H,
Oenema O, Tietema A, van der Veeren R, de Vries W. 2003. Uncertainties in the fate of nitrogen I: an overview
of sources of uncertainty illustrated with a Dutch case study. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 66(1):43 69.
Laegreid M, Aastveit AH. 2002. Nitrous oxide emissions from field-applied fertilizers. Danish Institute of
Agricultural Sciences Report. Plant Prod. 81:107 121.
Leip A. 2005a. N2O emissions from agriculture. Report on the expert meeting on improving the quality for
greenhouse gas emission inventories for category 4D, Joint Research Centre, 21 22 October 2004,
Ispra., EUR 21675, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publication of the European Communities. Available:
http://carbodat1.jrc.it/ccu/Pubblications/N2O.EMISSIONSfromAGRICULTURE.pdf.
Leip A. 2005b. The quality of European (EU-15) Greenhouse Gas inventories from agriculture. In Amstel Av, editor.
Non-CO2 greenhouse gases (NCGG-4). Rotterdam: Millpress, pp. 231 238.
Leip A, Mulligan DT. 2005. Interactions between direct N2O emissions from different N sources as seen by DNDC.
In Leip A, editor. N2O emissions from agriculture. Report on the expert meeting on improving the quality for
greenhouse gas emission inventories for category 4D, Joint Research Centre, 21 22 October 2004, Ispra. Vol.
EUR 21675. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, pp. 152 157.
Li C, Mosier AR, Wassmann R, Cai Z, Zheng X, Huang Y, Tsuruta H, Boonjawat J, Lantin RS. 2004. Modeling
greenhouse gas emissions from rice-based production systems: sensitivity and upscaling. Global Biogeochem.
Cycles: doi 10.1019/2003GB002045.
Li CS, Zhuang YH, Cao MQ, Crill P, Dai ZH, Frolking S, Moore B, III, Salas W, Song WZ, Wang XK. 2001.
Comparing a process-based agro-ecosystem model to the IPCC methodology for developing a national inventory
of N2O emissions from arable lands in China. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 60(1 3):159 175.
Maljanen M, Komulainen V-M, Hytonen J, Martikainen PJ, Laine J. 2004. Carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide and
methane dynamics in boreal organic agricultural soils with different soil characteristics. Soil Biol. Biochemistry
36(11):1801 1808.
Monni S, Syri S, Savolainen I. 2004. Uncertainties in the Finnish greenhouse gas inventory. Envir. Sci. Policy
7:87 98.
Mosier AR, Kroeze C, Nevison C, Oenema O, Seitzinger S, van Cleemput O. 1998. Closing the global N2O budget:
nitrous oxide emissions through the agricultural nitrogen cycle OECD/IPCC/IEA phase II development of
IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventory methodology. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 52:225 248.
Mulligan DT. 2005. Regional modelling of nitrous oxide emissions from fertilised agricultural soils within Europe.
PhD thesis, submitted to the University of Wales, Bangor, September 2004.
Mulligan DT. 2005. Assessment of N2O losses from soils using a Pan-European Database. In Leip A, editor. N2O
emissions from agriculture. Report on the expert meeting on improving the quality for greenhouse gas emission
inventories for category 4D, Joint Research Centre, 21 22 October 2004, Ispra. Vol. EUR 21675.
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, pp. 70 81.
Nykanen H, Alm J, Lang K, Silvola J, Martikainen PJ. 1995. Emissions of CH4, N2O and CO2 from a virgin fen and a
fen drained for grassland in Finland. J. Biogeogr. 22(2 3):351 357.
Oenema O, Kros H, de Vries W. 2003. Approaches and uncertainties in nutrient budgets: implications for nutrient
management and environmental policies. Eur. J. Agronomy 20(1 2):3 16.
Regina K, Syvasalo E, Hannukkala A, Esala M. 2004. Fluxes of N2O from farmed peat soils in Finland. Eur. J. Soil
Sci. 55(3):591 599.
Reidy B, Ruettimann L, Menzi H. 2005. DYNAMO: An empirical model for the calculation of ammonia emissions of
farms and regions. In Kuczynski T, Dammgen U, Webb J, Myczko A, editors. Emissions from European
Agriculture. The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers, pp. 125 128.
Rypdal K, Flugsrud K. 2001. Sensitivity analysis as a tool for systematic reductions in greenhouse gas inventory
uncertainties. Envir. Sci. Policy 4(2 3):117 135.
Rypdal K, Winiwarter W. 2001. Uncertainties in greenhouse gas emission inventories evaluation, comparability and
implications. Envir. Sci. Policy 4(2 3):107 116.
Rypdal K, Zhang L-C. 2000. Uncertainties in the Norwegian Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory, Report 2000/13,
Statistics Norway.
Sitaula BK, Hansen S, Sitaula JIB, Bakken LR. 2000. Effects of soil compaction on N2O emission in agricultural soil.
Chemosphere Global Change Sci. 2(3 4):367 371.
Skiba U, Smith KA. 2000. The control of nitrous oxide emissions from agricultural and natural soils. Chemosphere
Global Change Sci. 2(3 4):379 386.

Downloaded by [Arif Setya] at 06:43 27 January 2015

192

A. Leip et al.

Smith KA. 2005. Quality of future N2O emission estimates: how might we improve? In Leip A, editor. N2O emissions
from agriculture. Report on the expert meeting on improving the quality for greenhouse gas emission
inventories for category 4D, Joint Research Centre, 21 22 October 2004, Ispra. Vol. EUR 21675.
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, pp. 17 23.
Sozanska M, Skiba U, Metcalfe S. 2002. Developing an inventory of N2O emissions from British soils. Atmos.
Environ. 36:987 998.
Syvasalo E, Regina K, Pihlatie M, Esala M. 2004. Emissions of nitrous oxide from boreal agricultural clay and loamy
sand soils. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 69:155 165.
US-EPA. 2005. Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 2003. Washington: US Environmental
Protection Agency.
Van Aardenne JA. 2002. Uncertainties in emission inventories. PhD thesis Wageningen University, Wageningen, The
Netherlands.
Van Amstel A, (ed.) 2005. Non-CO2 greenhouse gases (NCGG-4). Rotterdam: Millpress.
van Groenigen JW, Kuikman PJ, de Groot WJM, Velthof GL. 2005. Nitrous oxide emission from urine-treated soil as
influenced by urine composition and soil physical conditions. Soil Biol. Biochemistry 37(3):463 473.
Webb J, Misselbrook TH. 2004. A mass-flow model of ammonia emissions from UK livestock production. Atmos.
Environ. 38(14):2163 2176.
Webb J, Misselbrook T, Sutton MA. 2005a. Ammonia emission inventories, uncertainty and sensitivity analysis. In
Kuczynski T, Dammgen U, Webb J, Myczko A, editors. Emissions from European Agriculture. The
Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers, pp. 113 124.
Webb J, Menzi H, Pain BF, Misselbrook TH, Dammgen U, Hendriks H, Dohler H. 2005b. Managing ammonia
emissions from livestock production in Europe. Environ. Pollut. 135(3):399 406.
Well R, Weymann D. 2005. Recent research progress on the significance of aquatic systems for indirect agricultural
N2O emissions. In Amstel Av, editor. Non-CO2 greenhouse gases (NCGG-4). Rotterdam: Millpress, pp. 129
136.
Winiwarter W, Rypdal K. 2001. Assessing the uncertainty associated with national greenhouse gas emission
inventories: a case study for Austria. Atmos. Environ. 35:5425 5440.
Yanai J, Sawamoto T, Oe T, Kusa K, Yamakawa K, Sakamoto K, Naganawa T, Inubushi K, Hatan R, Kosaki T.
2003. Spatial variability of nitrous oxide emissions and their soil-related determining factors in an agricultural
field. J. Environ. Qual. 32:1965 1977.
Zheng X, Han S, Huang Y, Wang Y, Wang M. 2004. Re-quantifying the emission factors based on field
measurements and estimating the direct N2O emission from Chinese croplands. Global Biogeochem. Cycles
18:2167.