Separate focus on crop fertilization or feeding practices inadequately describes nitrogen (N) loss from mixed dairy farms because of (1) interaction between animal and crop production and between the production system and the manager, and (2) uncertainties of herd N production and crop N utilization. Therefore a systems approach was used to study N turnover and N efficiency on 16 conventional and 14 organic private Danish farms with mixed animal (dairy) and crop production. There were significant differences in N surplus (...) at the farm level (242 kg. N/ha. vs. 124 kg. N/ha. on conventional and organic dairy farms respectively) with a correlation between stocking rate and N surplus. N efficiency was calculated as the output of N in animal products divided by the net N import in fodder, manure and fertilizer. N turnover in herd and individual crops calculated on selected farms showed differences in organic and conventional crop N utilization. This is explained via a discussion of the rationality behind the current way of planning the optimum fertilizer application in conventional agriculture. The concept of marginal N efficiency is insufficient for correcting problems of N loss from dairy farms. Substantial reductions in N loss from conventional mixed dairy farms is probably unlikely without lower production intensity. The concept of mean farm unit N efficiency might be a way to describe the relation between production and N loss to facilitate regulation. This concept is linked to differing goals of agricultural development—i.e. intensification and separation vs. extensification and integration. It is discussed how studies in private farms—using organic farms as selected critical cases—can demonstrate possibilities for balancing production and environmental concern. (shrink)

In an increasingly urbanized world, construction industry is called upon to serve the needs of human society, such as environmental protection and safety in terms of infrastructure. In this context, a sustainable and ethical development means a close connection between buildings and environment. This connection can be achieved through, for example, the concept of ecological concrete or green concrete, as it is often called. The conventional process of obtaining cement and mineral aggregates from the concrete composition generates pollution, especially through (...) greenhouse gas emissions. Also, one should not ignore the fact that extraction of the raw materials affects the habitats of the sites and of the neighboring areas. When construction materials are questioned, the ethical issues lay not in the means of expression, but mainly in the means of production. More to the point, the present contribution aimed to find solutions for enhancing the adhesion of vegetal aggregates with the cement matrix, in order to obtain a material with optimal mechanical properties, which is valued as an ethical approach of building industry. Results showed that plant aggregates can be used to obtain a building material which can be improved by using partial substitution of cement by silica fume, fly ash, or by using additives and that green concrete as an environmentally friendly material offers the alternative for lower energy use and fewer CO2 emissions. Marketers must understand not only the advantages of these green materials, but also that they have an ethical commitment to provide consumers with environmentally friendly materials. (shrink)

Three views of sustainability are juxtaposed with four views about who the members of the moral community are. These provide points of contact for understanding the moral issues in sustainability. Attention is drawn to the preferred epistemic methods of the differing factions arguing for sustainability. Criteria for defining membership in the moral community are explored; rationality and capacity for pain are rejected as consistent criteria. The criterion of having interests is shown to be most coherent for explaining why all living (...) humans belong to the moral community. This criterion allows inclusion of future generations as well, and extends to animals and plants membership in the moral community. Inferences are drawn that food sufficiency advocates hold only presently living persons to be full-fledged members of the moral community, but that this view is internally inconsistent. Stewards should agree that all living things are members of the moral community. A distinction between welfare interests and ulterior interests allows the steward to include the aims of those who argue for sustainability as community without committing some of their errors. Community advocates argue that essential values and virtues will be lost is the culture of agriculture is transformed. I argue that community advocates may fail to pass on our most important virtue — justice — without such a transformation. (shrink)