@article {66,
	title = {Reducing nitrogen surplus from dairy farms. Effects of feeding and management.},
	journal = {Livestock Production Science},
	year = {2003},
	pages = {165-178},
	abstract = {The objective of the present paper is to review the factors which can affect N flow and surplus both at farm and at cow
level in order to point out areas with scope for future improvement. Special attention is given to management factors and
feeding. Besides information from the literature the paper is based on meta-analyses of our own and published results. With
regard to effects of production systems, mainly Danish surveys have been chosen as examples demonstrating the effects
obtained under practical conditions. A positive correlation between stocking rate and N surplus per hectare at farm gate level
is demonstrated, but there is also a considerable variation in N surplus per hectare at a given stocking rate. A number of
factors influencing N surplus and loss have been identified, and their impact on N surplus and production efficiency has been
estimated. N excretion per animal is an important factor for N turnover at farm level. Analysis of herd data indicates that
feeding strategy, breed and milk yield, together with energy conversion and the protein content of the diet, are important
factors explaining N excretion and N efficiency of cows. Reduction of N intake by optimal synchronisation of energy and
protein supply over time, especially in pasture-based systems, is one way of reducing N excretion from cows. Furthermore,
the ideal profile of absorbed amino acids should be identified, and models to estimate amino acid supply to the intestine
should be further improved. The effect of reducing N excretion from cows has to be evaluated at farm level as manure is
used as fertiliser for crop production. Overall, it seems possible to reduce the N surplus through better management and
feeding without reducing production efficiency.},
	keywords = {EPNB},
	author = {Borsting, C. F and Kristensen, T and Misciattelli, L and Hvelplund, T and Weisbjerg, M. R}
}
@article {76,
	title = {The development of the EMEP/CORINAIR Guidebook with respect to the emissions of different nitrogen and carbon species from animal production.},
	journal = {Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment},
	volume = {112},
	year = {2006},
	abstract = {The reduction of emissions of air pollutants is subject of international conventions, which include reporting of emissions in accordance with guidelines or guidebooks provided. Within the Convention on the Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution, the Atmospheric Emission Inventory Guidebook describes the methodology. With respect to emissions from agricultural sources, in particular from animal husbandry, this guidebook at present undergoes major modifications: the calculation procedure making use of partial emission factors for the various sources of emissions (animal house, storage, manure application, etc.) is being replaced by a mass flow concept for both nitrogen and carbon species. The current state of the Guidebook, present activities to update it and future plans are described. The necessity to update both the Guidebook and the IPCC Guidelines as complementary tools to describe agricultural emissions and mass flows is emphasized.},
	keywords = {EPNB},
	author = {Daemmgen, U and Webb, J}
}
@inbook {Leip2011p,
	title = {{Agri-Environmental Nitrogen Indicators for EU27}},
	booktitle = {Bio-Economic Models applied to Agricultural Systems},
	year = {2011},
	pages = {109{\textendash}123},
	publisher = {Springer Netherlands},
	organization = {Springer Netherlands},
	address = {Dordrecht},
	abstract = {Nitrogen is a key element to ensure modern agriculture{\textquoteright}s output, sustaining global food, feed, fibre and now bio-energy production. But it also accounts also for, or at least contributes to, key environmental problems that challenge the well functioning of today{\textquoteright}s societies (Sutton et al. 2011). One molecule of nitrogen can contribute to one or many environmental problems, including eutrophication, groundwater pollution via leaching and run-off of nitrates and organic nitrogen, climate change via N2O emissions, acidification via ammonia emissions and may affect human health via ozone formation or biodiversity via nitrogen deposition on natural areas. This multiple impact of nitrogen is often referred to as the {\textquotedblleft}nitrogen cascade{\textquotedblright} (Galloway et al. 2003). Accordingly, agri-environmental indicator frameworks typically feature several indicators related to nitrogen such as ammonia emissions, use of nitrogen fertilisers, gross N surplus, nitrates in water or GHG emissions (EEA 2005). Often, however, these indicators are calculated independently from each other based on sometimes contradicting data sources, methodologies or assumptions (see e.g. Grizzetti et al. 2007). This includes also the first overview of the {\textquotedblleft}European Nitrogen Case{\textquotedblright} that was presented by van Egmond et al. (2002) at the second International Nitrogen Conference held in Potomac (USA). Thus, a system that calculates the detailed nitrogen balance and the related indicators for agriculture in Europe on the basis of consistent data sets and advanced methodologies is highly desirable. A closed balance of nitrogen is calculated in the CAPRI (Common Agricultural Policy Regionalized Impact) model, i.e., next to monetary values and product balances, also the nutrient fluxes are in accordance with the law of mass-conservation (Britz et al., 2007). This has been exploited by Leip et al. (2011b) to develop nitrogen budgets for the system boundaries of the soil, land, and the farm. The authors provide for the first time mutually consistent calculations of farm, land and soil N-budgets for all member states of the European Union and quantify the two major indicators, namely the nitrogen use efficiency and the nitrogen surplus for each of the N-budgets. The data showed that the nitrogen surplus increases for the soil {\textless} land {\textless} farm budget, while the nitrogen use efficiency decreases analogically for soil {\textgreater} land {\textgreater} farm budgets. The farm N-budget appeared to be the most relevant one giving a picture of the overall N management of agriculture and is accordingly recommended for integrative studies assessing the {\textquotedblleft}nitrogen footprint{\textquotedblright} of society. Based on the work of Leip et al. (2011b), we propose in this chapter three additional nitrogen indicators focusing even more on the use society in European countries makes of their productive land.},
	keywords = {mypublications},
	isbn = {978-94-007-1901-9},
	doi = {10.1007/978-94-007-1902-6_6},
	url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/pq4846/{\#}section=954524{\&}page=1{\&}locus=0},
	author = {Leip, Adrian and Weiss, Franz and Britz, Wolfgang},
	editor = {Flichman, Guillermo}
}
@article {Leip2011b,
	title = {{Farm, land, and soil nitrogen budgets for agriculture in Europe calculated with CAPRI}},
	journal = {Environmental Pollution},
	volume = {159},
	number = {11},
	year = {2011},
	pages = {3243{\textendash}3253},
	abstract = {We calculated farm, land, and soil N-budgets for countries in Europe and the EU27 as a whole using the agro-economic model CAPRI. For EU27, N-surplus is 55 kg N ha -1 yr -1 in a soil budget and 65 kg N 2O-N ha -1 yr -1 and 67 kg N ha -1 yr -1 in land and farm budgets, respectively. NUE is 31{\%} for the farm budget, 60{\%} for the land budget and 63{\%} for the soil budget. NS values are mainly related to the excretion (farm budget) and application (soil and land budget) of manure per hectare of total agricultural land. On the other hand, NUE is best explained by the specialization of the agricultural system toward animal production (farm NUE) or the share of imported feedstuff (soil NUE). Total N input, intensive farming, and the specialization to animal production are found to be the main drivers for a high NS and low NUE. {\textcopyright} 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.},
	keywords = {agriculture, Europe, Nitrogen budgets, Nitrogen use efficiency, Nutrient balances},
	issn = {02697491},
	doi = {10.1016/j.envpol.2011.01.040},
	url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2011.01.040},
	author = {Leip, Adrian and Britz, Wolfgang and Weiss, Franz and De Vries, Wim}
}
@inbook {Leip2011d,
	title = {{Integrating nitrogen fluxes at the European scale}},
	booktitle = {European Nitrogen Assessment},
	year = {2011},
	pages = {345{\textendash}376},
	publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
	organization = {Cambridge University Press},
	chapter = {16},
	address = {Cambridge, UK},
	keywords = {mypublications},
	url = {http://www.nine-esf.org/ENA-Book},
	author = {Leip, Adrian and Achermann, Beat and Billen, Gilles and Bleeker, Albert and Bouwman, Alexander F and De Vries, Wim and Dragosits, Ulli and D{\"o}ring, Ulrike and Fernall, Dave and Geupel, Markus and Heldstab, J{\"u}rg and Johnes, Penny and Le Gall, Anne Christine and Monni, Suvi and Neve{\v c}e{\v r}al, Rostislav and Orlandini, Lorenzo and Prud{\textquoteright}homme, Michel and Reuter, Hannes I and Simpson, David and Seufert, G{\"u}nther and Spranger, Till and Sutton, Mark A. and van Aardenne, John and Vo{\ss}, Maren and Winiwarter, Wilfried},
	editor = {Sutton, Mark and Howard, Clare and Erisman, Jan Willem and Billen, Gilles and Bleeker, Albert and van Grinsven, Hans and Grennfelt, Peringe and Grizzetti, Bruna}
}
@article {Sutton2011a,
	title = {{Too much of a good thing.}},
	journal = {Nature},
	volume = {472},
	number = {7342},
	year = {2011},
	month = {apr},
	pages = {159{\textendash}61},
	keywords = {agriculture, Agriculture: economics, Animals, Biodiversity, Climate Change, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Diet, Environmental Pollution, Environmental Pollution: adverse effects, Environmental Pollution: analysis, Environmental Pollution: economics, Environmental Pollution: statistics {\&} numerical da, Fertilizers, Fertilizers: analysis, Food Supply, Fossil Fuels, Humans, International Cooperation, Meat, Meat: utilization, nitrogen, Nitrogen Fixation, Nitrogen: adverse effects, Nitrogen: analysis, Nitrogen: economics, Nitrogen: metabolism, Reactive Nitrogen Species, Reactive Nitrogen Species: adverse effects, Reactive Nitrogen Species: analysis, Reactive Nitrogen Species: chemistry, Reactive Nitrogen Species: metabolism},
	issn = {1476-4687},
	doi = {10.1038/472159a},
	url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21478874},
	author = {Sutton, Mark A. and Oenema, Oene and Erisman, Jan Willem and Leip, Adrian and van Grinsven, Hans and Winiwarter, Wilfried}
}
@article {Winiwarter2014a,
	title = {{A European perspective of innovations towards mitigation of nitrogen-related greenhouse gases}},
	journal = {Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability},
	volume = {9-10},
	year = {2014},
	pages = {37{\textendash}45},
	publisher = {Elsevier B.V.},
	abstract = {Technology design and effectiveness studies available in the scientific literature demonstrate future mitigation potentials of nitrogen-related greenhouse gases. Here we investigate {\textquoteright}innovations{\textquoteright} influencing such emissions. These innovations mainly address agriculture: reduced meat diets, urban gardening, genetically modified crops, and precision farming, but also more distant options such as vertical farming and cultured meat production, that is, indoor agriculture. While the latter approaches, which allow full management of effluents, seem very promising in terms of emission control, the cost estimates available would rule out any practical relevance. Technologies that currently seem more realistic offer much smaller mitigation potential. Information on energy need, greenhouse gas emissions, and land requirements feed into a semi-quantitative assessment, which delivers information in a format useful for existing European policy tools. {\textcopyright} 2014 Elsevier B.V.},
	issn = {18773435},
	doi = {10.1016/j.cosust.2014.07.006},
	url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2014.07.006},
	author = {Winiwarter, Wilfried and Leip, Adrian and Tuomisto, Hanna L. and Haastrup, Palle}
}
@article {Westhoek2014,
	title = {{Food choices, health and environment: Effects of cutting Europe{\textquoteright}s meat and dairy intake}},
	journal = {Global Environmental Change},
	volume = {26},
	number = {1},
	year = {2014},
	month = {mar},
	pages = {196{\textendash}205},
	publisher = {Elsevier Ltd},
	abstract = {Western diets are characterised by a high intake of meat, dairy products and eggs, causing an intake of saturated fat and red meat in quantities that exceed dietary recommendations. The associated livestock production requires large areas of land and lead to high nitrogen and greenhouse gas emission levels. Although several studies have examined the potential impact of dietary changes on greenhouse gas emissions and land use, those on health, the agricultural system and other environmental aspects (such as nitrogen emissions) have only been studied to a limited extent. By using biophysical models and methods, we examined the large-scale consequences in the European Union of replacing 25-50{\%} of animal-derived foods with plant-based foods on a dietary energy basis, assuming corresponding changes in production. We tested the effects of these alternative diets and found that halving the consumption of meat, dairy products and eggs in the European Union would achieve a 40{\%} reduction in nitrogen emissions, 25-40{\%} reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and 23{\%} per capita less use of cropland for food production. In addition, the dietary changes would also lower health risks. The European Union would become a net exporter of cereals, while the use of soymeal would be reduced by 75{\%}. The nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) of the food system would increase from the current 18{\%} to between 41{\%} and 47{\%}, depending on choices made regarding land use. As agriculture is the major source of nitrogen pollution, this is expected to result in a significant improvement in both air and water quality in the EU. The resulting 40{\%} reduction in the intake of saturated fat would lead to a reduction in cardiovascular mortality. These diet-led changes in food production patterns would have a large economic impact on livestock farmers and associated supply-chain actors, such as the feed industry and meat-processing sector. {\textcopyright} 2014 The Authors.},
	keywords = {Dietary change, Greenhouse gas emissions, Human diet, Land use, Livestock, Reactive nitrogen},
	issn = {09593780},
	doi = {10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.02.004},
	url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.02.004 http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959378014000338},
	author = {Westhoek, Henk and Lesschen, J.P. Jan Peter and Rood, Trudy and Wagner, Susanne and De Marco, Alessandra and Murphy-bokern, Donal and Leip, Adrian and van Grinsven, Hans and Sutton, Mark A. and Oenema, Oene}
}
@article {Leip2014,
	title = {{The nitrogen footprint of food products in the European Union}},
	journal = {The Journal of Agricultural Science},
	volume = {152},
	number = {S1},
	year = {2014},
	month = {oct},
	pages = {20{\textendash}33},
	keywords = {Footprint, mypublications, nitrogen, online},
	issn = {0021-8596},
	doi = {10.1017/S0021859613000786},
	url = {http://www.journals.cambridge.org/abstract{\_}S0021859613000786},
	author = {Leip, Adrian and Weiss, Franz and Lesschen, Jan Peter and Westhoek, Henk}
}
@article {Leip2015a,
	title = {{Impacts of European livestock production: nitrogen, sulphur, phosphorus and greenhouse gas emissions, land-use, water eutrophication and biodiversity}},
	journal = {Environmental Research Letters},
	volume = {10},
	number = {11},
	year = {2015},
	pages = {115004},
	publisher = {IOP Publishing},
	abstract = {Livestock production systems currently occupy around28{\%}of the land surface of the European Union (equivalent to65{\%}of the agricultural land). Inconjunction with otherhumanactivities, livestock production systems affect water, air and soil quality, global climate and biodiversity, altering the biogeochemical cycles of nitrogen, phosphorus and carbon. Here,we quantify the contribution of European livestock production to these major impacts. For each environmental effect, the contribution of livestock is expressed as shares of the emitted compounds and land used, as compared to the whole agricultural sector. The results show that the livestock sector contributes significantly to agricultural environmental impacts. This contribution is78{\%}for terrestrial biodiversity loss,80{\%}for soil acidification and air pollution (ammoniaand nitrogen oxides emissions),81{\%}for global warming, and73{\%}for water pollution (bothNandP). The agriculture sector itself is one of the major contributors to these environmental impacts, ranging between12{\%}for global warming and59{\%}for Nwater quality impact. Significant progress in mitigating these environmental impacts in Europe will only be possible through a combination of technological measures reducing livestock emissions, improved food choices and reduced food waste of European citizens. Introduction},
	keywords = {air quality, biodiversity loss, Climate Change, coastal eutrophication, European Union, livestock production, soil acidification},
	isbn = {1748-9318},
	issn = {1748-9326},
	doi = {10.1088/1748-9326/10/11/115004},
	url = {http://stacks.iop.org/1748-9326/10/i=11/a=115004?key=crossref.b8ce885804d5c860e008c03ed18e7ab8 https://zenodo.org/record/58514{\#}.WLQb4zsrKXr},
	author = {Leip, Adrian and Billen, Gilles and Garnier, Josette and Grizzetti, Bruna and Lassaletta, Luis and Reis, Stefan and Simpson, David and Sutton, Mark A. and De Vries, Wim and Weiss, Franz and Westhoek, Henk}
}
@book {Westhoek2015,
	title = {{Nitrogen on the Table: The influence of food choices on nitrogen emissions and the European environment. (European Nitrogen Assessment Special Report on Nitrogen and Food.)}},
	number = {April},
	year = {2015},
	pages = {1{\textendash}5},
	publisher = {Centre for Ecology {\&} Hydrology},
	organization = {Centre for Ecology {\&} Hydrology},
	address = {Edinburgh, UK},
	isbn = {9781906698515},
	url = {https://www.clrtap-tfrn.org/sites/clrtap-tfrn.org/files/documents/Nitrogen_on_the_Table_Report_WEB.pdf},
	author = {Westhoek, Henk and Lesschen, J.P. Jan Peter and Leip, Adrian and Rood, Trudy and Wagner, Susanne and De Marco, A. and Murphy-bokern, Donal and Palli{\`e}re, C. and Howard, Clare M and Oenema, Oene and Sutton, Mark A. and Marco, De}
}
@article {Zurek2018,
	title = {{Assessing Sustainable Food and Nutrition Security of the EU Food System {\textemdash} An Integrated Approach}},
	journal = {Sustainability},
	volume = {10},
	number = {11},
	year = {2018},
	pages = {4271},
	doi = {10.3390/su10114271},
	author = {Zurek, Monika and Hebinck, Aniek and Leip, Adrian and Vervoort, Joost and Kuiper, Marijke and Garrone, Maria and Havlik, Petr and Heckelei, Thomas and Hornborg, Sara and Ingram, John and Kuijsten, Anneleen and Shutes, Lindsay and Geleijnse, Johanna M and Terluin, Ida and van{\textquoteright}t Veer, Pieter and Wijnands, Jo and Zimmermann, Andrea and Achterbosch, Thom J. and Havl, Petr}
}
@article {Vanham2019a,
	title = {{Environmental footprint family to address local to planetary sustainability and deliver on the SDGs}},
	journal = {Science of The Total Environment},
	volume = {693},
	number = {June},
	year = {2019},
	month = {jul},
	pages = {133642},
	publisher = {Elsevier B.V},
	abstract = {The number of publications on environmental footprint indicators has been growing rapidly, but with limited efforts to integrate different footprints into a coherent framework. Such integration is important for comprehensive understanding of environmental issues, policy formulation and assessment of trade-offs between different environmental concerns. Here, we systematize published footprint studies and define a family of footprints that can be used for the assessment of environmental sustainability. We identify overlaps between different footprints and analyse how they relate to the nine planetary boundaries and visualize the crucial information they provide for local and planetary sustainability. In addition, we assess how the footprint family delivers on measuring progress towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), considering its ability to quantify environmental pressures along the supply chain and relating them to the water-energy-food-ecosystem (WEFE) nexus and ecosystem services. We argue that the footprint family is a flexible framework where particular members can be included or excluded according to the context or area of concern. Our paper is based upon a recent workshop bringing together global leading experts on existing environmental footprint indicators.},
	keywords = {Environmental footprint, Environmental footprint assessment, Family, Footprint, Footprint family, Planetary boundaries},
	issn = {00489697},
	doi = {10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.133642},
	url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0048969719335673 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.133642},
	author = {Vanham, Davy and Leip, Adrian and Galli, Alessandro and Kastner, Thomas and Bruckner, Martin and Uwizeye, Aimable and van Dijk, Kimo and Ercin, Ertug and Dalin, Carole and Brand{\~a}o, Miguel and Bastianoni, Simone and Fang, Kai and Leach, Allison M. and Chapagain, Ashok and Van der Velde, Marijn and Sala, Serenella and Pant, Rana and Mancini, Lucia and Monforti-Ferrario, Fabio and Carmona-Garcia, Gema and Marques, Alexandra and Weiss, Franz and Hoekstra, Arjen Y.}
}
@article {AdrianLeip,
	title = {{The value of manure - manure as co-product in life cycle assessment}},
	journal = {Journal of Environmental Management},
	volume = {241},
	number = {March},
	year = {2019},
	month = {jul},
	pages = {293{\textendash}304},
	publisher = {Elsevier},
	keywords = {Allocation, Fertilizer, Life cycle assessment, Livestock supply chains, Manure, Nutrients},
	issn = {03014797},
	doi = {10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.059},
	url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0301479719303627},
	author = {Leip, Adrian and Ledgart, Stewart and Uwizeye, Aimable and Palhares, Julio C.P. and Aller, Fernanda and Amon, Barbara and Binder, Michael and Cordovil, Claudia M.d.S. and Dong, Hongming and Fusi, Alessandra and Helin, Janne and H{\"o}rtenhuber, Stefan and Hristov, Alexander N. and Koelsch, Richard and Liu, Chunjiang and Masso, Cargele and Nkongolo, Nsalambi V. and Patra, Amlan K. and Redding, Matthew R. and Rufino, Mariana C. and Sakrabani, Ruben and Thoma, Greg and Vert{\`e}s, Fran{\c c}oise and Wang, Ying and Ledgard, Stewart and Uwizeye, Aimable and Palhares, Julio C.P. and Aller, M. Fernanda and Amon, Barbara and Binder, Michael and Cordovil, Claudia M.d.S. and De Camillis, Camillo and Dong, Hongming and Fusi, Alessandra and Helin, Janne and H{\"o}rtenhuber, Stefan and Hristov, Alexander N. and Koelsch, Richard and Liu, Chunjiang and Masso, Cargele and Nkongolo, Nsalambi V. and Patra, Amlan K. and Redding, Matthew R. and Rufino, Mariana C. and Sakrabani, Ruben and Thoma, Greg and Vert{\`e}s, Fran{\c c}oise and Wang, Ying}
}
@article {Kanter2020,
	title = {{A framework for nitrogen futures in the shared socioeconomic pathways}},
	journal = {Global Environmental Change},
	year = {2020},
	keywords = {corresponding author, s},
	author = {Kanter, David R and Winiwarter, Wilfried and Bodirsky, Benjamin and Bouwman, Lex and Boyer, Elizabeth and Buckle, Simon and Compton, Jana and Dalgaard, Tommy and wim de Vries and Lecl{\`e}re, David and Leip, Adrian and Muller, Christoph and Popp, Alexander and Raghuram, Nandula and Rao, Shilpa and Sutton, Mark A. and Tian, Hanqin and Westhoek, Henk and Zhang, Xin and Zurek, Monika}
}
@article {Carlo,
	title = {{Sustainable food protein supply reconciling human and ecosystem health: A Leibniz Position}},
	journal = {Global Food Security},
	volume = {25},
	year = {2020},
	month = {jun},
	pages = {100367},
	keywords = {corresponding author, s},
	issn = {22119124},
	doi = {10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100367},
	url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2211912420300201},
	author = {Weindl, Isabelle and Ost, Mario and Wiedmer, Petra and Schreiner, Monika and Neugart, Susanne and Klopsch, Rebecca and K{\"u}hnhold, Holger and Kloas, Werner and Henkel, Ina M. and Schl{\"u}ter, Oliver and Bu{\ss}ler, Sara and Bellingrath-Kimura, Sonoko D. and Ma, Hua and Grune, Tilman and Rolinski, Susanne and Klaus, Susanne}
}
@article {242,
	title = {Appetite for Change: Food system options for nitrogen, environment \& health. 2nd European Nitrogen Assessment Special Report on Nitrogen \& Food},
	year = {2023},
	institution = {UK Centre for Ecology \& Hydrology},
	address = {Edinburgh},
	isbn = {978-1-906698-83-6},
	issn = {INMS Report 2023/01},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10406450},
	author = {Adrian Leip and Jan Wollgast and Susanna Kugelberg and Jo{\~a}o C Leite and Rob J M Maas and Kate E Mason and Mark A Sutton}
}
@article {bach_reactive_nodate,
	title = {Reactive nitrogen flows in {Germany} 2010 - 2014 ({DESTINO} {Report} 2)},
	year = {Submitted},
	pages = {152},
	abstract = {Emissions of reactive nitrogen give rise to a wide range of environmental problems. In order to develop reduction measures it is necessary to quantify sources, sinks and flows of Nr, and as part of the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLTRAP) it was agreed in the Gothenburg Protocol to construct national nitrogen budgets. The {\textquotedblleft}Guidance document on national nitrogen budgets{\textquotedblright} of the Economic Commission for Europe forms the starting point for this task. The Nr flows are determined for the following pools: {\textquotedblleft}Atmosphere{\textquotedblright}, {\textquotedblleft}Energy and Fuels{\textquotedblright}, {\textquotedblleft}Material and products in industry{\textquotedblright}, {\textquotedblleft}Humans and settlements{\textquotedblright}, {\textquotedblleft}Agriculture{\textquotedblright}, {\textquotedblleft}Forest and semi-natural vegetation{\textquotedblright}, {\textquotedblleft}Waste{\textquotedblright}, and {\textquotedblleft}Hydrosphere{\textquotedblright}, as well as for the {\textquotedblleft}Trans-boundary N-flows{\textquotedblright} (imports and exports). The N-flows are taken directly from statistical reports, publications, etc., or are calculated as the product of the quantity of transported or converted substance and the mean nitrogen contents. Some 150 N-flows are described, and the uncertainty of the results is graded in four levels from {\textquotedblleft}very low{\textquotedblright} to {\textquotedblleft}high{\textquotedblright}. In Germany, approximately 6275 kt Nr is introduced into the nitrogen cycle every year (mean value from 2010 to 2014), of 43 \% is by ammonia synthesis. Domestic extraction of nitrogenous fossil fuels (lignite, coal, crude oil) and imports contribute 2335 kt N a-1. Natural nitrogen fixation converts 308 kt N a-1 into organically bound nitrogen. Conversely, processes involving the combustion of fossil fuels and regenerative fuels and the refining of crude oil to mineral oil products result in 2711 kt N a-1 being transformed to N2. In waters, soils, and wastewater treatment plants, denitrification leads to the release of 1107 kt N a-1 as molecular nitrogen. Via the atmosphere and hydrosphere, Germany exports 745 kt N a-1 to neighbouring countries and the coastal waters. The changes in N-stock in soils have to date only been determined for forest soils, where they are 293 kt N a-1. On balance, reactive nitrogen totalling 1627 kt N is released in Germany every year, with negative impacts on the ecosystems and their functions. The national nitrogen budget involves considerable uncertainties, and this should be taken into consideration when interpreting the results.},
	author = {Bach, Martin and H{\"a}u{\ss}ermann, Uwe and Klement, Laura and Knoll, Lukas and Breuer, Lutz and Weber, Tatyana and Fuchs, Stefan and Heldstab, J{\"u}rg and Reutimann, Judith}
}
