IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i16p10374-d893307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Phosphorus Management in Slovakia—A Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Tomáš Bakalár

    (Institute of Earth Resources, Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnologies, Technical University of Košice, Letná 9, 042 00 Košice, Slovakia)

  • Henrieta Pavolová

    (Institute of Earth Resources, Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnologies, Technical University of Košice, Letná 9, 042 00 Košice, Slovakia)

  • Zuzana Šimková

    (Institute of Earth Resources, Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnologies, Technical University of Košice, Letná 9, 042 00 Košice, Slovakia)

  • Lucia Bednárová

    (Institute of Earth Resources, Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnologies, Technical University of Košice, Letná 9, 042 00 Košice, Slovakia)

Abstract

Recently, phosphorus (P) has become a material that is the focus of many countries, including the EU, due to its scarcity. EU countries significantly depend on P export/import due to a lack of extraction and deposits. In this paper, an economic analysis of P management in Slovakia as a source for responsible and sustainable exploitation and reuse is presented based on available P sources, whether traditional (P rock mining), recovery and recycling (from surface water, un/treated wastewater, sewage sludge, sewage sludge ash) or alternative (from urine, manure, slaughter waste, steelmaking slag). The current state in Slovakia shows that there is no P rock mined, and no P is recovered or recycled from any resources. All the P is imported, mostly from other EU countries. But there are several possible P sources, except for mining, with estimated available sources of surface water (14,933 t per year), treated wastewater (285 t per year), sewage sludge (49,125 t per year), urine (433,806 t per year), manure (1,626,132 t per year), slaughter waste (456 t per year) and steelmaking slag (4214 t per year). The explicit identification of an effective P management strategy in Slovakia was done by a Strength-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT) analysis, and the corresponding factors were identified and quantified. As there are no P deposits mined and no P recovery facilities from existing sources at present in Slovakia, there is a declining trend in cattle breeding and in the produced amount of manure and urine, absence of the P recovery from sewage sludge ash, the low estimated potential of available P compounds from sewage sludge, low estimated potential of available P compounds from steelmaking slags in connection with lack of governmental support, instability of steel production, reduction of manure production due to the reduction of cattle breeding, reduction of slaughter waste production due to the reduction of animal waste production, significant dependence on P import and the low number of potential P deposits are the main results of the SWOT analysis that suggests that the P management should be guided by the principles of a retreat strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Tomáš Bakalár & Henrieta Pavolová & Zuzana Šimková & Lucia Bednárová, 2022. "Phosphorus Management in Slovakia—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:16:p:10374-:d:893307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/16/10374/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/16/10374/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kurttila, Mikko & Pesonen, Mauno & Kangas, Jyrki & Kajanus, Miika, 2000. "Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis -- a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 41-52, May.
    2. Robert Ulewicz & Dominika Siwiec & Andrzej Pacana & Magdalena Tutak & Jarosław Brodny, 2021. "Multi-Criteria Method for the Selection of Renewable Energy Sources in the Polish Industrial Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-30, April.
    3. Dominika Siwiec & Andrzej Pacana, 2021. "Model Supporting Development Decisions by Considering Qualitative–Environmental Aspects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-28, August.
    4. Jhuma Sadhukhan & Mark Christensen, 2021. "An In-Depth Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Lithium-Ion Battery for Climate Impact Mitigation Strategies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-20, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tadeusz Olejarz & Dominika Siwiec & Andrzej Pacana, 2022. "Method of Qualitative–Environmental Choice of Devices Converting Green Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-22, November.
    2. Andrzej Pacana & Dominika Siwiec, 2022. "Model to Predict Quality of Photovoltaic Panels Considering Customers’ Expectations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-33, February.
    3. Dominika Siwiec & Andrzej Pacana, 2021. "Model of Choice Photovoltaic Panels Considering Customers’ Expectations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-32, September.
    4. Robert Ulewicz & Dominika Siwiec & Andrzej Pacana, 2023. "A New Model of Pro-Quality Decision Making in Terms of Products’ Improvement Considering Customer Requirements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-22, May.
    5. Grzegorz Ostasz & Dominika Siwiec & Andrzej Pacana, 2022. "Universal Model to Predict Expected Direction of Products Quality Improvement," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-18, February.
    6. Qiucheng Li & Jiang Hu & Bolin Yu, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Patterns and Influencing Mechanism of Urban Residential Energy Consumption in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-17, June.
    7. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    8. Gözaçan Nazlıcan & Lafci Çisem, 2020. "Evaluation of Key Performance Indicators of Logistics Firms," Logistics, Supply Chain, Sustainability and Global Challenges, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 24-32, February.
    9. Sabina Kordana-Obuch & Michał Wojtoń & Mariusz Starzec & Beata Piotrowska, 2023. "Opportunities and Challenges for Research on Heat Recovery from Wastewater: Bibliometric and Strategic Analyses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-36, September.
    10. Javier Mendoza Jiménez & Montserrat Hernández López & Susana Eva Franco Escobar, 2019. "Sustainable Public Procurement: From Law to Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-23, November.
    11. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    12. Sepehr Ghazinoory & Mansoureh Abdi & Mandana Azadegan-Mehr, 2010. "Swot Methodology: A State-of-the-Art Review for the Past, A Framework for the Future," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 24-48, November.
    13. Baffoe, Gideon, 2019. "Exploring the utility of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in ranking livelihood activities for effective and sustainable rural development interventions in developing countries," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 197-204.
    14. Zelin Liu & Xiyan Duan & Hongling Cheng & Zhaoran Liu & Ping Li & Yang Zhang, 2023. "Empowering High-Quality Development of the Chinese Sports Education Market in Light of the “Double Reduction” Policy: A Hybrid SWOT-AHP Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, January.
    15. Sangmin Lee & Donghan Kim & Sunwoo Park & Wonseok Lee, 2021. "A Study on the Strategic Decision Making Used in the Revitalization of Fishing Village Tourism: Using A’WOT Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, July.
    16. Kurttila, Mikko & Hamalainen, Kari & Kajanus, Miika & Pesonen, Mauno, 2001. "Non-industrial private forest owners' attitudes towards the operational environment of forestry -- a multinominal logit model analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 13-28, April.
    17. Samuel O. Afolabi & Idowu O. Malachi & Adebukola O. Olawumi & B. I. Oladapo, 2025. "Data Process of Net-Zero Revolution for Transforming Earth and Beyond Sustainably," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-19, June.
    18. Syed Hammad Mian & Bashir Salah & Wadea Ameen & Khaja Moiduddin & Hisham Alkhalefah, 2020. "Adapting Universities for Sustainability Education in Industry 4.0: Channel of Challenges and Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-33, July.
    19. Phadermrod, Boonyarat & Crowder, Richard M. & Wills, Gary B., 2019. "Importance-Performance Analysis based SWOT analysis," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 194-203.
    20. Chanthawong, Anuman & Dhakal, Shobhakar, 2016. "Stakeholders' perceptions on challenges and opportunities for biodiesel and bioethanol policy development in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 189-206.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:16:p:10374-:d:893307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.