Bio-based fertilisers (BBFs), meaning fertilisers produced from nutrient-rich organic wastes, are generally perceived as being beneficial for environment, climate and socio-economy. BBFs recycle nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) plant nutrients, thus avoiding these nutrients from polluting air and water, and they replace mineral fertilisers and their climate footprint. This general understanding of BBFs is the background for wishes, not least expressed politically, such as in EU's Farm-to-Fork strategy, for accelerating their production and use. However, the BBF market remains marginal, revealing a need for increasing our understanding of ways to sustain BBF markets and close the gap between political aims and practical realities.

Analysing the situation of BBF production, taking basis in real cases, meaning value chains for converting nutrient rich organic wastes from farming, industries and municipalities into BBF, has provided some useful insights. 

BBF production is typically involving additional transport and requring investments in processing facilities that consumes energy, and in some cases also chemicals. BBF production is always having an alternative, and in many cases the BBF production does not mean that nutrient recycling is raised from 0 to 100%; some cases even shows a negative impact on nutrient recycling, and especially thermal and oxidative processing methods are associated with large nutrient losses. Variations are huge, and this is also reflected in the socio-economic impact, that were found to be negative in most of the 11 evaluated cases, and only one case showed a production price, competitive with nutrients in mineral fertilisers. 

These insights gives basis for a more qualified policy dialogue towards a circular economy in the area of N and P nutrient recycling via BBF production.

The detailled presentation of the BBF production analyses are found in this report and its associated spreadsheet model: