Nitrogen (N) budgets at farm level are influenced by N fertilisation recommendations. In this study, we reviewed and analysed the underlying principles and methods of N fertilisation recommendations in 10 West European countries, to identify similarities and differences, and develop suggestions for reconsideration and improvement. An analysis of national official documents on N fertilisation recommendations revealed that there were three main categories of calculation methods: (i) ‘N mass balances’ (France, Italy, Spain), (ii) ‘Corrected standards’ (Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, Luxembourg), and (iii) ‘Pre-parameterised calculations’, which rely on a soil N supply typology (United Kingdom, Ireland, Belgium). In total 16 variables were identified in the calculation methods. The more complex methods use 10 (Italy, France), while the simplest only rely on 3 (Luxembourg). The most common variables include the availability of N in manure, the N uptake by a crop, and the N released by crop residues. Few countries explicitly consider N losses to ground and surface waters or to the atmosphere in the calculation methods. In some countries, the N fertilisation recommendation has a voluntary status, and in other countries, a legal one (caps on maximum allowable N rates). We compared the N fertiliser recommendations for a wheat crop grown on a farm with livestock, and for a farm with a diverse arable crop rotation without livestock. Across the 10 countries, large differences in the N fertilisation calculation methods and resulting N recommendations existed for the two management scenarios, ranging from almost no fertilisation to 135 kg N ha-1, and from 111 to 210 kg N ha -1, respectively. The differences were not accounted for by the complexity of the equations used, but rather resulted from contrasting reference values for N availability in manure, N uptake by crop and N leaching. However, the study concluded that standardisation of the method to calculate N fertilisation recommendations is likely to be counterproductive as there are no objective reasons to favour one method more than the others. Nonetheless, improvements in N use efficiency are necessary. Farm scale mass balance, combined with parameters such as minimum residual soil mineral N test at harvest, was suggested as being an important consideration.
