Cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata L.) is becoming increasingly important for grassland farming due to climate change, which alters precipitation and increases droughts. Although it is generally considered to be drought-tolerant, little is known about the differences between cultivars. This study aimed to investigate the effects of four different field capacity (FC) levels (80%, 60%, 40%, and rewetting to 80% after a period of 40% FC) on the yield, crude protein content, water consumption, water use efficiency (WUE), and drought susceptibility index of five European cocksfoot cultivars (cv). A pot experiment was conducted in a greenhouse subjected to the specified irrigation treatments over three growth periods. The results revealed significant differences in the cultivars’ responses to the irrigation treatments. Dry matter yield decreased under simulated drought conditions, while crude protein content and WUE increased. Prolana cv achieved the highest yield under drought conditions, Tandem cv had the highest WUE, and Laban cv exhibited the highest crude protein content. Rewetting to 80% FC in the last growth period resulted in similar dry matter and crude protein yields for all cultivars compared to full irrigation. These findings highlight the importance of selecting and breeding drought-tolerant cocksfoot cultivars to maintain high yields and quality in perennial grassland farming under future climate conditions.

The sustainable future of dairy farming will depend on how trade-offs between environmental impact, economic viability, and animal welfare are managed. Dairy production contributes significantly not only to human nutrition but also to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, ammonia release, and water pollution. Comprehensive sustainability assessments are essential for addressing these impacts, also in light of evolving regulations like the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. However, existing research on sustainable dairy farming and intensification often overlooks trade-offs with other ecological aspects like biodiversity, economic viability, or animal welfare. This study evaluated the sustainability performance of Austrian dairy farms using a tool called NEU.rind, which combines life cycle assessment (LCA) with other indicators. Applied to 170 dairy farms, the tool identified four sustainability clusters across the dimensions of environmental conditions, efficiency, animal health, and sustainability: (1) Alpine farms (high cow longevity, medium-to-high emissions per kg milk), (2) efficient low-input farms (low emissions, high cow longevity), (3) high-output lowland farms (high productivity, lower animal welfare), and (4) input-intensive lowland farms (high emissions, especially per hectare; inefficient use of resources). The analysis revealed fundamental trade-offs between production intensity, environmental impact, and animal welfare, particularly when comparing product-based (per kg milk) versus hectare-based indicators. Key improvement strategies include increasing the use of regional feed and pasture as well as adapting manure management. For policymakers, these findings underline the importance of site-specific sustainability assessments and the need for region-specific incentive schemes that reward both environmental efficiency and animal health performance. In this context, NEU.rind provides farm-specific recommendations with minimal data input, making sustainability assessments practical and feasible.