The Netherlands Food System Policy Nitrogen Emission Reduction Policy Amidst Competing Interests And Struggles For Influence

Generated Summary

This paper examines the Dutch policy on nitrogen emission reduction, focusing on the political economy of change within the food system. It uses a desk study approach, relying on literature, reports, media articles, and discussions with the Food System Economics Commission (FSEC). The study investigates the challenges in addressing excessive nitrogen emissions, the role of stakeholders, and the evolution of policy interventions. The research analyzes the interplay of competing interests, institutional frameworks, and the dynamics of coalition-building within the context of the Dutch agricultural sector. The paper highlights the shift from sector-based policies to integrated approaches and explores the challenges and opportunities for sustainable solutions in the future. The Dutch policy on nitrogen emissions reduction is based on strict targets for emission reductions, in accordance with the court ruling in 2018. The policy is met with resistance from many farmers, and as such policy is not built on shared values and lacks broadly shared objectives.

Key Findings & Statistics

• The agricultural sector in the Netherlands is the most productive and efficient in the European Union per unit of land (Van Grinsven et al, 2019).
• About 54 % (2,2 million hectare) of Dutch land is agricultural land.
• Emissions of ammonia, surpluses of nitrogen and phosphorus, and the use of pesticides per hectare of agricultural land in the Netherlands are among the highest in the EU (Van Grinsven et al 2019).
• The economic loss of projects stalled due to the PAS ruling is estimated at over 14 billion euros and is still growing (Erisman, 2021).
• The government aims to reduce climate gas emissions by 60% compared to 1990.
• The legal aim is 55%.
• In 2030 74% of the nitrogen sensitive, Natura 2000, areas must be under the critical deposition values, with 40% achieved by 2025.

Other Important Findings

• The Programmatic Approach on Nitrogen (PAS), a nitrogen-licensing system based on estimated future emission reductions, was ruled insufficient by the European Court of Justice in 2018.
• The Netherlands is one of the few countries in Europe where excessive nitrogen use plays a strong role in public debate and policy discussions.
• The government acknowledges the problem is far from limited to agriculture and is linked to other sectors, such as housing, transportation, infrastructure, manufacturing, and industry.
• The government has announced that it wants to maintain a strong agricultural sector.
• The study notes the decline of the Green Front, an iron triangle of firm collaboration between politics, administration, and corporate business: the Ministry of Agriculture; the parliamentary specialists, and the agricultural interest organizations.
• Farmers feel threatened in their subsistence and their trust in the government is low.
• The current policy has not brought a successful integrating policy and it is still on the agenda.
• The new policy includes both a national and an area-based approach.
• The new National Program Countryside Areas (NPLG) is a government broad plan.
• The government will introduce a transition fund of 25 billion euros until 2035 for measures supporting nitrogen emission reductions.

Limitations Noted in the Document

• The study is based on desk research, with limitations inherent to the use of secondary data sources.
• The analysis relies on information available up to July 2022, with updates to include later developments.
• The perspective of the farmers and the political landscape is subject to ongoing changes, especially after the election in November 2023.
• The paper acknowledges that the institutional framework is complex, with competing interests, which may lead to challenges in reaching a consensus.
• The analysis recognizes that policy implementation depends on the ability of the Dutch government to coordinate efforts and address the concerns of various stakeholders, which may be difficult to achieve.

Conclusion

The Dutch policy on nitrogen emissions reduction faces significant challenges due to resistance from farmers and a lack of shared objectives. The shift from the traditional approach, rooted in strong collaboration between government, industry, and farmers, towards a more politicized and open decision-making process has led to increased uncertainty. The historical context of the “Green Front,” which ensured agricultural decision-making and consensus, is no longer applicable. The current policy’s success hinges on the government’s ability to navigate a complex landscape of competing interests and diverging values. The analysis emphasizes that for a successful policy transformation, it is important to build credible and transparent institutions. This will require the alignment of interests, power, and influence. The situation requires the adoption of a new and systemic approach that is not specific to the Netherlands. The analysis further states that by acting together the energy and trust needed will rise. The need for inclusive governance for a food system transformation, based on credible and transparent institutions aligning interests, power, and influence, with negotiation and conflict management processes in cases where interests diverge. A return to the past when agriculture was a matter for the agricultural sector is not an option any more.