The business climate must be significantly improved, food security must be increased, and the approach to the nitrogen problem must be fundamentally changed. This is what eight organizations write in a joint report. vision document about the future of agriculture.
The parties involved are Agractie, DDB, FDF, NAV, NMV, NVP, POV, and VVK. Discussions were held with LTO-Nederland and the NAJK, but the differences in vision proved too great, according to coordinator Jeroen van Maanen. Their views on matters such as target management and other aspects of emissions policy are too divergent.
The business climate in the Netherlands is deteriorating, according to the six organizations. More than six in ten entrepreneurs consider the current business climate to be poor or very poor. In agriculture, that figure is even higher at seven in ten. Entrepreneurs are a crucial pillar of our society and economy. Moreover, the food supply is declining more and more rapidly.
Food security precarious
If a crisis breaks out, with imports and exports collapsing, the Netherlands already lacks enough food to feed its own population. Food security must therefore be placed much higher on the political agenda. Regarding the nitrogen problem, the organizations advocate for aligning with the European approach – which prioritizes nature conservation – and for the Netherlands to abandon its self-imposed, one-sided focus on nitrogen.
The organizations are calling for a significant reduction in regulatory burden. The Dutch business climate is deteriorating rapidly and urgently needs to improve. The Netherlands must stop imposing additional national regulations ("heads") on top of EU policy and commit to the rapid harmonization of European standards, particularly regarding water quality. It is incomprehensible that water flowing into our country from Belgium or Germany is considered "good" there, but "poor" in our country. Moreover, in large parts of the Netherlands, the quality of groundwater and surface water has been good for some time. These areas should therefore be declassified as vulnerable – a decision the Netherlands can make itself.
New, clean technology
Food security is central to the shared vision. This issue is becoming increasingly urgent due to the rapidly growing demand for food and rising geopolitical tensions. Our agrifood sector plays a leading role globally—with high-quality products, knowledge, and technology—and has developed into the largest manufacturing industry in the Netherlands. Family businesses are the cornerstone of this success.
It is crucial that the sector can continue to develop. Relocating production abroad would actually be a step backward from the perspective of climate, nature, biodiversity, and animal welfare. Thanks to groundbreaking technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), food production can be even more precise, cleaner, and sustainable – while maintaining high quality standards and affordability for everyone. To stimulate this, the organizations propose the establishment of an Innovation Fund of €2,5 billion per year. They also advocate for the reclamation of the Markerwaard, partly in light of the expected population growth towards 20 million inhabitants, and for a separate Directorate for Food Security within the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality (LVVN).
Practical and realistic nitrogen policy
According to the eight organizations, the Netherlands must abandon its self-imposed, one-sided focus on nitrogen and the associated theoretical models' reality. This approach unnecessarily locks the country into a rut and offers no guarantee whatsoever for the preservation or restoration of nature. They advocate for the Netherlands to adopt the European approach, which prioritizes the conservation of nature. Nitrogen is just one of many pressures—alongside nature management, water supply, and soil quality, for example. The actual state of nature must be central. In concrete terms, this means replacing the critical deposition value (KDW) targets in the law with conservation targets. In addition, a policy-defined threshold value will be introduced to enable permitting again, in a form that eliminates the need for the Aerius model. Finally, the organizations are committed to an effective emission reduction policy that truly contributes to nature and is based on incentives rather than punishments.
Soil, manure and crop protection
According to the organizations, a general legal standard for land-based fertilizers does not offer a suitable solution to the manure problem. Such an approach insufficiently considers the specific circumstances of farms and leads to a cumbersome regulatory landscape. This makes it unnecessarily difficult for many farms to remain profitable. Local soil fertility should be the guiding principle for fertilization, rather than national model averages. New technologies, such as precision agriculture, allow manure to be applied with increasing precision, tailored to the soil and crop. Manure is a valuable resource, and arable farmers are already expressing concern about the availability of manure on all land in the Netherlands.
Regarding crop protection products, the organizations warn against unnecessarily drastic, unsubstantiated measures, advocate for recognition of the current efforts of the plant sectors, and call for continued collaboration to improve and make the entire chain more sustainable.
Farmers' privacy
Finally, the organizations urgently call for better protection for farmers against activism and data misuse. In recent years, the agricultural sector has faced threats, unwanted farm entrances, arson, and barn burglaries and occupations by animal extremists. These incidents have not only deeply affected the direct victims but also created a lasting sense of insecurity. Furthermore, the number of Open Government Act (WOO) requests is increasing sharply. Information obtained through these requests—such as home addresses, GPS data, and information still pending in court—is regularly misused for purposes not intended by law. Because farmers' farms are also their homes, this represents a serious infringement of privacy and security. This must be stopped urgently.
© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.
This is in response to it Boerenbusiness article:
[url = https: // www.boerenbusiness.nl/artikel/10914352/gezamenlijke-toekomstvisie-8-landbouworganisaties]Joint vision of the future of 8 agricultural organizations[/url]
It's incomprehensible that no one from the sector has responded to an article like the one above so far. Other topics are often discussed endlessly, with everyone arguing over each other's points, but on this, an important issue, there's a complete silence, as if it's none of their business. There's no agreement or opinion on what's being discussed. I'm not a farmer, but I don't understand this at all.This is in response to it Boerenbusiness article:
[url = https: // www.boerenbusiness.nl/artikel/10914352/gezamenlijke-toekomstvisie-8-landbouworganisaties]Joint vision of the future of 8 agricultural organizations[/url]
There are a few agricultural parties: BBB, SGP, and FvD.
Totally agree. The CDA has really fallen below the threshold as a party that stood up for farmers' interests. They only know how to utter the word "decency," but they'll be joining forces with Timmermans soon.
CM wrote:It seems beneficial for agriculture when parties in power hold positions that resonate with farmers. But in my experience, farmers' interests often turn out to be different, or even diametrically opposed, to what they think.Totally agree. The CDA has really fallen below the threshold as a party that stood up for farmers' interests. They only know how to utter the word "decency," but they'll be joining forces with Timmermans soon.