What can the agricultural sector learn from the Danes?

The Netherlands is well on its way to squandering its traditionally leading agricultural image. Former ASML CEO Peter Wennink points to the dairy farming sector as the main culprit for blocking permits. According to the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, buy-out schemes have barely any effect on improving nature.

An obsessive fixation on nitrogen sidelines the Netherlands. Crucial factors such as soil structure, management, and water management are disregarded; field research is ignored. Organic farmers and short-chain formulas struggle immensely to stay afloat, despite the many millions in subsidies the government pumps into them. Pushing a niche market is pointless. The consumer chooses convenience and is unwilling to pay the premium.

The systemic world is clashing hard with the lifeworld. Wishful thinking is striking at the pillars of our prosperity. The lack of knowledge about the food system is appalling. Inspired by moral and elitist superiority, opinions regarding suspected abuses in the food system are dominantly displayed in politics and the media, and far-reaching ethical standards are imposed.

Food producers have been beaten into submission.
How is the agricultural sector responding, and what are food producers doing? Due to the incessant stream of negative reporting, they have been worn down and are shutting themselves off from the outside world. Advocacy for the agricultural sector is highly fragmented; mutual trust is hard to find. The agricultural agreement failed. With the abolition of the product boards in 2015, funding for information campaigns for dairy, vegetables, fruit, eggs, and meat disappeared. NGOs dominate the public domain with intrusive messages about mega-farms, broiler chickens, pesticide spraying, and slaughter cows.

In Denmark, an agricultural agreement was indeed concluded.
In 2024, an agricultural agreement was indeed concluded in Denmark. The agricultural sector (Landbrug & Fødevarer), nature and environmental organizations, trade unions, and the industry sat at the negotiating table. The deep-rooted cooperative culture forms the foundation of the agreement. Characteristic of the Danish success is the legal anchoring of public relations and sector promotion. Danish farmers pay a small levy per unit produced or based on the value of their agricultural land. Because everyone contributes, the financial burden per farmer is low, but the budget runs into the millions. This money is placed in an independent, legally anchored foundation. This foundation uses this budget to create structural public support – a license to produce – to educate consumers about the farmer's sustainability steps, and to promote the rock-solid export position of Danish products worldwide.

What do agricultural trade associations do?
In the Netherlands, pursuant to a similar General Binding Declaration, funds are automatically collected from food producers for the benefit of, among others, ZuivelNL, BO Akkerbouw, and Producten Organisatie Varkenshouderij. With the exception of POV, which actively promotes 'The Pig Story', the visibility of ZuivelNL and BO Akkerbouw in the public domain is nil. This is surprising, given that these organizations have budgets of over €11 million and €3 million respectively, according to their public annual figures. Meanwhile, to the annoyance of dairy farmers and arable farmers, the 'demolition milk' and 'toxic cart' campaigns continue unabated.

It is too easy to accuse ZuivelNL and BO Akkerbouw of passivity. For example, they devote a great deal of attention to food education, but this largely remains out of sight of the Dutch consumer. Once again, the fragmentation of funds is blocking a positive, optimistic view of Dutch agriculture and horticulture. Denmark has legally defined this through an Agricultural Aid Act.

€200 per company generates €10 million annually for PR
The Netherlands must use the Declaration of General Binding Value more intelligently. Instead of charging for promotion or lobbying, the statutory levy should be explicitly linked to goals such as transparency, consumer education on sustainability, innovation, and knowledge sharing. A campaign regarding how farmers are working on biodiversity or nitrogen reduction may, however, be collectively funded, because this serves a public interest.

Converted over 50.000 Dutch farmers and horticulturalists, an annual levy of €200 per company yields a budget of €10 million. The RVO collects this levy and transfers it directly to the independent foundation. In Denmark, public relations are credible because the sector itself has unequivocally chosen a course towards climate neutrality. The collective budget is used to tell that story.

Establishment of Product Board 2.0
In the coalition agreement, D66, CDA, and VVD demonstrate their intention to strengthen the sector's implementation capacity: "Therefore, we are starting the establishment of a Product Board 2.0." This intention is the perfect moment to set aside our egos and shadows and truly get to work on a single, overarching, independent public relations organization. Who will help take up this challenge?

Wim Groot Koerkamp

Founder ReMarkAble, co-founder BBB, founder AT THE TABLE!

© 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.