Research Proposal: The Nitrogencrisis, Circular Agriculture & the Farmers' Protests

Research Proposal

The Nitrogencrisis, Circular Agriculture

and the Farmers’ Protests

The Analysis of a Transition to Circular Agriculture

and its Effects on and the Nitrogencrisis

By Nadette Embregts

12403164

nadette.embregts@hotmail.nl

Examiner and Daily Advisor

Co-Assessor

Prof. dr. J. (John) Grin

Dr. A. (Albert) Tietema

Master Thesis Proposal Leiden, October 23rd_{, 2020} Earth Sciences: Environmental Management

University of Amsterdam Word count: 6351

1

Summary

For decades, the Netherlands has been experiencing nitrogen-surpluses, mainly caused by man-made nitrogen-emitting activities. Even though these activities bring about economic developments, the nitrogen-surpluses they cause have negative effects on vital natural areas and humans’ health. During the end of the 1900’s, the measures the Dutch government took to decrease the emission of nitrogen seemed to have effect. However, since the beginning of the 21st _{century, decrease of} nitrogen-emissions started to stagnate. Despite numerous governmental measures, the Netherlands has since then been unable to promote further economic developments whilst decreasing the emission of nitrogen.

In May 2019, this nitrogen-problem regained momentum due to the abolition of the Program

Approach to Nitrogen (PAS), causing the current Nitrogencrisis. Consequences of this crisis are delays in economic developments as well as protesting farmers, dissatisfied with the government’s actions. Simultaneously, the agricultural sector is one of the key components in finding successful solutions for the Nitrogencrisis, making the government’s task in finding solutions ever more challenging.

Suitable solutions for the Nitrogencrisis are far-reaching and complex. Therefore, additional research on the consequences of new policies and new insights regarding solutions to the Nitrogencrisis are crucial. Hence the aim of this research is to contribute to the development of sustainable solutions to the Nitrogencrisis, meant to decrease nitrogen-emissions as well as encourage economic growth simultaneously.

As the issues of the Nitrogencrisis are so complex and over-arching, this study has been limited to the following research question: To what extent and how may circular agriculture become a “well-balanced” solution for the Dutch Nitrogencrisis, and if so, what improvements may be considered? In which the term “well-balanced” will be validated by determining the feasibility of a transition to circular agriculture, as well as the effectiveness of circular agriculture on nitrogen-emissions. By dividing the research question into subquestions, and by utilising different research-methods, the research question is hoped to be answered. The use of literature will be important throughout the entire research, while the use of in-depth interviews is expected to deliver the gross amount analysable information. By interviewing farmers, the consequences of a transition to circular agriculture will become apparent, as well as the farmers’ willingness and capability to cooperate. As a result, the feasibility of such a transition can be determined.

This qualitative knowledge will be supported by quantitative knowledge, using the Kringloopwijzer, Excretiewijzer and Excel or MATLAB. Using these programs, the change of nitrogen-emissions due to a transition to circular agriculture can be calculated. With the use of (statistical) analyses of these results, the effectiveness of such a transition can be examined. Furthermore, surveys and additional interviews can be added to the existing interviews to increase the reliability of the research.

After following the intended time scheme and sticking to the set budget, the hope is to find a suitable answer to the research question. Such an answer should not only include the feasibility of circular agriculture and its effects on nitrogen-emissions. It should also render recommendations to the government that would improve their policies and decisions and would therefore contribute to a successful solution for the Nitrogencrisis.

2

Table of Content

3

Theoretical Framework

A history of nitrogen

In the 1970’s, scientists stated for the first time that the Netherlands has a nitrogen-problem due to nitrogen surpluses (Remkes et al., 2020). A surplus of nitrogen has multiple consequences. Apart from human health issues, it causes eutrophication, acidification and desiccation of soils and waters

(Hermans et al., 2020). As a result, biodiversity, and soil- and water quality decreases, which can have a negative effect on the productivity of soils and the safety of drinking water, with far-reaching consequences (A. Tietema & H. Barmentlo, personal communication, September 10th_{, 2020).} As a reaction to these findings, policymakers started to take measures in the 1980’s, advocating a decrease of nitrogen emissions. Figure 1 shows these measures have had their effect. During this period, European legislation on the protection of the environment emerged as well, with the

Netherlands as one of its frontrunners (Remkes et al., 2020). Under these European legislatures, the Natura 2000-areas were introduced, as well as the European Nitrogen Ceilings and Habitat Guidelines (Dutch: Habitatrichtlijnen) (Remkes et al., 2020).

Figure 1: Decrease of (among others) nitrogen since the 1990’s (Rijksoverheid, 2019).

Unfortunately, the Dutch ambitions regarding the protection of the environment weakened since the 2000’s (Figure 1). The Netherlands had underestimated the efforts it would take to keep the high European standards they used to advocate themselves. Economical activities and intensive agriculture were keeping nitrogen-emissions too high, while a wide variety of more and less ambitious plans, programs, agreements, and laws attempted to meet the international standards (Remkes et al., 2020). Meanwhile, the agricultural sector has been an important pawn in national policies regarding the decrease of nitrogen-emissions (Figure 2). During the government’s struggle to keep nitrogen-levels decreasing in the past decades, the agricultural sector has been subject to numerous measures, restrictions, and programs (Remkes et al., 2020). The last policy attempt to harmonize economic activities, which emit nitrogen, with the environment, which experiences the negative side-effects of such activities, was the Program Approach to Nitrogen (Dutch: Programma Aanpas Stikstof) (PAS). On the 29th _{of May 2019, the PAS stranded due to the verdicts of the Council of State (Dutch: Raad} van State) (Raad van State, 2019).

4 Figure 2: The emission of the agricultural sector has decrease tremendously over the last decades (Rijksoverheid, 2019).

The End of the PAS

In their verdict, the Council of State states that the PAS, that has been used to allow nitrogen-emitting activities, causing nitrogen deposition in vulnerable Natura 2000-areas, is unlawful and incompatible with European legislation (Raad van State, 2019). The aim of the verdict is the lawful protection and preservation of biodiversity in the Dutch Natura 2000-areas. Hence, new policy must be made to reduce the deposition of nitrogen in these Natura 2000-areas, while promoting economic

developments, for instance in industry, construction, or transport. Until effective solutions have been found, the Council of State annulled all permits of nitrogen-emitting activities which were approved under the statements of the PAS (Remkes et al., 2019). As a result, a large amount of economic developments has been put on hold, until a solution has been found for the nitrogen-impasse, creating the current Nitrogencrisis.

To tackle this crisis, the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality appointed an Advisory Committee to investigate the causes of the Nitrogencrisis and to seek for solutions simultaneously. Other institutions, like the Research Centre of Wageningen University did the same. According to this research (Hermans et al., 2020), agriculture is responsible for 41% of the nitrogen-deposition in nitrogen-sensitive Natura-2000 areas. 11% of the nitrogen originates from transportation, including shipping. 4% of the nitrogen in sensitive Nature 2000-areas flows in through the North Sea, while 35% comes from abroad.

Even though there has been commotion about these numbers (Rotgers & Zijlstra, 2020), the advisory committee concluded that the agricultural sector is the largest contributor as well. Therefore, the Advisory Committee as well as the Dutch government have laid high expectations for the agricultural sector to contribute to solutions for the Nitrogencrisis (Remkes et al., 2019) (Remkes et al., 2020) (NOSop3, 2020). As a reaction to this vision, the farmers protests started.

Farmers’ Protests and Governmental Challenges

The overload and constant changes of rules and restrictions, increasing uncertainties, and low incomes farmers have been facing the past decades have brought a severe resistance from within the

5 mistreated and unfairly portrayed as the big polluters of the environment, while having contributed a lot to the decrease of nitrogen-emissions in the past decades (Figure 2) (NOS, 2019c).

The influence of the farmers and their protests has become clear with the animal feed-measure. One of the short-term solutions of the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality, was the temporary limitation of proteins in animal feed (NOSop3, 2020). This policy came across a lot of resistance from farmers, which lead to reconsideration and eventually to the withdrawal of the policy. The blockage of national policies does not only show the impact of farmers in policy regarding the Nitrogencrisis. It also shows the necessity of their cooperation in finding effective short- and long-term solutions to the Nitrogencrisis. Unfortunately, the confidence of farmers in the national government is low, making a path to government-led solutions with help of the farmers ever more difficult (NOS, 2019a).

One of the long-term solutions that has been proposed by the Advisory Committee is the introduction of circular agriculture in the Netherlands (Remkes et al., 2020). Circular farming is also one of the policy-aims of the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality (2018), which already had been published in 2018. In this policy plan, its Minister states that the Ministry wants the entire agricultural sector of the Netherlands to be circular in 2030. However, whether this plan can become a realisation and whether this measure will contribute to the solution of the Nitrogencrisis can be argued, as the cooperation of farmers will be crucial, while their discontent with the current agricultural policies is high.

In sum, the newly revived Nitrogencrisis is a persistent problem for the Dutch environment on which the Netherlands does not seem to get a grip. Meanwhile, the nitrogen-impasse has caused delays in economic developments and governmental policies have stirred up great dissatisfaction among Dutch farmers. Consequentially social unrest prevails in this sector that is so crucial in creating successful solutions for the Crisis. At the same time, other challenges have a grip on the entire society due to the Coronacrisis. Even though the advisory committee has executed extensive research on the current nitrogen-problems, sustainable solutions are far-reaching and complex (Remkes et al., 2020). Therefore, additional research on the consequences of new policies and new insights regarding solutions to the Nitrogencrisis are crucial.

6

Research Aim

The aim of this research is to contribute to the development of sustainable solutions regarding the Nitrogencrisis. This solution should not only ensure the decrease of nitrogen-emissions, but

simultaneously encourage economic growth which can be endured into the far future, without causing harm to nature. By exploring the policy measure of circular agriculture and seeking for improvements within this policy, I hope to contribute to this goal.

The Nitrogencrisis, and its solutions, is a large and complex arena. By demarcating the research area and the acceptation of assumptions, a feasible research can be created within this field. To be able to realize a feasible research, the following framework has been made:

• It is assumed that the nitrogen-problem is a problem with high urgency which needs to be addressed accordingly. The ethical, philosophical, and political questions whether the efforts of limiting nitrogen-emissions for the improvement of Natura 2000-areas are worth the challenges it costs the economic development will not be taken into consideration.

• Even though the surplus of nitrogen has multiple negative effects on humans and nature, the nitrogen-problem referred to in this research will be limited to the harms and consequences of areal nitrogen, expressed by the Council of State (2019, 29th _{of May).}

• The nitrogen-problem to which is referred by the Council of State is caused by two main sorts of areal nitrogen. The first one is ammonia (NH3), which is predominantly emitted by the agricultural sector. The other type of nitrogen, nitric oxide (NOx) is mainly rooted in the emission of industry and transport. Even though the methods of measurement and calculations are not un-argued (Rotgers & Zijlstra, 2020), it is assumed they are reliable enough to state that the agricultural sector is the largest nitrogen-polluter for nitrogen-sensitive Natura-2000 areas. Therefore, this research will focus solely on the NH3-emissions of the agricultural sector, leaving the emission of NOx and the emission of other industries out of consideration. • Looking at the vision of the government, and Advisory Committee, the agricultural sector will

again play an important role in the solution of the Nitrogencrisis. The ethical question whether this is ‘fair’, considering the large contributions this sector has already made in the past, and the role of other sectors, will not be part of this research.

• A large part of the nitrogen-emissions within the agricultural sector is related to animal manure and animal feed (Remkes et al., 2020). According to the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality (2020), cows emit the most nitrogen among livestock in the

Netherlands. Within this branch, dairy cattle emit the highest amounts of nitrogen (Remkes et al., 2020). Therefore, this research will be focused on the (ground bound) dairy farms of the Netherlands.

• In order to tackle the Nitrogencrisis, whilst promoting nitrogen-emitting economic activities, the minister of Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality has proposed reforms within the

agricultural sector which should promote the re-use of nitrogen and the development of the sector as a whole, by reaching for a circular agriculture. The aim of the Minister is to achieve circular agriculture by 2030 (Ministry of Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality, 2018). In this

7 research, the consequences that the implementation of this policy will have on the (ground bound) dairy farms in the Netherlands will be explored. Herewith, the consequences of this policy on other branches within agriculture or sectors outside of agriculture will not be taken into consideration.

• Furthermore, all other short- or long-term (governmental) policies, meant for the agricultural sector or other sectors, will neither be studied in this research.

8

Research Questions

By knowing whether a governmental policy, like the policy-aim of circular agriculture, is achievable, it can be determined whether this policy can become a suitable contributor to the solution of a problem, like the Nitrogencrisis. After all, if a policy-aim proves to be unfeasible, it cannot have the expected (positive) impacts. Evidently, it cannot function as a solution. The success of the

implementation of governmental policies is therefore essential in finding successful solutions. To that end, the following research question has been formulated:

To what extent and how may circular agriculture become a “well-balanced” solution for the Dutch Nitrogencrisis, and if so, what improvements may be considered?

In the reports of the Advisory Committee, Remkes et al., (2019) (2020) have used “well-balanced” to describe the share every nitrogen-emitting sector, including agriculture, should have in the

contribution to a solution for the Dutch Nitrogencrisis. With this term, the Committee wanted to stress the “cost-effectiveness” measures in every sector should have, preventing “proportional” contributions which may have a less advantageous cost-effectiveness. Therefore, in this research the term “well-balanced” will be interpreted as the “cost-effectiveness” of circular agriculture as a solution for the Dutch Nitrogencrisis. The cost-effectiveness will be determined by the feasibility and costs of a transition to circular agriculture, and the effectiveness of such a transition on the reduction of nitrogen-emissions.

The answer to this research question will be explored based on the assumptions and boundaries formulated in the abovementioned Research Aim. Furthermore, the undermentioned subquestions are formulated to divide the research question into comprehensible questions that will be investigated throughout this research.

Subquestion 1: How does the Dutch government define ‘circular agriculture’, and what measures is the government planning on using to reach this goal (in 2030)?

By answering this question, a future scenario will be made along with a roadmap to reach this vision. The Ministry of Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality (2018), has aimed to reach this goal in 2030. Hence, the coming ten years (2020 to 2030) will be the timespan in which the feasibility of a transition to circular agriculture will be assessed.

Subquestion 2: What measures and requirements has the government formulated for (ground bound) dairy farms in particular, to establish the government’s vision of a circular agriculture?

While Subquestion 1 paints an overall picture of the agricultural sector in 2030 (macro-level), Subquestion 2 focusses on the specific roadmap and scenario for (ground bound) dairy farms (meso-level). An answer to Subquestion 2 specifies the directions (ground bound) dairy farms need to follow in the future within the government’s vision.

Subquestion 3: What alterations should a Dutch (ground bound) dairy farmer need to make to his/her business to meet these new measures and requirements?

9 Within the roadmap and scenario for (ground bound) dairy farms, a further focus can be made into individual roadmaps and scenarios of (ground bound) dairy farms (micro-level). This will be done by answering Subquestion 3.

Subquestion 4: What are the consequences of such a transition for a Dutch (ground bound) dairy farm?

To determine the consequences, three different perspectives will be distinguished: Economic/financial, knowledge/entrepreneurial, and social/cultural. By looking into the economic/financial consequences, research will determine whether farmers will financially benefit or suffer from a transition to circular agriculture, and whether this may change over the coming decade.

It is possible alterations to circular farming are not very costly, but do require a high amount of knowledge gathering, like an additional education or different entrepreneurial skills. The implicit and explicit ‘costs’ of such knowledge-investments should be taken into consideration as well, when exploring the consequences of a transition to circular agriculture. This will be done under the category knowledge/entrepreneurial.

Changes in business management can come with social and cultural changes simultaneously, especially in a sector which can be considered as a sector with a high cultural and social values, like agriculture. The influence of circular agriculture on the social and cultural values of individual (ground bound) dairy farms will therefore be assessed as well.

Subquestion 5: What is the capacity and willingness of a Dutch (ground bound) dairy farmer to carry out the government’s envisioned transition to circular agriculture (in 2030)?

As where in Subquestion 4 the overall costs of a transition to circular agriculture will be determined, Subquestion 5 will analyse whether farmers are able and willing to pay these costs, and what (policy-)alterations should be made to make them able and willing to engage in this transition. By conducting an in-depth case-study, as is needed to answer Subquestion 3 through 5, detailed information about real-life causes and consequences can be gathered. Through analyses and research of this micro-level information, trends and generalisations are hoped to be found, that can be utilised on the meso- and macro-level as well. Herewith, overarching conclusions and recommendations can be formulated.

Whether circular agriculture is feasible or not, will be the conclusion of Subquestions 1 to 5. In the worst-case-scenario, circular agriculture is not feasible. Therefore, it can practically not function as a contributor to the solution for the Dutch Nitrogencrisis. Further research should be aimed at looking for ways in which circular agriculture can be feasible for farmers. In the best-case-scenario, circular agriculture is completely feasible, and its implementation could possibly contribute to the solution for the Nitrogencrisis. Further research will be necessary to determine the effectiveness of circular agriculture as a solution for the Nitrogencrisis. It is expected that the results of Subquestions 1 to 5 will lay somewhere between the best- and worst-case scenario. Hence, for the successful realisation of a transition to circular agriculture, several amendments will be required.

10 As the research question of this thesis is aimed at finding a solution to the Nitrogencrisis, in the continuation of this research, it will be assumed that the transition to circular agriculture will take place, in spite of possible alterations to enhance its feasibility.

Subquestion 6: Assuming the realisation of a circular agriculture is feasible, what will the decrease of nitrogen of a Dutch (ground bound) dairy farm be, after the transition to circular agriculture?

The answer to Subquestion 6 will be expressed in kg NH3 per year. As starting point, the emissions of 2019 will be taken, because this is the baseline which is used by the government’s Advisory

Committee as well (Remkes et al., 2020).

Subquestion 7: Will the decrease of nitrogen of Dutch (ground bound) dairy farms be enough to reach an effective contribution to the solution of the Nitrogencrisis through circular agriculture?

By answering Subquestion 5 and 6, the effectiveness of circular agriculture on the decrease of nitrogen-emissions can be measured. Herewith, the overall suitability of this policy measure as a solution for the Nitrogencrisis can be determined.

It can be expected that the policy-aim of circular agriculture, as currently formulated by the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality, will not be flawless in ensuring the highest feasibility and effectiveness. In this case, a last subquestion needs to be answered.

Subquestion 8: Which adjustments to the current governmental policy can be proposed to improve the feasibility and/or effectiveness of circular agriculture with the aim of optimising its contribution to a solution for the Nitrogencrisis?

By answering this last subquestion, an overall answer to the research question will be formulated, including recommendations that will contribute to a more sustainable solution regarding the Nitrogencrisis.

11

Methods

To conduct this research, various research methods are expected to be needed. In Figure 3, the scheme shows the required research methods, which have been linked to the subquestions they are expected to answer (left), and the results they are expected to deliver (right). These results combined form the base on which the feasibility and effectiveness of circular agriculture will be analysed. As a result of this analysis, the research question is expected to be answered.

Figure 3: A schematic display of the research questions, intended research methods and expected results, which will lead to a final analysis and eventually result in an answer to the research question. It is hoped that all the interview meant to answer Subquestion 3 to 5 can be done simultaneously with the interview meant to answer Subquestion 6. However, when this is not

possible, separate interviews need to be scheduled.

In this section, the research methods shown in figure 3 will be explained and motivated.

Literature Study

Literature study will be an important research method throughout the entire research. Firstly, it is an important tool to find answers to practical questions, for instance about how to conduct an interview or how to interpret statistical information. It can also render new insights and offer comparison of this study with previous research and findings.

Meanwhile, literature is necessary to gather the right (background) information. It will be used to describe the vision and roadmap the government has planned to realize a circular agricultural sector in 2030. By using (political) documents, (scientific) reports and (news) articles, a clear vision and roadmap will hopefully appear on macro-level. With the additional use of agricultural journals and articles, rendered by organisations and institutions for (ground bound) dairy farms, such a vision and roadmap are hoped to be found for (ground bound) dairy farms in particular as well.

Furthermore, by knowing the government’s expectations through literature, a ‘baseline’ can be formulated to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of a transition to circular agriculture. As the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality (2018) has formulated its policy aim for circular

12 agriculture, is will also mention explicit or implicit standards of when this goal has been reached, along with the costs they expect to make. By using these governmental expectations as a ‘baseline’ it can be tested whether this policy-aim suffices in feasibility and effectiveness.

If through this study the feasibility of a transition to circular agriculture is higher than expected, while costs are lower than expected, this policy aims has a higher chance of being successful when

implemented. When the contrary appears, this is not good for the feasibility of the policy-aim. The same applies to the effectiveness of the policy-aim. If the effectiveness is higher than expected by the government, this is a positive sign. When the effectiveness appears to be lower, problems may be expected in the future.

The careful formulation of ‘baselines’ for the feasibility and effectiveness at the beginning of the research is therefore crucial, even though the analyses in which these values will be used will only be apparent at the end of the research. This way, literature study will be important throughout the entire research. Moreover, by formulating ‘baselines’ at the beginning of the research, standards cannot be altered to fit results of the study at the end.

Interviews

The first-hand information of farmers through in-depth interviews will be a crucial information-source in this study. Their insights, opinions, and situations will be at the core of this research, as they will answer four out of eight subquestions to a large extent. The interviews will not only be necessary to determine alterations and consequences for farm businesses, or the capacity and willingness of farmers to make these changes. The extensive interviews are also important to find out what the nitrogen-emissions of individual dairy farms are, and how these will change after a transition to circular agriculture.

However, as this is a single-student Master Thesis, there are limitations to the interviews that can be conducted and processed. Therefore, unfortunately, not all dairy farms can be represented according to the reality. Even if it would theoretically be feasible to cover all sorts of dairy farms proportionally, there will still be farmers that are unwilling or unable to cooperate with this research, due to the highly personal aspects of the Nitrogencrisis or due to limitations caused by the Coronacrisis.

To make the research under the current circumstances manageable and feasible, the aim will be to interview four to six dairy farmers who together will represent as many (ground bound) dairy farmers as possible. To determine the representativeness of the participants, the following characteristics will be sought when looking for participants:

• According to Van der Lelij & Oomen (2020), a distinction between farmers can be made based on the region they live in, regarding their attitude towards circular agriculture. In addition to this, the Advisory Committee has recommended to adopt regional measures to tackle the Nitrogencrisis (Remkes et al., 2020). Based on these assumptions, the feasibility of a transition to circular agriculture may have regionally based variations. Therefore, the search for participating farmers will firstly be aimed at finding one farmer from every region: North, East, South, West, and if possible, Mid.

• The entrepreneurial opportunities of an agricultural business are partly dependent on the soil on which the business is located (Leneman, Reinhard & Hoogeveen, 1999). Differences in soiltypes can therefore influence the economic and entrepreneurial position of a farmer.

13 Subsequently, the soiltypes on which the participating farmers operate should be as diversified as possible as well. Fortunately, this division can go roughly along with the division between regions (Figure 4).

Apart from several areas in the South and East of the Netherlands, the Dutch soiltypes can be divided into four main categories (Figure 4):

- Peat (Dutch: veen): Mainly found in the West and North of the Netherlands.

- Sand (Dutch: zand): Predominantly located in the East, the Mid-Netherlands and along the coast (West).

- Sandy clay (Dutch: zavel): Mainly located in the South-West, Mid and North-East of the Netherlands.

- Clay (Dutch: klei): Can roughly be found in the same areas as sandy clay.

The aim will be to include all these four categories in this research. If possible, the fifth category, loam (Dutch: leem) will be included as well.

Figure 4: The main soiltypes that can be found in the Netherlands (Wageningen University & Research, 2006).

• Another factor which influences a farmer’s situation and motivation is the business type a farmer has (Van der Lelij & Oomen, 2020). Biological dairy farmers may have to make less alterations than traditional dairy farmers, while farmers with a mixed business have more entrepreneurial opportunities. Therefore, dairy farms will be divided into biological farms,

14 traditional ground bound farms and mixed farms. If possible, this aspect will be taken into consideration as well when selecting participants.

The best chance of finding suitable farmers that are willing to take in-depth interviews is probably by using the personal network of people within my own personal network. Other ways of finding participants is by contacting agricultural institutions and organisations for help, and by contacting diary farms directly, for instance by email of phone.

Additional to the interviews with farmers, other parties can offer a lot of valuable information as well. In case farmers are unwilling or unable to give certain information, this information can be sought through interviews with other parties, like companies who deliver or purchase farmer goods. Other parties which might offer valuable or additional information are agricultural organisations, agricultural journals, or scientists.

The transcribing, rewriting, coding, and analysing of interviews is very labour-intensive. Supporting programs like Atlas-ti and websites like o.transcribe.com can offer some relief and speed up the research process.

Fieldwork

It is plausible that for the deduction of the in-depth interviews sight visits can or must be made to the participating farms or other parties. Not only would this ease the development of a conversation. In the case of farm-visits, it would also render an opportunity to get a clearer vision about the situation of contemporary farmers and their businesses. Of course, due to the current Coronacrisis, sight visits will be unlikely. Fortunately, media like Zoom and Whatsapp can offer suitable alternatives.

Quantitative Research

To support the findings of the interviews, a survey can be sent to as many dairy farms as possible. By using a greater amount of standardised data, the qualitative information of the interviews with farmers can be combined with quantitative information deducted from the surveys. This way, the

representativeness of the interviews can be put into perspective, and the viewpoints of the participating farmers can be extrapolated and generalized from micro- to meso-level.

The hope is that there will be enough spare time to conduct such a survey, and that there will be enough survey participants. To find these participants, the extended network of my own network will be an important medium. Other ways of spreading the survey is through social platforms like

Facebook, and by asking interviewees for help. The results of these data need to be supported by statistical analyses, using MATLAB or Excel. In case there is not enough time to conduct the survey, or when there are not enough participants, the survey will be excluded from the research.

The information gained from individual dairy farms is important to determine the change of nitrogen-emissions once the transition to circular farming has been made. This change can be calculated using the Kringloopwijzer and Excretiewijzer. As I do not have any experience with these programs, support from people with knowledge of the Kringloopwijzer and Excretiewijzer would be a tremendous help in this research. When the emission-numbers have been produced, these findings need to be analysed statistically and compared with the ‘baseline’ which has been determined at the beginning of this research.

15 However, there is a chance the information of individual dairy farms that is needed to use the

Kringloopwijzer and Excretiewijzer, will not be available. In this case other ways are needed to calculate the change of nitrogen-emissions after a transition to circular agriculture. One strategy could be to use the Kringloopwijzer and Extretiewijzer to calculate which scenario(‘s) would lead to the highest decrease of nitrogen-emissions. With this information, it can be determined what changes dairy farms would need to make to reach such a scenario, and how divergent these scenarios are from reality and the ‘baseline’. The use of secondary analyses based on available resources, like policy and sectoral documents, expert reports, scholarly literature, and public databases will be needed to support this research-strategy.

Critical Thinking

To reach the right conclusions, it is in my opinion important to discuss findings with other people. This way, I will be able to keep an open mind and prevent ‘tunnel vision’. By debating about my results and findings with people disagreeing with my interpretations, I hope to come to the best conclusions and create the best research I can.

Insurance, Safety & Equipment

Apart from some probable sight visits for interviews, this research does not require (risky) fieldwork, the utilisation of a laboratory or other equipment other than a computer and the potential use of transportation means. Therefore, this research does not require additional insurance or precautions.

16

Planning

The planning (Figure 6) shows the process which is supposed to be followed to produce this research successfully. To make the work, which is required to conduct this research manageable, the study is divided into different phases, which all end with a few days of rest, if done well.

Phase 1

The Kringloopwijzer and Excretiewijzer are important programs to conduct this study; to calculate the change of nitrogen-emissions. Meanwhile, accessible information and help of people with knowledge of these programs is limited. It is therefore expected that the use of these programs will cause the biggest obstacles. To cope with these problems timely, the research will start with obtaining a basic knowledge of these programs, including their possibilities and limitations. The possibilities and limitations of the Kringloopwijzer and Excretiewijzer will be decisive for the process of information-gathering and information-use during the rest of this research.

Phase 2

Another important pillar of this study is the government’s vision on circular agriculture. By exploring their vision and roadmap, it will become clear what the painted reality is to which dairy farmers are directed. Furthermore, this vision will create a ‘baseline’ for the feasibility and effectiveness which is expected for the transition to circular agriculture. By studying the intentions of the government, their measures and requirements for dairy farms are expected to become clear.

Phase 3

With all the information gathered in Phase 2 a clear ‘story’ can be formed about what the government wants, and how they want to get there. This ‘story can be used to explain farmers the intentions of this research and to start the interviews with participants. If, hopefully, these farmers have been found, and the interviews have been done, the analyses of these interviews will be one of the main activities of this research. Therefore, this needs to be done thoroughly and accurately.

Phase 4

In case the information received from interviewed farmers can be used in the Kringloopwijzer and Excretiewijzer, these data can be used to calculate the change of nitrogen-emissions after transition to circular farming, in the particular cases of the interviewed farmers. In the case the right information cannot be given by participating farmers, the secondary research-strategy needs to be obtained, as mentioned in the Methods. It is expected this research-strategy will cost more time, because it is dependent on secondary sources, instead of first-hand information.

Phase 5

When the Kringloopwijzer and Excretiewijzer have been used properly, these results can be compared with the ‘baseline’ created earlier in the research. This way, the effectiveness of a transition to circular agriculture as a solution to the Nitrogencrisis can be determined. Based on these results, further recommendations can be formulated.

Phase 6 (optional)

Based on the challenges that will be faced along the way, the quality of the information gained, and the time left (Figure 5), the research needs to be rounded up, or additional information can be gathered.

17 A: Sufficient amount of information C: Enough time left

B: Insufficient amount of information D: No time left Figure 5: Factors on which analyses of research-possibilities will be based.

- AC: In the case there is enough information to round up the research, but there is still time left to strengthen the research with additional information, it can be considered to increase the representativeness of the interviews by conducting the survey, or complement the interviews’ information with additional interviews with other parties.

- AD: When the information is sufficient to finish up the research, and no time is left to find additional information, no extra research will be done.

- BC: When there is an insufficiency among the gathered information, this information can be strengthened by conducting additional interviews with other parties and/or conducting a survey amongst more farmers. Which option suits best, is dependent on the amount of time left and the information that is lacking.

- BD: In the case the gained information is insufficient, but time is running out, it can be considered to conduct either a survey, or (an) additional interview(s), with the risk of falling behind schedule. When neither a survey nor an additional interview is possible, the lacking information may be drawn out of existing data and literature.

Phase 7

When all the above-mentioned actions have been executed, the final analysis on the feasibility and costs of a transition to circular agriculture can be made. Herewith, the last recommendations on the feasibility of circular agriculture can be formulated as well. After finishing all these results and analyses, the last recommendations can be made, and the last conclusions can be written. With this phase, the last subquestions and the overall research question are hoped to be answered.

Thereafter, the entire research needs to be elevated into a written, understandable, and well-structured Master Thesis Research.

Phase 8

In the very last phase, one last glance will be given at the final result, before it will be handed in.

As can be seen in Figure 6a and 6b, even without the option of phase 6, the study will already take 26 weeks to finish, instead of the standard 21 weeks. This is because this research is highly dependent on the responses of farmers, willing to cooperate with this study. Therefore, a lot of time has been taken for Phase 3, in which the interviews will be processed. So, in case it will take a lot of effort to find the right farmers, this will not jeopardize the planning. On the other hand, if farmers will be found rather easily, the research will be ahead of schedule. Depending on the windfalls along the way, Phase 6 can be added to the research (Figure 6c).

18 Figure 6a: Planning, using Plan A (Phase 4) and without Phase 6.

Proposal Master Thesis Research

Pre-phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Phase 0

Explore subject

Assessor and daily supervisor: John Grin Co-asessor: Albert Tietema

Literature study on subject Writing Research Proposal Presentation

Review Research Proposal Approval of Research Proposal

Phase 1

Understanding Krinloopwijzer (6) Understanding Excretiewijzer (6) Write down findings + motivations (6)

Phase 2

Literature research (1,2,4,5,7,8) Write down definition CA (1) Write down vision government (1)

Write down measures government (roadmap) (1) Write down measures for dairy farms (2)

Formulate 'baseline' on feasibility and costs CA (4,5,8) Calculate 'baseline' on effectiveness CA (7,8)

Phase 3

Formulate interview questions (3,4,5,(6),8) Write down 'story' for farmers (3,4,5,(6),8) Determine requirements for participants (3,4,5,(6),8) Find farmers as participants (3,4,5,(6),8)

Conduct interviews (3,4,5,(6),8) Transcribe interviews (3,4,5,(6),8) Rewrite interviews (3,4,5,(6),8) Code interviews (3,4,5,(6),8) Produce results (3,4,5,(6),8) Analyse results (3,4,5,(6),8)

Write down results + findings (3,4,5,(6),8)

Phase 4 (plan A)

Use information from interviews for Kringloopwijzer (6) Use information from interviews for Excretiewijzer (6) Produce results (6)

Analyse results (6)

Write down results and findings (6)

Phase 5

Analyse effectiveness of CA (7) Write down results + findings (7)

Phase 7

Review entire research

Analyse all results + findings combined

Write down last results + findings + recommendations (8) Rewrite study into an understandable thesis

Make sure the RQ has been answered in the conclusion

Phase 8

Review research one last time Hand in Master Thesis Research

Start Working on Finished Days off

(Nr) The subquestion(s) for which the research provides information at that moment of the process

19 Figure 6b: Planning, using Plan B (Phase 4), without Phase 6.

0 Proposal Master Thesis Research

Pre-phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Phase 0

Explore subject

Assessor and daily supervisor: John Grin Co-asessor: Albert Tietema

Literature study on subject Writing Research Proposal Presentation

Review Research Proposal Approval of Research Proposal

Phase 1

Understanding Krinloopwijzer (6) Understanding Excretiewijzer (6) Write down findings + motivations (6)

Phase 2

Literature research (1,2,4,5,7,8) Write down definition CA (1) Write down vision government (1)

Write down measures government (roadmap) (1) Write down measures for dairy farms (2)

Formulate 'baseline' on feasibility and costs CA (4,5,8) Calculate 'baseline' on effectiveness CA (7,8)

Phase 3

Formulate interview questions (3,4,5,(6),8) Write down 'story' for farmers (3,4,5,(6),8) Determine requirements for participants (3,4,5,(6),8) Find farmers as participants (3,4,5,(6),8)

Conduct interviews (3,4,5,(6),8) Transcribe interviews (3,4,5,(6),8) Rewrite interviews (3,4,5,(6),8) Code interviews (3,4,5,(6),8) Produce results (3,4,5,(6),8) Analyse results (3,4,5,(6),8)

Write down results + findings (3,4,5,(6),8)

Phase 4 (plan B)

Search for useful data and literature (6)

Create most successfull scenes in Kringloopwijzer (6) Create most successfull scenes in Excretiewijzer (6) Produce results (6)

Quantitative analysis (6) Qualitative analysis (6) Write down results + findings (6)

Phase 5

Analyse effectiveness of CA (7) Write down results + findings (7)

Phase 7

Review entire research

Analyse all results + findings combined

Write down last results + findings + recommendations (8) Rewrite study into an understandable thesis

Make sure the RQ has been answered in the conclusion

Phase 8

Review research one last time Hand in Master Thesis Research

Start Working on Finished Days off

(Nr) The subquestion(s) for which the research provides information at that moment of the process

20 Figure 6c: Phase 6 (optional)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Phase 6a (optional)

Determine what information is missing (3,4,5) Formulate survey questions (3,4,5) Send survey to participating farmers (3,4,5) Produce results (3,4,5)

Conduct (statistical) analysis (3,4,5) Write down results + findings (3,4,5)

Phase 6b (optional)

Determine what information is missing (3,4,5) Formulate interview questions (3,4,5) Find suitable participant(s) (3,4,5) Conduct interview(s) (3,4,5) Transcribe interview(s) (3,4,5) Rewrite interview(s) (3,4,5)

Code interview(s) or filter out missing information (3,4,5) Produce results (3,4,5)

Analyse results (3,4,5) Write down results + findings (3,4,5)

Start Working on Finished Days off

(Nr) The subquestion(s) for which the research provides information at that moment of the process

21

Budgeting

The highest costs of this research would lay in the working hours of the student as well as the working hours of supporting staff. As this is a Master Thesis Research, naturally, the working hours of the student are paid through the lessons learned during the research-process. The costs of the Examiner / Daily Supervisor and Co-Assessor are covered by the University of Amsterdam. As a result, the budget of this research is limited. The details of the expected expenses are laid out in Figure 7. The first expense that is mentioned in Figure 7 is the cost of Premium Zoom. Currently a free version of Zoom is already available. However, in the case this version does not meet all the requirements needed to conduct the interviews, the premium version of Zoom needs to be considered. This version is not supported for students by the University. Hence, it will be a research-investment.

As can be seen in Figure 7, the most costs are expected to be made to reward participants;

predominantly farmers that agree to be interviewed. Other interviews may be conducted with other parties like businesses, or organisations, in case Phase 6 will be executed. In the situation sight visits may be possible, transport costs need to be taken into consideration as well. As I have access to a car, transport costs will probably be limited to petrol costs.

Week 1-4 Week 5-8 Week 9-12 Week 13-16 Week 17-20 Week 21-23 Week 24-26

Working Hours Student 120 - 160 120 - 160 120 - 160 120 - 160 120 - 160 80 - 120 80 - 120 Examiner / Daily Supervisor 3 - 12 3 - 12 3 - 12 3 - 12 3 - 12 3 - 12 3 - 12 Co-Assessor 2 - 4 0 - 2 0 - 2 0 - 2 0 - 2 0 - 6 0 - 6 Research Costs

Staff costs Incl. Incl. Incl. Incl. Incl. Incl. Incl.

Premium Zoom

-Costs per Period - €150 €0 - €350 €0 - €350 - €0 - €150

-TOTAL COSTS €150 - €1000

22

References

Hermans, T., Smits, Smits, N.A.C., Dijkstra, J., Geerdink P., Groenestein, K., Huijsmans, J., … & Voogd, C.J. (2020). Ruimtelijke aanpak van het stikstofprobleem: Inzicht in

oplossingsrichtingen vanuit landbouw en natuur. Retrieved from Wageningen University &

Research: https://www.wur.nl/upload_mm/9/8/1/23564eb3-4a5f-49f8-a19d- c2ce4b98c0e9_Rapport%20Stikstof%20WUR_Totaal.pdf

Leneman, H., Reinhard, A. J., & Hoogeveen, M. W. (1999). Weer en gewasopbrengst; Invloed van

weer op productie van akkerbouwgewassen. Retrieved from Wageningen University &

Research: https://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/wurpubs/fulltext/24886

Ministerive van Landbouw, Natuur & Voedselkwaliteit. (2018, 1st _{of September). Landbouw, natuur}

en voedsel: Waardevol en verbonden. Nederland als koploper in kringlooplandbouw.

Retrieved from Rijksoverheid:

https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/richtlijnen/2018/09/01/landbouw-natuur-en-voedsel-waardevol-en-verbonden-nederland-als-koploper-in-kringlooplandbouw

Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur & Voedselkwaliteit. (2020, 30th _{of June). Rapportage Nederlands}

mestbeleid 2019. Retrieved from Rijksoverheid:

https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2020/06/01/rapportage-nederlands-mestbeleid-2019

NOS. (2019a, 30th _{of September). Eerste protesterende boeren onderweg naar Den Haag: ‘Maat is}

vol’ [Internetarticle]. Retrieved from NOS:

https://nos.nl/artikel/2304048-eerste-protesterende-boeren-onderweg-naar-den-haag-maat-is-vol.html

NOS. (2019b, 1st _{of October). Deze boeren leggen uit waarom ze demonstreren: ‘Ik zit muurvast door}

dit beleid’ [Internetarticle]. Retrieved from NOS:

https://nos.nl/collectie/13799/artikel/2304207-deze-boeren-leggen-uit-waarom-ze-demonstreren-ik-zit-muurvast-door-dit-beleid

NOS. (2019c, 4th _{of October). Stikstof: vier vragen (en antwoorden) over de uitstoot van boeren} [Internetarticle]. Retrieved from NOS: https://nos.nl/collectie/13799/artikel/2304403-stikstof-vier-vragen-en-antwoorden-over-de-uitstoot-van-boeren

NOSop3. (2020, 25th _{of July). Waarom actievoerende boeren boos blijven [Video]. Retrieved from} NOS: https://nos.nl/op3/video/2341959-waarom-actievoerende-boeren-boos-blijven.html Raad van State. (2019, 29th _{of May). Uitspraak 201506170/2/R2, 201506807/4/R2,}

201506815/3/R2 en 201506818/3/R2. Retrieved at 27th _{of September 2020, from Raad van} State: https://www.raadvanstate.nl/@115590/201506170-2-r2/

Remkes, J. W., Dijkgraaf, E., Freriks, A., Gerbrandy, G. J., Maij, W. H., Nijhof, A. G., ... & Vet, L. (2019). Niet alles kan: Eerste advies van het Adviescollege Stikstofproblematiek:

aanbevelingen voor korte termijn 25 september 2019. Retrieved from Rijksoverheid:

https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2019/09/25/eerste-advies-adviescollege-stikstofproblematiek

23 Remkes, J. W., van Dijk, J. J., Dijkgraaf, E., Freriks, A., Gerbrandy, G. J., Maij, W. H., ... & Vet, L. E.

M. (2020). Niet alles kan overal: Eindadvies over structurele aanpak op lange termijn. Retrieved from Rijksoverheid:

https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2020/06/08/niet-alles-kan-overal

Rijksoverheid. (2019, 17th _{of May). Emissie van luchtverontreinigende stoffen [GovernmentWebsite].} Retrieved from Rijksoverheid:

https://www.clo.nl/indicatoren/nl0183-verzuring-en-grootschalige-luchtverontreiniging-emissies

Rijksoverheid. (2019, 17th _{of May). Emissie ammoniak (NH3) per doelgroep [GovernmentWebsite].} Retrieved from Rijksoverheid:

https://www.clo.nl/indicatoren/nl0183-verzuring-en-grootschalige-luchtverontreiniging-emissies

Rotgers, G. & Zijlstra, R. (2020). Stikstof in een verstikkend politiek debat. Retrieved from Mesdag- fonds: http://mesdag-fonds.nl/upload/ck/files/Rapport_versie_definitief.pdf

Van der Lelij, B. & Oomen, K., (2020). De beleving van de transitie naar kringlooplandbouw:

Rapport communicatieonderzoek (1-meting). Retrieved from Rijksoverheid:

https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2020/08/26/de-beleving-van-de-transitie-naar-kringlooplandbouw-rapport-communicatieonderzoek-1-meting

Wageningen University & Research. (2006). Grondsoortenkaart 2006 [Map]. Retrieved from Wageningen University & Research: https://www.wur.nl/nl/show/Grondsoortenkaart.htm