Moving towards pesticide use reduction in the Netherlands

At the beginning of February, farmers and environmental protection groups, led by Agriculture Minister Veerman, reached agreement on measures aimed at reducing harm to the environment caused by pesticides by 95 per cent: a lengthy process with an apparently happy ending. The Minister achieved consensus after a long stand-off. Michel Jehae reports.

Farming organisation LTO-Nederland, the Foundation for Nature Conservation and Environmental Protection (‘Nature and Environment’), the Ministry of Agriculture and the Department of the Environment have reached an agreement whereby they will all be working on reducing the environmental damage caused by pesticides by at least 95 per cent by 2010 (from baseline 1998). In the short term, work is being done on reducing by half the list of products regarded as ‘indispensable’ by the farming industry – but which are extremely harmful to the environment
    The four parties to the agreement are satisfied with it and confident that its objectives will be met. The Secretary of State for the Environment, Pieter van Geel, describes the agreement as ‘…consensus forming at its best. Each party has clear starting points and takes them as the basis for working towards a compromise.’
One of the main aims of the agreement is to encourage the more reluctant farmers to adopt environmentally-friendly methods: a small group of farmers is responsible for a large proportion of pesticides use. At the same time, financial incentives are needed for those farmers who are prepared to take the initiative and who, up until now, find themselves facing higher costs or inflexible regulations.

Bringing stakeholders together
When he joined the government in August 2002, Agriculture Minister, Cees Veerman, immediately made it known that he had no intention of getting involved in the longstanding battle between the environmental movement and the farming community about pesticides. On a number of occasions, ‘Nature and Environment’ and the Zuid-Holland Environment Federation had won court cases opposing some extremely harmful pesticides. These decisions were later overturned by the Dutch Parliament leaving farmers facing a confusing situation between the legal and illegal use of certain pesticides. According to the Agriculture Minister, the situation had become impossible: the parties were no longer talking to each other and all communication was taking place through the courts. The Minister succeeded in bringing together LTO-Nederland and ‘Nature and Environment’ as well as the authority responsible for setting the environmental standards – the Department of the Environment – with the aim of making a long-term agreement about the use of pesticides. To demonstrate good intentions, ‘Nature and Environment’ refrained from legal proceedings during the negotiation period and all parties refrained from talking to the outside world about the issue in order to avoid disrupting the negotiation process. The four parties hoped to settle the matter by the end of 2002, partly with a view to the farmers’ crop scheduling for 2003 but the negotiations ended up taking much longer.
    Reporting on the negotiations, Minister Veerman said that both LTO-Nederland and ‘Nature and Environment’ responded enthusiastically to the initiative. Veerman sees benefits for the environment in both the short and the long term: ‘The agreements that we have now made will promote innovative technologies which will have the effect of reducing the use of pesticides.’

Compromises and benefits
The role of LTO-Nederland is important and, in support of the agreement, it has undertaken a structured approach to disseminating information to its members about methods and technologies that require fewer pesticides and about using ‘best farming practice’.
    For its part, the Ministry of Agriculture will be disseminating information on subjects such as mechanical pest control and non-chemical crop protection backed, for example, by an extra 1.75 million euros (until 2006) for research into alternative ways of combating potato blight. Almost 20 per cent of all chemical pesticides in use are for combating this disease.
    For ‘Nature and Environment’ the most important part of the agreement is that farmers who have hitherto not done so are obliged to work more cleanly. The Director, Ad van den Biggelaar comments: ‘We are more or less in agreement that 80 per cent of the pesticides are used by 20 per cent of the farmers. Minister Veerman was for a long time convinced that the market would solve the problem of the rest. We managed to persuade him that this approach was not working and that legal measures were needed to encourage that group to produce more cleanly.’
    Rules will be made at sector level, and even for specific crops where necessary, that will set out the related environmental requirements. The starting point is that 80 per cent of farmers must be able to meet those requirements which will be set up by independent commissions. ‘Nature and Environment’ does not foresee many problems in enforcing the rules and believes that supermarkets also have an important part to play: ‘Supermarkets… want to meet the legal requirements whatever it takes, not least because a violation can cost them their supply contract.’

Financial incentives
For the companies who are already moving ahead on reduction, the Social Economic Council will be looking at options available for financial incentives to encourage them to take further steps. ‘Nature and Environment’ believes that there must be more transparency about the cultivation methods that will show which companies are performing best. LTO-Nederland decided to support those companies for other reasons believing that many companies have been discouraged by the government’s pesticide approvals policy and the legal campaigns of the environmental movement and it is important that the motivation of those companies be restored.
    There have been times in the past when agreements were made about pesticides that were not implemented as intended. The Department of the Environment, the Ministry of Agriculture and ‘Nature and Environment’ do not expect that to happen with this agreement, despite the fears expressed by Agriculture Minister Veerman and Environment Secretary Van Geel regarding impatience among farmers and environmental protection groups. Doubts still remain at LTO-Nederland and poor past relations have not yet been forgotten. Problems also remain in the environment movement: the Zuid-Holland Environment Federation has already made it known that it does not feel beholden to the agreement and intends to proceed with court cases against the pesticides regarded as indispensable by the farming community. The co-ordinating role of ‘Nature and Environment’ will be important in bringing all the environmentalists round to supporting the agreement. Minister Veerman is intent on making sure the agreement survives – but acknowledges that there is a great deal to be done to make it work.

This article first appeared in the March 2003 edition of Natuur en Milieu. Michel Jehae is Editor and it is produced by Stichting Natuur en Milieu (Nature and Environment), snm@snm.nl, http://www.snm.nl/index.htm

[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No. 60, June 2003, page 17]