4 ms·

Thank you, this is very informative. The last paragraph is particularly anxiety inducing: forcing food shortages on society on experimental recent data based sc

Thank you, this is very informative. The last paragraph is particularly anxiety inducing: forcing food shortages on society on experimental recent data based science is not a good backbone for running a country.

madeofpalk 4y ago
Food shortages?
rocqua 4y ago
The Netherlands is the second or third biggest net food exporter in the world. For food security, we can do with less farmers. That doesn't mean we should screw over our farmers. But the tragedy here is how farmers are being ruined by long ignored legal requirements. The tragedy is not how the Netherlands will go hungry for lack of food production.
- Aerroon 4y ago
  Of course people won't go hungry in the Netherlands, they'll just eat worse food instead and their economy takes a hit.
  - sushibowl 4y ago
    > they'll just eat worse food instead This is very debatable. A majority of nitrogen emissions are from dairy farmers, and some 80% of milk produced in The Netherlands is meant for export (as powder, mainly baby formula). It's unlikely the Dutch food market will affected much, although it's possible our export markets will. > and their economy takes a hit. Sure, although the impact of this is also debatable. All Agriculture together forms around 1.4% of the Dutch GDP. Even if the entire sector were to collapse (which it obviously will not) it would be survivable in terms of economic impact.
  - Denvercoder9 4y ago
    It's not that simple. Most of the food produced here is exported, most of the food we eat is imported, and farming accounts for about 1-2% of GDP. A significant amount of farming here is in the business of importing plant-based foods, feeding it to animals, and exporting dairy and meat. It's a very intensive business: for example, there are 100 million chicken here, 20% of that in the US but on less than 1% of the farmland area. Why we do it that way? It was very profitable for the farmers when environmental costs could be externalized. (Flower farming is significant as well, but doesn't produce food).
- emn13 4y ago
  Let's not quite overlook the fact that the farmer's actively lobbied to be ignored for years. They knew these rules were coming, and worked to shield their business from environmental rules. This isn't some sudden surprise; that's just PR to extract even more concessions. And when considering that, consider also that farmers are already particularly wealthy in the Netherlands, and that there are already compensation funds. That's not to say there won't be individuals that will be financially worse off due to their particular circumstances; nor that it's not a downside that they'll need to live with some uncertainty about their future, but I'm not buying that there exists even a single business surprised by this. Not one.
  - rocqua 4y ago
    Farmers are not a hive-mind. Some farmers lobbied, that doesn't mean all farmers knew the current rules were untenable.
- TechBro8615 4y ago
  > The Netherlands is the second or third biggest net food exporter in the world. For food security, we can do with less farmers. What if all the farmers are cooperating as a bloc? Are these protesters mostly farmers directly affected by nitrogen lawsuits, or just fellow farmers who rightfully think their farm could be next?
  - rocqua 4y ago
    Its a mix of farmers directly affected, and farmers who feel that agriculture in general is under attack and needs to be defended.
- brnt 4y ago
  The system that makes the Netherlands the second largest food exporter has resulted in ever fewer farmers earning ever less money. They as a group are the first that stand to gain from a complete change in how Dutch agribusiness operates, because the profits of the current export-focussed system are not going to them. It also costs the Dutch tax payer (and European tax payers through the famous European agricultural subsidies) billions of Euros. Subsidy on pork farming is over a 100%, and still pig farmers are struggling. That a significant group of farmers is defending this status quo goes to show that they have a poor understanding of their situation.
  - jcadam 4y ago
    Clearly they need software engineers to go over and explain their business to them.
    - brnt 4y ago
      People who carefully raise the point that they should perhaps understand their business risk are always struck down. As if they have a fundamental right to earn money doing their work.
Someone 4y ago
That last paragraph is a bit disingenuous. The model has been in development since at least 2013 (https://www.aerius.nl/en/reviews https://www.aerius.nl/en/reviews links to an international scientific review from 2013) The discussion is highly politicized (and that’s an understatement), so it’s hard to figure out whether the model is good enough for its purpose. Any statement by the developers about uncertainties in the model gets translated into “it’s rubbish” by some of those (currently; from what I understand, some politicians have changed their opinion here over the years) not happy with its predictions. I don’t know how hard it is to do either, but those who want to can read the source or run the model. The model is open source (GNU Affero GPL version 3. See https://gitlab.com/AERIUS/AERIUS https://gitlab.com/AERIUS/AERIUS)
KaiserPro 4y ago
its way more complicated than that. The main issue is runoff. In short, cows shit. That effluence has to be disposed of. The issue is, cows poo in fields, the rain comes and washes it into watercourses. That then finds it's way into rivers and lakes and causes large algal blooms that kill everything. The more productive a farm, the bigger the runoff problem. As everything has water in the Netherlands, runoff is a massive problem(its a big problem in the UK, but we have other issues that are more pressing in the eyes of the public). The traditional solution would be to drain Makermeer, expand onto that and have done with it. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevopolder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevopolder was "drained" in 1962) but thats not going to happen anymore. The Dutch are not going to have food shortages. its more an issue of livelihood.

madeofpalk 4y ago

Food shortages?

rocqua 4y ago

The Netherlands is the second or third biggest net food exporter in the world. For food security, we can do with less farmers. That doesn't mean we should screw over our farmers. But the tragedy here is how farmers are being ruined by long ignored legal requirements. The tragedy is not how the Netherlands will go hungry for lack of food production.

Aerroon 4y ago
Of course people won't go hungry in the Netherlands, they'll just eat worse food instead and their economy takes a hit.
- sushibowl 4y ago
  > they'll just eat worse food instead This is very debatable. A majority of nitrogen emissions are from dairy farmers, and some 80% of milk produced in The Netherlands is meant for export (as powder, mainly baby formula). It's unlikely the Dutch food market will affected much, although it's possible our export markets will. > and their economy takes a hit. Sure, although the impact of this is also debatable. All Agriculture together forms around 1.4% of the Dutch GDP. Even if the entire sector were to collapse (which it obviously will not) it would be survivable in terms of economic impact.
- Denvercoder9 4y ago
  It's not that simple. Most of the food produced here is exported, most of the food we eat is imported, and farming accounts for about 1-2% of GDP. A significant amount of farming here is in the business of importing plant-based foods, feeding it to animals, and exporting dairy and meat. It's a very intensive business: for example, there are 100 million chicken here, 20% of that in the US but on less than 1% of the farmland area. Why we do it that way? It was very profitable for the farmers when environmental costs could be externalized. (Flower farming is significant as well, but doesn't produce food).
emn13 4y ago
Let's not quite overlook the fact that the farmer's actively lobbied to be ignored for years. They knew these rules were coming, and worked to shield their business from environmental rules. This isn't some sudden surprise; that's just PR to extract even more concessions. And when considering that, consider also that farmers are already particularly wealthy in the Netherlands, and that there are already compensation funds. That's not to say there won't be individuals that will be financially worse off due to their particular circumstances; nor that it's not a downside that they'll need to live with some uncertainty about their future, but I'm not buying that there exists even a single business surprised by this. Not one.
- rocqua 4y ago
  Farmers are not a hive-mind. Some farmers lobbied, that doesn't mean all farmers knew the current rules were untenable.
TechBro8615 4y ago
> The Netherlands is the second or third biggest net food exporter in the world. For food security, we can do with less farmers. What if all the farmers are cooperating as a bloc? Are these protesters mostly farmers directly affected by nitrogen lawsuits, or just fellow farmers who rightfully think their farm could be next?
- rocqua 4y ago
  Its a mix of farmers directly affected, and farmers who feel that agriculture in general is under attack and needs to be defended.
brnt 4y ago
The system that makes the Netherlands the second largest food exporter has resulted in ever fewer farmers earning ever less money. They as a group are the first that stand to gain from a complete change in how Dutch agribusiness operates, because the profits of the current export-focussed system are not going to them. It also costs the Dutch tax payer (and European tax payers through the famous European agricultural subsidies) billions of Euros. Subsidy on pork farming is over a 100%, and still pig farmers are struggling. That a significant group of farmers is defending this status quo goes to show that they have a poor understanding of their situation.
- jcadam 4y ago
  Clearly they need software engineers to go over and explain their business to them.
  - brnt 4y ago
    People who carefully raise the point that they should perhaps understand their business risk are always struck down. As if they have a fundamental right to earn money doing their work.

Someone 4y ago

That last paragraph is a bit disingenuous. The model has been in development since at least 2013 (https://www.aerius.nl/en/reviews https://www.aerius.nl/en/reviews links to an international scientific review from 2013) The discussion is highly politicized (and that’s an understatement), so it’s hard to figure out whether the model is good enough for its purpose. Any statement by the developers about uncertainties in the model gets translated into “it’s rubbish” by some of those (currently; from what I understand, some politicians have changed their opinion here over the years) not happy with its predictions. I don’t know how hard it is to do either, but those who want to can read the source or run the model. The model is open source (GNU Affero GPL version 3. See https://gitlab.com/AERIUS/AERIUS https://gitlab.com/AERIUS/AERIUS)

KaiserPro 4y ago

its way more complicated than that. The main issue is runoff. In short, cows shit. That effluence has to be disposed of. The issue is, cows poo in fields, the rain comes and washes it into watercourses. That then finds it's way into rivers and lakes and causes large algal blooms that kill everything. The more productive a farm, the bigger the runoff problem. As everything has water in the Netherlands, runoff is a massive problem(its a big problem in the UK, but we have other issues that are more pressing in the eyes of the public). The traditional solution would be to drain Makermeer, expand onto that and have done with it. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevopolder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevopolder was "drained" in 1962) but thats not going to happen anymore. The Dutch are not going to have food shortages. its more an issue of livelihood.