2000-2010 Made byAlterra

GaiaLumen

Atlas

2000-2010

Wageningen UR Campus15.04.200717:04 h

Ten years of research on the green living environment by Alterra Wageningen UR

MadebyAlterra

The three buildings where Alterra is housed.

54

2000-2010

>‘Made by Alterra’ is an ambitious title for a tenth

anniversary publication, but it’s appropriate for an

ambitious research institute. Since its birth in

January 2000, Alterra, part of Wageningen UR (University

and Research Centre), has profiled itself as the research

institute for the green living environment.

This publication represents an overview of those ten

years. It is not, however, an overview in the form of lengthy

summaries of work areas and projects, slick but boring PR

stories or strategic policy-speak. Instead we chose to inter-

view researchers who have contributed to fulfilling

Alterra’s ambitions.

Some of the interviews are provocative; all are perso-

nal, showing that our work is not just done by people, but

above all for people. For society. Even the most ecological

ecologist, the deepest-digging soil scientist and the best

informed geo-information scientist at Alterra are not only

concerned with increasing the depth of scientific under-

standing in their subject area: they are chiefly concerned

with applying this in ways that make the world a better

place to live in. This publication is also a small contribu-

tion to fulfilling that ambition, as it highlights moments in

the last ten years when Alterra researchers made the world

a little better place.

We asked all the researchers we interviewed to name a

date in the last ten years that was in some way crucial to

their research – the day they made that vital discovery; the

day the results of their work were put into action; the day

something almost went terribly wrong; the day when every-

thing worked out for the best. The resulting interviews

recall those red-letter days.

‘Made by Alterra’

6 7

Kees van Diepen has been computer modelling for a long

time: initially, just crop growth, then, potential food

production, and finally, harvest predictions. As well as his

work on models, he wanted to talk about the nerve-

wracking business of tendering.

by Leo Klep

>Van Diepen became involved in modelling agricul-

tural production in the early 1980s, when working

at ISRIC’s predecessor, Wageningen’s Soil Science

Museum. He continued at CABO (the Centre for

Agrobiological Research), then home of the research group

of the doyen of theoretical crop modelling, Professor C.T.

de Wit. At that time, crop growth models were scaled up to

make it possible to estimate the productivity of soils and,

ultimately, the maximum feasible world food production.

Scaled-up models were also used as the basis for fore-

casting the actual production in a given year. For this, extra

variables had to be input, such as the weather. One of the

projects Van Diepen worked on in that context was a system

using meteorological data and the emerging techniques of

remote sensing as a basis for predicting drought in Africa

and its impact on world food production.

This famine early warning systemwas put to the test in

Zambia in 1987. The FAO was especially enthusiastic, but

the Dutch Directorate-General for Development

‘Tendering can never be routine’

Kees van Diepen, soil scientist

Cooperation was not prepared to put money into it. They

felt that the system was technology-driven and, moreover,

the scientists couldn’t answer a question about how it

would help improve the position of women and the poorest

of the poor. This was Van Diepen’s first painful experience

of the fact that when you compete for project funding, you

should expect unexpected questions.

Fortunately, the Wageningen models had attracted the

attention of the European Commission. Year on year,

Europe was having to contend with mounting surpluses

and increasing price support for farmers, so the

Commission wanted to be able to monitor agricultural pro-

duction in the member states. Van Diepen – who by then

was working at the Winand Staring Centre – set to work on

this.

In effect, the system he developed translates meteoro-

logical data into crop yields. ‘Actually, the system tries to

reconstruct agricultural statistics with the help of weather

data’, he says. Using daily met data such as rainfall, suns-

hine and temperature, plus statistical correlations from the

past (many countries have reasonably reliable data for the

last thirty years), the model can predict harvests per regi-

on. At the start of the growing year, the predictions made

are still very uncertain, but by June they’ve already become

more reliable. Without this system, the first official estima-

tes of the harvest wouldn’t appear until March the follo-

12.01.00 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

On 12 January 2000, Kees van Diepen

resumed the management of the

MARSOP yield prediction model he

had developed.

Wageningen,Kielekampsteeg13.10.200915:48:36 h

0.0 - 0.2

0.2 - 0.3

0.3 - 0.4

0.4 - 0.5

0.5 - 0.6

0.6 - 0.7

0.7 - 0.8

0.8 - 0.9

0.9 - 1.0

1.0 - 1.2

Yield in kilograms per hectare (x 10000)

8 9

< -30

> -30 - < -20

> -20 - < -10

> -10 - < 10

> 10 - < 20

> 20 - < 30

> 30

Difference in yields 2009-2008, in percent

The map above shows the difference between the reference yieldsin 2009 and 2008, in percent. Blue indicates that in 2009 theyield was over thirty percent higher than in 2008. In the red areas,the yield is thirty percent or more lower. Yellow indicates a diffe-rence of ten percent (higher or lower). The next step, the final offi-cial yield estimate, is to statistically analyse even more informa-tion and use expert judgment to interpret the result. The wheatsimulations can be used for other winter cereals.

Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, IPSC, MARS Unit Source: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, IPSC, MARS Unit

< Map of Europe, showing the normal geographical distribution ofthe long-term mean reference yield for wheat. High simulatedyields (negligible effect of drought) occur in agricultural areaswith cool, humid climates (green and dark blue), such as theAtlantic coast, higher altitude and east of the Baltic Sea. Lowyields (yellow and red) occur in areas with a dry climate anddrought-prone soils (sandy and/or shallow soils), such as the stripof land between Berlin and Warsaw where rainfall is low in sum-mer and the soil is sandy. The simulation excludes areas wherecereal crops are grown rarely, if at all, such as the Alps and farNorth.

Kees van Diepen, soil scientist

Sint Jacobiparochie,Friesland, NetherlandsJune 2008

Reference yield for winter wheat, mapped using the simulated yields generatedby CGMS for wheat grown without irrigation or uptake of groundwater.

10 11

wing year.

In 1994, the Crop Growth Monitoring System was ready

and was presented to the MARS project of the European

Joint Research Centre (JRC) at Ispra in Italy. But after it

had been made fully operational there, under European

rules there had to be a call for tenders to run it. Van Diepen

won the contract. And so, on 12 January 2000, after a

short interruption, he resumed the management of the

system he’d developed. It was a seven-day week job – a real

culture shock. Every day, 300 black and white maps had to

be sent to Italy. Over the years, the volume of data increa-

sed, but thanks to further computerisation and transmissi-

on via internet, efficiency improved.

Running MARSOP (Mars-operational) is not actually

research. But quite apart from the turnover – millions of

euros – the contract also entails continuous improvements.

Moreover, experience is being acquired in the information

techniques needed to handle vast databases like this.

MARSOP is currently Alterra’s biggest external computer

application. This project has put Alterra on the map not

just in terms of the know-how required to improve the

system and the experience acquired with huge databases,

but also for the actual data.

Since 2003, Van Diepen has concentrated on using the

system and the information from it for new research: for

example, for advising on crops and climate change, and on

transferring and applying the system to other countries,

such as China, Ukraine and Finland. Sometimes this is dif-

ficult, because the system – including the data – is owned

by Europe. Permission has to be acquired for every study.

Furthermore, much of the work done at Wageningen is cre-

dited to JRC and appears under its logo. ‘In this case, we’re

Kees van Diepen, soil scientist

just a contractor’, Van Diepen sighs. In 2008, Alterra and

its partners, who include Meteoconsult and VITO (the

Flemish Institute for Technological Research), obtained a

second extension, for a period of six years. The contract is

worth about eight million euros and so no counter-funding

is needed: everything is paid for by Brussels, on a commer-

cial basis.

Yet Van Diepen still gets nervous about one aspect: the

tendering procedure. ‘For our first tender in the 1980s we

submitted about sixty stencilled pages. They included a

12-line paragraph on finance: that five people would be

employed for 55 thousand ECUs per year, plus ten percent

for travel and computer expenses and contingencies.

A recent proposal we wrote was a massive seven hundred

pages of text plus three hundred pages of annexes. That’s a

thousand pages in total – and we had to submit seven

copies. It included a separate financial part describing

everything in detail, with hourly rates. Sometimes you have

to say precisely how many square metres of office space

and meeting rooms you’re going to use.

‘At a certain moment you know that your client, in our

case the JRC in Italy, is going to write an Invitation to

Tender. Naturally, you want to know what they’re going to

ask for, but there are strict rules: you’re not allowed to have

any contact about this. So you have daily contact about the

ongoing work, but not a word is said about the tender. This

gives rise to a most unnatural situation, which can last up

to a year. In your heart of hearts, you’d really like to influen-

ce it, because if they make ridiculous requests, you’re

saddled with them. And it’s risky to suggest alternatives in

your tender.

‘After the Invitation arrives, you have six weeks to react.

But you don’t know exactly when it’ll arrive. So you go on

holiday, but at the back of your mind you know that at any

moment you could be summoned back home. In the end,

the Invitation arrived in August, so only our Belgian part-

ners had to cut short their holiday. Holiday time is really

inconvenient because you need to get all sorts of official

stamps and signatures and evidence for the tender, which

is difficult when many people are away. Once I had to send

someone to Overijssel to get a signature. I was lucky that

the person in question wasn’t on safari.

‘So, it all has to be sorted within six weeks. To start

with, you obviously have to make agreements with your

partners and put them on record. The annexes are a story in

themselves. They range from full details on your research

partners and documentation indicating your institute’s

legal status, to a declaration that your director has never

been in prison, bank guarantees, liquidity demands and a

non-bankruptcy declaration. Often, these are things you

don’t have at your fingertips. The first few times we had to

chase up everything ourselves, but fortunately, Alterra now

has a dedicated Tender Support Team. What about your

own institute and the DLO Foundation? How do you deal

with that in notarial acts? Where are the official stamps to

be stamped at the end of the form? Or you can’t pick up a

declaration of good behaviour from the court in Arnhem

without a copy of your director’s passport and he’s gone

away and so then you’re referred to the Ministry of Justice.

And if that doesn’t work, you have to request deferment for

that detail. It’s nerve-wracking work.

‘And after a couple of tenders you think it’s become rou-

tine – but that’s dangerous because the rules can change

from one year to the next, just like they vary from one direc-

torate to another. So each time you must go through every-

thing very carefully. I remember once three days before a

deadline discovering that the substantive proposal should

mention no sums of money because the evaluator must be

able to judge it purely on its content, without knowing how

much it would cost. So then I had work feverishly to split

our submission into a technical offer and a financial offer.

‘All these details make you nervous that a procedural

error will jeopardise your proposal. One mistake and your

entire tender will be rejected. Once that nearly happened

at the last moment – well, actually, just afterwards. The

proposal had to be franked at the post office before a cer-

tain time. But it had been sent by a TNT courier and though

it had been franked at the post office, that didn’t count. It

was refused. We were finally able to make it clear that the

postmark was valid because in the Netherlands TNT func-

tions like a postal service. Unexpected things like that get

the adrenalin racing.

‘But there you go. The Brussels procedures are oner-

ous, the thresholds are high and they can find fault with

everything, but it is all transparent. You get an evaluation

report which says on which points you scored well or poorly.

You can’t always say that at national level: though there

usually are procedures, they’re liable to change at the

moment they’re applied.’

The team in the Huabei-CGMS development cooperation project (CGMS for the North China Plain) at the inau-gural meeting in Beijing. The project partners are VITO Belgium, Alterra Netherlands, China Academy ofAgricultural Sciences (CAAS) and China Academy of Meteorological Sciences (CAMS). The project focused onknowledge exchange and the application of European harvest prediction techniques in North China usingCGMS and remote sensing. Front row, from left to right: Chen Zhongxin, Dong Qinghan, Kees van Diepen, YanboHe, Shuan Qian; back row, from left to right: Ren Jianqiang, Ma Yuping, Wang Limin, Wang Shili (obscured),Xiao Shenliang and Jia Li.

Beijing, China October 2002

Beijing,ChinaOctober 2002

12 13

In Piet Verdonschot’s view, the European Water Framework

Directive (WFD), introduced in 2000, is one of the most

advanced directives the EU has ever produced.

Verdonschot was involved in a project to specify the

ecological criteria that the various types of running surface

water types would have to meet, which was one of Alterra’s

first European projects.

by Leo Klep

>‘What made the introduction of the Water

Framework Directive special is that this was the

first time that environmental policy was explicitly

guided by biology, by the living environment as such, rather

than abiotic environmental requirements which can be

measured and expressed in exactly quantified numbers.

Although it’s often claimed that ecology is a poorly defined

concept, it’s precisely those ‘exact numbers’ which often

turn out to be very vague when it comes to conserving the

environment we live in. The authors of the WFD understood

this very well. In fact, environmental protection is one of

Brussels’ strongest points. Initially, the European

Community’s jurisdiction was limited to a few areas only.

The environment was one of the exceptions, probably

because many Member States thought that such a ‘minor’

subject could safely be left to Brussels. This resulted in a

number of highly dedicated officials in the European capi-

‘Our research has helped to producethe clearly specified European WaterFramework Directive’

Piet Verdonschot, aquatic ecologist

tal, as well as a really effective European policy. The Dutch

government experienced this when it failed to meet its tar-

gets under the Nitrate Directive, and Brussels immediately

imposed a large fine.

‘The most important project for us aquatic ecologists

was AQEM, which started in 1999. It was intended to pro-

duce an ecological assessment system for the Water

Framework Directive, which was then being developed. At

the time, we were very keen on the idea of ecological water

assessment, as were some of our colleagues, such as those

in Essen, Germany. Once you’ve worked out a system for

that, you can set biological standards, make assessments

and predict the effects of restoration measures.

‘The word ecological implies that you don’t look at just

one group of organisms, but at the whole combination of

groups and their interactions. For fresh water, this includes

algae, aquatic plants, fish and invertebrates. The project

had to define a natural reference condition for each water

type, which we did for two types of stream in the

Netherlands. Since the Water Framework Directive allows

conditions to ‘deviate only slightly’ from the undisturbed

situation, we also had to specify what is meant by a ‘slight

deviation’, for instance in terms of numbers of species.

And finally, after having described the reference or very

good and good classes, we had to define the three distur-

bance-related classes: moderate, poor and bad.

20.01.00

Research into ecological assessment

criteria for the EU’s Water Framework

Directive officially started on 20

January 2000

Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

Wageningen, Lumen, Artificial Streams Lab 19.10.200910:59:00 h

14 15

Experiments to assess the responses ofwater plants and invertebrates to tempera-ture (climate change) and oxygen (ecosy-stem function). These experiments werecarried out in the artificial streams labora-tory and the climate room.

Experimental set-up (above) and measuring instruments (below) to produce quantified threshold valu-es for hydrological aspects of the Water Framework Directive, such as peak discharge (bottom right)and sediment transport (bottom left). Discharge and sediment transport measurements and peak dis-charge experiments were carried out in the Springendal stream (in the Twente region) and theFrederik-Bernhard stream (Veluwe region).

Wageningen, Lumen, Artificial Streams LabMay 2008

Ootmarsum, NetherlandsSpringendal Nature Reserve October 2002

16

I had done my PhD on water typology in the Dutch province

of Overijssel, and other European aquatic ecologists had

also been considering the idea of constructing assessment

and prediction models on the basis of a typology, which

made it easy to find European partners. Many colleagues

felt ‘finally we can start doing what we’ve been wanting to

do for so long’.

‘So, we were really hoping that we would get this pro-

ject, not only to strengthen the profile of our discipline, but

also because it would generate work for us – it would invol-

ve half our research group. And finally, the research would

enable us to publish papers, which is what you want to do

as a researcher. It’s strange that national clients are rarely

interested in this aspect, whereas it’s an important criteri-

on for the quality of research.

‘We were up against stiff competition, and we were

relatively inexperienced newcomers on the market. We’d

had no experience in dealing with Brussels at all, and we

had no idea who would be judging our proposal there. And

the same was true for our project partners in Germany,

Sweden, Austria, Czech Republic, Portugal, Greece and

Britain; some were institutes that had been privatised in

similar ways as Alterra had been. We got together and stu-

died the 10-line letter from Brussels, every third word of

which represented a key aspect that needed to be addres-

sed, and drafted our proposal. We hardly worried about

what the competition might do; we just tried to present a

strong project proposal and thought: nothing ventured,

nothing gained. We were very happy when we did get the

project. We had a cake during the office coffee break, and

after our kick-off meeting in Essen we all celebrated in the

pub. The contracts were signed on 12 January 2000, and

that meant we now had to get down to business. We had bli-

thely, almost naively, come up with a daring plan, but now

17

we had to implement it. I think we managed quite well in

the end, and our research helped to support the present

clearly specified Water Framework Directive. The WFD sur-

vived the political process intact, and has had considerable

consequences in many countries.

‘The results in the Netherlands have so far been a bit

disappointing. We already felt a lack of interest when we

applied to various ministries and other water management

agencies for match funding, and none of them responded.

Most of them had never even heard of the Water Framework

Directive. In the end, Alterra provided half the project fun-

ding from their budget for ‘strategic expertise develop-

ment’. It’s unfortunate that there is no source of funding

for long-term applied research in the Netherlands, which

would give research institutes a more independent posi-

tion. As it is, research projects that could result in publica-

tions come only from Brussels.

‘As regards the implications of the Water Framework

Directive, the Dutch government is smart enough to use

legal options. For instance, the WFD includes an exception

for ‘heavily modified’ and ‘artificial’ water bodies, and

countries can refer to ‘significant adverse effects’ on other

uses and ‘disproportionate costs’, and the Dutch authori-

ties have made liberal use of these options. Most of the cur-

rent targets are hardly above those already in place before

the WFD. If you offer some clever arguments, you can get a

deferment until 2027.

‘The other problem in the Netherlands was all the regi-

onal water boards, each with their own opinions and appro-

aches. Each had its own small group of ecologists, who

were hardly taken seriously by the other departments. One

favourable effect of the Framework Directive is that the

water boards responsible for the Rhine, Scheldt, Meuse

and Eem basins have now started to collaborate much

more closely, which is a start at least. And the ecologists

have set up a joint platform, from which they profit.

‘Another missed opportunity is the limited scope of

many of the projects that have been implemented. We

recently re-evaluated the ecological effects of stream

restoration projects, and found ecological progress in only

two to five percent of the projects. You can restore the natu-

ral meandering course of a stream, but that in itself brings

no benefits. Plants and animals also need reduced dischar-

ge dynamics and moderate nutrient concentrations.

Discharge patterns in Dutch streams are usually far too

dynamic: too low in summer and too high in winter or after

a downpour. If you want to restore a stream ecosystem, you

have to tackle the system as a whole. You can repair a

clock, but if you leave out the final cog, it won’t work.

Hence the four parameters included in the WFD’s ecologi-

cal assessment system: algae, higher plants, invertebrates

and fishes. A healthy stream system implies that the food

web should include all of these, in a suitable environment.

It’s not just a matter of creating meanders that look nice;

you’ll have to work on the valley and the upstream ranges,

including ditches and gullies. Just as Germany and

Switzerland will have to do something to prevent peak dis-

charges in the Rhine. And the problem of eutrophication

hasn’t been solved either. It was a hot topic for twenty

years, but attention has recently shifted to climate change.

‘It’s now nine years since the Framework Directive was

published, and we’re actually beginning to see some pro-

gress. Many people are now thinking in more integrated

terms. An example is the transition towards a habitat-

based approach at the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture,

Nature and Food Quality. They’re still thinking mostly in

terms of species rather than ecosystems, but it’s a step in

the right direction. On the other hand, it’s now 2009 and

we still need to find out how the guidelines for the WFD and

Natura 2000 can be coordinated in such a way as to allow

targets to be met, even though plants and wildlife by defi-

nition need water.

‘However, the time seems ripe. People are warming up

to these ideas. The first evaluation moment for the WFD is

in 2015, and for biodiversity it’s supposed to be 2010.

People are beginning to see that something will have to be

done, and we can assist them.’

Piet Verdonschot, aquatic ecologist

An automated water level gauge is attached underneath a platform.

Sampling groundwater fauna inan intermittent Mediterraneanstream.

Ternelles, Mallorca May 2006

Deventer,Netherlands,Lake Bolwerk November 2005

18

Wageningen, Lumen, Ecological Garden02.11.200911:22:39h

19

Paul Opdam still prides himself on the fact that his research

project on landscape fragmentation has induced the Dutch

government to reinforce the National Ecological Network by

adding another 27,500 hectares of natural habitats to it.

In its 2000 memorandum called ‘Nature for People, People

for Nature’, the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food

Quality announced that it would allocate funds to these

so-called Robust Connections. In Opdam’s view, ‘this shows

that scientific knowledge can lead to changes in society.’

by Astrid Smit

>The story of the National Ecological Network started

in the 1980s, when Opdam and his colleagues were

doing research on the fragmentation of Dutch natu-

ral habitats. Fragmentation was a serious problem: the

habitat patches for plants and animals were small, making

populations vulnerable. Opdam’s research on birds soon

convinced him that this fragmentation was having a negati-

ve effect on biodiversity. Plant and animal populations that

depend on such habitats had too few opportunities to meet

and became isolated, as if they were living on islands, incre-

asing the risk of extinction. Opdam and his colleagues con-

sidered that reconnecting these islands by means of wildlife

corridors could result in stable ‘meta-populations’. The

government liked the idea, and in 1990, work started on a

robust infrastructure for wildlife areas, the National

‘Ecological logic doesn’t alwaysequal political logic’

Paul Opdam, landscape ecologist

Ecological Network, which had to provide a more solid basis

for biodiversity in the Netherlands. The intention was to

combine 440,000 hectares of existing natural habitats as

well as 200,000 hectares of farmland and 50,000 hectares

of newly created habitats into a coherent network.

Despite these ambitious plans, the implementation of

the Network did not proceed as intended, as was shown by

research by the National Ecological Assessment Agency,

using models developed by Opdam and his research team.

There was too much emphasis on quantity – acquiring large

areas of land – and not enough on quality. A sample survey

in the province of Gelderland revealed, for instance, that the

planned wildlife corridors were not wide enough to suit the

species for which they were intended, or that they were not

located in the areas with the most serious fragmentation

problems.

At workshops organised by the Ministry of Agriculture,

Opdam and his colleagues emphasised that the Network

requires greater ‘robustness’ in the form of larger units and

wider, more robust corridors. Their research had shown that

larger units mean greater ecological benefits. Bird and

mammal populations require about one and a half times

more hectares if the natural habitat is fragmented.

Opdam, who has since been appointed professor of

Landscape Ecology, found that the government was prepa-

red to listen to his arguments. On 13 July 2000, the then

13.07.00 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

On 13 July 2000, Secretary of State

for Agriculture, Geke Faber,

announced plans to construct ‘Robust

Connections’

20

De kaart van Nederland met daarop aange-geven de totale directe betalingen in euro-’s uit de eerste pijler van het GLB in post-codegebieden, variant historisch recht,mei 2006

Outline of National Ecological Network including new habitats

Freshwater bodies within National Ecological Network

Potential areas of newly created habitat for National Ecological Network

Intensively used military areas (outside Network)

Outline of North Sea part of Network

Outline of potential sites for Robust Ecological Connections

Potential Robust Ecological Connections, to be specified and coordinated with authorities

21

Paul Opdam, landscape ecologist

12

2

3

3

3

2

Wildlife overpass across the A50 motorwaynear Beekbergen. These overpasses areintensively used by animals and promotethe exchange of individuals between thehabitats on both sides of the road. Suchmigration facilities will become even moreimportant with climate change.

< This map shows the Robust Connections(dark green lines) to be added to the ter-restrial part of the National EcologicalNetwork (green). The map reflects a prog-nosis for completion of the Network by2018.

The Network is based on the principle thatexchange of plants and animals betweenfragmented habitats will result in an ecolo-gical network offering more sustainableconditions than the individual fragments(right-hand figure).

Beekbergen,Netherlands November 2008

1 habitat loss2 remaining habitat patches become isolated3 total length of habitat boundaries increases

original habitat

22

Wildlife Overpass at Crailo, near Hilversum. Alterra wrote an advisory report on the value of thisoverpass and the need to construct it. It concluded that the overpass would only be effective inthe context of a larger, coherent network, which would require a series of wildlife overpasses. A similar overpass has since been constructed across the A28 between Utrecht and Amersfoort.

Hilversum, NetherlandsCrailo Wildlife Overpass11.01.200919:51:28 h

Secretary of State at the Ministry, Geke Faber, announced

that an additional 27,500 hectares of habitats would be

created. This marked the birth of the concept of ‘Robust

Connections’, corridors 10 to 30 kilometres long and one

kilometre wide.

Opdam picks up a large sketchbook and opens it. ‘Look,

this is the drawing we made at a study group meeting, sho-

wing the preliminary outlines of the Robust Connections in

the Netherlands. We then discussed the matter with the

Ministry and the provincial authorities to decide where they

would have to be situated.’

Since provincial and municipal authorities found it dif-

ficult to determine exactly where these wildlife corridors

would need to be situated and what would be the most

effective design for them, the decision immediately led to a

follow-up request from the Ministry, which asked Opdam to

write a Handbook on Robust Connections, setting out the

ecological requirements for these ‘wildlife highways.’ It was

a very interesting assignment, says Opdam: ‘The challenge

was to translate a fairly complicated ecological story into a

concept that designers and policymakers could work with.’

In his view, the effort was successful. The provincial autho-

rities, who nowadays have the final say since the recent

decentralisation programme, can choose between three

levels of ambition for their Robust Connections. B1 refers to

a solid basic level of biodiversity, B2 to the same basic level

plus additional opportunities for specific animals, and B3

for maximum effort to achieve the biodiversity that inhe-

rently belongs to a particular habitat. According to Opdam,

‘these three ambition levels create room for negotiation. It’s

a successful approach.’

Although it is now ten years since Faber decided to

introduce the Robust Connections, they have not yet mate-

rialised. In fact, not a single one has been definitively outli-

ned and designated. ‘The decision-making process is slow.

It is very difficult to create large natural habitats in the

Netherlands’, says Opdam. But he is not disappointed. He

is a realist. ‘The procedure often involves converting farm-

land, which is not easily achieved.’

Opdam is regularly asked for advice in debates about

designing new Robust Connections, such as the one in the

Bethunepolder near the city of Utrecht. ‘We act as the inde-

pendent third party in the debate, offering a rational frame-

work for a debate that’s often very emotional.’ By and large,

the Utrecht provincial authorities had correctly interpreted

his Handbook on Robust Connections for the

Bethunepolder project, says Opdam. But there was a gap in

the design, as they had not planned in a water link. ‘Our

advice resulted in improvements to the design, partly

through the addition of this important water link.’

Sometimes the parties use a different kind of logic,

says Opdam. Under the pretext of a Robust Connection,

they construct new natural habitats in areas that do not real-

ly need a major wildlife corridor. ‘We hadn’t planned any

Robust Connections in the province of Zeeland, as wildlife

there was not really affected too much by fragmentation.

But the Zeeland provincial authorities wanted one. In the

end, the plans were amended and a Robust Connection was

designed for Zeeland, in the form of a wide zone across the

Zeeuws-Vlaanderen region’, remembers Opdam.

Another example is the area between the towns of

Vledder and Steenwijk, where Opdam doubts the value of a

wildlife corridor that is being constructed between a forest

and a peat moor. ‘Although the additional habitats definite-

ly contribute to the local biodiversity, it’s not a very effective

contribution to national biodiversity. I sometimes wonder

whether the distribution of national funds for wildlife corri-

dors over the provinces gives enough weight to national

interests. But of course, the allocation process is affected

by other interests as well. The ecological logic does not

always equal the political logic. We scientists have to live

with that.’

The decision-making process may be slow, but the

Robust Corridors will definitely materialise according to

Opdam. The government intends to complete the National

Ecological Network by 2018. Although Opdam thinks that

this deadline will probably not be met, he thinks a large pro-

portion of the connections will have been constructed by

then, as the authorities plan to speed up their implementa-

tion. This is because a new argument for their construction

has arisen since 2000: climate change. As Opdam puts it:

‘Robust Connections are a good way of buffering the adver-

se effects of climate change, as they increase the resilience

of ecosystems. That will be very important when the green-

house effect results in more extreme weather conditions

and climate zones start to shift.’

23

Paul Opdam, landscape ecologist

Hilversum, NetherlandsCrailo Wildlife Overpass30.05.200911:06:37 h

24

Wageningen, Lumen12.11.200915:15:30 h

25

Pavel Kabat has been studying climate change for almost

twenty years now. His emphasis on land use seemed

strange to some at first. But today Kabat leads a large

group of scientists who conduct research both on basic

aspects of the climate system – how the atmosphere

functions and the interaction between land and land use –

and on technologies to adapt to climate change.

by Leo Klep

>‘When I started looking at climate change in the

early nineties it raised some eyebrows.

Wageningen was known as a university for agricul-

ture and land use. And that was precisely the perspective I

was working from. When people think of climate change,

they think of the weather, atmosphere and the oceans.

Climate scientists at the time also thought that the earth’s

climate system could best be studied with a model that

included just the oceans and the atmosphere. But those of

us in Wageningen, along with colleagues from NASA, were

among the first to propose that the terrestrial part is also

important. Land and land use are essential to understan-

ding how the climate system works. That idea was relative-

ly new at the time, and it is still sometimes forgotten in the

climate debate.

‘On the one hand, carbon is to a large extent captured

on land; tropical forests, for example, play an important

‘To understand the climate system youhave to look at the land too’

Pavel Kabat, hydrologist and climate scientist

role in this. On the other hand, carbon emissions are also

mostly produced on land. Moreover, ninety percent of

nitrous oxide and seventy percent of methane around the

world is emitted through agricultural activities, particularly

livestock breeding and rice production. We were able to

demonstrate this important role played by land by measu-

ring the emission and capturing of greenhouse gases in

various places, from the Amazon to the Siberian tundra. We

built large measuring masts and later even acquired an air-

plane. It was an exciting time.

‘We then started to look more closely at all the carbon

stored in organic soils, particularly in wetlands. The frozen

ground of the permafrost, for example, contains an enor-

mous amount of methane that could be released at a faster

rate if the ground thaws. In short, we developed this notion

that the land was important. It took fifteen years before all

of the world’s large climate models seriously took into

account changes in land use and the processes that take

place on land. It actually took until about 2005, when two

books came out about the synthesis between vegetation,

land use and water in the climate system. I recently explai-

ned how we got land use into the climate debate to

Princess Maxima when she visited Wageningen.

‘Land and land use play a role in the climate system,

but they are also the first place that the effects of climate

change will be felt, for example through droughts, flooding

21.10.01

On 21 October 2001 Pavel Kabat and

his colleagues formulated a proposal

for research into land use within the

context of the climate debate.

Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

26

free discharge will no longer be possible without increasing the upstream water level

freshwater supply limited / attention should be paid to the limited possibility for discharge

sea impact area shifting upstream in the river

attention needed for height and stability of dykes

attention needed for height and abatement of dunes

freshwater intake Bernisse and Gouda has to be stopped more frequently

risk of river flooding is increasing

seepage of salt water

river water retention area

27

4.5 m

4.0 m

3.5 m

3.0 m

2.5 m

2.0 m

1.5 m

1.0 m

0.5 m

0.0 m

2000 2050 2100 2150

KNMI 2006-scenarios Deltacommissie 2

The Delta Commission 2Front row, from left: Pavel Kabat, Louise Fresco, Cees Veerman, Tracy Metz, Bart Parmet.Back row, from left: Marcel Stive, Jaap van Duijn,Andries Heidema, Ineke Bakker, Koos van Oord.

< The map shows an impression of the DeltaCommission 2’s points of attention for 2010,assuming a scenario of 65 to 130 cm rise inthe sea level.

> The graph shows that the Delta Commission2 assumes a ‘plausible rise in sea level’ in2100 that is 35 cm higher than that in theKNMI scenarios from 2006.

Pavel Kabat, hydrologist and climate scientist

no lo

nger

adeq

uate

,

,

28

or damage to the ecosystem. That’s why we have been

focussing in recent years on those effects: how does the

changing climate influence functions such as availability

of water, water safety, transportation, health and energy

supply? To answer such questions you need a combination

of knowledge about the climate, agricultural systems,

nature, and so on. These are all areas that we are working

on here in Wageningen.

‘I think it is especially important that you don’t look at

sectors such as agriculture, nature and water safety indivi-

dually, but at how the system works when you combine

them. Functions do not stand alone. The combination of

functions represents a scientifically interesting system,

which we in Wageningen have been able to place on the

global scientific agenda. Against the background of clim -

ate change, how can we achieve a robust system with

respect to water safety, economy, agriculture and nature?

Can it be calculated? How would it be managed? This is

clearly something to be studied at the regional level – in

contrast to the work being done by the Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change, the IPPC, for which we as co-

authors, together with Al Gore, received a Nobel Peace

Prize in 2007.

‘At first we were thus looking for a way to study land

use as part of the climate debate within the Netherlands.

Then we came across the FES (Economic Structure Fund),

the natural gas monies, and especially the BSIK (Decree

regarding Subsidies for Investment in the Knowledge

Infrastructure). I remember it well. One Sunday afternoon

in the fall of 2001 we got together to write a proposal in res-

ponse to KPMG’s call for possible knowledge themes. This

involved millions of euros in subsidies. We wrote half a

page; it was one of over a thousand ideas that were submit-

ted.

‘As an extension to our thoughts about land use and

climate and the combination of functions, we concluded

that every adaptation in the Netherlands – including to cli-

mate change – would come down to competition for scarce

space. That’s when I came up with the concept ‘Climate

changesSpatial Planning’. If you want to solve climate

issues in the Netherlands, you can’t avoid the topic of spa-

tial planning. You’ll have to link and combine the various

functions that are influenced by climate change. This idea

was born on that Sunday afternoon, and it became the

basis for many ongoing research programmes, worth hund-

reds of millions of euros. The research programme Climate

changesSpatial Planning, for example, of which I am the

scientific director, currently involves three hundred resear-

chers, seventy of whom are PhD students. The idea has

also subsequently spread into other arenas, such as the

Delta Commission, of which I was also a member. To be

sure, that Sunday afternoon was one of the most important

turning points of the past ten years.

‘The shift from focusing on the role of land use within

the large climate system to looking specifically at the shor-

tage of space at regional level with all its spatial planning

implications struck a chord in the scientific world but also

in society at large. Policy soon followed. Every province

now has a structural vision that incorporates climate chan-

ge and climate resilience.

‘In 2005 we published the article ‘Climate proofing

the Netherlands’ in Naturemagazine, followed a month

later by a large conference in the Kurhaus in

Scheveningen. This was attended by ministers, including

the Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, and four hund-

red officials from the national to local governments. The

conference focused on how to implement the notion of cli-

mate proofing. In that same year, the Dutch Senate passed

the Lemstra motion, which we contributed to, about the

robustness of long-term investments in light of climate

change. All of this together led in 2006 to the national pro-

gramme ARK (Adaptation Space and Climate). Can it get

any better? I still use a PowerPoint sheet with an image of

Balkenende during his speech shown above our article in

Nature: a perfect example of a science-policy interface

that really worked.

‘Towards the end of 2007 Dutch Cabinet and the Royal

Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences got in touch

with me about the Wadden Academy. We approached this

area in the same way that we had approached the Amazon

years earlier, namely as a system with countless interacti-

ons between climate, ecology, economy, cultural heritage

and society. So I am still looking at the bigger picture, but

at the same time we have miraculously managed to trans -

late this into a context that policymakers are eager to

em brace. I even dare say that the Delta Commission would

have been quite different, in terms of composition and

results, if our programmes had not existed. Within that

arena too we were able to strongly advance our idea that

you have to look at the interaction between various functi-

ons in order to come up with a robust adaptation strategy.

This is how we came up with the idea of sand suppletions.

You can build these up or flatten them out depending on

how much the sea rises, and you can create more land for

the establishment of new nature, for example. This kind of

idea would not have come out of the first Delta Commission

Delfzijl, NetherlandsWaddentoogdag(open day)30.05.2009

29

(1953). The objective back then was to shorten the coast

and keep the water at bay with solid dams. Period.

‘I believe it would be by definition cheaper and more

efficient in regions such as Rotterdam, Schiphol Airport

and the ‘Green Heart’ to adopt a cross-sectoral spatial

planning and climate-proofing approach and to strategical-

ly combine functions. But we don’t have any models to cal-

culate this yet. The Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis

understands this concept, but has no economic methodo-

logy to adopt it. You can’t get there using the classic cost-

benefit analysis. It is not clear how to incorporate non-

monetary concepts – like the value of nature – into existing

theories. Another problem is the discount rate. Until

recently, the standard was four percent. But this means

that every project with a horizon of thirty to forty years –

which is always the case for climate proofing – is by defini-

tion not cost effective. If you calculate it in this way, you

can’t speak in terms of sustainability.

‘In any case, our position is that for climate adapta-

tion, you have to take a cross-sectoral approach, and there

is money to be gained in this way. Space is scarce in our

country; and the same can in fact be said about all of the

deltas in the world. This is why we set up the Delta

Alliance, with government support, to talk to colleagues

from other deltas like New York and Bangladesh. Because

seventy percent of the global economy is generated in del-

tas - from San Francisco and the Thames to Djakarta, Tokyo

and Shanghai. Eighty percent of the world’s population

lives in deltas or within a hundred kilometres of the coast.

So if we in the Netherlands can figure out how to deal with

lack of space in relation to things like the rising sea level,

interannual variability in river flows and siltation, then we

will have developed an entirely new export product.’

Pavel Kabat, hydrologist and climate scientist

The Board of the Wadden Academy on the island of Terschelling. From left: Hessel Speelman, Jouke van Dijk, Jos Bazelmans, Peter Herman.In the foreground: Pavel Kabat.

Terschelling,NetherlandsJuly 2008

30 31

Nature has a calming effect on us, as many would agree.

And yet, until recently, policymakers and nature

organisations paid little attention to the benefits people

gain from experiencing nature. Thanks in part to Agnes van

den Berg’s extensive research and lobbying efforts, the

topic is now on the political agenda.

by Laurien Holtjer

>Our mood improves measurably when we’re out in

nature. ‘Even a quick glance at greenery through

your window can have a positive influence on your

mood’, says Agnes van den Berg. Her own view is of a few

bright red artificial begonias on her window sill. ‘The resto-

rative effect of nature can be divided into phases, from

superficial to profound. Short contact restores acute

stress. An artificial plant can have that effect as well.’

In recent years, this environmental psychologist has

shown in several experiments that nature is good for peo-

ple. Besides improving mood, nature also has a positive

effect on stress: the number of stress hormones in the sali-

va diminishes. ‘Sick people are found to recuperate more

quickly if they have a view of natural elements’, says Van

den Berg. ‘And nature has positive effects on children with

problems such as ADHD, phobias and poor self-confiden-

ce.’

However, Van den Berg remembers – as if it were just

Agnes van den Berg, environmental psychologist

yesterday – that at the end of the 1990s, she had to go all

out to convince governments, nature organisations and

research colleagues of the importance of nature for health.

That was until Natuurmonumenten held an invitational

congress on the topic of nature and health in the Beurs van

Berlage in Amsterdam. The organisation asked Van den

Berg, a pioneer in this field in the Netherlands, to help

decide on the programme. This was the ‘long-awaited icing

on the cake’ for her, after years of studying the importance

of nature for human health.

Van den Berg began her research on perceptions of

natural landscapes in 1993; in 1999 she received her

PhD. ‘It struck me back then that nature experiences were

increasingly seen as a luxury that one could do without.

Public green spaces were often the first to go when buil-

ding new neighbourhoods. Ecologists did manage to secu-

re money for the preservation and development of species,

but isn’t it strange that the top priority is animal conserva-

tion, while the importance of nature for humans wasn’t

even being discussed until very recently?’ wonders Van den

Berg. ‘Nature is very important for people, yet this aspect is

poorly promoted. That struck me as true societal poverty.’

In 1997 she realised that the research had to change

direction. ‘I had just started working for Alterra when it

dawned on me that the key to the solution was to demon-

strate the health benefits of nature scientifically.’ This idea

22.04.04 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

‘Finally people could see theimportance of nature to our health’

On April 22, 2004, the first congress

on nature and health took place.

Groenekan,Netherlands07.07.200911:30 h

32 33

Agnes van den Berg, environmental psychologist

was sparked by meeting Terry Hartig, an American environ-

mental psychologist who did research on the restorative

effects of nature on human stress. In the Netherlands,

research on healthy emotions experienced while out in

nature was primarily descriptive: people tell what they feel

and experience when in nature. ‘That’s completely diffe-

rent from controlled experiments in which you measure

effects.’

Since ancient times, humans have been attributing

healing effects to nature. ‘The ancient Greeks, for exam-

ple, built hospitals in natural environments because con-

tact with nature was thought to promote the healing pro-

cess. Yet still there was barely any well-controlled research

on the health benefits of nature for humans. Most people

do think that nature is healthy, but that also inhibits the

research: it seems so obvious. Because there is no well-

controlled research, people don’t take their feelings seri-

ously. It’s a vicious circle. Only hard evidence could give

the importance of nature for humans a permanent place in

society and politics.’

At first, her research plans met with the usual resistan-

ce among both colleagues and politicians. Due in part to

misperceptions, she didn’t get research funding. ‘The sub-

ject matter appeals to many people, including extremists

who believe that nature is a panacea. This became painful-

ly evident during the very first workshop on this topic orga-

nised by the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food

Quality in 1999’, tells Van den Berg. A high-ranking offici-

al at LNV, who did believe in the relationship between natu-

re and health, had got the subject onto the agenda. ‘In the

meantime, word was spreading that nature was good. LNV

capitalised on that with this workshop without realising

how vulnerable the topic was. A man showed up there –

painfully thin, because he believed that he could live on

sunlight – and made a plea to dispense with consumer

society and go back to nature. At lunchtime, he took off his

clothes and jumped, nude, into the pond. It gave the day a,

vague, ‘new-agey’ tint. It was a slap in the Ministry’s face

back then, because LNV didn’t want to be associated with

this angle.’

Despite the scepticism and the associations with tree-

huggers, Van den Berg succeeded at the end of the nineties

in providing, without financing, the first scientific eviden-

ce in the Netherlands for the calming effects of nature.

Research done by a student intern did the trick. After that,

Van den Berg finally got the chance to probe the topic fur-

ther. In order to convince everyone of the positive health

effects of nature, and to give the topic a more authoritative

status, she collaborated with the Health Council of the

Netherlands on a booklet containing concrete facts: ‘Van

buiten word je beter’ (‘Being outside makes you better’).

Its publication in 2001, as an appendix to Alterra’s annual

report, made the difference. ‘All of a sudden things started

to move. The next year, the Ministries of Health (VWS),

Agriculture (LNV), and Housing, Spatial Planning and the

Environment (VROM) petitioned the Health Council for

advice. In 2004 they concluded that there had been very

little research, but that what had been done was only posi-

tive.’

When Natuurmonumenten then chose the relationship

between health and nature as the theme for their annual

invitational meeting, the topic had finally ‘landed’. Van

den Berg: ‘As I walked down the stairs of the Beurs van

Berlage where the meeting was being held, I realised that

what I had thought up in the office could have such an

effect on society. And that there was no turning back.’

Still, Van den Berg’s spirits sank that day when

Natuurmonumenten’s chairman gave a speech featuring

the question: ‘Nature is healthy for people; but how healthy

is nature itself?’ He ignored the subject of human well-

being altogether, going on instead about the importance of

protecting natural values and biodiversity. ‘I heard only

that, first and foremost, we must make sure that the goals

for nature are met. Sure, that’s important, but then we’re

talking at a whole different level. Functions such as the sti-

mulation of activity, social contacts and stress reduction

have very little to do with those goals. That day in 2004

made me realise that the theme of nature and health ranks

high in politics and in society, yet at the same time it is vul-

nerable: it’s easy to interpret it according to one’s own opi-

nion.’ She has observed, for example, that nature conser-

vation organisations cite the positive effects of nature

mainly as an argument for the protection of large-scale

nature areas farther away from the city, while she believes

that the biggest benefits are to be gained in and around

cities.

This is why Van den Berg is keen on more scientific evi-

dence. ‘It would, for instance, be very valuable to know how

nature influences the brain. Look at ADHD: children are

given Ritalin. It’s an accepted medication because we

know how it works. Nature therapy might also work, but as

long as we don’t know exactly how, it won’t be acknowled-

ged as a treatment. With my research, I want to do justice

to the deep and important meaning of nature for people;

that motivates and inspires me. If we know which natural

elements have what effects and how that works, then there

34

is less room for personal interpretation of research

results.’

In the meantime, many projects have been set up.

According to Van den Berg, one worthwhile initiative is the

Natuursprong project, run by the National Forest Service

(Staatsbosbeheer), the National Youth Foundation ‘Jantje

Beton’, and the Netherlands Institute for Sport and

Physical Activity (NISB). This project takes underprivile-

ged children into nature after school. ‘Children who take

care of nature learn social behaviour and learn about how

the world works; they explore their boundaries and learn

that they can fall. That can’t be done in little once-a-week

outings to the heather. Children learn to value nature when

they spend time every day playing in the garden and explo-

ring nearby woods and fields.’

She regrets that there aren’t many of those kinds of

spots in urban areas. ‘Why don’t we leave a bit more room

around the houses, so that children can roam around? The

connection with nature is mainly formed at a young age.

After that, you’ll have missed your chance.’

35

Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

Bloemendaal, NetherlandsZuid-Kennemerland National Park18.10.200915:00 h

> Agnes van den Berg and her youngdaughter, Vivian. In her daughter’s deve-lopment, she continually sees affirmationof all sorts of information from her researchon the importance of nature for children.‘Having a child yields insight and inspira-tion [for my work], but the reverse is alsotrue: my research inspires me in raisingVivian.’ Her research was one factor in Vanden Berg’s decision to move to a housewith a large garden, just outside the city, sothat her daughter could have daily contactwith nature.

Stills from the television programme Eén Vandaag. This episode(29 April, 2008) featured out-of-school care centre ‘Struin’ inNijmegen, where children are kept busy outdoors every day, rain or shine.

36 37

In November 2004, soil scientist Henk Wösten had cause

to celebrate: he’d been awarded 1.5 million euros by the

European Union for his proposal for a project called

Restorpeat to study the potential for restoring peat swamp

forests in Asia.

by Astrid Smit

>The EU’s choice of Wösten’s project was not unex-

pected, as his research team had just completed a

four-year study of the state of tropical peat swamp

forests for the EU. ‘Yet it felt like recognition’, Wösten says,

‘a signal that we’d done our work well. And with this follow-

up project we could contribute to finding a solution.’

Indonesia, Malaysia and, to a lesser extent, Vietnam,

are faced with a major problem: they emit vast amounts of

greenhouse gases. Indonesia is in third place on the list of

countries responsible for the largest emissions – only

China and the US contribute more to the greenhouse

effect. Indonesia’s high ranking is not so much because of

massive use of fossil fuel but because so much peat swamp

forest has been converted into land for agriculture. The

same is true for Malaysia.

Tropical peat swamp forests are, by nature, a good

place to store carbon dioxide. In these swampy jungles the

trees have their roots in water and remove vast amounts of

CO2 from the air. When they die, they form a thick layer of

Henk Wösten, soil scientist

peat which releases very little carbon; the swamp water

prevents the plant matter from being broken down comple-

tely. This makes tropical peat swamp forests, seventy per-

cent of which occur in Southeast Asia, an important carbon

sink. They account for about three percent of all the carbon

stored in the world’s soil and forests.

But in recent decades, much of the tropical peat

swamp forest of Indonesia and Malaysia has been drained

for logging, rice cultivation and, above all, for palm oil

plantations. The result is that the peat areas have become

a major source of greenhouse gases. When the swamps are

drained, the peat decomposes more quickly: oxygen from

the air reacts with carbon in the ground, releasing CO2. An

associated problem is that dry peat is a perfect fuel and

catches fire easily, with the result that even more carbon

dioxide disappears into the atmosphere. Every year, light-

ning, arson or extreme drought result in thousands of hec-

tares going up in flames. According to Wösten, the 26 mil-

lion hectares of tropical peat are responsible for eight per-

cent of global emissions of greenhouse gases.

In 1997, when El Niño caused severe drought in

Indonesia, the fires in the Kalimantan peat areas got com-

pletely out of control. They were so intense and lasted so

long that thick grey smog hung over Borneo. Airports and

schools were closed. The smoke affected people as far

away as Singapore and the Malaysian capital Kuala

01.11.04 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

‘An ecological disaster, but with a positive outcome’

On 1 November 2004 the Restorpeat

project was approved and Henk

Wösten’s research budget secured.

Wageningen,Lumen10.11.200915:06:41 h

38

> Large dam in a large drainagecanal in Sebangau National Parkin Kalimantan, made from localmaterials plus imported sand-bags. If they stay in place, theselarge and relatively costly damsrewet large areas upstream.

Digital elevation model of the Air Hitam Lautcatchment (a peat area) on the island ofSumatra. Each colour gradation indicates aheight difference of 1 metre. The darkestcolour indicates an altitude exceeding 20metres above sea level; the palest colourindicates 0 to 1 metres above sea level.

Using local material to damsmall drainage canals inSebangau National Park incentral Kalimantan.These simple and thus cheapdams are effective in rewettingthe peat areas upstream.

39

Henk Wösten, soil scientist

The Oya river in Sarawak meanders through a peat area, sometimes with villages on its banks. Major rivers like this form the natural boundaries oflarge, contiguous peat areas and so are used as boundaries when modellingthe hydrology of areas.

Oya riverSarawak,Indonesiaspring 2005

Railway used to access manyuncontrolled logging sites. Suchactivities must be halted, inorder to manage areas moresustainably. Local people mustbe given the prospect of incomefrom sources other than logging.

40

Lumpur. ‘It was a real ecological disaster’, says Wösten,

‘but it did have a positive outcome. Indonesia and Malaysia

decided that henceforth they’d take better care of their

peat areas.’

The European Union offered a helping hand and made

1.5 million euros available for research. ‘The outcome was

the Strapeat project, a reconnaissance study in which we

and colleagues from Europe, Indonesia and Malaysia

inventoried the problems surrounding the tropical peat

areas: the state of the flora and fauna, the hydrology, the

socio-economic situation and the products the local peo-

ple extract from the forest.’

The Restorpeat follow-up project focused on using the

peat area accountably. Peat areas used for oil palm planta-

tions can be kept in good condition by good water manage-

ment. Currently, some plantations are subsiding by ten to

fifteen centimetres a year because dry peat shrinks and

compacts. ‘We drew up some guidelines, such as keeping

the groundwater level high and constant, and using relati-

vely small dams, and the plantation managers have taken

them on board.’

In addition, the project team maintains that the intact

tropical peat swamp forests – there are only 1.5 million

hectares left, mostly in Irian Jaya – must be protected,

come what may, so they can remain a good store for carbon.

Apart from that, Indonesia and Malaysia would do well to

retain more water in the degraded forests. Currently, these

– some ten million hectares – are slowly drying out because

of the drainage canals constructed in the past for illegal

logging. The canals are above sea level, and as long as they

remain open and unimpeded, they will continue to drain

the peat.

But the real question is how to conserve and restore

the peat swamp forests. These tropical ecosystems are

under extreme pressure. They are in demand as areas for

logging and for oil palm plantations that yield a lucrative

BerbakSumatra,Indonesiasummer 2006

Berbak, south-east Sumatra. Alterra scientists Herco Jansen, Henk Wösten and HenkRitzema (seated on right) and Indonesian colleagues, during fieldwork in a peat arearecording, among other things, the density and composition of the peat swamp forest,peat thickness and the country gradient.

41

Henk Wösten, soil scientist

product. The demand for oil palm continues to rise year on

year, especially now that palm oil has become an important

fuel in the West. ‘It’s all very well to say that the countries

involved should no longer clear their peat swamp forests,

but you also have to offer an economic alternative. One

solution is for them to earn money by maintaining these

tropical peat swamp forests.’

This can be done by means of carbon credits. A country

is then paid for each ton of carbon it stores by planting

forests and allowing peat to accumulate again. ‘It’s not that

simple,’ Wösten admits. ‘How do you work out how much

carbon is being stored in the tropical peat swamps at the

moment you start this credit system? How do you work out

how much carbon the peat swamps store every year? And

then, who gets the money – the government, or the local

people? And who owns these areas?’ So the carbon credits

for tropical peat swamp forests aren’t yet ready to be laun-

ched on the market. But Wösten believes it’s just a matter

of time.

According to him, Indonesia and Malaysia will have to

choose between profit in the short or longer term. They can

earn money now by issuing permits for logging or oil palm.

Or, later, they can earn carbon credits for good peat swamp

management. ‘Sometimes I compare the peat swamp

forests to Cinderella’, Wösten says. ‘Once a girl nobody loo-

ked at, but now an important princess.’

The Wageningen soil scientist is optimistic about the

future of the peat swamp areas in Malaysia and Indonesia.

‘They’re certainly attracting criticism from other countries.

Indonesia is well aware that it’s the third biggest emitter of

greenhouse gases after China and the US. And it gets many

complaints from its neighbours about the continuing forest

fires. There were some big ones again in 2009.’ Wösten

believes that this is why Indonesia will do its best to protect

and restore the tropical peat swamp areas. ‘For example,

under President Yudhoyono there’s been some decline in

illegal logging, and concessions are not being awarded so

readily.’

What Indonesia and Malaysia need to do first, accor-

ding to Wösten, is to stop the fires: they’re responsible for

fifty percent of the country’s carbon dioxide emissions but

serve no purpose. And they’re relatively easy to tackle.

‘Putting out the fires is the easiest option.’ He’s all for

Europe helping with this. ‘If you want to reduce carbon

dioxide emissions, each euro invested in putting out the

fires in Indonesia achieves more than subsidising double

glazing in the Netherlands.’

Wösten looks back with satisfaction at Restorpeat,

which was completed last year. ‘It’s nice to feel that as a

scientist you’ve helped solve a social problem – that you

can help politicians to make good decisions. The peat

swamp forests in Asia used to be very poorly understood,

with the result that disastrous mistakes were made. I don’t

think that will happen anymore. We’ve organised many

conferences with stakeholders in Indonesia and Malaysia,

and now they have enough in-house knowledge to be able

to manage tropical peat swamps properly themselves.’

Peat profile in south-east Sumatra. At the top are remains of theaerial parts and roots of poorly decomposed peat swamp forestvegetation. Deeper in the profile are the oldest and thus mosthumified peat layers.

Sumatra,Indonesiasummer 2006

42

Wageningen, Lumen 30.10.200911:59:12 h

43

Peter van der Meer’s heart lies with the tropical forests of

Southeast Asia. Forest conservation is the common

element in the projects that he is involved in, and it’s what

motivates him. ‘I love the research I do – it’s very

interesting, but that’s not enough for me. If that was all

there was to it, I’d start to have my doubts. It’s important to

me that my work is useful, that it serves a purpose. In my

case that’s tropical forests.’

by Maartje Kouwen

>Van der Meer’s research combats illegal timber

flows in Malaysia. One of his activities is to measu-

re CO2 emissions of peat areas, created by felling

forest. Van der Meer has had to learn the rules of the forest.

‘In the tropics the rule is: use it or lose it. As far as the local

population is concerned, forest must have a use, otherwise

they cut it down. A special proboscis monkey or an ende-

mic plant is not enough.’ This happens in the Malaysian

state of Sarawak too, where Van der Meer does research on

nature conservation. ‘The ramin tree used to be common in

Sarawak. These hardwood trees stood in dense stands on a

thick layer of peat. This combination is what makes up tro-

pical peat swamp forest. The area is densely populated

however, and heavy felling has been going on since the six-

ties. Ramin trees had become so rare that conservation was

urgent.’

‘Our research has helped find a way of protecting the forest’

Peter van der Meer, tropical forest expert

Ramin was Van der Meer’s first project in Malaysia. He star-

ted in 2001, studying the growth of the ramin population,

CO2 emissions, and the environmental effects. ‘Carrying

out the research was not easy. Forest felling continued in

Sarawak, but we and our counterparts believed that this

needed to be done in a carefully planned way. Our aim was

sustainable management, but most of the forest had alrea-

dy disappeared. Nevertheless we pressed on, because

something needed to be done urgently.’

The research was carried out in close collaboration with

Malaysian counterparts. ‘In Malaysia lots of different par-

ties have a say over the forest: the forestry service, govern-

ment ministries and various local groups. For instance,

those who manage the forest are not the owners, which

makes it difficult to reach agreement on responsibilities.

Unfortunately our direct counterparts did not always have

enough political power to implement sustainable forest

management practices.’

The research report took four years to complete. Van der

Meer and his fellow researchers presented their findings at

a final workshop. ‘Our joint research showed that logging

was damaging the environment. Things had gone so far

that sustainable forest management was no longer possi-

ble, as most of the natural ramin forest had already been

felled. The only option was to create ramin plantations. The

most important priority was to stop the remaining natural

01.12.04 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

Malaysia proposed that ramin be

added to the CITES list of protected

species.

44

ramin population from being cut down.’

Then, on 1 December 2004, something unexpected

happened. ‘Malaysia took the initiative and suggested that

ramin should be assigned protected status on the CITES

list, which controls international trade of animal and plant

species that are threatened with extinction. We hadn’t

expected this at all. We were delighted. In front of the press

and photographers we and our counterparts explained how

we’d gone about our research. It was a memorable

moment. We had put so much time and money in, and we

ended up with a way to protect the forest. That’s something

I’m really proud of.’ Not everyone was as pleased as Van der

Meer. ‘The local timber industry was perhaps not so happy

with the outcome. Ramin felling had been forbidden,

which deprived them of income. In that sense our research

was pretty controversial.’

Van der Meer still visits the area regularly. ‘The new sta-

tus on the CITES list was a high point, but not a break -

through we realise now in retrospect. We’ve still got quite a

way to go. People still have no economic incentive to pre-

serve the forest instead of logging it.’ There are various ini-

tiatives through which people can compensate their CO2

emissions. ‘Indonesia has also set up a scheme. In addi-

tion to logging, forest fires are a problem, and cause similar

quantities of CO2 emissions. For every month that no forest

fire happens, the local population receives a bonus. This

way the forest remains intact and the local people become

actively involved in its management.’

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and

Degradation (REDD) was set up by the United Nations to

help upscale this local way of dealing with things to the glo-

bal level. ‘Under this construction the industrialised coun-

tries compensate their CO2 emissions by paying money to

forest-rich countries so that the latter don’t cut down their

forests. Although this might seem to let the industrialised

countries off the hook when it comes to reducing their own

CO2 emissions, it does open up possibilities for creating

better ways of paying for forest functions. Forests are not

only a source of timber; they are also an excellent way of

storing carbon and function as water regulators. At present 45

Peter van der Meer, tropical forest expert

Maludam National ParkSarawak, IndonesiaJune 2005

LinggaSarawak, IndonesiaAugust 2004

One of the wet stretches of a leaf-falltransect walk in Maludam National Park.The water level varies dramatically in peatswamp forests. During the wet season largeareas are submerged under twenty to fiftycentimetres of water. Although large areasare dry during the dry season, it oftenremains wetter near the river.

Camp on the Maludam River, Sarawak (Borneo). Located in the middle of theMaludam National Park, this camp takes two hours to reach by boat and is usedfor overnight stays during research campaigns.

Measuring photosynthesis in a ramin seedling.These measurements provide informationabout the optimal growing conditions (e.g. theamount of light needed) for trees.

46

Central Kalimantan,IndonesiaJuly 2008

Central Kalimantan,IndonesiaJanuary 2008

47

Maludam National ParkSarawak, Indonesia17.07.2003

there’s no good system for paying for these functions.’

At the request of the Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial

Planning and the Environment (VROM), Van der Meer has

started on a new project, which will show how much CO2

savings forest conservation yields. His research team has

returned to Sarawak to measure the amount of greenhouse

gases that are released when peat swamp forest is turned

into oil palm plantations. ‘Millions of hectares of forest

have already been felled in Malaysia and Indonesia to

make way for oil palm plantations. The industry is growing

fast and still wants millions more hectares. I can under-

stand their reasoning. As far as they’re concerned forest is

unused land. Planting oil palms is seen as doing something

useful with it.’

Much of the population is unaware that in its present

state the forest is actually very useful. ‘The forest, together

with the peat soil it stands on, is a very special and extre-

mely threatened ecosystem. The peat layer can be up to fif-

teen metres deep and stores large amounts of CO2. It’s not

just that trees are being felled – land is being reclaimed

and drained. As a result the soil shrinks and compacts, and

enormous amounts of CO2 are released.’

Malaysia claims that its emissions are not too high, but

the Netherlands has indicated that there is a serious pro-

blem. ‘To get a clearer understanding of the situation, the

two countries agreed to this joint project in 2008.

Organisations like Greenpeace have been critical. Their

reasoning is ‘You know that things are bad, why do you have

to go and do more research?’ It is true that we know that

these changes are bad for CO2 emissions, but we need to

show how bad they are, so that these countries make policy

changes.

‘The Malaysians are planning to use flux towers to mea-

sure the amount of CO2 in the air. We are looking at how

much CO2 is stored in the trees and soil. Because this is a

joint project, it’s important to maintain a dialogue. But

politics slows the research down. It’s difficult to organise

sustainable management in a country where so many diffe-

rent parties have an interest at stake in the forest. In the

meantime felling continues, while it’s vital that enough

forest remains to preserve biodiversity, and corridors need

to be created. But management not only costs money, it

also means less production. The REDD initiative is very

important, as it offers an opportunity to make protecting

trees lucrative. A region like Sarawak stands to benefit

from this.’

< Peat forest reclaimed and replantedwith rubber trees. The blackened treestump indicates that burning was used toclear the forest, which releases enormousextra quantities of CO2.

< Peat forest where felling has been done,but which is still reasonably intact.

> Group photo taken during the officialopening of Maludam National Park.From left to right: Datu Cheong Ek Choon(Director of Forest, Sarawak ForestDepartment), Peter van der Meer, Tan SriDatuk Dr Abdullah Mohd Tahir (SecretaryGeneral, Ministry of Primary Industries,Malaysia), Sarawak Forestry representati-ve (name not known), resident of BetongDivision (name not known).

Peter van der Meer, tropical forest expert

4948

Vincent Kuypers focuses on what green can do for a city.

He combines the knowledge and experience of scientists,

politicians, policymakers, project developers and others to

create innovative projects related to today’s most pressing

issues, such as climate and the credit crisis. He believes

Alterra is uniquely positioned to develop itself as a

knowledge innovator in urban issues.

by Martin Woestenburg

>‘The Junglebus was a decisive project for me. It was

during that project that I decided to resign from my

job as an urban ecologist with the municipality of

Rotterdam, and to become a researcher at Alterra.

‘I had been hired by the municipality of Rotterdam to

act as a catalyst, to get nature onto the urban agenda. I was

in a team with civil engineers, who were excited by the idea

of ecology but had never really considered it. We were wor-

king at the time on establishing an Urban Nature bureau

for ecology and spatial projects, whose aim would be to

make nature an important focal point for the spatial plan-

ning and urban renewal departments. Once that was

accomplished, my role as a catalyst was finished.

‘Then came the Junglebus. This was part of the

Architecture Biennial in the Netherlands Architecture

Institute (NAi) in Rotterdam, which had been given the

theme of motorway panoramas. The bus was kind of a stunt

‘The city is not yet a priority issue’

Vincent Kuypers, knowledge broker

to draw attention to the idea of incorporating nature in

cities. We had renovated a bus to function as a mobile

nature reserve, and organised excursions and discussions

with people active in this field, focussing on the role of spa-

tial planning in their work. We thus suddenly found oursel-

ves influencing urban architects and politicians.

‘For the opening of the Biennial we parked the

Junglebus at the entrance to the NAi. The Queen was sche-

duled to officially open the event, but there was nothing in

her protocol about a bus. So here she comes, approaching

the building together with the director of the Biennial,

Francine Houben, and the mayor of Rotterdam at the time,

Ivo Opstelten, and she sees the bus. She stopped and said:

‘I want to go in there’. You could see all the faces drop. She

listened intently to the whole story of the Junglebus told by

the driver of the RET, who was behind the wheel: that the

bus was the world's first mobile nature reserve and that we

would be attempting to earn a place in the Guinness Book

of Records as the fastest nature reserve in the world.

‘In this way, we suddenly drew lots of attention to the

idea that nature can actually be everywhere in the city. I

would never have been able to achieve this had I just conti-

nued working on my own as a bureaucrat in Rotterdam. The

special thing about the Junglebus was the team that car-

ried out the project. Artist and architect Ton Matton con-

ceived the project and put the bus together, Wim

26.05.05

The opening of the Architecture

Biennial Rotterdam took place on

7 May 2003. Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

Wageningen,Gaia12.11.200915:37:36 h

Rotterdam, Netherlands07.05.2003

50 51

Timmermans from Alterra organised, during excursions

with the bus, discussions with urban architects, politici-

ans, scientists and others involved with spatial planning.

And I joined in the debate about what a city has to look like

if you want to take advantage of the functions that nature

can fulfil in improving the living climate.

‘I enjoyed working together with people who were acti-

ve in the city, and nature in the city was my passion. The

only connection I had with Alterra at the time had to do

with the management of urban green spaces. But there was

a shift underway within Alterra towards focussing more on

the urban environment. For example, through the GIOS

programme (Green in and around the city), Timmermans

was studying practical options for increasing green space

in the 31 largest Dutch cities, not for nature’s sake, but as

a way to improve the living surroundings. My ambition is to

find ways to apply such experiences on a larger scale; and

this is why I took the leap. I am now involved in Future

Cities, a European project focused on adapting cities to cli-

mate change and more specifically making them resilient

to heat stress. The objective of Future Cities is to make

cities function more in harmony with natural processes.

This project is very challenging, and it brings me back to

Rotterdam once in a while.

‘Clearly a lot has changed in Alterra’s relation to the

urban environment, but not enough. The city is not yet a

priority issue. This would require a culture shift, which I

hope to see one day. Alterra has been in operation for ten

years now, but it needs to develop more as a knowledge

innovator with respect to the greening of cities.

‘The effective collaboration that characterised the

Junglebus project made me realise that you have to con-

stantly strive for this kind of teamwork if you want to get

anything off the ground. I see myself now as a knowledge

broker and Wageningen UR as an important knowledge

supermarket. The university holds an amazing amount of

fundamental knowledge; this knowledge changes, but so

does the context. You have to change with it; otherwise your

knowledge will become obsolete. This means that you have

to organise a network of people who work in the field, inclu-

ding people from the municipality, but also project develo-

pers for example.

‘This sometimes leads to strange situations. I was once

working with a project developer on a housing development

in the Bentwoud area, when I received a glossy brochure in

the mail. Someone called shortly afterwards to ask if I had

a specific offer in mind. Apparently, the developer had

assumed I was from the Altera real estate agents. This

taught me a lot about how project developers work. They

want to make money. If you want to discuss something with

a project developer, don’t be confrontational or give in too

easily: the most important thing is to listen very carefully.

‘In the role of knowledge broker, as the middleman

between implementation, policy and knowledge, you’re

always going to cause some friction. You’re not regarded as

a real scientist, but a consultant, so you’re definitely not

going to be easily accepted by the Wageningen resear-

chers. As a consultant you are able to give advice without

anyone’s help. But we know from experience that one party

– whether it is the government, a project developer or a

consultant – cannot be successful on their own. A knowled-

ge broker is always looking for ways to apply existing know-

ledge to situations for the benefit of various parties. Being

in that position allows you to turn knowledge into practical

expertise. If you are not in that position, you will not be able

to make the most of your knowledge.

‘Working in such a network exposes you to a constant

stream of new issues. For a long time, the emphasis in the

Netherlands was on compact cities and open rural areas.

As a result, no attention was paid to green space within the

cities, even though the residents were screaming for it.

This social stimulus led over the years to greater efforts to

create green space in and around the cities. Five or so years

ago, attention turned to the issue of particulate matter and

air quality, and now the focus is on climate change.

‘As a scientist you have to get a good understanding of

the stakeholders’ motivations related to urbanisation, and

you have to know how to apply the knowledge that you

Vincent Kuypers in the Junglebus.

The Junglebus (design: MattonOffice, 2003).

Vincent Kuypers, knowledge broker

Rotterdam, 07.05. 2003

shelf

emergency exit

thin layer of sand on floor, glued if necessary

cupboard

kitchen

table

52 53

and others from LEI, Applied Plant Research and

Wageningen UR Livestock Research on a strategy for urban

agriculture. We came up with the vision of the A4 motorway

as a green parkway with a park supermarket, a model of

which was displayed at the Architecture Biennial in Sao

Paolo, Brazil, in November 2009. That idea got a lot of

things moving. Actually, it can be traced back to the

Junglebus idea from 2003.

‘Opportunism is not the driving force behind my work: I

am not focused on the bottom line. It is more the other way

around. The driving force is a shared sense of urgency sur-

rounding a particular issue. The meaning and function

attributed to green space in cities keep shifting along the

way. Take the credit crisis, for example. We have been wor-

king for years in Haarlemmermeer with a project focused

on building and water. Initially the focus was on water sto-

rage, stemming from water problems experienced in the

nineties; later it was all about climate-proof construction,

and now with the credit crisis it’s about making the nor-

thern Randstad area attractive to new businesses and resi-

dents. In the coming five years the focus will be on shrinka-

ge – the decline in population and what impact this will

have on cities.’

have. This was already the case when I worked for the

municipality of Rotterdam on development of the

Nesselande neighbourhood. One part of the area consisted

of what we call katteklei, acid sulphate soil that creates

enormous problems when drained because of the release

of sulphuric acid. We hired Herbert Diemont from Alterra to

assess the soil. It was normal building procedure at the

time to put a layer of sand over soil containing about 4%

water. Herbert told us that he had worked in the Mekong

delta in Vietnam with about 15% water, and that they culti-

vated pineapple and banana on that soil. So we made a list

of what grows on katteklei. But at that moment the sug-

gestion of planting pineapples was not well received.

Recently, by the way, we presented, together with architect

Jago van Bergen, a concept for a park supermarket in the

heart of Delfland, which includes cultivation of subtropical

crops on this type of soil.

‘Working as a knowledge broker, you quickly come in

contact with Wageningen scientists from various research

groups. I recently worked, for example, with Fred Tonneijck

from Plant Research International on capturing particulate

matter with greenery. In one of my current projects, I am

working with Han Wiskerke, professor of rural sociology,

< It is a challenge in the already busy areaof Haarlemmermeer to combine housingdevelopment with water storage and naturedevelopment. In the project Building withWater, in the western flank of Haarlemmer -meer, Vincent Kuypers is developing, toge-ther with governments, businesses andresearch institutes, new concepts for‘water urban development’ in which waterrather than soil serves as the basis for inno-vative, climate-proof neighbourhoods (design: Oosterhuis Architects, 2009).

> In the plans for the park supermarket, thepolders of central Delfland, for example,are transformed into a park landscape withmoderate, Mediterranean and subtropicalclimate zones, within which various super-market products are cultivated. Eachsupermarket ‘department’ has its own characteristic structure and products: pandan and risotto rice on graduated terraces, tilapia fish in meandering basins,kiwis and avocados growing along undulating fruit walls (design: Van BergenKolpa Architects, 2009).

54 55

For decades, the economy in China took precedence over

the environment. In recent years, however, China too has

realised that there are limits to what the natural

environment can sustain, and the government is working

on a stricter pesticide policy based on expertise and

models from Alterra. Researcher Rik van den Bosch

needed only five minutes to convince the government that

collaboration would be useful.

by Laurien Holtjer

>If a manufacturer wants to bring a new product to

fight diseases and pests onto the Dutch market, the

new agent would first have to be thoroughly tested.

‘The government tests such an agent according to three

general criteria’, explains Rik van den Bosch. ‘One: does it

kill the bug? Is the manufacturer’s claim regarding the

agent’s effectiveness true? Two: human toxicology. How

bad is the stuff for the farmer’s and the consumer’s health?

And three: how bad is the agent for the environment?’

For the last thirty years, Alterra has been conducting

research on the third criterion, the environmental impact

of pesticides. Researchers have developed numerous

methods to predict the behaviour of pesticides in the envi-

ronment. Some models calculate how much of the pestici-

de reaches the groundwater or the surface water. Others

show the impact of pesticides on soil life, fish, birds and

‘I was given five minutes to tell my story’

Rik van den Bosch, environmental scientist

water plants.

Thanks to Alterra, the Netherlands has for years been

an important player in the development of methods to

achieve better pesticide policies, explains Van den Bosch.

Europe has taken full advantage of this expertise in esta-

blishing its pesticide policy.

‘Since we had already come this far in Europe, it was

time to spread our knowledge further’, says Van den Bosch.

In 2005 he saw an opportunity to branch out to China,

where economic development had taken precedence since

the 1980s, to the detriment of all else. ‘The reasoning

behind this was that everyone would benefit, including the

poorer rural population.’ But since the turn of the century,

attention to the environment has been growing. ‘Thirty-five

percent of the Chinese population lives in the urbanised

eastern part of the country. Sixty-five percent lives in the

rural countryside, which covers the largest part of China.

The contrasts between the urban and rural areas are enor-

mous. It is becoming increasingly clear to the government

that this discrepancy will only increase if the environment

continues to be ignored. The people are getting tired of

smelling foul air and watching the environment deteriora-

te.

‘At the end of August 2005 I heard that a congress on

pesticide policy was going to be held in China in mid-

September. China was about to develop a new pesticide

10.09.05 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

Wageningen,Lumen 30.10.200915:14:58 h

On 10 September 2005 Rik van

den Bosch convinced the Chinese

government.

56

Beijing,China15.09.2005

Beijing,China03.07.2008

57

< The speakers at the second internationalsymposium ‘Pesticide and EnvironmentalSafety’, where it all began.

< After almost three years of preparation, Rikvan den Bosch sealed collaboration in theproject by shaking hands with the director ofthe Chinese regulatory authority.

> Application of pesticides in China. Anexample of bad practice: the equipment isoutdated and the personal protection is ina-dequate. Barefoot and without gloves or amask, this farmer is in the process of mixingpesticides; rinsing is done in the ditch.

> Lab workers of the Chinese regulatoryagency are developing a standard test todetermine the effects of pesticides on silk-worms.

58

policy geared toward protecting the environment. I saw it

as a great opportunity to tell my Chinese colleagues about

the European pesticide policy and hopefully to convince

them to begin long-term collaboration with us.’

Van den Bosch was able to get his name onto the pro-

gramme at the last minute. ‘I signed up far too late, but was

still given ten minutes to speak.’ But was that enough to fly

across the world for? Once they agreed to stretch the time

to twenty minutes, he booked the flight. ‘I thought: I’ll buy

the ticket and then we’ll see.’

The first speaker of the day was the director of an agen-

cy under the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture, which is res-

ponsible for pesticide policy. ‘He immediately started tal-

king about their ambition to expand the pesticide policy to

include environmental criteria and how they wanted to be

inspired by the European regulations.’ It was exactly what

Van den Bosch was planning to propose to the government.

‘I thought: this is already in the bag.’

Unfortunately, the organisers had scheduled Van den

Bosch to speak at the end of the day. ‘And it is customary in

China for the VIPs to leave quite quickly. This meant that

the director would not see my presentation.’ Van den Bosch

took immediate action. Through a Chinese student who, in

accordance with Chinese custom, had been assigned to

him as an assistant for the day, he managed to arrange a

meeting. ‘I asked the student to find a way for me to talk to

the man. A little later he whispered in my ear that I was

expected at 11 o’clock.’

The meeting took place in a small backroom. ‘The man

was standing there stiff as a board in his formal suit and tie

and told me that I had five minutes to tell my story. It was

definitely a bit intimidating.’ But Van den Bosch was aware

of the importance of status in China and was not dissua-

ded. ‘I told my story and it fitted neatly with what he was

pushing for. When I arrived back in the Netherlands a week

later, a letter was waiting for me with the request to come

back and talk more about the topic and possible collabora-

tion. That day at the congress, 10 September, supply and

demand simply came together. This was the start of the

collaboration.’

But it was only the first step. ‘In China it is really very

important to gradually build up a relationship. Over the fol-

lowing two years I travelled three times a year to China to

talk about what they wanted and what we could offer.’ This

involved of course the necessary courtesy gestures. ‘We

exchanged a lot of presents’, explains Van den Bosch, poin-

ting to a miniature folding screen on the bookcase. He also

dined regularly with the director. ‘Relaxation is very impor-

tant. The Chinese really like to see you enjoying the food

and drink.’

The effort was not in vain, and Van den Bosch’s patien-

ce eventually paid off. ‘After two years the project finally

got off the ground with money from both the Dutch and the

Chinese governments. And for the past eighteen months

experts from Alterra and other Dutch institutes have been

travelling regularly to China.’ These researchers are wor-

king on adjusting the models. ‘The biggest challenge is to

translate all of the models and instruments in a scientifi-

cally sound way to fit the Chinese context. The runoff

models, for example, are based on the Dutch context, but

The chance of no, slight or a clear effect on various biological groups in the aquatic ecosystemafter exposure to 0.3 mcg/l of the insecticide Chloropyrifos, as predicted by the PERPEST model.

59

China has very different soils. So you can’t just apply the

existing models.’ There are also some different environ-

mental factors in China to be considered. ‘The silkworm,

for example, is economically extremely important to the

Chinese. The worms are cultivated on farms for the produc-

tion of silk. But these businesses are located right in the

middle of agricultural land. If the worms are cultivated

next to a field with crops, the neighbouring farmer can’t

just spray his crops. Before you know it all the worms would

be dead. So we have to look for methods that can predict

the effects of pesticides on the silkworm.’

‘At the moment we are looking carefully at the one

hundred most important pesticides in China’, explains Van

den Bosch. The objective is to explicitly involve policyma-

kers in deciding which pesticides are allowable – because

ultimately it is the government that has to decide whether a

particular agent may be used. ‘If a fish dies, the harmful-

ness of the agent is clear’, he explains. ‘But what about if

one fin doesn’t function properly? Or if the fish act strange-

ly for one day and are then fine again? The policymakers

have to establish criteria for what is, or is not, acceptable.

We provide the methods and show them the results of parti-

cular choices.’

Four years have passed now since the decisive moment

in the backroom of the congress. Van den Bosch is satisfied

with what has been achieved so far and optimistic about

the future. ‘As of this year, it is required by law in China

that the environmental impact of an agent be included as a

criterion in deciding policy’, he says with satisfaction.

‘There are currently more than 500 pesticides on the mar-

ket in China that the authorities permitted without ever

considering the potential impact on the environment.

China wants to evaluate these old pesticides as well. The

rotten ones are going to be thrown out.’

This is only possible through good collaboration, con-

cludes Van den Bosch. ‘A large group of colleagues has

combined quality scientific research with a good feel for

supporting policymaking. The only thing I did was export

our knowledge to Asia.’

no effect

slight effect

clear effect

Alterra employees at work at Sinderhoeve, the experimental field station of the Environmental Sciences Group in Renkum,the Netherlands. Harry Boonstra is applying a test agent to an experimental system in which the effect of pesticides onwater plants is tested. This is a relatively new development for Europe. In 2010 two Chinese postdoctoral researchers willbe coming to work with Alterra for a year in order to master this research method. In the foreground is Laura Buijse.

algae and higher water plants community metabolism fish insects

large shellfish small shellfish other large invertebrates Rotifers

60 61

‘We provide the facts; it’s the politicianswho draw the conclusions’

Tia Hermans, agriculture expert

on all Dutch farms, including their location and size. ‘So I

mailed André van der Zande, Director-General at the

Ministry, asking: would you like to know where, in what

Dutch regions, the EU payments end up? I could prepare

you maps of that. And the Ministry was indeed interested.’

At the same time, however, they realised that this statisti-

cal exercise might yield very controversial information.

‘Van der Zande then asked Gerrit Meester to supervise the

study on behalf of the Ministry.’

Meester was the Ministry’s ‘grand old man’, who had

been closely involved in European negotiations on farm

subsidies during his long career. In 2005, he represented

the Ministry in various international bodies, while serving

as a theoretician and strategist at the ministry itself. He

was at least as excited about the proposed study as

Hermans herself; the maps she showed him reflected the

results of his long career of EU negotiations.

Hermans recalls: ‘This was my most enjoyable project,

especially because of the monthly meetings with Gerrit

Meester and his staff. When we arrived, we would spread

out our laptops and maps on the big round table in Gerrit’s

room. He would study them for a while, sometimes looking

surprised, sometimes not. And then he’d say something

like ‘Ah, is that how it works? Interesting. Wait, let me get

so-and-so to have a look at it.’ And he’d search the corri-

dors of the Ministry to find an expert. That then usually

21.09.05 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

On 21 September 2006, the EU farm

subsidies received by Dutch farmers

were made public for the first time.

Wageningen,Droevendaal organicexperimental and training farm, 20.10.200911:44:00 h

A study by Tia Hermans into European agricultural support

payments led to lively debates in meetings at the Dutch

Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, giving her

some new insights into negotiations in Brussels. But her

report led to angry reactions from representatives of the

farming community, who felt that Alterra’s colourful maps

were threatening their livelihood.

by Korné Versluis

>On 21 September 2005, the Ministry published a

list of all support payments from Brussels to Dutch

farms, having been forced to do so after an appeal

to the Dutch Public Information Act by the Evert Vermeer

Association, the think tank of the Dutch Labour Party

(PvdA). The association wanted information about these

subsidies, as it felt they were giving European farmers

unfair advantages over poor farmers in developing coun-

tries. The publication of these figures received a lot of

attention in the media, which concluded that the payments

mostly went to large firms, like the Campina dairy company

and giant food producer Nestlé, and that – unsurprisingly –

it was the larger farms that received the largest sums.

When she read about this in the newspaper, Tia

Hermans had an idea. ‘I suddenly thought: this is a great

opportunity for us. We can link these data to our geographic

farm information system GIAB.’ The system contains data

62

Map of the Netherlands showing 2006 payments from thefirst pillar of the EU’s common agricultural policy (CAP) forthe different postal code areas, in euros per farm.

63

Tia Hermans, agriculture expert

< € 9,100

€ 9,100 - 11,350

€ 11,350 - 14,270

€ 14,270 - 20,980

> € 20,980

64

resulted in a lively discussion and a lot of anecdotes from

Meester. It gave us great new insights into international

agricultural politics.

‘Meester had wonderful stories to tell about nocturnal

negotiation rounds and the clever tricks they’d played. For

instance about milk. He told us that he and his delegation

had managed to get a proposal for payments per cow rejec-

ted and replaced by a different plan that involved pay-

ments per litre of milk. That was a lot more profitable for

the Dutch farmers, as their cows produced record amounts

of milk each.’

The EU has a whole range of subsidy schemes for far-

mers, not only for milk, but also for maize, cereals, calves,

suckling cows, ewes and so on. Hermans and her collea-

gues linked all payments to postal codes and farms, and

were thus able to produce maps showing how much was

paid per hectare in the various regions. These maps sho-

wed that, on the whole, regions dominated by specialised

dairy, veal or starch potato farming were benefiting most

from the schemes, whereas regions dominated by smaller

farms, which often also included more valuable landsca-

pes, got considerably less.

After six months of drawing maps, the study was con-

cluded and Hermans officially presented her report in a

stylish theatre in The Hague. One of those invited was

Herman Versteijlen, Director of the Directorate of Direct

Support, Market Measures and Promotion at the European

Commission. In Versteijlen’s view, the maps would only stir

up unnecessary debate about farm subsidies, which he

thought were perfectly justified. He later wrote a long letter

to a national newspaper, entitled ‘Long live the farm subsi-

dies.’ According to this high-ranking EU official, farmers

Tia Hermans and her team on a field trip at Nils Spaans’ organic farm in Broek in Waterland.Left to right: Leonne Jeurissen, Jaap van Os, Berien Elbersen, Tia Hermans, Willem Rienks,Wim Meulenkamp and Anne van Doorn.

65

were working hard for a meagre income and providing the

public with attractive green landscapes and healthy food,

so they deserved some support. In his letter, Versteijlen

called the Alterra report ‘frightening’, referring for instance

to the map showing the effects of redirecting payments to

farms situated in national landscapes and organic farms.

This would force farmers in the other areas to increase their

farm size even further, making the landscape in

Netherlands as a whole less attractive. He predicted ‘con-

crete barns housing five hundred cows.’

A farmers’ magazine published an interview with

Versteijlen, under the headline ‘It’s the farmers’ money; be

careful about redistribution.’ Versteijlen told the intervie-

wer: ‘They’re trying to siphon off subsidies, transfer them,

stimulate organic farming, give preference to valuable

areas. I’m surprised at the ease with which they’re talking

about redistributing what I consider to be money that

belongs to the farmers.’

Versteijlen was not the only one to criticise the report.

In another farmers’ magazine, Klaas Jan Osinga of the far-

mers’ organisation LTO Nederland was scornful: ‘Alterra,

which is always good at drawing colourful maps, has now

concluded that the areas where most of the farm subsidies

end up are ‘hot spots’. The underlying idea is that it would

be OK to take away some of that money. Just throw every-

thing on to a big pile and let’s start to redistribute. We’ll

draw the maps.’

The then minister of agriculture, Cees Veerman, was

not displeased. He had a problem. The World Trade

Organisation was putting pressure on Europe to reduce

production subsidies, as they led to unfair competition.

The EU needed new arguments to justify support for far-

mers, and so it wanted to grant subsidies for maintaining

the quality of the landscape, and other public tasks perfor-

med by farmers. In any case, subsidising production was

out of the question.

But there was as yet no new distribution system. The

temporary solution adopted by the Dutch government was

to allocate payments on the basis of historical rights. A

strange decision, according to Tia Hermans. ‘Why would a

farm be subsidised, just because it had received a subsidy

ten years ago? As if the world never changes.’

Agricultural organisations were not yet ready to sup-

port reform. ‘Each sector wants to hold on to its money,

which is not surprising. Family incomes in veal farming, for

instance, depend entirely on subsidies, and dairy farmers

get half of their income from subsidies.’ In addition, chan-

ges in the distribution system would also have consequen-

ces for the distribution of payments over the Netherlands.

The northern provinces, for instance, had just been told

that the government was not going to invest in a high-speed

rail link to Groningen. So a plan to redirect subsidies from

the large dairy farms in Friesland or the large arable farms

in Groningen to farmers in the west of the country might be

regarded by northerners as further proof that the govern-

ment in The Hague was not interested in the northern pro-

vinces.

Hermans’ final report made no recommendations. ‘We

could have suggested supporting organic farmers or using

the EU payments to invest in the landscape. But that’s not

our task. We provide the facts; it’s the politicians who draw

the conclusions.’ And that is precisely what the Minister

did, says Hermans. ‘Veerman used our study to start up the

debate. Our findings led him to conclude privately that we

couldn’t go on like this, and that new solutions were requi-

red. The Ministry has started follow-up studies to decide

what public goals should be stimulated by the subsidies.’

Tia Hermans, agriculture expert

Broek in Waterland,Netherlands23.09.200811:30 h

66

dinsdag 03.12.200715.00 uur

67

It was not hard for Bas Pedroli to decide what was the most

memorable day of the last ten years for him.

He immediately mentioned 23 May 2008, the day when

he, Dirk Wascher and Marion Bogers jointly organised a

seminar entitled Blueprint for Euroscape 2020, on behalf

of the LAND SCAPE EUROPE network.

by Martin Woestenburg

>‘The seminar was an event we had been preparing

for years. We were in a late nineteenth-century

hotel on the shore of Lago Maggiore in Northern

Italy, with a distinguished group of people, including the

director-general of a Dutch ministry, the director of the

German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, the

minister for spatial planning and the environment of the

Italian Piedmonte Region, and numerous scientists and

policymakers from all over Europe. All of them high-level

people professionally involved in landscape studies or poli-

cies, who had now gathered in a private capacity to discuss

the European landscape.

‘With hindsight you could say that it was this seminar

that caused us to be taken seriously in various research and

policymaking bodies. One of the questions we asked our

guests was: what is your own personal relationship with the

landscape? This yielded highly spontaneous responses,

even from the seasoned politicians. People recounted how

‘Brussels cares very little about the landscape’

Bas Pedroli, European landscape expert

they used to play in the area where they grew up, and how

the landscape that was so dear to them had changed. The

event was a great encouragement for the LANDSCAPE

EUROPE network, which intends to provide an interactive

platform for landscape researchers and policymakers. The

company got on well together, despite their different back-

grounds. That seminar resulted in contacts I’m still using

today. I think it created a solid basis for coordinating colla-

borative European landscape research. And I find we’re

able to point out the main policy problems.

‘LANDSCAPE EUROPE, and the new Euroscape

2020, are concerned with a paradox: although the

European Union is not responsible for landscape policy,

EU policies on agriculture, transport, climate and soil – all

sectoral policy areas – directly impact on the landscape.

The fact that policymakers in Brussels are not interested in

this is a shortcoming. They tend to focus on individual sec-

tors.

‘The landscape in Europe is under threat. The coastal

areas are overrun by tourists, while the original functions of

the landscape are no longer available. Why grow olives if

tourism is more profitable? And there are similar problems

in the Alps. Whereas the problems of Eastern Europe are

very different: landscapes are being abandoned as farming

them is no longer profitable. And then there’s the proble-

matic relationship between town and countryside. Europe

23.05.08 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

On 23 May 2008, a seminar laid

the foundations for a network of

landscape researchers.

Wageningen, Gaia 04.11.2009 12:15:36 h

68 69

Although a landscape typology covering the whole of Europe could never dojustice to the huge variety of landscapes, it can provide a basis for a generaltypology (as provided in this map, taken from the European LandscapeClassification LANMAP by Sander Mücher, Jan Klijn, Dirk Wascher and JoopSchaminée) which could be used as a starting point for a further characterisa-tion of one’s own regions in terms of recognisable landscapes. Such landscapesnearly always have a specific name, such as Betuwe, Vorarlberg or Alentejo;they are associated with typical local products, and people identify with them.The challenge is to find ways for EU policies to take more explicit account of thecharacteristics that make a landscape unique.

Mediterranean high mountains

Mediterranean alpine mountains

Continental lowlands

Continental hills

Continental mountains

Continental high mountains

Anatolian lowlands

Anatolian hills

Anatolian high mountains

Anatolian alpine mountains

Steppic lowlands

Steppic hills

Steppic mountains

Steppic high mountains

Urban

Flats

Water bodies

Arctic lowlands

Arctic hills

Arctic mountains

Boreal lowlands

Boreal hills

Boreal mountains

Atlantic lowlands

Atlantic hills

Atlantic mountains

Alpine lowlands

Alpine hills

Alpine mountains

Alpine high mountains

Alpine alpine mountains

Mediterranean lowlands

Mediterranean hills

Mediterranean mountains

Forest Row East Sussex,England12.09.2009

Bas Pedroli, European landscape expert

70

Lago Maggiore Italy23.05.2009

has become an urbanised society, and even farmers are

nowadays a kind of townspeople on tractors. But what hap-

pens if they disappear? Dutch people who own a second

home in Southern France usually do not feel responsible

for landscape maintenance. Such a landscape can be lost

within a generation.

‘European policies impact on this, and it’s a challenge

for us scientists to describe this as clearly as possible. It

must be obvious to anyone that arrangements to support

mountain farmers and to restructure olive plantations have

huge consequences for the landscape. But it’s not easy to

distinguish between cause and effect, or to assess land -

scape quality. What is clear is that the EU has instruments

that might provide incentives for landscape quality impro-

vement.

‘Take the Common Agricultural Policy. The first pillar

of this policy, direct payments for agricultural production,

is why farmers in Poland and Bulgaria want to join in. Their

current farm size is often eight to nine hectares, and they’d

like to grow. But what does that mean for the landscape?

The increased scale of farming operations in the

Netherlands, resulting from intensified farming practices,

has led to higher incomes for the remaining farmers,

through land consolidation schemes. But it also led to

impoverished rural populations. The EU’s common agricul-

tural policy will be reformed in 2013, and it would be inte-

resting to know what consequences this will have for the

landscape. That it will have consequences is beyond

doubt.

‘I think European policymakers need to learn from the

mistakes made at national level. It would be wrong to start

land consolidation schemes in Poland when the Dutch

experience has shown us the unfavourable long-term con-

sequences they’ve had on the landscape, and hence on

agriculture and wildlife. The European landscape is highly

diverse, which is what makes it so special. Part of this

diversity is caused by the fact that the landscapes have

often been shaped by humans, reflecting local culture.

The landscape setting for the seminar on the shore of Lago Maggiore was chosen deliberately. The sense of the evident importance of the landscape was reinforcedby the ambience and a meal featuring excellent local products.

71

This is what draws all those American and Japanese tou-

rists, this diversity of cultures and landscapes. Although

Europe is only one fifth the size of North America, the

European landscape is much more varied.

‘We are researchers, not policymakers or politicians,

and we shouldn’t try to do their job. But those people often

have no clear idea of the landscape as such, since they look

at it from a sectoral point of view. The question is how to

use research at a European scale to show policymakers

where the landscape is vulnerable. Landscape researchers

can draw up criteria that policymakers can use to predict

the consequences of agricultural or transport policies.

Different European countries tend to characterise their

landscape in different terms, which is not surprising, as a

country like Greece has a very different landscape culture

from that of Finland, for instance. Finns live in a level

country with vast forests and mires, with a cold climate.

They tend to spend more time indoors and experience the

landscape in a very different way from the Greeks, who live

outdoors most of the time, and whose land produces won-

derful crops. And the Dutch view is different again, as we

live in a dynamic landscape that has been changing for

ages under human influence.

‘Our talks on the shore of that Italian lake signalled the

start of the process of creating Euroscape 2020. The goal

of this new collaborative network is to create an organisa-

tion of researchers and policymakers who have to improve

the visibility of landscape research for Brussels officials. It

is the logical follow-up to LANDSCAPE EUROPE, which

has been mostly concerned with mapping the European

landscape values and establishing the first contacts bet-

ween researchers and policymakers. In 2007, we publis-

hed a book called Europe’s Living Landscapes, providing

descriptions of 21 regional landscapes. It gives a good idea

of the huge variety of landscapes in Europe; from the terra-

ced lands in Malta, the dehesa – combining farming with

oak forests – in southern and western Spain and the ‘chee-

se-making landscape’ in Saint Nectaire in France, to the

Flevo Polders in the Netherlands and the Východné

Karpaty area in Slovakia.

‘We don’t intend to let Euroscape 2020 grow into a

huge, unwieldy network, as that would mean spending all

our time managing it. Our main aim is to strengthen the

influence of science on policymaking. What we’re hoping

for is to be inundated with phone calls from Brussels. The

project has enabled us to create a clear international profi-

le for Alterra as regards landscape research and landscape

policy. Before, landscape research in Europe was mostly ad

hoc work. Now, we base our research on an integrated

approach, not just from the perspective of landscape archi-

tecture or landscape ecology.

‘Alterra itself has become more European, more inter-

national, than ten years ago. Although I’ve always had a

more European outlook, I now notice that it’s not unusual

to find a desk empty because a colleague is on a field trip to

China or the Ukraine. I’ve always felt that Europe is our

domestic market. The Netherlands is too small for Alterra.

But this implies that Alterra has to seek European partners

to collaborate with.

‘The Euroscape 2020 network will first concentrate on

our core business, which is supplying scientific evidence to

help answer the question what the European landscape

might look like in 2020. In fact, we ought to work our way

backwards. What is our vision of the landscape in 2020,

and what should we do to achieve this? In addition, we’re

going to talk to people like the directors-general in Brussels

about the questions they are currently asking and that we

hope to be able to answer. Ultimately, we would like to cre-

ate a taskforce to study the question how landscape value

and landscape identity can be safeguarded within the

European system, and how the paradox can be reshaped to

offer new opportunities.

‘Europe’s landscape variety and the associated cultu-

ral diversity are among the most important assets that

distinguish it from the rest of the world. The problem is that

although everyone agrees that we ought to take good care of

this, no one has the instruments to make effective policies.

Who is actually responsible for the landscape?

Policymaking is becoming more and more decentralised in

all countries, making it ever more difficult to safeguard the

local qualities that stand out at European level. We need to

find clever solutions to this problem.’

Lago MaggioreItaly 23.05.2008

Bas Pedroli, European landscape expert

72 73

For the last twenty-five years, researchers have been

warning that maize fields and grasslands contain

ever-increasing amounts of phosphate. But it took until 1

January 2010 before regulations were introduced to reduce

the amounts of manure farmers are allowed to spread on

soils high in phosphate. Phosphate researcher Oscar

Schoumans says: ‘This means we’ll have to make manure

processing more profitable.’

by Marianne Heselmans

>On 24 March 2009, Oscar Schoumans was working

as usual in his office in Wageningen. He was answe-

ring e-mails, preparing a poster on innovative manu-

re-processing methods, and finishing an article. At some

moment during this day, probably in the morning, the Dutch

Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality sent a

memorandum called Fourth Dutch Action Programme on

the Nitrate Directive (2010–2013) to the Lower Chamber

of Parliament. Nothing special, one might think. But this

memorandum included a few pages based on the results of

thirty years of phosphate research.

Both the Lower Chamber and the European Union have

since accepted the proposals made in the memorandum.

‘This is the first time something is actually being done

about the phosphate problem’, says an enthusiastic

Schoumans in his Alterra office, as he pulls some maps sho-

‘At last something is being doneabout the phosphate problem’

Oscar Schoumans, manure and minerals expert

wing phosphate-saturated soils out of a filing cabinet.

‘Twenty-five years ago we were already warning that phos-

phate was becoming a problem in areas with a manure sur-

plus. In 1986 we made the first maps showing phosphate-

saturated soils. Another few years of research showed how

much phosphate was accumulating in the soil. Although

manure legislation was soon tightened up after that, far-

mers were still allowed to spread more phosphate than their

crops needed. It’s only since 1 January 2010 that they have

to adapt the manure applications to the amount of phospha-

te already contained in the soil. If the concentration is too

high, they’re no longer allowed to spread more phosphate

than the crop can take up from the soil.’

For all these years, Alterra’s research clearly revealed

the magnitude of the problem. In the 1970s and 80s, when

farmers were still free to spread as much slurry as they wan-

ted, an annual average of between 250 and 750 kg of phos-

phate per hectare was applied on the maize fields in the

areas with a manure surplus, seven to ten times more than

the amount taken up by the crop. Although the average

annual amount fell to about 250 kg per hectare in the early

1990s, this was still much too high. A large proportion of

the manure surplus was transported to other parts of the

Netherlands or abroad, and the result was that in the late

1990s, the top 50 cm of a hectare of farmland soil contai-

ned an average of 5000 kg of phosphate, as was shown by a

24.03.09 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

On 24 March 2009, results of thirty

years of phosphate research were

presented to Parliament.

Wageningen, ’t Binnenveld03.11.200310:37:52 h

74

Map of phosphate-saturated areas in the Netherlands.

75

0 - 25

25 - 50

50 - 75

> 75

nature reserves

Phosphate-saturated soils, in percentages

Oscar Schoumans, manure and minerals expert

76

national soil sample survey. The average could even be as

high as 10,000 kg in heavily fertilised fields.

Fortunately, eighty percent of the phosphate binds to

iron and aluminium particles in the soil, so no more than

twenty percent can leach to the groundwater and surface

water. But with 2000 to 10,000 kg of available phosphate

in the topsoil, twenty percent is still a huge amount. ‘The

effects were observed in the early 1980s’, explains

Schoumans, ‘as the water in ponds, ditches and lakes near

heavily fertilised fields was green with duckweed and algae,

suffocating the other species.’

Although this was partly caused by phosphates from

household detergents released into surface waters, and dis-

charges from sewage treatment plants, the detergent

industry has greatly reduced phosphate contents and sewa-

ge treatment techniques have been greatly improved, so a

growing percentage of eutrophication is due to farming.

After the first warnings by environmentalists in the

1980s, the Ministry commissioned studies to assess what

legislation could effectively reduce phosphate inputs. But

as Schoumans remembers, none of the proposed measures

was economically feasible. If the amounts of manure that

farmers were allowed to spread were drastically curtailed,

the amounts of slurry to be disposed of would soar, resulting

in high disposal costs. This would drive many pig farmers to

bankruptcy. ‘The Ministry therefore decided to reduce

manure spreading gradually’, which explains why Dutch

legislation on manures and fertilisers is still rather lenient.

The fourth Action Programme also intends to gradually tigh-

ten up regulations, so that farmers will ultimately be allo-

wed to spread very little phosphate on the most phosphate-

saturated lands.

Asked about his own role in this process, Schoumans

feels that ‘lobbying’ is not the right word. ‘It’s not our task to

lobby. What Alterra is good at is estimating the consequen-

ces of certain policy measures. It’s then up to the politicians

to weigh up the costs – in this case to pig farmers – and the

benefits to nature. One aspect that caused delays in adop-

ting stricter regulations is of course that it is easy to calcula-

te the costs to pig farmers, but very hard to put a price on the

benefits of nature to society. So we were helped by the stric-

ter European guidelines and the European Commission’s

pressure on the Netherlands to reduce nutrient emissions.’

Even with this stricter manure policy, however, it will

take dozens of years before phosphate stops leaching from

maize fields and grasslands in the wet areas with shallow

groundwater, Schoumans expects. But this does not mean

that it will also take that long before the Moor frog, Water

lobelia and Small red damselfly return to Dutch waters.

Fairly quick results can be obtained using technologies that

involve changing flow patterns or water tables, constructing

helophyte filters or getting brooks to meander again. ‘But at

last now something is being done about the emissions of

phosphate to the environment, taking into account the

actual phosphate levels in soils’, says Schoumans.

This does not, however, solve the pig farmers’ problem.

As of 2010, livestock farmers will be faced with rising

manure surpluses, which will continue to grow as phospha-

te standards become ever stricter. The Ministry of

Agriculture has therefore asked Schoumans to lead a manu-

re innovation project in which experts from various depart-

ments of Wageningen University and Research Centre will

try to find solutions to the problem of the manure surplus. It

is not the first time that Wageningen researchers have loo-

77

ked into this problem, but, says Schoumans, what is new is

the integrated approach, involving various disciplines as

well as industry and the farmers themselves. ‘It used to be

that each individual researcher studied part of the problem,

whereas now we’re looking at the overall picture. We’ll also

be studying the whole phosphate cycle, from phosphate

imports from other countries for fodder to recovering phos-

phate from manure and phosphate sales.’

Alterra is also studying methods to replace mineral fer-

tilisers and to recover phosphate from manure. Agro-system

experts from Plant Research International (PRI) and

Wageningen UR Livestock Research are assessing how

farms can use phosphate most efficiently, and how solid

manure components can best be separated from the urine

component and then processed. In addition, livestock rese-

archers are examining whether phosphate levels in fodder

can be reduced, and agrotechnologists at the

Agrotechnology and Food Sciences Group (AFSG) are trying

to find ways to produce better phosphate fodder out of raw

material. The project also involves farmers, the slurry pro-

cessing industry, the phosphate industry and the fodder

industry.

Schoumans hopes that farmers will come to regard

manure as a product that can earn them a profit. ‘This colla-

borative project involves so much expertise that it must be

possible to make manure processing cost-effective. Just

incinerating it to phosphate-rich ashes is such a waste. In a

hundred years’ time, it’ll be much harder to mine phosphate

Oscar Schoumans, manure and minerals expert

than it is now, making it much more expensive as a raw

material for fodder or mineral fertiliser. That’s why we’re

collaborating with the slurry processing and phosphate

industries to see if phosphate can be extracted from manure

in such a way that livestock farmers can make a profit from

it.’

Making a profit from manure is a long-term goal. In the

short term, the parties participating in the project will try to

get relatively well-developed technologies for manure sepa-

ration, low-phosphate fodder and more efficient manure

incineration accepted by farmers, by organising demonstra-

tions and open days at experimental and model farms. The

project leader is not discouraged by the fact that previous

attempts to sell pig manure processing systems – like the

government-funded Promest project – have failed. ‘There is

now a greater sense of urgency. And techniques have impro-

ved.’

Schoumans and the Executive Board of Wageningen

University have had two talks with the Minister of

Agriculture, Gerda Verburg, and the manure innovation pro-

ject was discussed on both occasions. ‘The talks were very

positive. The first time we brainstormed about solving the

manure problem without wiping out the Dutch intensive

livestock sector, which was a precondition imposed by the

Ministry. The second time we went through the project pro-

posal together. Isn’t it wonderful that we can contribute

directly to solving the Dutch manure problem and at the

same time help create new natural habitats?’

Ecological recovery of lakes and pools requires phosphate concentrations of the order of 0.05 to 0.08 mg/litre. Little is known aboutthe progress of recovery in watercourses in rural areas. This is currently being researched.

Vreedepeel,Netherlands07.08.2003

input 1970 1986 1995 2000 2005

concentrates 38 78 81 69 59

P in fodder 21 16 7 5 7

roughage 1 2 3 3 3

mineral fertiliser 47 37 27 27 21

other manures 4 5 6 5 6

total input 111 138 124 109 96

output 1970 1986 1995 2000 2005

animal products 16 26 23 23 29

vegetable products 10 16 7 5 7

animal manure - 0 5 6 7

total output 26 41 55 55 60

surplus 85 97 69 54 36

total output 111 138 124 109 96

Phosphorus balance of Dutch agriculture, in millions of kg per hectare (1970–2005). A large propor-tion of the surplus ends up being spread on farmland. The magnitude of the surplus can be monito-red by showing the phosphate balance of Dutch agriculture over time. The surplus peaked in 1985,and has fallen since. (Source: Statistics Netherlands)

7978

Vegetation ecologist Joop Schaminée always likes to record

his observations in detail, in notebooks, databases, journal

articles, and preferably in lavishly illustrated books. To

date, he has published about 25 books, including a series

of books on vegetation and wildlife of European significan-

ce in the Netherlands, which was recently completed.

by Astrid Smit

>The three hefty tomes, one on the higher parts of

the Netherlands, one on the low-lying parts and one

on coastal areas, are the most recent additions to

the series of books on ‘Natura 2000’ in the Netherlands.

Together, these handsome books describe the 165 natural

habitat sites that have been given special protection status

by the European Union, with their locations, the species

and communities occurring in them and their legal status.

‘The series is primarily intended for policymakers, property

developers and conservationists’, says Schaminée, who co-

wrote the books with his colleague John Janssen and other

experts. ‘But actually, we wanted to show everyone that the

Netherlands is an ecologically valuable country.’

Schaminée has been fascinated by the world of plants

and animals ever since he was a child, when he turned one

of the rooms in his parent’s home into a natural history

museum. For a few cents, friends and neighbours could

come and look at his collection of mammoth teeth, butter-

‘Natura 2000 is a blessing for wildlife’

Joop Schaminée, vegetation ecologist

flies and pressed plants. ‘My fascination with nature devel-

oped from within’, remembers Schaminée. ‘My parents

had no time for plants and animals. They were too busy

working in the local pub my father owned in a small village

in the south-eastern province of Limburg.’

When Schaminée started to study biology at Nijmegen

University, he was immediately captivated by the lectures

given by the famous Dutch plant sociologist Victor

Westhoff. ‘When he showed us fabulous slides of humid

oak forests in Ireland, I knew I wanted to become a vegeta-

tion scientist.’ A few years later, Westhoff sent him to

France, to do a PhD research project on subalpine heath

communities in the Massif Central. ‘Westhoff and I travel-

led extensively together. We shared the same interest in

plant life, the scientia amabilis, and were both fascinated

by the beauty of nature around us. He treated me as a kind

of adopted son, and passed on large parts of his huge libra-

ry to me, long before his death in 2001. He wanted me to

safeguard his intellectual legacy.’

And that is what Schaminée has been doing with great

dedication ever since, especially since being appointed to

the Westhoff chair in Wageningen and Nijmegen in 2006,

in addition to his work for Alterra. Together with Anton

Stortelder, Eddy Weeda and Victor Westhoff, he published

a five-part series of books on the vegetation of the

Netherlands in the late 1990s. That series, which took ten

28.05.09 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

On 28 May 2009, Schaminée

presented the final volumes of his

series of books on Dutch wildlife of

European significance.

Wageningen, Lumen Ecological garden15.10.200911:29:18 h

8180

years of hard work to complete, defines and documents in

detail the 320 plant communities in the Netherlands, as

well as the species they include, their ecology and manage-

ment. A few years later, Schaminée collaborated once

more with Weeda and others to publish a four-part atlas of

Dutch plant communities, using information from the

National Vegetation Databank, which includes over

500,000 vegetation assessments collected over the past

80 years. ‘The two series together have become a kind of

encyclopaedia for policymakers’, says Schaminée, ‘provi-

ding a solid scientific basis for nature conservation policy,

which is very much based on plant communities.’

Soon after these publications, the Dutch Ministry of

Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality commissioned

Schaminée to prepare a Dutch translation of the EU’s

Habitats Directive that would be intelligible for policy -

makers. The Habitats Directive is intended to ensure

protection of a network of natural habitat sites harbouring

specific plant and animal communities. The Directive

distinguishes over two hundred habitat types, ranging from

‘old acidophilus oak woods on sandy plains’ to ‘lowland hay

meadows’. ‘The Ministry asked us to explain exactly what

was meant by each of these habitat types, as the docu-

ments describing them were so full of scientific jargon that

they were of no use to them.’ This resulted in a book on

European habitat types in the Netherlands.

It was then only a small step to a description of all 165

Natura 2000 sites in the Netherlands, as they have been

designated on the basis of the Habitats Directive – on

which Schaminée was by now an expert – and the Birds

Directive, which protects sites with endangered bird spe-

cies. In fact, Schaminée was responsible for the designa-

tion of quite a number of these sites, as he is one of the

independent experts of the European Topic Centre on

Nature Conservation, which has been charged with imple-

menting the site selection. ‘The Dutch government had

initially proposed 78 sites. But I, and some of the other

experts, made it clear that this was not enough. In the end,

over 140 sites were designated under the Habitats

Directive’, he says with some satisfaction. For a while, he

was afraid that Alterra’s most important client, the Ministry

of Agriculture, would not be pleased with this, as it meant a

considerable duty of care for them, but he need not have

worried, as he was actually asked to help designate and

delineate the sites.

Most of the Dutch Natura 2000 sites are situated

within the National Ecological Network, a network of inter-

connected natural areas being developed since 1990.

‘That’s not entirely a coincidence’, says Schaminée, ‘as the

Network was carefully designed. But the main difference is

that the Natura 2000 sites have a more protected status.

The EU checks to see whether the Netherlands is indeed

taking good care of these sites, based on strict conserva-

tion rules. So Natura 2000 is definitely a blessing for wild-

life.’

The knowledge incorporated in the Natura 2000

books, which were presented on 28 May 2009, helps

policymakers, property developers and site managers to

avoid wasting time, money and effort, claims Schaminée.

If any of them want to start construction works somewhere,

they can check the value of the adjoining wildlife areas

beforehand, rather than after work has started. However,

Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

< Alterra also advises other EU countriesabout Natura 2000. Working visits to suchcountries usually involve workshops andone or more field trips. Here, researchersdiscuss a steppe landscape near Sibiu, inTransylvania.

> Field trip to Kruger National Park, aspart of the development of the SynBioSysKruger information system. The north ofthe park has baobab trees (Adansonia digitata), with their huge trunks, whoseunusual appearance, according to a legendof the local San people, resulted from theirbeing flung down to earth by the gods as apunishment, where they landed upside-down.

Sibiu, Romania28.04.2006

Kruger National Park South Africa17.02.2005

82 83

< Field trip by the Dutch plantsociology study group to theBemelerberg reserve in SouthernLimburg. The group organisesabout 40 field trips a year, duringwhich plant sociologists visit sitesto assess the state of the vegeta-tion and give advice on the bestmanagement approach. To theright of Joop Schaminée is EddyWeeda, another Alterra vegetationexpert.

> On 2 October 2009,Schaminée and colleagues visitedthe De Prunje habitat develop-ment project and found a fewsites with the highly endangeredSea barley association. Later thatday they found that the associa-tion had actually disappearedfrom its ‘locus classicus’ nearViane, making the discovery evenmore valuable.

Joop Schaminée, vegetation ecologist

he would also like the books to be read by a wider audience,

to make them aware of the unique natural habitats in the

Netherlands. ‘Most Dutch people underestimate the value

of our wildlife. Although the natural sites are smaller than

in other countries, these small patches do have great value

for European wildlife. The position of the Netherlands

within a delta of rivers in the northwest European lowlands

has resulted in an incredibly high, small-scale diversity.

And where most of the delta habitats in the world have

been destroyed, the delta nature of the Netherlands is rela-

tively well protected.’

According to Schaminée, we have conservationists to

thank for the fact that these natural delta habitats have

been preserved. ‘There’s hardly a country in Europe with

such extensive dune areas, and the same goes for salt

marshes. All of these are highly valuable in terms of flora

and fauna. Just think of the thousands of birds that come

here to fatten up in spring and autumn.’

The books take a positive approach, without lamenting

the loss of so many treasures or the threats to natural habi-

tats. ‘That’s less urgent now’, says Schaminée, ‘as Dutch

wildlife is actually doing quite well. We have made great

progress in recent decades. The quality of surface waters

has improved a lot, which meant that stoneworts have

returned. Concentrations of sulphur and nitrogen in the air

have been reduced, allowing lichens to grow on trees once

more. We’ve got White-tailed eagles breeding in the

Oostvaardersplassen reserve, and Cranes in the

Fochteloërveen reserve. That doesn’t mean we’re all done,

however. We still have problems with nitrogen deposition

from farming, traffic and industry, and natural habitats

have to compete for the scarce space. But the Netherlands

has done a lot to restore natural habitats.’

Schaminée takes out his notebook with vegetation

assessments, and points at entries for early October 2009,

when he and some colleagues visited the De Prunje site,

part of a large habitat development project in the province

of Zeeland. ‘This is where we first saw the very rare

Hordeum marinum, or Sea barley. It was a sensational find:

not only had this species not been recorded at this site

before, but it was actually growing in the plant community

that’s named after it, which is among the rarest in the

country. This means that conditions in this newly created

nature reserve are now so good that rare species feel at

home in it. Such finds definitely make me very happy.’

Bemelerberg Southern Limburg, Netherlands09.06.200912:00 h

84

Wageningen,Gaia 21.10.200914:22:20 h

85

Alterra and games – an unlikely combination at first

glance. But Alterra is in fact one of the leading research

institutes in Europe in an international network of

organisations working on digital tools or games for policy

evaluations. These computer programs bring science and

policy together. Jan Erik Wien and his colleagues are

increasingly asked to create this kind of a tool, which helps

people talk about certain measures, or demonstrates the

effects of a policy.

by Martin Woestenburg

>As project leader, Wien has already worked on

about twenty of these policy evaluation tools, each

of which is a different program adapted to the

users’ needs. NitroGenius, for example, is a computer

game in which farmers, policymakers, scientists and

others involved with the nitrogen issue can gain insight into

various aspects, such as how a farm’s nitrogen emissions

could be reduced. EURuralis is a discussion support

system in which players can ‘virtually’ set European policy

and look at what effects these policies would have on

demography, ecology, economy, policy, technology and cli-

mate change. The tool explains the results, invites discus-

sion and supports in this way the interaction between poli-

cy and science. And in the European Seamless project, a

flexible framework has been developed with which models

‘It’s all about sharing knowledge in networks of scientists and non-scientists’

Jan Erik Wien, geo-information scientist

can be coupled relatively quickly and new agriculture poli-

cy options can be calculated. Through the development of

this framework, policy questions can be answered more

rapidly.

The job of Wien and his colleagues is to make the

scientific information and knowledge stored in various

databases and models accessible in a user-friendly way.

This means that databases, models and indicators are lin-

ked in such a way that policymakers gain insight into and

answers to complex, integrated questions. The world

encountered by players of NitroGenius, for example, is a

simplified version based on the very complex nitrogen

cycle. ‘If you simplify models, they calculate faster’,

explains Wien. ‘This was crucial for NitroGenius because

players don’t want to wait very long to see the effects of

their actions. For EURuralis we ‘pre-packaged’ all the

results of the model calculations.’ This means that the

policy buttons that the users can push in the program lead

to various future scenarios, the results of which were calcu-

lated, analysed and described beforehand. ‘In Seamless,

however, calculations are performed with complex, large

models. This tool is intended for use by modellers and

model users.’

Alterra is now a key player in this type of mostly

European-focused, policy-supporting tools. Wien explains:

‘On 1 November 2009, Alterra became coordinator of LIAI-

01.11.09 Made by Alterra, 2000-2010

On 1 November 2009 Alterra

became coordinator of LIAISE.

86

SE, the Network of Excellence Linking Impact Assessment

Instrument to Sustainability Expertise, a European net-

work of fifteen research institutes and universities in nine

countries. This is the culmination of our work over the past

ten years. We coordinate this network and are thus a key

player in the area of ICT tools for policy evaluation.

Through this role we are also asked more readily to partici-

pate in other projects.’

Wien has worked on digital tools for policy evaluation

since he began at Alterra. He believes Alterra achieved its

key position in Europe thanks to the decision made in

2000 to invest in the development of ICT. ‘It is unique in

Europe that a research institute like Alterra has been wor-

king for years with a team of professional geo-information

scientists. There are fifteen of us now working on the deve-

lopment of the tools, and we keep a close eye on trends in

both the research and the ICT fields.’

87

A lot has changed in the past ten years – not surprising

at a time in which computers are obsolete by the time they-

’ve been unpacked and software programs require almost

daily updates. ‘The ICT component is becoming increasin-

gly important in the research process’, suggests Wien.

‘People have also become more used to ICT. We used to all

use paper maps, but now you look up what you need on

Google Maps and you end up with a whole bunch of additio-

nal information as well.’

The information and communication technology that

Wien and his colleagues design has become more complex

and important in two ways: appearance and content. Game

users have become more demanding with respect to appe-

arance and user friendliness; what is called user interface

in ICT terms. ‘The first policy evaluation model was applied

by researchers themselves, on their own computer. Now

users all want their own access via internet. The user inter-

face used to be a thin layer around a model, now it consists

A SEAMLESS project meeting in Prague.

Screen shots of the SEAMLESS Integrated Framework. Above: visualisation of the effects of policy in a map of Europe.Below: comparison of various indicators and policy variations in a spiderdiagram.

Prague,Czech Republic17.05.2007

88 89

Jan Erik Wien, geo-information scientist

of various interactive applications for the different users.’

Interaction has thus become increasingly important.

People want to see the results of their actions immediately

on their screens, and this means that Wien and his collea-

gues have to make sure that these actions are quickly visi-

ble. Moreover, this has to look very slick, because people

have become spoilt in the current world of gaming. ‘We hire

special interaction and interface designers to satisfy the

users’ high expectations.’

‘The information in games is also more complicated

nowadays’, explains Wien. Many different databases and

models are often coupled in the tools, which means that

software developers have to get computer programs to talk

to each other. This creates technical problems, if the pro-

gramming languages are not compatible, but also seman-

tic problems, for example if two models use different

names for the same variable.

It is in this combining and integration of various

models that Alterra has played a leading role in recent

years. ‘The Open Modelling Interface is a standard devel-

oped in the water sector to technically couple models’,

explains Wien. ‘We have played a major role in expanding

this standard to the environmental sciences and applying it

in various European projects.’ Wien believes this is why

Alterra was granted the coordinating role within LIAISE.

The current emphasis on ICT has significantly chan-

ged Wien’s work in the past ten years. ‘We used to play a

more supportive role, in which we created user interfaces

that functioned like a veneer over a model, for example.

Now we have a much more stimulating, integrating and

mediating role between the research institute and geo-

information.’

Wien himself is hardly ever at his computer writing

software any more. He spends most of his time making sure

that everyone involved with the tools gives their input: the

policymaker and the user, the scientist and the information

supplier, the model builder, the interaction designer and

the designer of the user interface, and in the midst of all

this the geo-information scientist from Alterra. ‘It is much

more of an iterative development process, in which you

work with prototypes and feedback.’

Wien expects to see more of this in the future. ‘Even

more non-scientists will be involved in the development of

our products. Open innovation is the new trend. Philips,

together with other companies, for example, had consu-

mers involved in a project called ‘Living Tomorrow’, so that

the company could use the feedback to improve their pro-

ducts. As a research institute, we too have to move in this

direction. The old triangle of knowledge transfer –

research, education and guidance – no longer exists. ‘Now

it’s all about sharing knowledge in networks of scientists

and non-scientists.’

Wien expects ICT people to play a leading role in the

development of knowledge-based systems that provide

quick, cheap and adequate answers to questions posed by

policymakers, farmers and nature conservationists about

policy for specific sectors. ‘The digital component is also

very important. Kodak was the global leader in photogra-

phy, but completely missed the digital revolution. This

could also happen to a research institute like Alterra.

That’s why you have to know what the trends are and look

carefully at what the market wants. People want to share

information faster and they want answers to their

questions. With good ICT you can supply this faster and

cheaper.’

It pays to invest in ICT, Wien believes. ‘The tricky thing

is that developments in ICT are very high paced. So you

need a group of people who enjoy conducting research

from an ICT perspective. New trends include mobile know-

ledge-based systems, in combination with positioning,

such as mobile telephones that access information about

your current location or precision agriculture in which far-

mers fertilise or spray based on satellite images, digital

maps and models.’

The big problem with ICT is that it is largely invisible.

Wien: ‘People often can’t see what kind of a tool is hidden

underneath. This only becomes clear when the application

is viewed on a computer screen. The user interface is nor-

mally all they see. Even though creating this kind of inter-

face is only a very small part of a knowledge-based system,

it is what everyone talks about. But through the iterative

development process and intensive interaction with users,

we have been able to make this more apparent.’

The components of the LIAISE Network of Excellence(NoE); the figure shows how the development of impactassessment (IA) tools contributes to bringing togetherthe fragmented research field and the practical applica-tion of the instruments.

> Chairman of the Executive Board Aalt Dijkhuizen signsthe LIAISE contract in the presence of Alterra directorKees Slingerland and Jan Erik Wien. This contract is theGrant Agreement for a European FP7 project (FP7stands for Seventh Framework Programme).

Improved use of IA Tools

IA Practice

Training

Learning

Dissermination

Test cases

Shared Toolbox

Toolbox front-office

Improved IA Tools

Toolbox back-office

Post-project durability

Supply of IA Tools

Inside NoE

- IA Tools

- IA Methods

- IA Background knowledge

- Other relevant background

knowledge

Outside NoE

- IA Tools

- IA Methods

- IA Background knowledge

- Other relevant background

knowledge

Demand for tools

Demand for IA Tools

Role IA in policy process IA for SD challenges

Wageningen, Head Office27.11.200917:30 h

L

I

I

A

ESh

ared

Res

earc

h Ag

enda

Shared Research Agenda

Shared Research Agenda

Shar

ed R

esea

rch Ag

enda

S

Shared Research Agenda

Shared Research Agenda

90

Made by Alterra

Ten years of research on the green living environment by Alterra

Wageningen UR, published to mark the tenth anniversary of Alterra.

© 2010, Alterra Wageningen UR

Interviews

Marianne Heselmans

Laurien Holtjer

Leo Klep

Maartje Kouwen

Astrid Smit

Korné Versluis

Martin Woestenburg

Compilation and editing

Bert Jansen, Alterra Wageningen UR

Korné Versluis, Bureau Bint, Wageningen

Yvonne de Hilster, Bureau Bint, Wageningen

Sara van Otterloo-Butler, English Language Editing, Wageningen

Translation

Joy Burrough-Boenisch

Catharina de Kat-Reynen

Jan Klerkx

Sara van Otterloo-Butler

Diane Schaap

Picture research

Loek Kemming, Office for Design, Laag-Keppel

Portrait photos

Guy Ackermans (except Agnes van den Berg)

Theo Tangelder (Agnes van den Berg)

Photos

Van Bergen Kolpa Architecten

Marion Bogers

Rik van den Bosch

Malcom Demies

Luc Enting

Jelger Herder

Marjan Looman

Peter van der Meer

MTS Hoogterp

Marjel Neefjes

Rik Olde Loohuis

Bas Pedroli

Annejet Rümke

Shutterstock

Theo Tangelder

Martin Woestenburg

Ronald van Zon

Graphic design

Loek Kemming, Noudi Spönhoff, Office for Design, Laag-Keppel

Photo editing

Jos Goldewijk, Dfi, Doetinchem