● Following the election results, Caroline van der Plas, leader of the Dutch Farmer-Citizen Movement, addresses supporters from the stage. Photo: NUFor over six months, Dutch farmers have been protesting against nitrogen reduction policies. Amid this unrest, the Farmer-Citizen Movement (BoerBurgerBeweging, or BBB)—widely seen as a pro-farmer party—emerged as a dark horse in the Netherlands’ March regional elections. Founded just four years ago, the BBB not only captured nearly 20% of the vote but also secured 17 seats in the Senate, instantly becoming its largest party. Yet, is this electoral triumph truly a victory for Dutch farmers and agriculture? To find out, we must examine the nitrogen reduction policy that ignited nationwide protests.
I. Are cows really to blame for nitrogen emissions?
The origins of this nitrogen reduction policy lie in the EU’s Natura 2000 programme for protecting natural reserves. Scientists argue that excessive nitrogenous gases (nitrogen oxides and ammonia) in the atmosphere return to the soil, causing nitrogen deposition, which in turn triggers various ecological disasters. The Netherlands, meanwhile, records the highest nitrogen emissions in Europe.
According to calculations by the RIVM (the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment), 41% of this deposition stems from agricultural emissions. Consequently, when the Dutch government mandated a 70% cut in nitrogen emissions by 2030 last year to protect the country’s fragile protected areas, agriculture naturally became the target of regulation: the policy plans to reduce livestock numbers by 30%, addressing the affected farms through government buyouts and forced closures.
It is hardly surprising that Dutch farmers believe this policy is specifically “targeted” at them: under previous greenhouse gas accounting, Dutch agriculture’s emissions accounted for less than 10% of the national total. Yet, when the methodology changed, agriculture was suddenly cast as the “main culprit”.
● RIVM chart showing the distribution of nitrogen emissions. Emissions are primarily calculated for ammonia (square icons) and nitrogen oxides (circular icons). The top five corporate emitters are Tata Steel, Schiphol Airport, Dow Chemical, Chemelot, and Shell.
That said, nitrogen emissions from the Dutch livestock industry have long been a serious issue. If we look closer at the sources of these emissions, the story becomes more complex.
“Cow dung and urine mix to form ammonia; we’re living in a sky thick with manure.” Last year, two well-known Dutch comedians parodied Leonard Cohen’s famous “Hallelujah” with their comedic track “Alle koeien” (All the Cows), satirising the government’s tendency to blame all nitrogen emissions on livestock manure.
In reality, animal digestion and excretion are entirely normal physiological processes. The true problem lies in excessively high stocking densities. According to 2021 statistics, the Netherlands’ 40,000-square-kilometre landmass (roughly equivalent to six and a half Shanghai metropolises) houses 3.8 million cattle, 11.4 million pigs, and nearly 100 million chickens—four times the EU average density.
The large-scale import of soy feed and the nitrogen fertilisers required to grow fodder are the very prerequisites that make high-density intensive farming possible. The Netherlands is the world’s sixth-largest soybean importer, bringing in 4.16 million tonnes worth $1.96 billion from Brazil, the US, Canada, and others in 2021. Converted to cultivation area, this is equivalent to importing food yields from land nine times the size of the Netherlands’ own agricultural area, exceeding its total landmass.
Total livestock numbers in Dutch farming in 2021Total value and sources of Dutch soybean imports in 2021. By comparison, China’s soybean import value during the same period was 27.3 times that of the Netherlands.
Those encouraging these feed and fertiliser imports are precisely the Dutch government (which has long pursued an agricultural expansion strategy), the multinational agribusiness giant Cargill, and Rabobank, which provides financial backing to Cargill and others while promoting large-scale farming. If we are to trace the true sources of nitrogen emissions, these entities would be far harder to exonerate than the dairy cows in the barns.
II. Who is driving intensive farming?
“Together for a better world.” This is the manufactured promise behind Rabobank’s official slogan. The reality, however, is that the bank is the primary instigator behind a host of environmental problems, including the nitrogen crisis, and stands as the foremost beneficiary of the large-scale intensification of Dutch livestock farming. The expansionist model encouraged by Rabobank is what Professor Jan Douwe van der Ploeg—former head of sociology at Wageningen University and author of *The New Peasant Question*—calls “entrepreneurial agriculture”.
In his foreword to *The New Peasant Question*, Professor Ye Jingzhong of China Agricultural University summarises its characteristics: “…Because expansion relies so heavily on credit, entrepreneurial agriculture tends to carry high levels of debt. This financial pressure then translates into a drive to accelerate production, squeezing every available plot of land to generate the highest possible return (profit) to cover interest payments and repay the principal.”
The scaling-up of Dutch livestock farms serves as a telling case in point: between 2000 and 2021, average farm size grew by between 1 and 2.3 times, and Rabobank’s profits quadrupled in the process. Yet the farms themselves failed to secure their share of the promised “economies of scale”. Why?
●From top to bottom: average livestock stock of pigs, dairy cows and laying hens on Dutch farms (in thousands), alongside Rabobank’s credit returns. Chart source: Greenpeace NetherlandsThe explanation is straightforward: bank lending is tied to ever-rising chemical inputs and costly technological investments geared towards large-scale operations, such as heavy machinery, computers, and agricultural robots. The ones lining their pockets are the suppliers of feed, fertilisers, veterinary medicines, and farm machinery, along with slaughterhouses, meat and dairy processors, and the cooperative banks that finance the entire supply chain. The outlook for farmers themselves is far less rosy. They are saddled with sky-high input costs yet lack the bargaining power to resist the rock-bottom prices demanded by supermarkets and retailers. In 2016, over 44% of Dutch farmers lived below the low-income threshold; among dairy farmers, the figure reached 56%. The poverty crisis is especially acute on pig farms, which carry an average debt of €1.8 million.
Under last year’s nitrogen reduction policy, the Dutch government will allocate nearly €750 million in compensation to close and buy out farms. While these funds will undoubtedly help some farmers clear their debts, they will also flow straight into the coffers of Rabobank. As the largest financier of industrial-scale farming, the bank emerges from the nitrogen crisis virtually unscathed, whereas farmers’ livelihoods, biodiversity, and public finances bear the heavy toll of its negative externalities.
III. What is the way forward for Dutch agriculture?
● This March, supporters of agroecology also organised a protest march. The Dutch slogan at the centre reads, “More farmers, less CO2.”Professor van der Ploeg told Foodthink: “We are currently caught in a double vacuum. The first is a political vacuum: no party with the courage and vision has yet put forward a workable proposal. The second is a socio-technical vacuum: there is a lack of a practical solution that could be accepted by all stakeholders.” Solutions are not entirely absent. Indeed, he believes that small-scale farming represents a viable path forward amid the current environmental crisis. Agroecology, which champions small-scale farming and emphasises the harmonious development of agriculture, nature, and society, has likewise been shown—through years of exploration and research—to offer remedies for the twin crises facing both the farming sector and the environment today.
Even within the Netherlands, alongside intensive systems that rely heavily on markets and external inputs, a number of small farms have transitioned to ecological practices. By forgoing chemical fertilisers, pesticides, and herbicides, and rebuilding nutrient and energy cycles through free-range livestock management, these farms are better able to work in harmony with natural processes.
Click the image to read ▼
Professor van der Ploeg also points out that in the Netherlands, where public discourse is dominated by agribusiness and large-scale farming, vested interests will flatly reject sustainable transition plans that increase smallholders’ production autonomy. Instead, they will continue to push high-cost technological solutions, drawing farmers, the government, and society further into their “technological trap”. This may explain why the left-wing Animal Party, which pledged to tax Rabobank to subsidise sustainable agriculture, failed to secure the backing of most farming voters. It also accounts for why the organisations behind the Green Farmers Plan: Ten Joint Principles continue to have such a muted voice in public debate.
01 Achieve fair pricing through public fiscal interventions, such as levying taxes on pollution.02 A reasonable and comprehensive pricing mechanism that fully accounts for farmers’ interests and environmental value.03 Promote circular agriculture that integrates crop production and livestock rearing, reducing reliance on external fertiliser inputs.04 Ensure farmers have full participation in decision-making and action.05 The government and wider society should provide comprehensive support for farmers’ transition.06 The government must lead by example, establishing mechanisms to encourage ecological farming, promoting healthy diets, and preventing corporate greenwashing.07 Advance localised short food supply chains.08 Land policy must serve sustainable agriculture.09 Embed nature-inclusive principles into agricultural education, encourage farmers to participate in transition research, and compensate those who share knowledge and experience.10 Prioritise legislative fairness, ensuring that laws and regulations are equitable, appropriate, and incentivising.Has the pro-farmer party BBB truly grasped the severity of the nitrogen emissions crisis? Doubtful. Party leader Carola van der Plas has repeatedly insisted that the nitrogen reduction policy is a self-imposed burden by the Dutch government, not a direct mandate from the European Union. In her view, the Netherlands need only comply with EU legislation like any other member state, with no need for extra measures to cut nitrogen. With the election now settled, she has moved quickly to open talks with the EU, aiming to carve out more leeway for Dutch livestock farmers.
Yet what is crushing Dutch farmers is not merely a top-down, one-size-fits-all environmental policy, but a production system that drives farmers into bankruptcy while financial interests and upstream suppliers reap the rewards. The BBB, which proudly champions high-efficiency farming and the export of premium produce, is scarcely inclined to overhaul such an unsustainable model.
● Some observers note that the BBB’s success stems from drawing in right-wing voters who previously backed the populist Forum for Democracy (FvD). In 2019, the FvD—which proved adept at tapping into anti-immigration and anti-Muslim sentiment—swept from zero to twelve seats in the Senate, only to quickly lose ground amid internal strife and a failure to address pressing practical issues. Pictured: FvD leader Thierry Baudet. Photo: EPAHow will the BBB’s rise reshape Dutch politics? And what lies ahead for nitrogen reduction policy? For now, it remains unclear. One thing, however, is certain: resolving the nitrogen crisis demands a systemic approach. The widespread social and political backlash underscores the intricate ties between farming and environmental stewardship—a relationship that can never be untangled through blunt, one-size-fits-all calculations. Any attempt to oversimplify, pit sides against each other, or sidestep the core issues will only deepen the crisis. Professor van der Ploeg has added that it is time to bring small-scale farming back to centre stage, allowing its ecological potential to be fully realised. Yet even in Europe, where environmental awareness is at its peak, the complex interplay between agriculture and ecology remains a widening chasm separating urban dwellers from farmers, and scholars from practitioners.
Unless the public comes to a shared recognition of the inherent unsustainability of today’s farming model, meaningful political progress will remain out of reach, paving the way for conservative forces like the BBB to return to the political fore.
Notes and Referenceshttps://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2023/03/brussels-or-the-hague-van-der-plas-and-timmermans-to-meet/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/16/world/europe/netherlands-elections-farmers-emissions.html
