Category Archives: Education

Education

Boeren buitenspel gezet – Inspraak en onvrede in Restveen en Groene Waterparel

Posted on by

Door Reinier van der Starre, MSc student

Het melkveehouderij/akkerbouw bedrijf van mijn familie in de Wieringermeer wordt bedreigd door de  planvorming voor het Wieringerrandmeer. Dit proces volg ik dus al jaren van dichtbij. Wat mij opgevallen is, is dat mijn familie maar ook andere boeren in de omgeving zeer gefrustreerd zijn geraakt tijdens dit planvormingproces. Hierbij is men wel in contact met overheden, maar is de beeldvorming over de overheden zeer negatief. De vraag, die hierbij altijd in mijn achterhoofd speelt is: “waar komt die onvrede vandaan?” en “gaat het in andere gebieden ook zo?”.

Tijdens mijn studie Management of Agro- Ecological Knowlegde and Social Change (Maks) probeer je te begrijpen, waarom en hoe veranderingen tot stand komen en wat die veranderingen tot gevolg hebben. Het afstuderen was voor mij dan ook een unieke kans om uit te zoeken, waar die onvrede in genoemde planvormingsprocessen uit voortkomt. In samenwerking met Alterra heb ik de oorzaak van de onvrede in het gebied Restveen en Groene Waterparel in de Zuidplaspolder onderzocht.

De Zuidplaspolder is in de vijfde Nota Ruimtelijke Ordening aangewezen als ontwikkelingsgebied voor woning en glastuinbouw. Onder leiding van de provincie Zuid-Holland heeft de bestuurlijke werkgroep bestaande uit 23 partijen zoals; overheidspartijen, maatschappelijk organisaties en belangenbehartigers, de ontwikkelingsopgave verder uitgewerkt. Dit heeft er toe geleid, dat de op het veen gelegen zuidelijke deelgebieden Restveen en Groene Waterparel gedeeltelijk bestemd zijn voor natuur. Momenteel zijn er echter nog een aantal grondgebonden veehouderijbedrijven actief, die ontevreden zijn over de genoemde ontwikkelingen.

In dit onderzoek zijn de bronnen van onvrede van de boeren in het Restveen en Groene Waterparel onderzocht. Dit is gedaan door middel van een deskstudie van de verschillende beleidsdocumenten en daarnaast hebben er interviews plaats gevonden met de betrokken boeren, overheidsinstanties, belangenbehartigers en andere betrokkenen. De bronnen van onvrede zijn onderzocht door de beeldvorming over het planvormingproces, de wisselwerking tussen de regionale partijen en de boeren en de wijze van grondverwerving te analyseren. Uit het onderzoek is gebleken dat de volgende punten de bron zijn van de onvrede bij de boeren:

  1. Het feit dat de agrarische functie niet meer leidend is in het gebied.
  2. De overheid de verwachting schept dat de boeren nog invloed kunnen uitoefenen op het planvormingproces. Maar dat inspraak een illusie is.
  3. De boeren voelen zich niet vertegenwoordigd door de LTO in de bestuurlijke werkgroep.
  4. De overheid maakt in de ogen van de boeren misbruik van wet en regelgeving bij de verwerving van de grond.
  5. De overheid biedt in de ogen van de boeren geen redelijk vergoeding voor de grond gebouwen, die zij nodig heeft voor de planontwikkeling

Kortom de boeren voelen zich buitenspel gezet. 

U kunt hier klikken voor een volledige versie van mijn MSc-thesis ‘Boeren buitenspel gezet: Inspraak en onvrede in Restveen en Groene Waterparel’

The Black Gold

Posted on by

Last week, students of the course ‘Agrarische en rurale ontwikkeling, sociologische perspectieven’  had two days of excursions and could choose from 4 different excursions to see different models of multifunctionality and institutional arrangements in farming (see Birgit’s blog about a different excursion). With our group, we visited the Stadsboerderij Almere and the nearby Zonnehoeve in Zeewolde. Both farms have different other activities related to farming, such as school education, cattle in nature reserves, home sales of products, relations with care institutes.

Both are also organic farms, or better; bio-dynamic farms, which goes a step further in closing the nutrient cycle than organic farming. The nutrient cycle turned out to be the key to understanding the multifunctionality of these farms. At the very core of it all was what Tineke called ‘the black gold’; good quality manure, the essential ingredient for a healthy and productive farm without dependence on external input.

To illustrate her point, she took a handful of manure from last year and encouraged students to smell it. Hesitantly a few did. To their surprise it did not smell bad. The mixture of straw, urine and feces of the beef cattle was far into the composting process. It smelled more like soil than like shit….

At the Zonnehoeve they heard again about the importance of building soil. Piet told many unusual stories which illustrated that building soil is quite literally building a resilient farm. He showed his long list of activities in which he diversified which dazzled the students (amongst others, a bakery, permanent housing for caretakers, facilities for therapy with horses, internet shop). But starting with his dairy herd, he emphasised the importance of  Tineke’s ‘black gold’ too.

The centrality of the herd in the farming philosophy of both the Stadsboerderij and the Zonnehoeve, illustrates very well the theoretical framework which the students had learned in class (see Ploeg et al 2003). Grounding the farm in this vital resource  for a healthy nutrient cycle, both farmers deepened their farm strategy by shortening the supply chain whilst delivering high quality organic produce and from that solid base they broadened their farm with new additional functions. Tineke explained this by showing her ‘black gold’, which had brought good economic revenue of their core activity; producing food (e.g. onion, pies, carrots) which made it possible to invest in an entire new facility consisting of a farm-house and barn for a further expansion into care farming.

Who’s ‘the’ farmer?

Posted on by

Yesterday (Tuesday) 42 first year students , Paul Hebinck and I visited two Dutch farms for the course ‘Agricultural and Rural Development: Sociological Perspectives’ (RSO 20806 ).

We firstly visited the multifunctional farm ‘Eemlandhoeve’ of Jan Huigen. In an inspiring talk, Jan explained about the development of the Eemlandhoeve and the future plans. The farm has different functions, such as care farming, recreation, herb production, beef production and education for schoolchildren. After a nice walk around the farm and the calming farm yard (see picture), we walked to the neighbouring farm. 

The neighbouring farm ‘Hoeve ‘t Witte Schaap’ follows another path of development: a large scale dairy farm, with about 300 dairy cows and four milking robots. For most students, it was the first time they visited such a large dairy farm. The shed is large and high, with a lot of light and fresh air. Gerrit (the farmer) talked engaged about his farm, including the technology and animals. Two workers take care of the cows and by feeding them and looking after their health. The cows are fed with grass and maize of the farm and hardly received any concentrates (only in the milking robot). The farmer applies all the manure on his land. In fact, his way of farming is not that far from organic regulations.

After both visits we gathered, where Drees of ‘Willem & Drees’ gave an inspiring talk about regional production and sale of fruit and vegetables in five regions the Netherlands.

During the discussion, the students raised interesting questions. Firstly, one of the students asked Jan Huigen ‘How much of your income comes from food production?’ This – of course – was a limited amount and several students seemed concluded that he was not ‘a real farmer’, but more an entrepreneur in the countryside. Thereafter, the large scale farmer was asked how often he was actually among his animals, which was limited, since he had two workers to take care of the animals. The students seemed to conclude that he was neither ‘a real farmer’, because he had limited animal contact. Instead, he was more a ‘manager’.

To conclude, it was an inspiring excursion, which showed two very different development paths of contemporary farming in the Netherlands and gave students a great opportunity to think about the question what a farmer is nowadays.

Intensive Program Slovakia

Posted on by

By Marlies Meijer, MSc student

When I first heard about the Intensive Programme in Slovakia, I did not really know what to expect. The core of my MSc lies at land use planning, but for my thesis I choose a combination with rural sociology. What triggered me the most was the country. I’ve never been to Eastern (or Central) Europe and saw in the IP a great opportunity to experience transition from communism to capitalism and into EU-membership recently. On the first day the exchange with other students (about 40 from 12 universities, and even more countries) turned out to be just as interesting. Encouraged by cheap beer we had long discussions about everything, but still, mostly about the role of agriculture in the different countries.

For me the three day excursion to different villages in the Nitra-region was definitely a highlight. We were divided into small groups, each with a different region. My group stayed in a small cottage, north of Nitra. We were introduced to mayors of the small villages. I liked to see the differences between the Dutch planning system, where everything is arranged from paving stone to strategic master plans for 2030; and the project-based development in the little Slovakian villages: “if we have the money, we’ll think about constructing a sewerage system next year”. It makes all problems we have on the Dutch countryside (like “verrommeling”) relatively small.

The second day we went to a large cooperative farm. The size was overwhelming: 3000 ha., 120 employees, 800 cows and immense fields of rapeseed. But this was not everything; the cooperative farm (a legacy from communist times) had supporting departments in almost all layers of the market. We visited a bakery, a tool shop and a local grocery store (“Our Home”), all embodied in the cooperative. It put quite a different perspective on the development of short-supply-linkages. Small farms struggle in Slovakia, and we did not see many small scale (innovative) initiatives. What surprised me the most was that agriculture seemed to be disintegrated from all kinds of regional developments. There were no relations between local administration and the agricultural sector, and agriculture was not seen as a positive contribution (or even part of) to the landscape. Moreover the EU LEADER programme focussed in this region on social and economic developments; agriculture was not mentioned in the main objectives. Not surprisingly, since many villages suffer from more urgent problems, like ageing, unemployment, depopulation and a lack of basic social services.

But still, it pointed out that rural development cannot be just about agriculture, it is about the development of rural region entirely as well. Apart from farmers there are so many local actors that also could and should be included. For me it also pointed out that land use planning and rural development are not so different in essence. While approaches could be different, in the end it is about the same: sustainable development of (rural) regions.

Repeasantisation in Araponga, Brazil – a quest for space

Posted on by

By Leonardo Ayabe van den Berg, MSc graduate International Development Studies

Recently I completed my MSc-thesis. The thesis research is set in the municipality of Araponga in Brazil, where (re)peasantisation occurred and continues to occur. Here I describe some of the findings of my research.  When interested you can downlaod a pdf of my thesis ‘Invisible peasant movements: A case study of (re)peasantisation in Brazil‘.

Araponga

Araponga

When I started to read about the peasantry there were two major things that occurred to me as striking. First, in policy peasants are often considered as a group of laggards: who are unable to take care of themselves and therefore need social assistance; who rely on primitive forms of technology and therefore must be modernized; or who are impeded by a stagnant, traditional mentality and must therefore be converted into small entrepreneurs. The peasant mode of farming is seldomly considered in its own right. Second, in academic theory peasants are predicted to disappear, weaken or live a life of poverty as a result of their inferior mode of production and their helplessness. Departing from the assumption that actors are driven by a specific economic-rational logic, neo-liberal approaches roughly theorise that peasants commoditize, compete with other farms as a result of which there will be regional growth. Tradition or culture can block economic rationality and the transition from peasant to entrepreneur. The peasant will then be doomed to poverty. In contrast to the neo-liberal approach, neo-Marxist approaches, most of which also assume that the peasant is driven by an economic logic and commoditize, theorise that commoditization will either lead to the destruction of the peasant enterprise or to a fate of poverty. This is the result of price fluctuations, squeeze in agriculture (caused by the trend of decreasing produce prices and increasing input prices for farmers), or newly emerging food networks (through which income from weaker, peasant, parts of the chain are squeezed in favour of the more powerful, retailers, part of the chain). These predictions and preconceptions contradict with what happened in Araponga, a rural municipality in the state of Minas Gerais in Brazil where there was a rise in the number of peasants and an increase in welfare. The objective of this thesis was to find out how this was possible: how had (re)peasantisation occurred in Araponga. Continue reading →