WUR responds to criticism from farmer organizations: ‘The wrong conversation has been had’ | Pluimveeweb.nl

A group of researchers from Wageningen University faces six dilemmas the summary Which they believe will help determine the future of agriculture and nature in the Netherlands. These questions are: “What is the Dutch contribution to the world food supply?”, “What is the function of animal husbandry in the Netherlands?”, “What is the ethical status of animals in our food supply?”, “How big is it?” Future climate and do we want to achieve nature goals in the Netherlands? Will we separate or intertwine agriculture and nature in the Netherlands? and “Do we want to manage consumer behavior?”

After publication, nine farmer organizations sent message To WUR. They critique the report and provide necessary comments. For example, proponents argue that WUR should take on the role of an opinion-forming and policy-guiding organization in this report, while, according to the signatories of the letter, the university should focus on independent science. “Wageningen UR should neither be for nor against, but should focus on conducting research,” the letter states.

‘Seeing the gap widening’

Farming advocates, including the Pig Breeding Producers Organization and the Dutch Poultry Farmers’ Association, point out that Wageningen UR compiled this report in its personal capacity, primarily for policy makers. In this case also the largest financier of Wageningen UR. It is also striking that Wageningen UR arrives at a political vision on agriculture, without involving agriculture. What interest does Wageningen UR have in this, agriculture advocates wonder.

Advocates argue that the gap between science and practice is growing through these types of initiatives. Scientists have been given and held a position in political decision-making where the practice is all too easily overlooked. We have seen for some time what this leads to: a theoretical policy that is difficult to implement on the ground. The result: no support from the parties that have to implement it, and a lot of resistance, advocates say.

“Knowledge Exchange Mission”

A university spokesman responded to this accusation. “The mission of the university is really to conduct independent research and share knowledge. For example, through education, but also through scientifically proven contributions to the social debate. And that is exactly what they are doing here. The report identifies dilemmas and consciously moves away from political choices because they are not in our hands.” “As a knowledge institution, we determine the consequences of different choices and what recommendations can be drawn from scientific scenario studies.”

The report was created for a deliberate reason. “Researchers believe there is the wrong conversation going on about agriculture and nature in our country. “We allow ourselves to get caught up in partial problems and think little about the long term. The report therefore identifies six dilemmas so that the conversation can be conducted more constructively. In response to the post, nine organizations wrote a letter. “We would like to discuss their message with them and do not do so through the media,” the spokesman said.