land use in europe a methodology for policy-oriented future studies land use in europe 2 Promotoren: Dr. ir. R. Rabbinge hoogleraar in de plantaardige productiesystemen Drs. I.J. Schoonenboom bijzonder hoogleraar toekomstverkenning en beleid land use in europe a methodology for policy-oriented future studies Henk C. van Latesteijn Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor op gezag van de rector magnificus van Wageningen Universiteit, Dr. C.M. Karssen, in het openbaar te verdedigen op maandag 22 november 1999 des namiddags te vier uur in de Aula. preface preface Writing a PhD thesis as a sideline activity is a perilous undertaking, a general notion certainly reconfirmed by this study. When I originally took up the chal- lenge I was all too easily convinced by my supervisor Rudy Rabbinge that it was merely a matter of carefully writing down what we had already been discussing for some time. It would simply be an extension of the study that had led to the report ‘Ground for choices; Four perspectives for the rural area in the European Community’, an undertaking that at that moment we had just finished. However, the truth turned out to be a bit more complicated. On the one hand a lot more thinking and discussing appeared to be necessary than we had antici- pated to come to a balance between the methodological aspects of future studies and the particular case of land-use in Europe. On the other hand an intensifica- tion of my main occupational activities, resulting from a change in position, made the sideline more marginal than ever. If Rudy Rabbinge would not have insisted on finishing the job, I seriously doubt whether this preface would ever have been written. As with almost everything, this dissertation could not have been completed without the help and efforts of numerous other people. First of all the group of 5 (former) colleagues at the Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy with whom I compiled the report ‘Ground for choices’ deserve to be mentioned: Rudy Rabbinge, Marina van Damme, Frans Bletz, Dirk Scheele, Yvonne Starrenburg, Huib Hengsdijk and Emmy Bolsius. Although this group carried out all the core activities, we would never have succeeded without the input of numerous other scientists: Henny van Lanen, Kees van Diepen, Fre de Koning, Henk Janssen, Herman van Keulen, Arnold Brecht, Kees Hendriks, Jan-Dirk Bulens, Nicole Bischoff, Rob Jongman, Diana van der Stelt-Scheele and Marcel Wijermans, a list far from complete. I will certainly have forgotten somebody, so to whom it concerns, please accept my apologies in advance. Three people need special attention though. First of all I would like to thank Jan Schoonenboom, my co-supervisor, who through the years proved to be the ideal sparring partner. We tested all sorts of ideas and deductions and we never seemed to run out of new ones. For me these discussions were indispensable, not only for improving the line of reasoning in this dissertation, but also for keeping up spirits in my daily working environment. Secondly I wish to express my thanks to Simone Langeweg, who managed to uncover all sorts of flaws in the consecutive versions of the texts. If it weren’t for her perseverance, I would certainly have grown accustomed to my own mistakes. If there are still errors or weaknesses in this text, the blame is fully on me. Finally, I want to express my thanks to Rudy Rabbinge, whose never failing optimism proved to be a strong source of inspiration. Henk van Latesteijn land use in europe 6 land use in europe a methodology for policy-oriented future studies land use in europe 2 ISBN 90-399-696-9 SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL FOR GOVERNMENT POLICY preliminary and background studies v 106 land use in europe a methodology for policy-oriented future studies Henk C. van Latesteijn Sdu Uitgevers, The Hague, 1999 preface preface Investigating the future, using objective methods as a basis for recommenda- tions concerning long term government policy is one of the tasks of the Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy (wrr). Through the years the Council has tested several methods to gather information about the future. In this study the theoretical background and application of one of those methods, an explorative analysis of future potentials, is described in more detail. The study concerns a methodological elaboration of the 1992 wrr report ‘Ground for choices; Four perspectives for the rural areas in the European Community’. The elaboration specifically deals with the ways in which scientif- ic information can be made useful to policy processes. In this case an explo- ration of agricultural production processes is linked to the possibilities of simul- taneously attaining policy goals that are dealt with in the European Common Agricultural Policy (cap). The results of this exploration are still very relevant to the current policy debate. With the prospect of a considerable enlargement of the EU there is an obvious need to debate the sustainability of the cap goals in the future. 5 In this study ample attention is given to methods that may render information relevant to policy. The specific qualities of policy-oriented future studies are examined and translated into a pragmatic methodology. The Council consistent- ly seeks to provide scientifically based information and to identify problems and policy alternatives as objectively as possible. The conversion of knowledge to well-founded policy advice does however imply some normative aspects. In its constant effort to strike a balance between these matters the Council can benefit from the reflections on explorative methods that this study contains. Both aspects, the ongoing debate on the specification of goals for the cap and a more general debate on linkages between scientific analysis and policymaking, may be of relevance to a larger audience. Therefore the Council decided to pub- lish this study in its series Preliminary and background studies. Prof. M. Scheltema Chairman WRR land use in europe 6 table of contents table of contents Preface 5 Summary 9 1 Introduction 13 1.1 The policy dilemma: goals of agricultural production 13 1.2 The origins of the agricultural policy debate 16 1.2.1 Historical developments 16 1.2.2 Emerging conflicts between objectives 18 1.2.3 Initial policy reactions 20 1.2.4 The MacSharry reforms 21 1.2.5 Future expectations 23 1.3 The need for methodological considerations 24 1.3.1 Future studies 24 1.3.2 In search of constraints 27 1.4 The structure of the study 29 1.4.1 Research questions 29 1.4.2 Methods 30 7 1.4.3 Structure 31 2 In search of apt methodologies 33 2.1 Introduction 33 2.2 Future research in a policy environment 33 2.2.1 About scientific ‘facts’ and political ‘beliefs’ 33 2.2.2 A policymakers’ perspective 35 2.2.3 A future researchers’ perspective 39 2.2.4 The need for interaction 43 2.3 Methods of future research 44 2.3.1 Origins and typology 44 2.3.2 On probability, plausibility and feasibility 47 2.3.3 Scenarios and policymaking 48 2.3.4 Predictions and projections aim at probability 50 2.3.5 Explorations and speculations aim at feasibility 59 2.3.6 Policy-oriented predictions versus explorations 61 2.4 Conclusion: a policy-oriented explorative approach to the future 65 3 A pragmatic method to explore options for land-use 67 3.1 Introduction 67 3.1.1 The biological limitations of agriculture 68 3.1.2 The optimal mix of physical inputs 70 3.1.3 Scaling up to levels of scale relevant to policy 73 3.1.4 Levels of analysis 76 land use in europe 3.2 General outline of the goal model 80 3.2.1 The linear programming model 80 3.2.2 The imglp procedure 82 3.2.3 Results to be produced 85 4 The ‘technocratic’ component: assessments of facts 87 4.1 Introduction 87 4.2 Quantification of possibilities 87 4.2.1 Step one: Land evaluation 88 4.2.2 Step two: Production potentials 91 4.2.3 Step three: From crop potentials to cropping systems 98 4.2.4 Step four: Conversion from primary production into final products 102 4.3 Quantification of assumptions 102 4.3.1 Competitive types of land-use 103 4.3.2 Availability of water for irrigation 106 4.3.3 Demand for final products 110 5 The ‘decisionistic’ component: assessments of goals 113 5.1 Introduction 113 8 5.2 How to optimise wishes? 113 5.2.1 The selection of goal variables 113 5.2.2 Political philosophies as guidelines 115 5.2.3 Constructing scenarios from philosophies 117 5.3 Policy objectives in four scenarios 118 5.3.1 Results at the level of individual goals 118 5.3.2 Comparison between the four scenarios 122 5.4 Land-use in four scenarios: proportion, location and type 125 6 Discussion 131 6.1 The features of the goal model 131 6.2 Scenarios and policy 134 6.3 The future of explorative future studies 137 7References 143 8Appendices 149 AThe nuts-1 regions of the eu-12 used in the goal-modeL 149 B Actual, Potential and water-limited production in 58 nuts-1 regions of the eu-12 150 C Precipitation, runoff and usable quantities of surface water and ground water for the 58 nuts-1 regions in the eu-12 157 D Dutch Summary 158 E Curriculum Vitae 162 summary summary The common agricultural policy (cap) is going through a phase of significant restructuring. The original goals of the policy – already stated in 1957 – were primarily aimed at improving agricultural production and reducing consumer prices for agricultural products.