Regime Change and Storylines A sociological analysis of manure practices in contemporary Dutch dairy farming Marian Stuiver Promotor: Prof.dr.ir. J.S.C. Wiskerke Hoogleraar Rurale Sociologie Wageningen Universiteit, Nederland Co-promotor: Prof. Dr. A. Rip Emeritus hoogleraar Filosofie van Wetenschap en Techniek Universiteit Twente, Nederland Promotiecommissie Prof. dr. T. Marsden, Cardiff University, Wales, Groot Brittannië Prof. dr. J. Grin, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Nederland Prof. dr. ir. A. Veldkamp, Wageningen Universiteit, Nederland Dr. M. Weber, Austrian Research Centre Vienna, Oostenrijk Dit onderzoek is uitgevoerd binnen de onderzoekschool Mansholt Graduate School of Social Sciences. Regime Change and Storylines A sociological analysis of manure practices in contemporary Dutch dairy farming Marian Stuiver Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor op gezag van de rector magnificus van Wageningen Universiteit, Prof.dr. M.J. Kropff, in het openbaar te verdedigen op vrijdag 29 februari 2008 des namiddags te vier uur in de Aula Stuiver, M., 2008 Regime Change and Storylines, a sociological analysis of manure practices in contemporary Dutch dairy farming PhD-thesis Wageningen University. – With references. – With summary in Dutch ISBN: 978-90-8504-831-1 ‘And life ain’t nothin’ but a funny, funny riddle Thank God I’m a country boy.’ John Martin Sommers, as recorded by John Denver. © 1974 Cherry Lane Music Co. International copyright secured. All rights reserved. Ik draag dit boek op aan mijn vader Aalt Stuiver Contents 1 Introduction 9 1.1 Introduction 9 1.2 Research topic and research questions 11 1.3 Case study selection and empirical approach 1 1.4 Overview of the chapters 18 From local practices to regime change: theories and concepts 1 2.1 Introduction 1 2.2 A multi-actor, multi-aspect and multi-level approach to understand regime change 2.3 The significance of communities of practice for regime change 2.4 The role of storylines in knowledge production for regime change Too much bad manure! The development of the manure regime in Dutch dairy farming 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Stage 1: The emergence of a new manure regime 3.3 Stage 2: The stabilization of the modern manure regime in Dutch dairy farming 3.4 Stage 3: The manure regime revisited 8 3.5 Conclusions The rediscovery of making good manure, the case of the Nutrient Management Project of VEL and VANLA 8 4.1 Introduction 8 4.2 Material and methods 8 4.3 The start of the Nutrient Management Project of VEL and VANLA 9 4.4 The formulation of the promising novelties 4.5 Knowledge activities to investigate the promising novelties 4.6 Conflict and alignment within the Nutrient Management Project of VEL and VANLA 1 4.7 The consolidation of storylines within the Nutrient Management Project of VEL and VANLA 9 4.8 Conclusions Making good manure on eight farms in the Netherlands 8 5.1 Introduction 8 5.2 Material and methods 8 5.3 Introducing the farmers that make good manure 9 5.4 Actions and strategies while making good manure 81 5.5 The significance of indicators for making good manure 8 5.6 The role of experiential indicators in making good manure 89 5.7 Good manure and old regime 9 5.8 Conclusions 9 Narrating good manure for regime change 9 6.1 Introduction 9 6.2 Material and methods 9 6.3 The activities of VEL and VANLA to get a seperate status in government regulation 9 6.4 The activities of VEL and VANLA to alter the policies on manure application 99 6.5 The activities of VEL and VANLA to negotiate space in the law on excretion norms 10 6.6 The activities of VEL and VANLA to expand the carrying network 10 6.7 Conclusions 108 Narrating good manure in scientific practices: two cases of Wageningen University and Research Centre 111 7.1 Introduction 111 7.2 Material and methods 111 7.3 The ‘Wageningen Working Group on Experiential Knowledge’ 11 7.4 The ‘Project on the Manure Application Advice’ 10 7.5 Conclusions 1 8 Conclusions and further considerations 18 8.1 Introduction 18 8.2 Understanding the manure regime in Dutch dairy farming 18 8.3 The roles of storylines in knowledge production, niche formation and regime change 11 8.4 Further considerations: Heterogeneous knowledge production 1 Notes 19 Summary (in Dutch) 1 References 1 Appendix 1. interviews and meetings 1 8 Appendix 2. list of terms and abbreviations 19 Appendix 3. anonymity respondents 11 Acknowledgements (in Dutch) 1 Curriculum vitea 1 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction This thesis starts with the presentation of a non-contested societal fact: since the 1980s, Dutch dairy farming is in crisis due to the excessive production of polluting amounts of manure. Manure has become a metaphor for everything that went wrong with agriculture; smell, algae in surface water, nitrate in groundwater and tractors on the highway (KLV, 1996). As a consequence, different groups of actors have gathered and set up new and various types of experiments to discover ways to overcome this problem. Examples of these practices can be found in the setting-up of new research projects (e.g. Ekkes and Horeman, 2004; Grip, 2002; Anonymous, 2002), farmers that develop and rediscover long-forgotten practices (e.g. Goewie, 2002; Wolleswinkel et al.., 2004), government policy adaptations and new advisory schemes (e.g. Anonymous, 1995a; Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij, 1994; Commissie Bemesting Grasland en Voedergewassen 1998). As a consequence, the modern manure regime with its dominant rules, routines and knowledge practices has been in a period of transition for the last two decades. The changes that are required to make the manure regime more sustainable also involve the know- ledge infrastructure associated with the old regime (Nijkamp, 2003; Anonymous, 2000a; Van der Meulen, 1996). In the agricultural sector, the knowledge infrastructure that sustains the dominant regime played, and still plays, an important role. The relations between the sector and the dominant knowledge infrastructure can be characterized as linear, top down and supply driven (Smits, 2006:1). Innovations were based on the production of new knowledge within research institutes and labora- tories. The claim was that, through extension and education, the route of innovation ended in the successful application of this knowledge by farmers (Schot et al., 2000; Baars, 2002; Smits, 2006). Now that the manure regime is under pressure, the question which knowledge is relevant is also being discussed. The focus of the discussion ranges from observations and data to (epistemological) storylines about what is ‘good’ manure. This is why it is important to study new manure practices, if one wants to understand the transition in the modern manure regime. The object of the research for this thesis therefore includes the practices in which different actors experiment with finding alternatives to the manure regime, and the way in which these practices are embedded in wider 9 structures and developments, i.e. how the experiments have resulted in a niche where an alternative way to look and deal with manure, compared to the old regime, can be pursued. These practices have been studied before (although not in as much detail as I will offer), either from an agricultural-science perspective (e.g. Sonneveld, 2004; Reijs et al., 2004), or from a change perspective (e.g. Milone, 2004; Wiskerke and Van der Ploeg; 2004) how to nurture novelties if they go against the dominant regime. I will add a sociological perspective, namely one in which the central role of epistemological dimensions of niche formation and regime change is recognized. That is why I will use the concept of storylines. During experimentation and niche formation, the actors involved not only develop and test new socio-technological configurations, but they also try to find a common storyline that gives the new configurations meaning beyond the experiment and within the niche. The larger picture is that my topic and approach are situated at the cross-section of two societal developments, the changing role of agriculture, and changing views on and practices of, knowledge production. I will briefly discuss both before I tell (in section 1.2.) the story of how my research topic and research questions became delineated. Agriculture occupies an important place in Dutch economy; ten percent of the economic activities in the Netherlands are related to agriculture and more than half of the Dutch surface is occupied with farming activities (Van der Stelt, 2007: 10). Dairy farming is one of the major sectors in Dutch agriculture. At the same time, the number of dairy farms has decreased rapidly over the past years. Beldman et al. (2006: 18) state that from 1995 until 2004, 35% of the farms have disappeared up until the number of 24.332 farms in 2004. The average milk production at that time was 450.000 kg of milk. Thousand farmers pro- duce more than a million kilogram of milk during a year (Beldman et al., 2006: 19). Dutch dairy farming is based on highly efficient and intensive production of agricultural goods. Large quantities of input like fertilizer and concentrates are imported to the farms. In contrast to this, relatively small amounts of the imported nutrients leave the farm in consumer goods (milk, meat or feed) and so the remaining nutri- ents are excreted by the animals in the form of manure (Van der Stelt 2007: 10). Over the last few decades, Dutch dairy farming has been in crisis due to high levels of pollution caused by the excessive amounts of manure excreted. Large amounts of nitrogen (N), phosphate (P) and potassium (K) have created environmental burdens in different forms. Excessive nitrogen use leads to the accumulation of nitrates in the groundwater, eutrophication of surface water and is a threat for drinking water catchments’ areas.