Future Environment Agenda: clean, clever, competitiveToekomstagenda Milieu: schoon, slim, sterk....

Future Environment Agenda:clean, clever, competitive

VRO

M 6

304

/ A

UG

UST

US

2006Dit is een publicatie van: Ministerie van VROM

> Rijnstraat 8 > 2515 XP Den Haag > www.vrom.nl

Ministerie van VROM >staat voor ruimte, wonen, milieu en rijksgebouwen. Beleid maken, uitvoeren en handhaven.Nederland is klein. Denk groot.

Toekomstagenda M

ilieu: schoon, slim, sterk

To the President of the House of Representatives of the States General P.O. Box 20012500 EA The HagueThe Netherlands

Future Environment Agenda

25 April 2006

Dear President,

On behalf of the Cabinet, it is my pleasure to present to you the Future Environment Agenda. This memorandum, follows the Fourth National Environmental Policy Plan, describes how this Cabinet will implement national environmental policy, and offers suggestions as to how the policy can be sustained in the long-term. This Agenda was adopted by the Cabinet during its meeting of 10 March 2006. The Cabinet is confident that additional funds resulting from the considerations in connection with the 2007 Budget and the Economic Structure Enhancing (FES) Fund, in combination with existing funds, will be sufficient to proceed with implementation of the Agenda.

Your House was informed of the policy intentions in the letter of 5 October 2005, which accompanied the Future Environment Agenda Framework Memorandum (27 801, no. 41). The Permanent Committee for Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, the Permanent Committee for Economic Affairs and the Permanent Committee for Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality consulted with me on 14 December 2005 regarding the Future Environment Agenda Framework Memorandum.

In my opinion, the comments made by the House during the Policy Meeting have to a large degree been implemented in the enclosed Future Environment Agenda.

I hereby request your approval of the Future Environment Agenda.

Yours sincerely,The State Secretary of Housing,Spatial Planning and the Environment,

P.L.B.A. van Geel

TAblEoF

conTEnTs

Preface 06

Public edition 08

changing environmental policy 221.1 The challenge: a healthy and safe living

environment 231.2 Changing circumstances 241.3 Sensible and business-like 251.4 The government in a different role 261.5 This agenda and its successor 28

A future-proof environmental policy 302.1 Main points 312.2 A government that regulates more effectively 312.2.1 Boosting the quality of implementation

and supervision 312.2.2 Better relations with Brussels 332.2.3 A sensible cost-benefit analysis 352.2.4 Greater coherence between spatial planning

and environmental policy 362.2.5 The Netherlands and its responsibility

on the international stage 372.3 Room for healthy growth 412.3.1 More focused long-term Outlook 412.3.2 The environment as an economic opportunity 412.3.3 Greater responsibility for the business community 442.4 Environmental policy: from your backyard

to the atmosphere 472.4.1 Increasing citizen involvement 472.4.2 Bringing environmental policy closer to the citizen 482.4.3 Changing the way we communicate 49

Policy programme: future-proof 523.1 Clean air and climate 533.1.1 On our way to clean energy 543.1.2 Sustainable mobility 593.1.3 Green raw materials 613.1.4 Built environment 623.2 Clean water 623.2.1 An effective water chain 633.2.2 Diffuse sources 653.3 Quality of living environment 703.3.1 Room for local solutions 703.3.2 Noise emission standards for products 713.3.3 Communication of risks to neighbours 723.3.4 Careful handling of scarce space 723.3.5 Amsterdam Airport Schiphol 733.4 Maintaining Biodiversity 733.4.1 International biodiversity policy 743.4.2 (Agro-) biodiversity in the Netherlands 753.4.3 The Ecobalance 753.5 More efficient and innovative 763.5.1 Increasingly more efficient environmental policy 763.5.2 Investing effectively in innovations 79

Goal-oriented environmental policy 824.1 Policy tasks 834.2 Scope of the objectives 854.2.1 Climate 854.2.2 Acidification 854.2.3 Water quality 864.2.4 Soil decontamination 864.2.5 Air quality 874.2.6 Noise 884.2.7 Waste 894.2.8 External safety 894.2.9 Other environmental policy 894.3 Summary scope and purpose 89

colophon 92

Table of contents

0�

PrEFAcE

on that small piece of land ... “Fifteen million people, on that small piece of land... ... you do not tell them what to do, you respect them for who they are”. This is the refrain of a song that was popular at the end of the last century, which described Dutch society in a nutshell. It pro-jects an image of bustle and activity on a small piece of land, of pride in Dutch accomplishments and a unique and sometimes wayward manner of solving problems together. The bustle and activity on this little piece of land have only incre-ased since that time. Therefore, we have to work extra hard in the Netherlands, in comparison to many other countries, to realise and maintain a healthy, safe and pleasant living environment and our natural beauty. This idea enjoys broad support. This Agenda deals with the question of how best to proceed to realise this aim. The question is not so much whether we should do so, but rather, is our approach the right one and is it “future-proof”?

These questions have arisen because much has changed in the Netherlands and the world during the last decade. The social issues relevant today are new ones, the economic situation has changed, environmental issues call for a solution based more at a European and global level than we initially realised. The Netherlands truly is a small piece of land. What we do in the Netherlands has consequences for the living environment in other countries. Furthermore, our environmental problems cannot be solved without strong agreements with other coun-tries. Global issues such as climate change and a decrease in biodiversity demand an ambitious and global approach. If all the countries of the world consumed and produced to the same degree as the Netherlands, we would need three earths to sustain these activities. Precisely because there is much to be done in the world and in the Netherlands, we owe it to ourselves and the world to solve environmental issues as effectively and efficiently as possible. In order to clean up, and keep clean, the densely populated and busy city-state of the Netherlands, a clever approach is required so that we can remain economically competitive. The Netherlands must tackle the problem more effectively than other European countries, and up to now we have been insuf-ficiently aware of this. With this Agenda, I would therefore like to continue with the innovations the Cabinet has already started

to implement. I think it is important to view the environmental policy from a pragmatic perspective, and make certain that the policy remains sustainable in the long-term. This agenda describes the approach advocated by the Cabinet. Over the past six months, many parties, including the business commu-nity, civil-society organisations, knowledge institutions, other governmental organisations, but also individual citizens, have made suggestions and given recommendations regarding the approach I have felt this input to be exceptionally valuable, and have allowed it to ring through as often as possible in this agenda. I especially want to thank Mr Lubbers, Mr Winsemius, Mr Weijers and Ms Cramer for their useful advice. The Cabinet proposes an approach that has a sensible and rea-listic character. Do what is necessary, place high bets on the possibilities of technological innovation, allow room for indivi-dual responsibility and initiatives from the business community and cooperate with other European countries. And, last but not least, cultivate an active government that involves citizens, busi-nesses and local governments in policy-making, which sets out rules that can be implemented and managed, puts responsibility in its proper place, and explains policy carefully. However, such a sensible and business-like approach should not be confused with a “laissez-faire” attitude. The Cabinet holds to the National Environmental Policy Plan (NMP4) and strives to actually achieve the goals that are set out in it. This agenda is not a new description of environmental problems, of objectives, of all current efforts or an entirely new view of environmental issues, and is therefore not a new National Environmental Policy Plan. The challenge presented by this agenda is to achieve tar-gets and create policy that will allow us to continue to provide a clean and safe living environment in the future.. No more, but certainly no less. For ourselves and for that small piece of land ... and because we bear responsibility for the earth as a whole.

Pieter van Geel

Preface

0�

PublicEdiTion

For the readerThis public edition provides information about the Future Environment Agenda. The Public Edition describes what the Cabinet wants to achieve with the Future Agenda, and discusses subjects from the Future Agenda. Additional information concerning the subjects described can be found in the Future Agenda itself.

Future Environment Agenda: measures for a healthy and safe futureDuring the past 30 years, the Netherlands has been successfully in important areas with respect to the environment. Our living environment became cleaner and healthier, while the economy continued to flourish. But the battle is far from being won. Problems such as climate change and biodiversity call for a new approach, preferably an interna-tional one. Caring for a healthy, safe and pleasant living environment calls for new initiatives, or more to the point, measures.

These measures are now presenting them-selves. In the Future Environment Agenda, State Secretary Van Geel introduces his plans for a smarter, businesslike and, most importantly, effective approach to environ-

mental issues. It is not a new view, not a new National Environmental Policy Plan, but a pragmatic approach. It is about achieving targets and results, because we owe it to future generations. The following was said in an interview with Mr Van Geel:

The Fourth National Environmental Policy Plan of 2001 sets out the way in which the Cabinet wants to keep our country clean and liveable in the years to come. It is a good, ambitious plan, as you yourself have stated. Is the Future Environment Agenda a new policy plan? ‘No, it is not. The Future Agenda implements measures from the National Environmental Policy Plan. From 2000, the economy was practically at a standstill and the govern-ment became more cost-conscious. This meant that not all the plans that were set out in the National Environmental Policy Plan could be implemented straight away. This Future Agenda will allow us to do so after all by pursuing realistic policies and making practical choices.’ Why is this Agenda being formulated now? What has made the approach urgent? ‘For a long time, we underestimated the consequences of the high pressure exerted on the environment in this country. We must modernise environmental policies because the economy is globalising. In addition, the relationship between the government, citizens and the business community has changed. We have also had more and more trouble complying with European stand-ards, such as for clean air and water. The Netherlands simply has to tackle the prob-lems more effectively than other Europeans nations in order to achieve the same quality of life. For a long time, not everyone under-

stood this, the Cabinet included. But that time has passed.’ What would you consider to be the core of the Future Agenda? ‘In comparison to several decades ago, the question is not whether we should tackle environmental issues, but how we should do so. Right now we are especially concerned with improved implementation, that is prop-erly implementing transparent rules , and monitoring in a resolute manner.’ The Future Environment Agenda contains many measures. Can you indicate what aspects of the Agenda Dutch citizens will notice? ‘When the objectives set out in the Future Environment Agenda become reality, citi-zens and entrepreneurs will notice that rules have become simpler and easier. And that the government keeps a closer eye on com-pliance with the agreements we have made together. The environmental costs of prod-ucts that consumers place in their shopping baskets will be included in their price. This is in keeping with the principle that ‘the pol-luter pays’. This will result in some products becoming more expensive, but environ-mentally-friendly products will become more affordable. Citizens will also notice that their municipality opts for sustainable products and cleaner company vehicles. Entrepreneurs will notice that it will become more lucrative for them to produce and deliver these products, thanks to a growing market. These same entrepreneurs will find that environmental measures are not always troublesome and do not always place limits on their businesses, but also create oppor-tunities for innovation, new product devel-opment and a new market, both nationally and internationally. Motorists will find that

Public edition

0�

10

they cannot simply take the shortest route to their destination. Sometimes they will have to take an alternate route, so that exhaust fumes or engine noise bothers fewer people. Pedestrians in cities will find that it is less crowded and therefore that the air is becom-ing cleaner. Every Dutch person will see that European rules contribute even more to sustainable development and a healthy cli-mate, with the government playing an active role. And they will be able to see the Cabinet making a strong case all over the world for responsible economic development. In short, it is a combination of small and large changes that will really make a difference: a cleaner and healthier Netherlands.’

About 70 percent of the population wants the government to act on environmental issues. However, government and the environmen-tal movement seem unable to translate the support of the population into hard meas-ures. How are you going to change that? ‘I am convinced that if we show how a bet-ter environment will enrich our lives, we will gain support for our suggestions more quickly. The way in which we pass our mes-sage on to the people is crucial. The con-tent are fine, but the presentation must be improved.’ Are you are advocating that environmental measures be presented in a different way? ‘Exactly. The environment is fun. That’s my position. We should move away from the negative undertone that the topic some-times has. That is absolutely unnecessary, because working on clean air, clean water and a healthy earth are not threats. They are opportunities. My ambition is that in the coming years we succeed in linking the environment to the common goal of a good, satisfying life. And that the Dutch also see it in that way. Every day we make countless

choices. We buy products, move from place to place, eat food and discard products. Every choice is based on a combination of thoughts and considerations. Opting for a healthy and safe environment should be a part of that process. It should be an obvi-ous choice, because your own contribution counts in this case. That’s how I see it. But I am aware that this is going to be a long haul.’ Increasingly, environmental laws have European origins. The impression has come about that these rules are particularly prob-lematic for the Netherlands, and that they allow little opportunities for us to tackle our own environmental issues. ‘This is a big misunderstanding. The Netherlands benefits like no other from European cooperation and legislation. We are sometimes called ‘Europe’s drain’. Our living environment is under great pres-sure because of the central location of the Netherlands, so we are particularly in need of cross-border measures. This can only be realised with the help of the European Union. The angle taken in the Future Environment Agenda is that playing the European card even more in this way can actually generate possibilities.’ The environment is a topic of especially global interest. How does the Future Agenda see the role of the Netherlands in the world? ‘That role is important, and will only increase over time. Deep in my heart, I feel the solu-tion for environmental issues lies in inter-national cooperation. The fact that world’s population will grow from six to nine billion in the next 50 years and that large parts of the population are becoming increasing wealthy, will increase the demands for raw materials and energy enormously. This will have negative consequences for the climate

and the environment. To continue to live and especially to grow in the current fashion, will be impossible. If the whole world wants to have the same level of affluence in the future as the Netherlands has now, we would need the equivalent of three earths to sustain ourselves. International intervention is a cumbersome and time-consuming process that progresses in baby-steps. But if we in the Netherlands continue to improve, and use our knowledge to promote good environ-mental policies in fast-growing economies like China and India, our contribution will be comparatively large. In addition, it is an excellent export product with which Dutch companies can score points. By approaching the matter in a smarter way, we will create more global prosperity on a single beautiful, healthy earth.’ Applying measures costs money. Do citizens and businesses have to open their wallets right now in order to implement the meas-ures in the Future Agenda? ‘No, they don’t. Initially there will be some shuffling of money. Some topics will require less funding, while others need more. However, in the long run, we must increase spending on the environment if we want to make it healthier and safer. But I feel that the government may only ask for that after current available funds have been spent in the most effective manner. With respect to this last point, I want to use the Future Agenda to take an important step forward.A smarter approach will lead to more results for the environment per euro. After that, you can ask citizens and entrepreneurs for additional financial sacrifices for measures that will make life even more pleasant. If you proceed in that order, you should be able to increase support for environmental meas-ures.’

Public edition

‘Let’s organise a ‘Life 8’ for the environment.’

Monique Bollen, Director of the Association of Environmental Professionals (VVM)

11

Measures for clean airclean air is a basic requirement for life itself. The state is asking provinces and municipalities to implement local meas-ures against pollution.

Air quality is largely dependent on local circumstances. A high concentration of lor-ries in a (small) city centre will immediately lead to air pollution. The same applies to a busy motorway close to a residential area. Solutions to such problems are often custom-made. For instance, a municipal-ity may place a ledge alongside the road, which pushes polluted air upwards, so that it will not spread out across the bordering residential area. In order to avert older, more polluting lorries, a municipality may convert the city centre into a ‘green zone’, where only clean lorries are allowed. In addition, municipalities can lower the costs of parking licences for new, cleaner pet-rol vehicles and increase them for older, dirtier diesel vehicles.

By allowing municipalities to determine the planning of the space themselves, greater consideration is given to local circumstanc-es. Construction projects can be continued if the municipality takes measures to clean the surrounding air at the same time, for example, by attaching soot filters to city buses.

The Netherlands: Brussels’ nursery Environmental pollution in other countries causes polluted air and water in our country and vice versa. Environmental problems know no bor-ders. This is why we make agreements in Europe about what is and is not permis-sible. The netherlands wants to continue to play a role in the thinking and deci-sion-making processes in brussels and helping make rules that work. imagine a smart, business-like approach to, in which environmental issues are tackled by taking measures at the source of pol-lution, instead of only looking at conse-quences.

The Dutch environmental policy is decided more and more often in Brussels. Our voice is also heard in that arena. We must take more measures than less populated countries in order to achieve standards for things such as air quality. The same applies to some other European areas such as the Ruhr Area, Greater London and the Po Valley. We benefit the most when we set stand-ards on the things that cause the pol-lution. Take cars, for example. They are almost all made abroad. If Europe sets requirements on dangerous exhaust gas emissions, the manufacturers will be obliged to make their engines less harm-ful to the environment. In the Netherlands

‘In order win more points in the European arena, I think you have to

get all interested parties involved in the policymaking process as

early on as possible.’ Rinus van Schendelen, Professor of Political Sciences at the Erasmus

University, Rotterdam.

Public edition

Local circumstances determine the air quality

The Netherlands is densely populated and many activities take place there. In part because of this, air quality is relatively poor, just as in similar areas around Europe. Source KNMI/BIRA-IASB/ESA (2006)

12

that means that motorways can be built closer to residential areas without jeop-ardising public health and that barriers will no longer be required alongside roads.

innovative environmental policyThe Netherlands has experience with effective approaches to environmen-tal issues. We would like to share that knowledge with Brussels. In this way, the Netherlands serves as a nursery for innovative European environmental policy. In the meantime, the first child from the nursery is standing on its own two feet. European policy for hazardous materials (REACH) is based on experience acquired in the Netherlands. The Cabinet wants to work together with other densely popu-lated European areas to make a case to Brussels that air pollution and other envi-ronmental issues be tackled at the source.

The State buys sensible products At present, the government already buys as many sustainably produced goods as possible. After 2010 it will go one step further: sustainability will become the major criterion for everything the State purchases. With this requirement, the gov-ernment provides an even greater incen-tive to the business community to switch to sustainable production processes. After all, the government buys billions of euros worth of products every year, ranging from office supplies to vehicles. In 2006 the programme “Sustainable government

operations” (“Duurzame bedrijfsvoer-ing overheid”) will be launched. This will promote sustainable purchasing not only amongst the national government, but the provinces, municipalities and water boards. Everybody can already rely on the existing (inter)national seals of approval such as EKO and Fair Wear, already known to the public. Sustainable shopping should become an obvious choice.

Global responsibility The netherlands wants to avoid passing pollution on to developing countries that has been generated as a result of its own actions. The government cannot realise this goal without the help of its citizens, business community and civil-society organisations.

International agreements are designed to keep us from importing products or raw materials whose extraction, cultivation or manufacture has unacceptable negative consequences for the inhabitants or natu-ral living environment in developing coun-tries. Funds spent by the United Nations in support of developing countries must, in addition to other purposes, help cre-ate an environmentally-friendly society. This means hard environmental require-ments, not soft promises. Below are two examples of how the Netherlands puts its international responsibilities to work. EnergyEnergy is the engine that drives economic growth in developing countries. This must not result in sharp increases in CO2 emis-sions. The Cabinet is working hard to promote sustainable and healthy energy sources in developing countries that are accessible to many inhabitants. For this purpose, it wants to use the funding that is allocated by the Netherlands via the World Bank as developmental aid in such a way that it contributes to economic development, but also to a better environ-ment.

‘Be better at the European game, and anticipate it with domestic policy.’

Jan Paul van Soest, Advice for Sustainability

Public edition

The government will only use wood from sustainably managed forests

Sustainable energy for developing countries

13

curbing the use of hazardous materialsThe Cabinet wants the European Union to make an effort to take greater care in dealing with harmful chemicals. They form a threat to humans and the environ-ment. The Cabinet is developing an action plan with the aim of including EU policy concerning hazardous materials in global agreements.

Ecobalance illustrates biodiversityThe enormous demand for water, food and fuel is threatening the diversity of plants and animals all over the world. Some spe-cies are facing extinction within a few dec-ades. This is one of the greatest problems we are facing. Everyone agrees that this must be put to an end. In order to retain the diversity of species and strengthen ecosys-tems, measures must be taken. But these can only be taken if it becomes clear what

the problems are, and how they are inter-related. Therefore, the Cabinet wants to develop an Ecobalance. This is an aid that is used to make the effects of human actions on biodiversity visible and describe them. The Ecobalance could provide insight into the situation of the Netherlands as a whole, but also into that of an area, a business or even the yard surrounding a home. The Cabinet wants to use the Ecobalance in 2006 to measure negative and positive effects on biodiversity and compare them to each other. For example, the Ecobalance might be used to assess what effect using hard-wood windowsills has on tropical forests in Brazil. This knowledge can be used by the government, the business community and citizens to take concrete steps to improve or retain the diversity of plants and animals.

Successful Dutch waste processing makes a new approach possible The Dutch waste processing industry has accomplished a lot in recent years. In 2003, 80 percent of our waste mate-rial was recycled. Of all EU countries, we dump the least waste. Of course there is room for improvement. The question is whether we should recycle more, or

incinerate more? The Cabinet wants this decision to be made based on costs and environmental impact. Slowly but surely, we are also heading in that direction. It is becoming more and more commonplace to deviate from the usual order employed for waste disposal - recycling, incineration and only then dumping.. The cost price is becoming an increasingly important factor in deter-mining the method of waste processing. Thanks to this successful approach, the government monitor the process at more of a distance, under the strict condition that incineration does not result in addi-tional air pollution.

Annual waste mountain shrinksEvery year businesses and citizens in the Netherlands produce 60 million tons of waste. This is about enough to fill the Amsterdam Arena 50 times over. Since 2000, the quantity has been slowly decreasing, primarily due to waste pre-vention. We recycle about 80 percent of the waste mountain for various purposes.

‘Biodiversity is a requirement for the wellbeing of humanity. I

expect leadership from the government in determining long-term

sustainable management of nature in the national and international

policy.’ Willem Ferwerda, IUCN Director

Public edition

Will there be fish for our grandchildren?

No dumping of waste, but incineration with energy recovery

14

Half of the other 20 percent is incinerated, and the other half is dumped.

boost for ‘waste innovation’ In recent years, techniques have been developed that increase the energy yield from waste combustion. The Netherlands is an international leader in this area. It would be a pity to keep that knowledge to ourselves. This presents great opportuni-ties for the business community, such as waste processing units with high energy efficiency, which can be compared to a high efficiency boiler in the home. The Cabinet wants more innovations of this kind. Businesses have plenty of ideas. For example, how about techniques for improved waste sorting, so that even more becomes available for reuse? The goal is to process the increased waste we will be pro-ducing in the coming years in an environ-mentally-friendly way. It is estimated that waste production in the Netherlands will increase by four million tons by 2012, which is enough to fill three Amsterdam Arenas to the brim. We will make it cleaner by taking a more clever approach.

Cleaning Dutch soil more quickly The soil forms the basis for healthy life. our homes, factories and schools stand on it. our food grows in it. And children play on it, or in it. it is vital that the soil on which we live is clean, and remains so. The question is, does it need to be equally clean everywhere?

It would cost tens of billions of euros to completely clean up Dutch soil everywhere - a colossal amount. And so little was done for a long time. The Cabinet’s new approach will help overcome this impasse. At the core of this approach lies the aim to con-sider soil use at each individual location, instead of trying to make the entire country scrupulously clean. There is nothing wrong with building a factory on dirtier soil than a school. The Cabinet will link the timing of soil decontamination operations to the moment at which the land will be devel-oped. That will save money. Because they are directly involved, provinces, municipali-ties and water boards will take over the State’s monitoring duties. only cleaning where necessaryThat is the point of departure. You may wonder what will happen in the months and years to come. This year, the State will develop regulations, which local gov-ernments can use to determine whether decontamination is required. Decontamination will only take place if there are real risks for people and the envi-ronment. If these risks are not present, simple meas-ures which are far less expensive will be sufficient. In addition, standards will be set for soil quality for nature areas, schools, houses and recreational areas. Here is an example to illustrate how this will work in practice: An entrepreneur wants to build a theme park in Amsterdam. He reports to the municipality, which decides whether the soil quality is good enough for a theme park. If not, the owner will pay for decon-tamination costs. In this way, costs for clean soil are kept under control.

cleaning and maintaining cleanlinessSoil does not stop at the surface - the soil layers underneath must also be clean. Polluted ground water, for example, can have a negative impact on the environment and drinking water extraction. For this reason, the Cabinet is going to coordinate soil decontamination for each area together with existing organisations. How can this policy benefit the Netherlands? It prevents new pollution from rendering ground water useless. Old rubbish will finally be cleared away. This is how we will make our living environment healthy.

What will this cost us? You might be thinking, ‘A Future Environment Agenda is nice, but what is it going to cost us?’ innovations always come with a price tag. Although this is

‘Als je milieumaatregelen begrijpelijk weet te presenteren en

je maakt het de burger niet te moeilijk om die uit te voeren, dan

kom je gezamenlijk tot goede resultaten.’ Jaap Jelle Feenstra, voorzitter VVM

Public edition

Clean soil to play in

1�

true, the amount might be smaller than you think: a smaller price tag, for a clean-er environment. Thanks to a more effi-cient approach, you will get more value for your money. A healthy environment costs money. But by greatly modernising environmental regula-tions, increased efficiency is possible.

Innovative programs contribute to this. One example is the use of cheaper tech-niques to reduce noise pollution. Quiet asphalt and fewer and lower noise barri-ers are just as effective as regular asphalt and higher barriers. They just cost less. The costs of waste processing and water management are reduced through smarter and more effective approaches. Increased competition in the waste indus-try, for example, results in lower costs. Improved cooperation between potable water companies, municipalities and water boards, and economising on water use, also contribute to keeping costs down for citizens and businesses. The Cabinet encourages these innovative programmes. It is worthwhile, because it allows economic growth to go hand in hand with improving the environment. In short, it is an investment in the future.

Saving the environment is your business, too How clean and healthy is your neigh-bourhood? The cabinet wants to use the internet to allow all inhabitants of the netherlands the option of looking up information concerning the environment and health in their neighbourhood. in the coming months, the cabinet will interview 1500 citizens to ask them what informa-tion they require. based on their answers, the cabinet will develop a website. in 2008 everybody should be able to see how clean the water, air and soil are in their neigh-bourhood or city, simply by typing in their postal code.

By informing the population on subjects such as air quality, and water and soil contamination, the Cabinet will involve all residents of the Netherlands in solving environmental problems. Ultimately, the government is doing this all for them. A measure is much more effective if every-one understands the need for it. And if the government asks for sacrifices, these can be explained and more easily endured. The Netherlands is small. Think big. By working on environmental issues in and around the home, large, abstract problems like climate change and biodiversity will be placed in the correct perspective - so-called elusive prob-lems, that actually turn out to be very close to home. When we speak of the greenhouse effect, we are ultimately concerned with personal health, safety and wellbeing.

outdoor approachA sizeable part of the Dutch population reg-ularly complains of noise pollution, street litter, the nuisance caused by dog dirt or a lack of greenery along the streets. These are palpable problems that the Cabinet is going to tackle. In cooperation with prov-inces and municipalities, initiatives by neighbourhood organisations or individual citizens will receive (financial) support. Children in particular will receive attention. They should be able to play freely, safely, and in a healthy environment in residential communities and at school. indoor approachAll of us live and work on average 85 per-cent of the time indoors. Humidity and unpleasant smells in buildings are bad for your health. Take, for instance the water heater, cleaning agents, paint and cosmetics, which together area source of irritation and illness that should not be underestimated. The Cabinet will deal with this problem by, for example promoting the installation of air sensors in homes, by developing a quality mark for sufficient

‘Sustainability means more to citizens than rubbish and dog dirt.

Sustainability also has to do with a pleasant, safe and healthy

neighbourhood.’ Jaqueline Cramer, Professor of Sustainable Entrepreneurship at the

Copernicus Institute of Utrecht University

Public edition

Nuisance caused by litter

16

ventilation, and making binding agreements with respect to the quality of water heaters. Excessive noise from neighbours, as well as road and air traffic are also a great sources of irritation, and often cause insomnia. This results in a reduced sense of well-being, higher blood pressure and even cardiovas-cular disease. The Cabinet is investigating out whether stricter construction regula-tions could reduce noise pollution caused by neighbours. discussionsIn the coming years, the Cabinet will do a better job of explaining why it is taking envi-ronmental measures, i.e. why it “must” take these measures, as the Cabinet was hired by you to do the job. The government will start a discussion about what it is doing, show what it has accomplished, and indicate what citi-zens, businesses and local authorities can do for themselves.

EuropeIn all measures that the Dutch government takes, and information it issues, there is an important constant: European Union plays a major role. Our environmental issues often affect areas beyond our borders, so they require European solutions. What do the residents of the netherlands think?A survey conducted in response to the Future Environment Agenda shows that the popula-tion of the Netherlands ultimately chooses environmental solutions that require little effort and money. Even though people do want a stricter environmental policy, when it comes down to it, people choose the path of least resistance. By gearing its decisions to the desires and expectations of the population, the Cabinet is ensuring that support for environmental

regulations increases. In the long run, we will all benefit from this. Measures for (Percentage

solving environmental indicated)

issues

Promoting technical 30

solutions and inventions

Making environmentally 24

products more affordable

Government regulations to 23

fight environmental nuisance

(clean-up operations,

noise barriers, etc.).

Citizens choose measures that cost little effort and money

Source: TNS-NIPO report “How much is our environ-mental policy worth to us?” (“Wat is het milieubeleid ons waard?”), September 2005

APK for mopeds Nineteen percent of the Dutch population says it is seriously bothered on a regular basis by the noise caused by mopeds. In order to fight this annoyance, the Cabinet is researching a way to introduce a peri-odic motor vehicle test (APK) for mopeds, so that in addition to noise, harmful exhaust fumes can also be monitored.

Less energy for comfortable living The Cabinet will introduce an energy seal for homes, which will be similar to the well-known stickers on household appli-ances such as refrigerators and washing machines. The certificate will give insight into the energy performance of a building and will be accompanied by recommenda-tions regarding energy-saving measures. As it turns out, our homes can be more energy efficient. Examples of energy-sav-ing measures include the use of heat and cold in the ground to generate energy, glass roofs and double-glazing. These measures lower your energy bill, which in turn reduces CO2 emissions and often increase comfort in the home. Research will be done into new heating techniques for residential areas. These could include

‘These European guidelines don’t just fall from the sky. These

guidelines let us know when our health is at risk.’

Mirjam de Rijk, Director of the Foundation for Nature Conservation and Environmental Protection

Public edition

Strict requirements result in well-insulated homes

1�

environmentally-friendly fuels and the use of residual heat from power stations and industry. Let us make our homes warm and comfortable using sustainable methods.

The holy cow gets a green engine cars must become quieter, cleaner and more efficient and must run on better fuels. “cleaner” means that the cars will emit fewer harmful exhaust gasses. Fine particles and nitrogen make the air that we breathe unhealthy. The cabinet is research-ing how we can give our “holy cow” a green-er engine. in this way, air pollution will be fought at the source.

In addition to cleaner cars, we also want more efficient cars. People regularly con-

fuse these two aspects. For example, did you know that a luxurious all-terrain vehi-cle and a Fiat Panda are equally clean per kilometre if they both run on petrol? However, the small compact is a lot more fuel-efficient than a four-wheel drive. Large vehicles use more fuel and are therefore major contributors to climate change.

Quieter cars and tyresThe Cabinet wants to limit noise pollu-tion in the living environment, particularly by limiting traffic, by making a case in Brussels for stricter noise requirements for new cars, vans, lorries and tyres. In addition, agreements are being made with the transportation sector and the car and tyre manufacturers with regard to the fitting of the present vehicle fleet with quieter tyres. These measures are more effective and cheaper than the placement of noise barriers, for example. biofuels The Cabinet is promoting the development of fuels that will reduce CO2 emissions. Hydrogen or biofuels, such as fuel made from coleseed, are examples of environ-mentally-friendly alternatives. The use of biofuels reduces CO2 emissions. The development of technology in this area is in full swing, both for development of the fuel, as well as the engines. But for now, biofuels are more expensive than regu-lar fuels. Innovations may lower the cost price. The Cabinet will take steps to pro-mote this development. If the price tags for biofuels at the pump are the same as that of normal petrol and the performance is at least as good, then the driver is more likely to choose the environmentally- friendly option.

Better monitoring through cooperation The government will make an important contribution to a clean environment, good health and safety by creating licences for business, and by monitoring businesses. no one denies that this is important, but the government does not always deliver the quality that it should. citizens and busi-nesses perceive environmental regulations as cumbersome and businesses complain of feeling stifled by rules. They are too complicated, too technical and too bureau-cratic. Therefore, the cabinet wants to perform implementation and supervision in a smarter and more efficient manner, with-out relinquishing environmental objectives.

An important change is on the way. Starting in 2008, businesses will deal with a single office, licence, procedure and monitor-ing body. In anticipation of these changes, many municipalities are already putting them into practice. Thanks to the so-called spatial permit, effectiveness has increased and the government can no longer pre-scribe rules that require conflicting meas-ures of businesses. Businesses and citizens request thousands of licences each year. About 500 govern-mental organisations, such as municipali-ties and provinces, dispense licences and monitor businesses to make sure they are adhering to agreements made. Because too many governmental organisations are involved in small areas of environmental

‘Technological innovation remains an important path to follow. I

think we should continue to focus on what the Netherlands is good

at. Sustainable energy, for example.’ Prof.Ir. Klaas van Egmond, Director of the

Office for Environmental Assessment (MNP)

Public edition

Innovations can make cars considerably cleaner

18

supervision, the overview has been lost. In addition, more than half of Dutch munici-palities employ too few environmental inspectors. In addition, the available knowl-edge is sometimes insufficient to issue the proper licences and strictly monitor businesses. In 2007, the Cabinet will make proposals for improvement. For example, it will look into how many staff members are actually required to apply the rules in a responsible fashion. A possible solution is to combine expertise and manpower through regional coopera-tion. Another option is to set up national expertise centres to offer assistance to the governmental organisations involved. In both cases, the point of departure is the same: decreasing the environmental bur-den by businesses in a responsible fashion, and increasing environmental quality and safety. Efficiency worksThere are examples that indicate that com-bining strengths contributes to efficient and effective work. In Delfzijl, close cooperation

between a number of enforcement organi-sations has shown that businesses can be visited ten to 20 percent less often without jeopardising the quality of the supervi-sion. For years, the Rijnmond Central Environmental Management Department (DCMR) has successfully provided imple-mentation and supervision for the Province of Zuid-Holland and more than ten munici-palities in the Rijnmond region.

Innovation for the environment The cabinet supports environmentally friendly innovations. in this way, it pro-motes economic growth while at the same time limiting the burden on the environ-ment.

Environmental and economic ambitions are merged. New environmental techniques offer businesses opportunities in national and international markets.

As it turns out, Dutch knowledge and experience in the area of such subjects as waste water purification, waste and soil decontamination and sustainable horticul-ture are successful export products. The Cabinet wants to encourage more sectors to take advantage of this opportunity. A good climateIn the past, great environmental benefits have been attained through new techno-logical solutions. The Cabinet still expects this approach to produce great results. How will it actualise these ambitions? By offering subsidies, or imposing sanctions, by investing in research and education and by promoting the public private part-nerships. In short, its ambitions will be realised through the creation of a good climate for so-called eco-efficient innova-tions. ApproachThe following are a few examples: agree-ments between businesses and govern-ment for promoting innovation in areas

‘The government must make it more appealing to invest in small,

innovative businesses. These businesses can use sustainable

innovations to ensure that environmental protection does to

happen at the expense of the standard of living.’

Warner Philips, Director of Tendris/Greencard Visa

Public edition

Regional cooperation can improve enforcement

Thanks to innovations, the greenhouse of the future will be energy-neutral

Natural gas extraction in combination with CO2 storage in an almost empty gas field in the North Sea

1�

where the Netherlands has traditionally been well-represented, include waste, water and air quality management. The government can promote innovation by taking on the role of the customer. In this way, a market will come about for promis-ing innovations. The Cabinet is looking at developing a capital fund especially for small and medium-sized businesses that would provide financial support for eco-efficient measures. Finally, the Cabinet is looking at options for realising large inno-vative environmental projects.

Reliable policy Environmental measures are only effective if businesses and the government work together. Therefore, businesses must have the opportunity to do business in a sensible fashion. The government encourages this by, among other things, pursuing a reli-able, consistent policy and supporting busi-nesses that engage in cooperation.

In the past, government and businesses were diametrically opposed to each other where environmental measures were con-cerned. That time is definitely behind us: The business world is taking responsibil-ity for itself, and the government is taking economic dynamics into account wherever possible in legislation and regulations. As part of the Future Environment Agenda, the government wants to expand that relationship. consistent policiesBusinesses need consistent government policies, so that they can gear their busi-ness strategies to them. In order to meet that need, the Cabinet will consult with

the business community in early 2007 to draw up scenarios that map out the expected developments relating to cer-tain environmental issues. In this way, entrepreneurs will get more informa-tion about the long-term outlook will be able to invest in a targeted fashion. Manufacturers will be assigned more responsibility with respect to collect-ing and processing waste material, as is already the case for car tyres, car wrecks, household appliances, audiovisual equip-ment and batteries. In consultation with business sectors, the Cabinet will con-sider to which areas this scheme can be expanded. Private “greening”The Cabinet also offers businesses the opportunity to settle environmental costs among themselves so that legislation is not required. For example, take the case of a car lease company that buys clean and quiet cars and charges its custom-ers a small, additional environmental fee in connection with the higher acquisi-tion costs. Another example are inland

navigation boatmen who decide to install soot filters so that their ships’ engines run cleaner. They pass the costs on to their forwarders. In this way, the options available to businesses to take their own measures are increased. In 2006 the Cabinet will perform a quick scan amongst business sectors that exhibit potential for private “greening” and invite them to present proposals.

Market forces make a better environment possible Trade in emission allowances is an effi-cient way to decrease the emission of toxic substances. Under this system, all businesses have the right to emit gasses up to a certain limit. If companies exceed this limit, they can either take measures themselves to reduce emissions, if that proves too expensive, or buy emission allowances from companies that release fewer pollutants and have an allowance surplus. These are businesses that have already taken numerous measures in the past, or that can take measures relatively inexpensively to reduce their emissions. By selling their excess rights, these com-panies will recoup part of their invest-ments. Trade in CO2 emission allowances started last year.

‘Products should meet decency standards. Don’t expect the

consumer to be willing to pay more for this. Expect them to have

expected it all along.’ Lucas Simons, Assistant Director of Utz Kapeh

Public edition

Consultation between the government and the busi-ness community

20

Filtered air from the cowshed The cabinet is going to tackle the emis-sion of fine particles and ammonia in agri-culture by promoting the use of so-called combination air scrubbers. As a result of intensive stockbreeding (pigs, chickens and cows) fine particles and ammonia are released into the air. Ammonia also causes odour nuisance. Filtering the air prevents harmful materials from leaving the stables. cleaningAt least 20 percent of total emissions of fine particles come from farms. Air scrub-bers collect a large part of fine particles in a “water curtain”. Fans push stable air through a filter, along which water flows. At that point, stable air is cleaned chemically and biologically with water and bacteria. These filter out the odour particles and convert ammonia to harmless substances. The Cabinet wants to encourage farmers to use air scrubbers in their stables.

Biodiversity in agriculture Biodiversity in agriculture refers to the abundance of life in and on the soil in agricultural areas. We do not always treat the soil with care. Species disappear, so that natural processes and nature itself become unbalanced. This can lead to problems in agricultural production. In the Hoeksche Waard area, an experi-ment has been started up to plant great amounts of flowers on roadsides and field margins. The natural enemies of insects harmful to field cropping are attracted to the flowers. As a consequence, less insecticide is needed. This saves money and is better for the environment. In this way, biodiversity protects agriculture, and the landscape is beautified. The Cabinet wants to support these kinds of initia-tives financially, and helps municipali-ties develop their own biodiversity action plans. Among other things, the website “Biodiversity works” (“Biodiversiteit werkt”) on www.minvrom.nl has been

created to support this effort, with step-by-step plans, tips and references to information sources.

‘The government and the business community must work together

in Brussels.’ Niels Ruyter, Bouwend Nederland

Public edition

The new generation of combination air scrubbers remo-ves ammonia, fine particles and odours from stable air

Flower-rich field borders reduce need for insecticides

URGENTThe world keeps on turning. You know it even though you can’t see it. We must spare the environment.

cHAnGinG

EnvironMEnTAl

PolicY

23

1.1 The challenge: a healthy and safe living environment

Over the past 30 years, success has been achieved with Dutch environmental policy in important ways. Our living environment has become considerably cleaner and absolute separation has been realised in many areas, i.e. the economy is growing while pressure on the environment has decreased. However, the living environment does still pose signifi-cant challenges. The climate problem is nowhere near being solved, although the Kyoto objectives are within reach. Even if we take far-reach-ing measures with respect to energy sources, climate change is inevitable. This may lead to flooding, but can also result in radical changes in conditions for agriculture and nature. New health threats may arise in the Netherlands due to higher temperatures, and (tropical) illnesses we have not or rarely seen here may appear. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment has shown that humanity has changed the natural living environment (ecosystems) more rapidly and more drastically during the past 50 years than ever before, largely in response to increased demands

for food, potable water, wood, fibres and fuels. This has resulted in a substantial and largely irreversible loss of biodiversity. Approximately sixty percent of functions fulfilled by the natural environment, and which are essential for life on earth, are deterio-rating or not being used in a sustainable manner. This deteriora-tion is particularly hard on the poor. Shortages may become the cause of conflicts between population groups and countries, with important consequences for Dutch society as well. The Netherlands has not yet achieved all of the national emissions objectives. Due in part to the fact that we will not achieve short-term emis-sions objectives (2010, 2015), the quality of the air, surface water, soil and ground water will not reach desired levels on schedule based on current policy. In addition, the Office for Environmental Assessment (MNP) con-cluded in its sixth Environmental Outlook that emissions of a number of substances will start to rise again after 2010 if current policy continues. This means that citizens of the Netherlands will run higher than average environment-related health risks. The Cabinet thinks this is an unacceptable situation for a prosperous country such as the Netherlands. The Cabinet therefore stands by the points of departure of the environmental policy. The policy that is set out in the Fourth National Environmental Policy Plan (NMP4) and the memorandum “Fixed values, new forms” (“Vaste waarden, nieuwe vormen”), is the point of departure for this Cabinet. In keeping with the Coalition Agreement, the Cabinet insists on the absolute sepa-ration of the issues of economic growth and the burden on the environment. The Cabinet wants to provide Dutch citizens with a quality of environment that ranks among the best of similar urbanised areas in Europe (such as Ile de France, Greater London, Ruhr Area). In addition, the Cabinet wants to avoid passing on our environmental issues to other parts of the world or future genera-tions as much as possible by encouraging economic development that is based on sustainability. The challenge is to shape environ-mental policy in such a way that we are able to combine economic growth with decreasing the environmental burden, as these are also expressed in the objective formulated in Lisbon for economic development in Europe. Economic growth and increasing prosperity are less valuable if they occur at the expense of health, the living environment or nature.

1. Changing environmental policy

The environment should not pay the price for economic growth.

24

Sustainable development, that is to say, development we can sustain for generations to come, is only possible if we place explicit demands on the economy and ourselves and provide the development with a clear direction. The experience with environmental policy we have acquired over the past 30 years has taught us that economic growth and the environment do not necessarily have to be at odds. A healthy and safe environment, where it is pleasant to live, can easily coexist with a flourishing economy and increasing prosperity. It is possible, but it won’t happen by itself. Laying down preconditions is always difficult, especially at crucial times. One example of this is when invest-ments need to be made in environmental provisions and there are worries about the market position, or the situation on labour market under strain. Especially under these conditions, govern-ment, citizens and the business community should stand their ground.

1.2 changing circumstances

Important social developments that play a part in determining how environmental policy can be realised, are an additional reason the Cabinet has issued this Agenda. • It is becoming increasingly more expensive to solve environmen-

tal issues. The Netherlands spends three percent of its income (GNP) on environmental measures, which is twice as much as the European average. This is the result of the city-state-like character of the Netherlands: our country is densely populated and has a high concentration of economic activity. It is therefore unavoidable that investments made to guarantee the quality of life are relatively high here. Due to economic stagnation, how-ever, it was necessary to cut costs drastically in recent years, so that too few funds were available for policy implementation in certain areas. For example, the funds for NMP4 were not allo-cated for multiple years.

• In recent years, confidence in the government has decreased and

citizens are asking the government more forcefully than before

Chapter 1 • Changing environmental policy

0

40

80

120

160

200

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

Economy (GDP)ClimateDissruptionManure PollutionAcidificationWaste managementProjections

Inde

x (1

985=

100)

The economy (gross domestic product, GDP) is growing, and the pressure on the environment is decreasing (except for on the climate).

Source: MNP (2005), Environmental balance sheet 2005 Economicdevelopmentandenvironmentalpressure

2�

to justify the concrete results of its policy. This is one reason why support from citizens for more drastic environmental solutions is limited, although there is still much commitment from within society to environmental issues. This is especially true where there is doubt about the cost-effectiveness of measures, the dis-tribution of responsibilities and burdens, or where possibilities for behavioural change are limited.

• These days, the framework of environmental policy is largely

determined at European level. This is a useful and necessary development because the Netherlands’ competitive position, amongst other things, stands to benefit from good international and particularly source-based, environmental policy. At the same time, these developments mean that the Netherlands must cooperate with other European countries in determining its environmental policy, when envi-ronmental problems in these countries are often smaller or less urgent.

• There is, to an increasing degree, a global dimension to envi-

ronmental policy. New environmental issues such as climate change and deterioration of biodiversity are global problems. In addition, global economic activities have split up into more and more subcategories and become more and more interdependent. Also, countries have become more or less interchangeable busi-ness locations. This means that fewer decisions can be taken at national or European level, and the limitations of traditional policy development have become clear.

• In decades past, part of the business community has taken more

and more responsibility for environmental issues, due in part to changes in societal views. The business community is asking for opportunities to take the initiative and choose solutions. There is a feeling of irritation about the implementation and enforcement of the policy. In addition, it has become clear in recent years that the environmental issues are also present economic opportuni-ties for the Netherlands, because the Netherlands is often one of the first to be faced with the necessity of developing innovative solutions.

Such developments are doubly challenging. Because of European cooperation and internationalisation of the environmental issues, the Netherlands has become partially dependent on the position taken by other European countries and international partners. At

the same time, and also because of this development, the national partners in environmental policy are asking for greater involvement in and accountability for decisions that are made with respect to the national environmental policy. These parties are also requesting more freedom to assume responsibility in this area. 1.3 sensible and business-like

In response to the developments stated, the Cabinet has already implemented reforms. All along, the Cabinet has chosen a sensible and businesslike approach that holds social parties to their responsibilities and options in a realistic way. • The Cabinet will make the environmental policy easier for busi-

nesses, and offer more freedom for them to take responsibilities. By removing superfluous rules, combining regulations or struc-turing them in a different way, compliance with environmental rules will be easier and associated administrative burdens will decrease. For example, through simple regulations, the respon-sibility for collecting and processing certain types of waste such

Important success has been achieved as a result of Dutch

environmental policy during the past 30 years. Our living

environment has become considerably cleaner.


The natural living environment is not being used sustainably

26

as car tyres, household appliances and audiovisual equipment has been passed on to the producers.

• Increased ‘greening’ of the tax system will promote improved environmental quality in the Netherlands. By introducing CO2 emissions trading in February, 2005, the Cabinet has launched a system which will help businesses to realise the targets set for emission reductions as cheaply as possible.

• In order to adjust the environmental policy more closely to the

citizens’ perceptions, the Cabinet started the programme Policy with Citizens in 2003. One of the initiatives from this program is the Citizens’ Platform that presents advice about parts of VROM policy.

• In the memorandum “Dealing Pragmatically with Risks”

(“Nuchter omgaan met Risico’s”) the Cabinet shows how com-plex policy problems concerning such things as health, safety and costs can be considered in a transparent and careful man-ner. This technique was applied in the policy-making process with regard to legionella.

• A sensible approach is also required when determining and

shaping policy instruments. Promoting green electricity through energy tax incentives was initially ineffective and inefficient. This is now done much more effectively and efficiently through tar-geted supply incentives for domestic green electricity production. In addition, 500 million euros is saved each year while the effect on the environment is about the same as before.

• It has also been effective to use the returns from the exploita-tion of gas in and around the Wadden Sea for nature areas, and the savings resulting from the delayed closure of the Borssele nuclear power station for measures that contribute to energy transition.

This Agenda will be used by the Cabinet to continue with a sensible and businesslike approach to environmental policy. This approach is, on the one hand, a goal-oriented, more effective and more efficient and uses only those instruments that do not involve unnecessary costs and annoyance, and that really help us achieve environmental goals. On the other hand, the approach is future-proof, in that real-istic solutions are sought together with social partners that find will support and create opportunities for the sustainable development

of our economy - in both the long and short-term.. When expanding on and implementing this agenda, the government, citizens and the business community cannot proceed alone. However, the govern-ment does occupy a special position. 1.4 The government in a different role

Our living environment belongs to us all - and to no one in particular. As protector of the general good, the government bears important responsibilities and plays an active role in managing our living envi-ronment. International agreements are indispensable in this endeav-our. The government’s responsibility for the living environment can only be fulfilled if all social partners (citizens, government, business community) make a concerted effort to take decisions regarding the environmental policy, and to work together in order to achieve results. Environmental policy cannot function without the support of society and involvement by citizens. The business community has played a key role in developing and implementing innovative solu-tions, and local authorities have been essential in ensuring adequate implementation of the policy. The business community, civil-society organisations and other gov-ernmental bodies are increasingly taking the initiative to improve the environment. In this connection, but also in general, they are looking to international developments and decisions to an increasing degree. As a result, the options open to the national government are changing, although it remains responsible and is still held account-able for agreements made internationally. This is why the (national) government must remain open to developments taking place in soci-ety and in the business community, and work from the “outside-in” when developing policy and gear policy-making as closely as pos-sible to initiatives presented by society. The role of the national gov-ernment will be - much more than now - to work together with the business community and social organisations in determining inter-national policy routes, in developing an active negotiation strategy for these programmes and in forming coalitions with (international) partners. Once agreements have been made at international level, it is up to the national government to develop and enforce national frameworks for the implementation of international agreements. The point of departure should be that businesses and citizens have as much freedom as possible to contribute effective and efficient ways to solve environmental issues themselves. Local governmental bodies will be given the freedom to make local

In implementing this agenda, government, citizens and the

business community cannot proceed without each other’s help


You can say ‘no’ to Europe, or ‘yes’. Whichever it is, the environment does not stop at the border.

EUROPA

28

choices and come up with custom-made solutions concerning policy relating to the local living environment. The national government will offer guidance in the process, support where necessary, and develop interventions for cases where policy falls short. Consequently, the freedom of choice and room for customised options that is being offered to social partners, will not be without obligations. The government will be tough on stragglers. The implementation and enforcement must be consistent and responsibilities must be transparent. Minimum levels of protection must be maintained and interna-tional agreements complied with. The government will play an active - not a withdrawn - role.

1.5 This agenda and its successor

reading indicatorThe following chapters give further details on the new Agenda for environmental policy. Chapter 2 (Future-proof environmental policy) of this Agenda has a strategic character.

In this chapter, the Cabinet describes how the approach to environmental policy will be modernised and adjusted to new insights and changing circumstances. Important parts of the chapter are of a prioritising nature. This may be because the Cabinet considers it important to discuss matters with social partners, or in other cases because proposals must be expand-ed on. Chapter 3 (A future-proof policy programme) describes meas-ures the Cabinet will implement or start to prepare for the most important policy areas, in order to achieve more future-directed policy and will pay attention separately to measures that the Cabinet proposes in order to improve policy efficiency. Chapter 4 (Goal-oriented environmental policy) describes, in a nutshell, the additional measures that will be required to reach the environmental policy targets which have been determined (with reference to the Environmental Balance 2005).

So the government plays an active - not a withdrawn - role.


0

100

200

300

400

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Air Chemical substances Waste management Water Noise Energy Agriculture Nature

Number

Increasingly, the national government is given the task of translating international agreements into national legislation and regulations

Europeanenvironmentalguidelinesandregulations Source: MNP (2004), Environmental balance sheet 2004

2�

Progress reportThe Agenda lists the aspects of the goal-oriented and future-proof approach of the environmental policy that the Cabinet thinks are desirable. On its own, however, an agenda does not represent a complete approach. This is why the Cabinet will present a Progress Report in early 2007 in which the current state of the various proposals will be presented.

continuous improvementWith this Agenda, the Cabinet has taken the first steps on the road to continuous improvement of policy-making and imple-mentation of the environmental policy. The performance of the environmental policy will be assessed annually in connection with the From Policy Budgets, to Policy Accountability system (VBTB) together with relevant stakehold-ers (citizens, business community, municipalities, provinces, water boards and civil-society organisations) so that any correc-tions can be implemented quickly and social partners can intro-duce new agenda items for the future environmental policy. This annual evaluation will take place based on clear perform-ance indicators, so that parties can hold each other accountable for agreements and responsibilities. The European dimension will be a special point of attention in this effort. Benchmarks regarding similar countries or areas (such as the Ruhr Area, Po Valley, Greater London) will be used. Depending on performance in relation to the goal, consequences can be determined.

The progress report will set out the indicators against which the effectiveness will be measured annually for each policy goal.

The Netherlands is densely populated and many activities take place there. This is part of the reason why concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in the troposphere are high, just as in similar areas around Europe. Source: KNMI/BIRA-IASB/ESA (2006)


ToEkoMsT

vAsTMiliEubElEid

31

2.1 Main points

The Cabinet wants to modernise environmental policy and adapt it to changing circumstances, as well as gear it more to desires and options open to citizens and the business community. For this purpose, the Cabinet has formulated the following agenda for a future-proof environmental policy: • A government that regulates more effectively: In determining and implementing environmental policy, the

government must, more than is now the case, act decisively and purposefully. In policy and implementation it must be clear that the government has weighed costs and benefits, and will realise the environmental policy goals in the most cost-effective way possible, and in the least intrusive way for citizens and the business community.

• Room for healthy growth: The business community holds a key position in improving

the environment. The new environmental policy now aims, in keeping with the transitional approach started with the NMP4, at businesses acquiring the freedom to take their own

responsibility for environmental issues. Furthermore, it aims at allowing a favourable climate to develop for innovations and investments that will contribute to a healthy environ-ment and sustainable society.

• Bringing environmental policy closer to the citizen: A future-proof environmental policy should be easily recog-

nised by citizens and be supported by the society. This chapter expands on the Agenda.

2.2 A government that regulates more effectively

The Cabinet wants to determine and implement the environmen-tal policy in conjunction with social parties as much as possible. Government action should facilitate this, and where possible, government should do a better job regulating these activities than is currently the case. The Cabinet wants to realise modernisation regarding the fol-lowing items: • Improved implementation and supervision. When policy is

implemented, quality should improve and causing unneces-sary irritation on the part of citizens and the business com-munity should be avoided.

• Improved handling of European decision-making processes.

The Cabinet wants to increase its efforts in making sure European rules serve Dutch view and interests.

• A sensible analysis of costs and benefits. When determining

policy it must be clear, much more than it is now, that the government has weighed costs and benefits and will realise the goals of environmental policy in a cost-efficient way.

• Greater coherence between spatial and environmental policy.

Careful spatial planning can create opportunities for envi-ronmental policy and vice versa.

• Active participation in global environmental issues. The

Cabinet wants to contribute to decreasing the environmental burden in other places in the world.

2. Future-proof environmental policy

Purposeful government action

1 EIM “Costs of Actual Obligations for the Business World” (“Kosten voor inhoudelijke verplichtingen voor het bedrijfsleven”), May 2005

32

2.2.1 boosting the quality of implementation and supervision

Governmental bodies that implement environmental rules are burdened with the important responsibility of actually achieving the environmental goals in practice. The achievements by the local governmental bodies involved in this respect are an essential part of the environmental successes that have been realised in the Netherlands. Still, environmental regulations that apply to busi-nesses rank high on the list of irritating or unnecessary rules[1]. Among other things, this is caused by the rules themselves. In order to solve this problem, environmental regulations will be modernised. For many business activities, the environmental licence will be replaced by general environmental rules. Many licenses will be combined to form a single spatial permit. Another reason is the quality of the implementation. Quality improve-ment is a continuous process. The relevant governmental bodies have already achieved a lot, but additional improvement remains possible. The Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM) Inspectorate has concluded, based on indi-vidual municipal studies, that there is room for improvement with

respect to the implementation and supervision of construction, spatial and environmental regulations[2]. Previously, the Evaluation Committee for the Environmental Management Act concluded that municipalities definitely have capacity shortages and that efficiency can be improved[3]. As part of the BeteRZO Project, the conclusion was reached that govern-mental organisations do not always have the critical mass at their disposal to execute the external safety policy. Recently, the final measurement taken as part of the “Professionalisation of environmental enforcement” (“Professionalisering milieuhandhaving”)[4] showed that many enforcement organisations do not live up to minimum quality requirements, nor do all environmental licenses for businesses that fall under IPPC directives meet European that arise from those directives. Apart from the existing trouble spots, quality improvement is required in order to achieve the ambitions of regulating busi-nesses via general environmental rules and the spatial permit. One reason for lack of quality is the fragmentation and small scale of the implementing organisations involved. For example, at this time, more than 500 governmental organisations, including water managers, are involved with issuing and supervising licences. Approximately 60% of municipalities have fewer than four inspec-tors, who are partially involved in environmental enforcement[5]. It is difficult to vouch for continuity, expertise and decisiveness with such numbers.

Enforcement of environmental licensing in practice

Chapter 2 • Future-proof Environmental Policy

2 National report of VROM-wide Municipal Studies 2003 and 2004 (Landelijke rapportage VROM-brede Gemeenteonderzoeken 2003 en 2004), VROM Inspectorate, 2005

3 Capacity for the implementation of environmental regulations (Capaciteit voor de uitvoering van de milieuregelgeving). Evaluation Committee of the Environmental Management Act, 2003

4 Final measurement of the professionalisation of environmental enfor-cement (Eindmeting professionalisering milieuhandhaving). VenW, IPO, VROM, VNG, UvW, 2005

5 VROM survey amongst municipalities in connection with the “Professionalisation of environmental enforcement” project (VROM-enquête onder gemeenten in het kader van het project “Professionalisering milieu-handhaving”).

6 Aptroot and Bakker motion, TK 29362 no.76, 21 February 2006

33

Because other local authorities do not implement environmental regulations autonomously, but in joint administration, the State government is partially responsible for the quality. Therefore, the Cabinet wants to promote the improvement of quality and efficiency of regulations, the granting of licenses and supervision. For this purpose, the optimal scale level to guarantee expertise, continuity and decisiveness and to allow the implementation proc-ess to proceed efficiently will be redetermined for various types of businesses and activities.

The following elements will be included:• Developments surrounding the introduction of the spatial

permit, with environment being integrated with other spatial aspects;

• The shared services project, which facilitates initiatives to forces in the region that offer expertise;

• Implementation of the Aptroot motion[6], joining forces with respect to supervision;

• The future Cabinet position regarding inter-administrative supervision;

• Discussion about responsibilities in the joint administration of tasks that are subject to European commitments.

In designing and carrying out the study mentioned above, the implementing governmental organisations, the Association of Provincial Authorities (IPO) and the Association of Netherlands Municipalities (VNG) will be fully involved, and financial conse-quences for the other governmental bodies will also be taken into consideration. Then the results of this analysis will be implemented, with the intention of leaving current distribution of powers amongst the governmental bodies unchanged, but not excluding the possibility of change. In 2006, a stock-taking study of the efficiency of the processes of prescribing regulations and implementation was completed, and optimal scale levels with regard to capacity and expertise in implementation and supervision were broken down into various “groups”’ of businesses, such as businesses that are subject to general rules, businesses with an IPPC license, etc. In 2007, this will be followed by decision-making concerning the way in which the results of the study should be implemented, and by starting the actual implementation. An analysis of the required critical mass was already executed in 2005, specifically for the supervision of the external safety.

When policy is implemented, quality should improve and causing

unnecessary irritation on the part of citizens and the business

community should be avoided.


Examples of quality regulation

• Joint supervision of a group of businesses in Delfzijl by the VROM Inspectorate, Labour Inspectorate, Inspectorate for Traffic, Public Works and Water Management, Directorate-General for Public Works and Water Management, National Mines Inspectorate, Province of Groningen, Water Boards of Hunze and Aa, and regional fire brigade, has shown that the supervisory burden can be decreased by 10 to 20% for businesses, and that governmental bodies can achieve an increase in efficiency of up to 10%. In addition, joint supervision presents opportunities for increasing quality.

• Departments and also many EU Member States view the implementation of European rules as a duty of the natio-nal government. Therefore, implementation and super-vision take place under direct or delegated responsibility of a minister or state secretary. This allows for more options to control the realisation European goals, and a clearer division of responsibilities when goals are not met. Examples of such supervisory organisations in the Netherlands are the Dutch Competition Authority (NMA) and the Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (VWA).

• In the Rijnmond area, DCMR has been performing imple-mentation and supervisory tasks for the Province of Zuid-Holland and more than ten municipalities for over 25 years. Knowledge and capacity are amassed there, while administrative responsibilities are maintained.

• In the United Kingdom, HSE provides a national expertise centre and a network to support in the issuing of licences and the enforcement of external safety duties. This aut-hority itself also provides supervision of some establish-ments.

34

A study will be completed in 2007 regarding the advantages and disadvantages of various types of solutions necessary to reach the required critical mass. This also involves looking at experi-ence acquired within the Netherlands, such as Rijnmond Central Environmental Management Department (DCMR), as well as the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) in the United Kingdom.

2.2.2 better relations with brussels

European policy is necessaryThe frameworks of environmental policy are largely determined in Brussels these days. This is both useful and necessary. Many Dutch environmental issues can only be solved within a European context because pollution comes from abroad, or because products, such as cars or electrical appliances that place a strain on the environment when used or disposed of, are produced abroad. In the Netherlands, we live in a densely populated and built-up country where measures that are aimed only at removing the results of environmental pollution can be relatively expensive. Furthermore, such measures do not relieve the border-crossing environmental burden. A source-based

approach is often more effective and more efficient, but in order to retain the Netherlands’ competitive position, can usually only be implemented in at EU level. Stubborn global environmental problems such as climate change and loss of biodiversity also call for a European approach. Although European policy is useful and necessary in many cases, the Cabinet will apply the principle of subsidiarity very carefully in distributing responsibilities amongst Europe and national governments. In addition, the Cabinet wants to offer room to assume responsibility and create custom-made solu-tions at local and regional levels, and will do its utmost to pursue national policy freedom when choosing means for imple-mentation. The Netherlands as a Nursery The Cabinet wants to make even more of an effort than is cur-rently the case to ensure that European rules serve Dutch views and interests. The EU policy must continue to modernise and increase the range of policy options for Member States that have to contend with a relatively high level of environmental pressure. The Netherlands wants to be a nursery for the development of a set of innovative environmental instruments:• In Brussels, the Netherlands will promote expansion of

CO2 emissions trade to sectors that are not eligible at the moment, by presenting research and proposals.

• In cooperation with the business community and in anticipation of the EU Strategy for Natural Resources, the Netherlands will begin assessing Dutch use of natu-ral resources and evaluating the environmental impact with respect to the entire cycle in 2006 . In the process, the Netherlands will also include the relationship to the European waste strategy.

• The European Committee has asked the Netherlands to initi-ate activities for spreading knowledge of and experience with financial instruments for sustainable technological innova-tion within the EU, based in part on Dutch experience with ‘Green Investments’.

• On the initiative of the Dutch Presidency, EU Member States have expressed political support for sustainable mobility. Initial results have become apparent recently in the form of a covenant with the automotive industry, which includes increased efforts with respect to road pricing, biofuels and quieter tyres.


Much of environmental policymaking is done in Brussels

3�

• As a result of the Dutch EU presidency in 2004, the EU rec-ognizes that eco-efficient innovations can play an important part in improving European competitive position and employ-ment opportunities and therefore in achieving the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy.

• The Cabinet believes that with respect to the Better Regulation program of the EU, European environmental regulations in particular must be simplified, and will take the initiative to develop an action plan to this end. Generally speaking, the management philosophy applied in the Netherlands can serve as an example. The options include laying down more goal-oriented rather than means-oriented rules, getting rid of superfluous regulations, and using dif-ferent types of instruments, like covenants.

Creating Coalitions in EuropeThe Netherlands is having problems with the implementation of certain European environmental directives, such as the Nitrogen Directive, the Habitat Directive and the Air Quality Directives. Despite a greater than average influence and coordinated approach in the negotiations as compared with other Member States, the Netherlands was occasionally surprised by the finan-cial, judicial or administrative consequences. For this reason, the Cabinet wants to further improve its approach to European issues.

This is particularly important since the European Union has grown from 15 to 25 Member States and our voice formally weighs less heavily.The Cabinet wants to achieve this by:• Considering policy decisions at the European level even more

carefully (deciding for or against legislation, value objectives or value limits, quality requirements or source policy) with particular attention to the principles of subsidiarity and pro-portionality;

• Ensuring that relevant stakeholders such as local govern-ment, businesses, citizens and their organisations are involved at a much earlier stage, so that implementation and enforceability receive more attention during the negotiations;

• Engaging in discussions with the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament at an early stage regarding the input in European negotiations and the (implementation) consequences that will be connected to the various policy options;

• Forming international coalitions through active environmen-tal diplomacy which can support Dutch interests, especially with areas whose population density and environmental pressure are similar, such as the Ruhr Area, Po Valley and Greater London;

• Bringing the European Environmental Agenda to the atten-tion of the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament during an annual meeting, based on a review of the past year, and tak-ing an advance look at the agenda for the coming year;

• In distributing European funds in connection with the envi-ronment, basing allocation on environmental pressure should be promoted (that is to say, based on population size in relation to surface area).

Recent examples of the Dutch input being achieved accord-ing to the points of departure mentioned above, are the Dutch Chemicals Policy (SOMS) that served as input for negotiations regarding the European Chemicals Policy (REACH), and propos-als for changes to the air and soil quality files. The fact that input is considered carefully of course does not necessarily guarantee the desired outcome. It is typical of EU decision-mak-ing that compromises are inevitable. Therefore, being able to predict the outcome early on, and deal-ing adequately with deviations from the existing Dutch system, round out improved relations with Europe. From this standpoint, it is important that sectorial EU regulations continue to offer room for customised solutions at local level.

> In 2006, the Netherlands will set up partnerships with areas in Europe that have a similar level of environmental pres-sure and population density for the most relevant substances (NOx, SO2, VOS, NH3), with the goal of European policy being oriented more toward these areas. The partnership may involve the joint promotion of cleaner techniques, coordi-nated application of environmental zones in cities, exchange of information about the application of the best available techniques in respect of businesses that require licences, and taking joint action in Brussels.

2.2.3 A sensible cost-benefit analysis Effective and efficient environmental policy is required in order to retain credibility and support for the current policy, and to gain support for measures that are still needed. An analysis of current environmental policy that was implemented for this

Many Dutch environmental issues can only be solved

within a European context


36

agenda has resulted in proposals that could influence the cost-ben-efit ratio of the policy in a positive way, that allow for greater flex-ibility and customise solutions in the implementation of the policy, or could lead to transfer of responsibilities to the society. In order to make decision-making processes more transparent with respect to future decisions in environmental policy, the Cabinet will ensure clear presentation of all relevant advantages and disadvantages (costs and benefits) to society. This will include providing insight into the costs of “non-action”, as well as long-term benefits and specific consequences for vulnerable groups. Dealing sensibly with risksFor (parts of) policy areas that are at the start of the policy life cycle, such as biodiversity and non-ionising radiation, the risks are identified, and objectives are formulated. In the Memorandum “Dealing sensibly with risks” (“Nuchter omgaan met risico’s”), the Cabinet has chosen a line of policy for this. Dealing with uncertain-ties requires prudent, careful and responsible approaches to risks with all parties involved being clear about why the government has arrived at a certain conclusion. In addition, an assessment should be made - as quantitatively as possible - between the possible risks

of inaction and the costs of measures to combat risks. In this effort, risk communication will play an important role.

Where more is needed to formulate objectives than insight, research will be performed. In addition to actual scientific research into risks and problems for various population groups, acceptance by society and evaluation of risks are also important. This relates to health and safety aspects of new technologies of which little is known at present, such as underground CO2 storage, nanotechnol-ogy, new complex genetically modified organisms (GGOs), electro-magnetic fields of mobile phones, and the use of hydrogen as an energy carrier. In discussions about these issues, the Cabinet will offer room for questions from various levels of society in order to be able to carry out the social debate about these issues in the best possible way. Halfway through 2006, the government will indicate the points of departure for nanotechnology policy when it presents its position on nanotechnology. A careful assessment will be made of the eco-nomic and social opportunities that nanotechnology offers, and the management of any risks that may be involved. 2.2.4 Greater coherence between spatial planning and environ-

mental policy

Spatial planning and environmental policy are both focused on the quality of the living environment, and influence each other. Specific functions, such as nature and housing require specific environmen-tal conditions. This either places limitations on spatial develop-ment, or high costs must be incurred as recent developments in the air quality file illustrate. The Cabinet therefore considers greater coherence between spatial planning and environmental policy to be desirable, especially at regional and local levels. This applies to such subjects as external safety, air quality, soil, noise and making the spatial planning of the Netherlands more climate resistant. In addition, formulating environmental ambitions in relation to spatial development also offers possibilities for real-ising an optimal quality of life. In order to achieve that coherence and quality, a more specialised set of instruments is required. In connection with this, the Cabinet feels that simplification as well as synchronisation of the checks of the living environment for spatial planning are desirable. Strategic Environmental Assessment forms a good basis for this. An area-based approach whereby an inte-grated assessment is made of environmental aspects and spatial interests has a good chance of bringing optimal living quality within


GSM

tran

smis

sion

tow

ers

high

vol

tage

pow

er li

nes

benz

ene

cata

stro

phic

acc

iden

ts

legi

onel

la

nois

e

seco

nd-h

and

smok

e

rado

n in

hom

es

air

pollu

tion

traf

fic a

ccid

ents

alco

hol a

buse

obes

ity

smok

ing

1 in 10 billion

1 in 1 billion

1 in 100 million

1 in 10 million

1 in 1 million

1 in 100,000

1 in 10,000

1 in 1000

1 in 100

jaar

lijks

ste

rfte

risi

co (l

ogar

itmis

che

scha

al)

In addition to empirical scientific research into risks, social acceptance and risk assessment is also important

EstimateofannualriskofdeathduetoanumberofriskyactivitiesorsituationsintheNetherlands

Sou

rce:

RIV

M (2

003)

, Sup

plem

enta

ry r

epor

t 20

98-3

, app

endi

x 1

3�

Forming coalitions with areas that have to contend with an

environmental pressure that is just as high as in the Netherlands,

such as the Ruhr Area and London

our reach. In the coming year, the State will work together the other governmental bodies involved to carry out a number of area devel-opment projects in the form of pilots. Large area development and transformation assignments such as the Stadshavens area in Rotterdam, the Noordelijke IJ-oevers area in Amsterdam or the Zuidplaspolder in the Rotterdam-Zoetermeer-Gouda triangle may also be selected as locations. In a number of cases, area-specific implementation of general policy (as in the case of with sun-related distribution and city heating) can be effec-tive.

Furthermore, by using simplified procedures, combining funds and clear division of tasks within amongst others the Investment Budget Urban Renovation (ISV) and Investment Budget National Territory (ILG), the Cabinet wants to improve the options for achieving coher-ence between spatial planning and environmental policy.. Finally, the Cabinet wants to offer municipalities additional options for achieving an optimal quality of life by including environmental quality requirements in zoning plans. The basis for this is set out in the new Town and Country Planning Act, in addition to

which an amendment of the Environmental Management Act will still be needed.

> In 2006, the State will facilitate its approach to spatial devel-opment projects through five pilots.

> Halfway through 2006, an action plan will be ready to move toward less frequent and simpler testing of environmental and spatial planning .

> In 2006, a proposal for an amendment to the Environmental Management Act will be made to allow for the possibility of including environmental quality requirements in zoning plans.

> In the progress report, the Cabinet will take up a position regarding the standardisation of spatial concepts in environ-mental regulations, so that coherence between both policy areas improves at local level.

> In 2006, twelve administrative agreements ILG 2007-2013 were made between State and provinces, which will help improve the quality of nature and the environment in rural areas through simplified procedures, combining funds and a clear division of tasks. Halfway through 2006, the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament will be informed regarding the options making similar improvements in the ISV policy.

In order to better prepare the Netherlands for climate changes (the so-called adaptation to climate change), adjustments will be needed in the areas of water, traffic infrastructure, rural areas, recreation, nature, agriculture, landscape, urban areas, health and sustainable energy. As a result of this development, important new questions and challenges are arising where the areas of climate and spatial planning intersect. In order to make Dutch spatial planning more climate resist-ant, the State has taken the initiative in close cooperation with other parties, to draw up and implement the national Space and Climate Adaptation Programme (ARK). > In 2006, the Cabinet will carry out the zero measurement of

climate resistance in the Netherlands, and will take a posi-tion regarding the various options for adaptation, on the basis of which instruments will be developed to increase cli-mate resistance in the Netherlands.

> In 2007, a national adaptation agenda will be presented to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament.


Information regarding the relationship between spatial and environmental policy can be found on vrom.ruimtexmilieu.nl

38

2.2.5 The netherlands and its responsibility on the international stage

Economic growth is necessary for development, both here and in developing countries. The Netherlands has succeeded in achieving a certain degree of separation between environmental pressure and economic growth. In developing countries, this is not the case. Increased prosper-ity is not necessarily linked to decreased environmental pressure. Some large countries, especially Brazil, Russia, India and China, are undergoing rapid economic growth. The Cabinet thinks it is important to actively involve these countries in the development of international environmental policy. Because of its production and consumption patterns, the Netherlands contributes to the environ-mental problems of the world. At the same time, the Netherlands feels the results, for example in relation to rising sea levels. Therefore, the Cabinet plays an active role in negotiations and imple-mentation of the international environmental treaties and agree-ments. An overview of the Dutch commitment is set out in the Global Environmental Agenda, which was sent to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament in September 2005, together with the European Environmental Agenda. The climate problem and energy production security are crucial subjects included in it. These subjects will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 3. In addition, the Cabinet wants to prevent as much as it can, that negative results from our actions in the Netherlands are shifted to other places, and that actions by Dutch parties consciously or unconsciously add to perpetuation or even worsening of environmental damage in other places. Emission of polluting substances, waste dumping, or importing products or raw materials of which the extraction, growth or production can have negative effects on the inhabitants or the natural living environment in developing countries to the extent of being irresponsible, must be avoided. The Netherlands can also make a positive contribution to sustainable development by sharing technology, supporting the improvement of the environmental policy and providing development assistance.

Preventing a shift in responsibility is not a task for the government alone, but requires close involvement by citizens, businesses and civil-society organisations. Improved governanceIn order to protect the environment, global treaties have been drawn up, including the Convention on Climate Change and the Convention

on Biodiversity. International environmental agreements, and com-mitment to international organisations such as the United Nations (UN, particularly the United Nations Environment Programme UNEP and environmental treaties), the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the European Union are important, because they set preconditions on economic growth and promote sustainable investments. At the same time, implementa-tion of international agreements through financial support to the Global Environment Facility, and by involving the World Bank with developments that are relevant to environmental policy, is a work in progress. In addition to formal multilateral decisions, civil-society organisa-tions and partnerships can play an important role where judicial mechanisms are still insufficient. The partnerships that were set up for the implementation of the Johannesburg agreements will therefore be expanded on, as is indicated in the international section of the action programme Sustainable Action. The Cabinet thinks it is crucial that the UN include the environ-ment as an essential component of their activities. In addition, the Cabinet wants to strengthen the role of UNEP with a stronger mandate, clearer focus and more stable financing. Because the UN Sustainable Development Commission (CSD) discusses the ecologi-cal, social and economic aspects of sustainable development in rela-tion to each other, participation is important. The enforcement of agreements made in an international context has too often been neglected. The Cabinet wants to pay more atten-tion to this. Where there are rules, other rules must be developed for and compliance and enforcement. > The Netherlands will take an active role in improving interna-

tional environmental governance, as has been agreed to at the 2005 UN summit, through such means as strengthening UNEP and integrating environmental objectives into the work of other UN institutions.

> In the Progress Report, the Cabinet will discuss options for improving compliance with and enforcement of international treaties and agreements.

> The Netherlands will contribute to the options open to develop-ing countries to make their cycles sustainable and will actively encourage the EU to use its set of instruments for this pur-pose.


The Netherlands is actively involved with improving international

environmental management

SenSibleA risk-free society is an illu-sion, let’s be sensible about that and keep both feet on the ground

40

Government responsibilityIn our own country, much can be done to resist shifting responsibil-ity. Government organisations spend an amount of approximately 30 billion euros every year on purchases and contracts. This means the government can influence developments within the market sec-tors. Through sustainable purchasing, sustainable production is promoted. > The Cabinet will start the programme “Sustainable govern-

ment operations”, under which sustainability will be applied as an important criterion for all government purchases and investments by 2010. Regarding the practical application of this, a separate letter will be sent to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament in the near future. The programme is meant to facilitate sustainable purchasing not only by the State, but also by other governmental bodies. The State will join exist-ing (inter)national systems like EKO, Fairtrade Labeling Organisations International (FLOI) and Fair Wear whenever pos-sible.

> The government point of view with respect to the acquisition of sustainable wood (June 2004) is being tightened even more in the sense that the State has committed to buying 100% sustain-

able wood by 2010. State buyers will receive concrete assistance in 2006 in order to attain this objective. In addition, the recently determined assessment guideline for sustainable forestry and the trade cycle for wood from sustainably managed forests, will be used to measure the assessment of certification systems for sustainable forestry.

‘Greening’ of funds Many companies work on socially responsible entrepreneurship, also in an international context. In order to further promote this, the Cabinet will actively initiate discussions with international busi-nesses located in the Netherlands. The funds that the Netherlands spends on developmental aid will be used in a sustainable fashion. However, the criteria applied by banks and private investors when offering loans and making investments is at least as important for sustainable development, because of the magnitude of the funds involved. The Cabinet wants to give develop-ment and the application of such sustainability criteria a boost. In 2006, the Cabinet will undertake, in consultation with other civil-society organisations and the business community, to promote initiatives for socially responsible entrepreneurship in trade rela-tionships. A study will be completed in 2007 regarding the existing guidelines and enforcement mechanisms for international public and private banks regarding environmentally friendly policy. In its Progress Report, the Cabinet will indicate whether it sees opportunities to promote the harmonisation and application of these and if so, what these opportunities entail.

Natural resources, waste and substancesNon-sustainable use of natural resources is results in climate change and excessive use of clean water, soil and fish stocks, amongst other things. Use of natural resources has a strong global dimension. At the end of 2005, the European Commission introduced the Thematic Strategy for Natural Resources, in order to facilitate more sustainable use of natural resources. The points of departure are the life cycle approach, and decreasing environmental pressure that results from the use of natural resources. The Cabinet thinks a European approach is necessary in order to achieve complete separation of the issues of environmental pressure due to the use of natural resources and due to economic growth. The use of chemicals leads to much greater problems in develop-ing countries than in our country. Because of the lack of adequate


The government will only use wood from sustainably managed forests

41

legislation and compliance, hazardous materials are often found in people’s direct living environment without any form of protection. The Cabinet wants to keep the improvement of chemical policies in Europe from leading to production of these substances being shifted to countries outside of Europe. An important step was recently made when the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management was approved. The Netherlands supports rapid imple-mentation of this strategy. In 2006, in anticipation of the EU Strategy for Natural Resources and in collaboration with the business community the Cabinet will start assessing Dutch use of natural resources and evaluating the envi-ronmental impact of it along the entire cycle in 2006. Building on EU policy aimed at hazardous materials (REACH), the Cabinet will take the initiative to anchor this policy in relevant international agreements, strategies and treaties. The Cabinet will include an action plan to this end in its Progress Report. 2.3 room for healthy growth

The business community holds a key position in improving the environment. The new environmental policy is therefore aimed, in keeping with the transition approach that was started in the NMP4, at giving businesses freedom to take their own respon-sibility for environmental issues, and furthermore at creating a favourable climate for innovations and investments that will contribute to a healthy environment and sustainable society. In short, there must be room for healthy growth. In this effort, the Cabinet holds the following to be important:• Operating from a long-term perspective: by assessing pos-

sible developments in environmental policy, it will be easier for the business community to make decisions regarding investments in the environment;

• Improved utilisation of the possibilities for economic growth presented by environmental improvement;

• Placing greater responsibility for improvement of the envi-ronment with the business community.

2.3.1 More focused long-term outlook Developing policy has become increasingly more complex and therefore less predictable. Sharing the same view of (policy) development for the long-term, will make it easier for busi-nesses to take investment and innovation decisions. Based

in part on investigations by planning offices, the Cabinet will develop future scenarios together with business sectors. These scenarios will offer a long-term outlook, that is insight, into pro-jected market and technological development in relation to the (consequences of) national and international policy. This allows for greater foundation and direction for the parties concerned, in particular for businesses that are involved in innovating and investing. The choices for sectors will depend on the size of the environmental task, the instruments available, the degree of uncertainty and the policy and interests of the sector. Based on future environmental scenarios, targeted actions can be undertaken in order to develop the environment as an oppor-tunity (see 2.3.2), operate pro-actively within the EU, and share responsibilities with the business community (2.3.3). > In early 2007, the Cabinet will put together three scenarios in

consultation with the business community that will identify expected developments for the policy areas in question.

Waste dumping or the import of products or raw materials that

have negative effects on the inhabitants of developing countries,

must be avoided.


0

50

100

150

200

250

SpainPoland

Greece

Great Britain

France

Czech Republic

Belgium

ItalyThe Netherlands

Germany

2000 2010

gram

NO

x/G

J

Dutch industry produces the least NOx per unit of energy use in Europe. It is still not low enough to reach targets

EmissionfactorsofNOxfortheindustryandenergysectorsS

ourc

e: M

NP

, Env

iron

men

tal b

alan

ce s

heet

200

5

42

2.3.2 The environment as an economic opportunity

In the past and with great support by society, substantial suc-cess has been achieved for the environment through the use of technological solutions. The Cabinet still has high hopes for this approach. In addition, it has become clear that Dutch knowl-edge and experience in such areas as water purification, waste management, soil decontamination and sustainable horticulture are successful export products all over the world. Within the framework of the Lisbon Strategy, the Cabinet wants to develop the economic opportunities that solving environmental issues can offer with a more focused approach so that industries can develop in a manner that is consistent with a sustainable economy. The government can guide this through regulation (standards, obligations), through price instruments (subsidies, levies) and by promoting research and development and target-ed investment. In this effort, the transition policy initiated by the NMP4 forms an important strategic basis, both in the collabo-ration between public and private parties, and in the content-related focus on innovation from a long-term perspective. The Cabinet has already decided to combine parts of the individual

transitions and to focus on the energy aspects of these transi-tions. In so doing, encouraging innovation and reducing costs of environmentally friendly innovations form the point of departure for the Cabinet, and not guaranteeing a market or subsidising large-scale implementation. This point of departure is also the basis of road maps that have been developed in connection with energy transition. These road maps are paths to a common goal of clean, secure and affordable energy sources. Examples are cars that run on hydrogen, coproduction of chemicals, transport fuels, electric-ity and heat from biomass, and decentralised generation of electricity and heat (micro-total energy). Such road maps offer not only direction for environmentally friendly innovations, but also opportunities for knowledge institutions and business to tap drastically changing markets. The government supports such innovations and environment-friendly initiatives through the Energy Research Subsidy (EOS) and the Unique Opportunity Scheme (UKR). In addition, and in keeping with existing instru-ments, the Cabinet wants to boost policy aimed at seeing the environment as an opportunity. In order to encourage eco-effi-cient innovations, the general conditions for a positive innovative climate must in any event be satisfied and a good innovation policy is required. The Cabinet will meet these conditions with an updated set of innovation instruments. The updated set of instruments is made up of a combination of a basic package that consists of capital and advice, and a programming package aimed at superior performance. This programming package will bring together the strengths of businesses, knowledge institu-tions and other governmental bodies in order to further develop the potential strengths of the Dutch economy. Environmental innovation covenantsContinuing along the lines of the transitional approach and in keeping with the abovementioned future scenarios, the Cabinet will consult business sectors and chains of activities so that it can consider where agreements can be made to illicit greater commitment to eco-efficient innovations. The goal is that inno-vations that are consistent with specific Dutch strengths, such as in the areas of waste processing, water purification and man-agement, energy conservation and biotechnology be promoted in a targeted fashion and that the opportunities that arise from this be utilised, though without prescribing specific techniques. The following could be included in such agreements:


Thanks to innovations, the green house of the future will be energy neutral

43

• Agreements concerning a government contribution to inno-vation that is coupled to environmental performance which is better than the best available techniques (BBT);

• Agreements about contributions from the sector for such achievements such as private sector greening;

• The government possibly functioning as “launching custom-er”.

In so doing, the Cabinet wants, as much as possible, to act con-sistent with the existing innovation, energy and environmental instruments, such as long-range agreements about energy conservation, environmental covenants (and the system thereof) innovation performance contracts, innovation vouchers and the key area approach. In addition, it will look at what is required in respect of innovation programmes that are in development to increase attention for the environment as an innovation oppor-tunity. The Cabinet will also work at drawing sufficient attention to eco-efficient innovations in the national and international knowledge infrastructure and the financing of it. In consultation with the business community, the Cabinet will describe the approach for environmental innovation covenants in the Progress Report. The description will provide insight into the statutory opportunities and the connection with other agree-ments and instruments.

Large projects for environmental infrastructureA number of environmental innovation projects require a broad-based approach using many actors and many, often large-scale, provisions. Typical of such projects is that the participation of many parties is required, various technological systems are cou-pled and that there are environmental innovation covenants and infrastructures, large-scale investments and potentially high environmental impact involved. For individual parties, environ-mental profits are not in proportion to the size of investments, while a collective approach can lead to a desirable cost-benefit ratio. Examples in the area of energy transition are CO2 infra-structure at power stations that enable CO2 storage for other parties in the area, infrastructure for the use of waste heat and CO2 for horticulture and the development of a light rail system for the transportation of goods in Amsterdam. The Cabinet will take stock of projects with high environmental returns that agree with the characteristics mentioned. How the national government can play a meaningful role as well as how

possible financial support can be realised will be expanded on for selected projects. This proposal will also be part of the inte-grated consideration concerning the distribution of FES funds. The government as a role modelIn its role as the so-called launching customer, the government can offer many opportunities to promote eco-efficient innovation in a targeted manner in the business community through gov-ernment orders. The government functions as the initiator of the launch of an innovation, or plays a role in expanding the market so that economies of scale can be achieved. In this endeavour, communication is an important instrument. As was announced in the Cabinet’s reaction to the report “Finding limits, pushing back frontiers” (“Grenzen zoeken, grenzen verleggen”) of the Innovation Platform, the Cabinet is preparing an action plan to produce new examples and good establishment of the launching customer in the purchasing policy of governmental bodies. The new public contracting Act will help in streamlining procedures and bringing the understanding of innovative contracting to the attention of contracting authorities in all governmental bodies.

The business community holds a key position in improving the

environment

Natural gas extraction in combination with CO2 storage in an almost empty gas field in the North Sea


44

Dutch knowledge and experience in such areas as water purification,

waste management, soil decontamination and sustainable

horticulture are successful export products all over the world

The Lower House will receive an action plan before 1 May 2006 describing how the launching customer can be anchored in gov-ernment policy. Supporting innovative enterprisesThe Cabinet recognises that sufficient capital, especially for SMEs and new and growing businesses, can be a bottleneck for innova-tion. In response to this, a capital instrument will be developed as part of the reassessment of the set of innovation instruments, so that potential backers of the SMEs, such as banks and participat-ing companies, will receive incentives to provide financial support which might otherwise be considered too risky. In response to a parliamentary motion, a study into the desirability of a risk capital fund specifically for eco-efficient innovations will be completed in early 2006. Based on this, it will be determined whether it is desir-able to set up a specific fund for eco-efficient innovations, or to dovetail with the capital instrument in combination with additional advice or adaptations. In early 2006, the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament will receive a Cabinet opinion regarding the desirability of a specific capital fund for eco-efficient innovations.

2.3.3 Greater responsibility for the business community Businesses are often better judges of the way in which they can decrease environmental pressure than the government. This is why the government is looking for ways to give businesses more freedom to choose techniques for emissions reduction. At the same time, it must possible to make an incontestable determina-tion of the progress made in emissions reduction.. With the intro-duction of tradeable CO2 emission allowances for, an approach has been found that is expected to satisfy all these desires. In addition, by imposing regulations, producers can be made responsible for reducing the environmental impact of their products. This can be done by requiring them, for instance, to collect and process their products once the items have reached the waste stage. This has already been arranged for car tyres, car wrecks, batteries and household appliances and audiovisual equipment. Distributors of fireworks have been made explicitly responsible for the safety of firework storage areas since 2004. Companies want to take greater responsibility for decreasing the damaging environmental consequences of production and dis-tribution. The Cabinet wants to give them more freedom to do so by providing a stimulus for relatively new instrument of private greening, by increasing the use of instruments that are in line with market conditions, and increasing the opportunities for social par-ties to hold businesses accountable for their actions. Private greeningBusinesses can settle environmental costs amongst them-selves, for example by imposing a levy on products or services, the income of which is used for environmental investments or innovation. We call this approach “private greening”. Under the Environmental Management Act, the government can sup-port such a scheme in cases that concern waste management by means of a declaration of universally binding status (AVV). A successful example is the producers’ responsibility, whereby sectors opted for the organisation of a collective system of waste processing. Businesses finance this by collecting a removal fee from their customers. Potential projects are possible in the car leasing industry (promoting the use of cleaner and quieter cars), the taxi industry (promoting the use of soot filters), inland navi-gation (soot filters) and the automotive industry (quiet tires). In 2006, the Cabinet will perform a quick scan of industries where private greening can lead to environmental gains, and study whether amendment of legislation and regulations is is


Private greening: the business community organises the collection and processing of old refrigerators and washing machines itself

OppOrtunityGrab your chance to innovate. At the end of the day, it will be to your advantage. The envi-ronment is an opportunity!

4�

46

required to support industries in this effort (for example, by expanding the options for declarations of universally binding status). The Cabinet will then invite industries to present pro-posals for private greening. The development will be reviewed in the Progress Report. If necessary the Cabinet will take meas-ures which can lead to the same results as with private green-ing. Increased use of market forces and greeningThe route taken to introduce more market mechanisms will be further expanded through existing forms of emissions trade, at European level or otherwise, by expanding to other sectors and to non-greenhouse gasses. In principle, the Cabinet supports the inclusion of the aviation industry in the European system of emissions trade. Whether or not a ticket tax is introduced in the Netherlands will depend, according to the Cabinet, on the degree to which other EU nations, including Germany and Belgium, introduce the tax and how effective it proves to be. Other forms of pricing of environmental pollution can also be introduced (see also section 3.1.2). Additional fiscal greening has been realised by the Cabinet in recent years through envi-ronmentally related differentiation in existing taxation. This approach will be continued where it is socially effective and efficient. At local level, the Cabinet also sees possibilities for greening (aimed at the shipping industry and parking rates). In the Progress Report, the Cabinet will present an overview of the situation concerning fiscal greening and market forces. Increasing accountability The Cabinet views increasing the accountability of the busi-ness community as an important instrument to reduce govern-ment involvement and improving the division of responsibilities. The Cabinet sees various options for this purpose. Experience acquired in the United States show that the threat of liability in combination with market pressure from consumers and inves-tors forces producers to integrate the environment more into their business plans. Businesses could insure themselves for major calamities. In 2007, the European Environment Liability Directive must have been implemented in national legislation. The directive also applies to environmental damage sustained as a result of specific activities that under EU regulations may not be carried out without a licence (IPPC, among others), the production and marketing of genetically modified organisms and the transport and storage of hazardous materials. The guiding

principle of the directive is that “the polluter pays”. Damage to the environment caused by the activities named in the directive must be remedied on the account of the operator. This is meant to encourage businesses to include negative consequences to the environment in they determine company policy. Therefore, the point of departure of the directive is in line with the Cabinet’s policy, which places increased responsibility with the business community in preventing damage to the environment. The Cabinet will also study how the instrument “naming & fam-ing’ can be used responsibly in rewarding individual responsibil-ity. The Aarhus Treaty will lead to increased transparency and improved access to information (via the Internet) concerning the development of emissions of hazardous chemicals from large emission sources. In this study, it will be seen whether public environmental information can be used to present environmen-tal success stories and put them in the spotlight, and if so, how. Finally, the Cabinet will see whether the dialogue between civil society and the business community (amongst others in the form of partnerships) needs to be facilitated, and whether the experiences gathered from partnerships can be put to better use in the policy. The Cabinet thinks partnerships, also from an


Local governmental bodies may decide to offer clean ships tax incentives

4�

international perspective, are a promising possibility for allow-ing social considerations to play a part in business activities. In the Progress Report, the Cabinet will present its standpoint concerning the meaning of partnerships in the policy and the possibilities for ‘naming & faming’. Socially responsible entrepreneurship Sections of the business world are showing that they are serious about their social responsibilities, both within the Netherlands and abroad. More and more companies are realising that entre-preneurship is not only a question of money, but also of values. At the end of 2006, it will be five years since the Social and Economic Council (SER) has presented its recommendations entitled, “The Profit of Values” (“de Winst van Waarden”). At that point, the Cabinet will take stock of the situation with regard to socially responsible entrepreneurship. Transparency and chains of responsibility will be important areas of attention. The Cabinet wants to encourage the business world to shoulder its own responsibilities by spreading the word on the good exam-ples set by companies via MVO Netherlands, and by increasing the transparency of businesses regarding socially responsible entrepreneurship. The annual Transparency Benchmark sets out the type and form of accountability companies give in their annual reports regarding the consequences of their business operations with respect to the environment, human rights and employee issues. By late 2006, research regarding the progress and possible environmental consequences of socially responsible entrepre-neurship will be concluded. In 2007, studies will be conducted into whether policies need to be adapted in the area of socially responsible entrepreneurship, which will include the results of the evaluation of the tax advantages associated with green investments. 2.4 Environmental policy: from your backyard to the atmosp-

here

The environmental policy is aimed, on the one hand, at essential issues such as safety and health, and the living environment in our neighbourhoods, and on the other hand, at the liveability of our planet for generations to come. In recent years, the distance between the people and the environmental policy has increased.

The environmental policy must be brought closer to the people. For this purpose, the Cabinet wants to:• Improve involvement by citizens in policymaking, so that

policy is geared more to the wishes, views and possibilities of citizens;

• Include the quality of the living environment inside and around the home in the environmental policy;

• Communicate about policy in a different way, by explaining more about the background of the policies, providing a better explanation of changes, and gearing communication to the people’s information needs.

2.4.1 increasing citizen involvement The policy to increase citizen involvement in the development of policy and support initiatives by citizens and civil-society organi-sations, will be continued. By developing policy based on the thoughts and actions of citizens, it is more likely that the policy will actually have social meaning. For the people, the environ-mental policy is relevant to their health and physical well being as well as to nature, food safety, animal friendliness, the quality of the living environment and the quality of life. In addition, peo-

Businesses are often better judges of how to reduce their

environmental pressure than the government


Concern for the living environment in the neighbourhood

48

ple consider employment opportunities and economic growth to be important. A study that was conducted in connection with the Future Agenda has shown that on the one hand, citizens expect active intervention on issues such as climate change and air pollution, on the other hand, citizens do not allow the govern-ment much room for measures that will require actual sacri-fices. According to the people, promoting technological solutions and making environmentally-friendly products more affordable are important ways to solve environmental issues, as well as measures that combat nuisance. The Cabinet’s proposals in this agenda are consistent with the values and preferences mentioned. Health is an important aspect of environmental policy for citi-zens. Therefore, the Cabinet will make sure that people are given insights into the environmental and health aspects of their own living environment, and in so doing will take into account differences in information requirements and knowledge levels. This can form the basis for active citizenship. In this effort, the information system that has already been developed in Gelderland, and the provincial risk charts, as well as the website

“What’s in Your Backyard” that is operational in Great Britain, will serve as examples. In order to ensure that the information actually meets the prevailing desires and expectations, a study will first be conducted into the content and form, which should be used to make the information available. The information sys-tem which will be developed, integrates current initiatives such as the updated website of the Emissions Registration that shows emissions figures for hazardous chemicals from large sources at local level and the soil quality website. > In mid-2006, the Cabinet developed a web portal, which

makes information available about health and the envi-ronment from different angles for population groups and citizens. In late 2006, a plan will be presented regarding a system which, based on the user’s postal code, will provide information on health and safety implications with the aid of existing environmental information. This system will become operational by 1 January 2008 at the latest.

> The scheme aimed at social initiatives (SMOM) will be expanded on, so that the possibilities for participation by organised groups of citizens can be broadened and aimed more at local initiative and international environmental issues.

> The Cabinet will involve citizens in (large) preparatory routes for environmental policy, so that it can gear its activities more to the citizens’ views and possibilities and increase support for policy proposals in decision-making processes.

2.4.2 bringing environmental policy closer to the citizen No one will deny that it is difficult to involve citizens in national or international environmental policy, if the quality of life in their own neighbourhood or in their own homes leaves much to be desired. Another difficulty is that there is a desire to improve the environment, but this desire cannot be translated into action for all kinds of reasons cannot. By removing such issues as noise pollution, annoying street litter or dog dirt, lack of greenery and concern about particular health and safety aspects in specific communities, the Cabinet wants to contribute to the solution to environmental issues close to home. After all, our living environment does extend all the way from our backyard to the atmosphere.

In Gelderland, people can find information on the Internet regarding the quality of their living environment

7 The environment and the art of good living (Milieu en de kunst van het goede leven), VROM Council recommendations no. 48, October 2005


4�

> The Cabinet will enter discussions with communities and provinces to determine how the State can support other gov-ernmental bodies in improving local living environments.

In the Progress Report, the Cabinet will indicate whether there is a need for this support, and in which form support will be most effective and best suited to inter-departmental relationships.

> The Cabinet wants to facilitate local initiatives by citizens in close collaboration with other governmental bodies. This is in line with the VROM Council recommendations [7].

We will focus on initiatives that can generate enthusiasm about the environment and sustainable development, and in cases of interest, can also be carried out (by others) on a larger scale.

Indoor environmentOn average, citizens spend about 85% of their time indoors. Indoor environmental conditions caused by humidity (due to activi-ties like cooking, bathing and drying laundry), combustion (due to cooking, heating, heating water, amongst others), volatile organic compounds (due to cleaning agents, paint, cosmetics, particle

board, amongst others) and radon gas (due to cement, amongst others) play an important role in health complaints. These can, depending on the environmental aspect, vary from allergic reac-tions and pulmonary disease to headaches, dizziness and cancer. Nuisance caused by noise or odours from neighbours (due to hearths and compost bins, for instance) may influence health. Next to road traffic, noise from air traffic and neighbours cause the most nuisance, with both accounting for 12% of serious nui-sance experienced by citizens. Six percent of the Dutch population suffers from serious insomnia according to the National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection (RIVM) because of noise caused by neighbours. In addition, noise pollution causes increased blood pressure, cardiovascular disease and decreased performance. Up to now, there was no integrated governmental policy relat-ing to the indoor environment. Based on studies and pilots that were conducted in recent years, the decision was taken to make an effort towards actual improvement of the indoor environmen-tal quality in schools, existing homes and new construction from 2006. In 2005, VROM measured the quality of indoor environments in a national study. The analysis of the research data will be com-plete in mid-2006. In the further development of policy for indoor environments, the effects of the indoor environment on the health of various popula-tion groups (men/women, but also employed/unemployed persons, children/elderly) will be taken into account. > In 2006, the Cabinet will indicate which options are available to

realise the healthy use of a classroom in practice. In addition, the indoor environment working group of the Municipal Health Services (GGD) is designing a national project to improve the indoor environment of schools.

> The Cabinet will present conclusions in its Progress Report about the possibilities and necessity for improvement of the indoor environment in existing homes.

Ways of realising short-term improvement include installing CO2 sensors in homes, promoting the maintenance of air treat-ment systems, agreements about unvented geysers and an instrument that will give insight into the indoor environment of the home when it is being bought or rented.

> In 2004, a study was done into compliance with the Buildings Decree in 40 newly constructed homes. It was determined that there were problems with the discharge of indoor air when ventilating and to a lesser degree with noise protection.

During the past few years, the distance between the people and

environmental policy has grown. Environmental policy must be

brought closer to the people


Even race cars are being used to advertise for CO2 compensation

Sou

rce:

Ter

ra V

ital

is

�0

In 2006, additional research will be done and recommenda-tions for subsequent actions will be made and applied if pos-sible.

2.4.3 changing the way we communicateThe government can be expected to present its policy in a com-prehensible, but also in meaningful, way. This is certainly also applies to cases where environmental policy changes, because of new insights or progress in the area of technological develop-ments. In addition, someone must be held accountable when new, complex environmental issues present themselves, such as climate change and the deterioration of global biodiversity. These are issues that easily seem far removed from citizens because of their sheer magnitude. For this reason, environmental communication is being rede-signed. Much more than before, communication will consist of information about the background of policy in terms that will appeal to various population groups, and are consistent with their information needs. Explanations of policy will provide greater insight into the results that have been achieved, and will include information on efforts by citizens, businesses and gov-ernmental bodies that have lead to these results. The European context of the policy and economic opportunities offered by the environmental policy, will receive special attention in the com-munication. In communication about changing policy, new subjects will be chosen to serve as symbols of a smarter and more modern envi-ronmental policy. Hybrid cars, energy neutral greenhouses and CO2 neutral air travel are examples. Communication as to the government’s sustainable purchasing policy can play a support-ing role in this. Individual citizens will only be asked to change their behaviour where necessary and realistic. Those who want to take things a step further will be offered the opportunity to do so in a manner that is consistent with the approach set out in this agenda. The so-called pragmatic idealism, i.e. making responsible choices without sacrificing comfort, which is often coupled to a commercial product, can serve as a guideline a catalyst. Various options are already available in the area of the environment, such as Trees for Travel, green electricity, natural gas with CO2 compensation, Cool Driving, FSC wood, but also options such as investing in environmental technological innova-tions in installations in one’s own region.

Finally, the environmental education policy will be brought up to date and adjusted to changes that have taken place in society and in environmental policy in recent years. > In mid-2006, the Cabinet will start a multi-faceted campaign

to provide insight into the background of environmental poli-cy that will target specific population groups, such as youths. In so doing, account will be taken of the various expectations people have of the government through measures such as a periodic requirement study of various target groups and evaluation and adjustment of public relations.

> The Cabinet will support initiatives that hold the prospect of practical action based on the image that the Future Agenda seeks to promote, through market research and communi-cation.

> In mid-2006, the Cabinet will introduce a memorandum about innovative approaches to nature and environmental education.

Pragmatic idealism: making responsible choices without sacrificing

comfort, and often coupled to a commercial product


�1

Closer to home

Healthy and safe living, from your backyard to the atmosphere.

FuTurE ProoF

�3

The Cabinet sees four big policy challenges in the (near) future. These relate to clean air and climate, clean water, the main-tenance of quality in local living environments and retention of global biodiversity. In the interest of protecting health, The EU has formulated strict requirements for environmental quality as it relates to air and water. This has resulted in great policy chal-lenges for the Netherlands. Maintaining the quality of the local living environment is a mostly national issue. In the city-state of the Netherlands it is becoming increasingly difficult to coordinate activities with each other, in such a way that a high quality of life is maintained. The environmental issues surrounding Amsterdam Airport Schiphol and the transportation of hazardous materials through the Netherlands are examples of this. Finally, this issue of biodiversity is still largely in the process of being recognised as a problem. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment of the United Nations illustrates the urgency of the problem, but for the most part, solu-tions lie in international collaboration. The Netherlands wants to take a leading role in this matter. In this chapter, policy proposals that are future-proof and will be expanded on in the coming year are put forth as agenda items for these policy challenges. In the

final section, policy proposals that will lead to a more efficient environmental policy are listed. 3.1 clean air and climate

Greenhouse gas emissions can result in global warming, more extreme weather conditions and rising sea levels. Keeping cli-mate change in check will require more drastic measures after the Kyoto agreements have expired (after 2012). The European Union has determined that the rise of average global tempera-tures must be limited to 2 degrees Celsius. In order to achieve this it will be necessary to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2050 (in comparison to 1990). Air pollution in the air, such as fine particles and NOx, can cause respiratory dis-ease and premature death. Acidifying chemicals, such as NH3, VOS and SO2 also affect the quality of the environment. The Netherlands is having great difficulty meeting both national emission ceilings (NEC directives) for acidifying chemicals, as well as EU requirements on local air quality. The European Commission’s new programme Clean Air for Europe (CAFE) inte-grates approaches to acidification and improvement of local air quality. The European Commission wants to improve European air quali-ty in the long term (probably by 2030 or 2040) up to a level where the air has “no significant negative effects” on human health or the environment. This will present an even greater policy chal-lenge for the Netherlands in the near future.In the policy challenge for cleaner air, the transition to durable energy production plays a central role. A structural approach, aimed at other forms and applications of energy for industry, households and traffic can help reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses, acidifying chemicals and chemicals that are detrimental to health. In order to support this with policy, the Cabinet has established an inter-departmental energy transition programme department. The programme department must facilitate market parties and civil-society organisations in looking for new ways to create a clean, affordable and reliable energy supply for the long term. At the same time, the programme department must strengthen the coherence of the national policy. This applies to both traditional independent policy areas, such as policy regard-ing air quality and to supply reliability, both in long-term and short-term policies. The changes that government and social partners must facilitate together with regard to the energy

3. Policy Programme: future-proof

10

20

30

40

50

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

CO

2 em

issi

ons

(Gt C

O2-

eq.)

Without policy fuel-substitution

CO2 storage

biofuel

sun, wind andnuclear power

energy savings

Emissions course in the case of a temperature increase not exceeding 2 degrees

Limiting global warming to 2 degrees is technically feasible

Globalcost-optimaluseofreductionoptionsforglobalCO2emissions

Sou

rce:

MN

P (2

006)

, 6th

Env

iron

men

tal O

utlo

ok

�4

transition should lead to sustainable energy supplies within 50 years. Six topics have been determined with respect to the energy tran-sition: new gas, sustainable mobility, green raw materials, chain efficiency, sustainable energy and the built area. For each of these topics, the Netherlands has either taken a unique position or can attain such a position. Public-private partnerships (plat-forms), which consist of various interested parties and experts function as brokers and boosters of transition routes within the various topics. The aim is that the platforms create innovation opportunities for the Netherlands and identify bottlenecks in policy and regulations. 3.1.1 on our way to clean energyPolicy aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions contributes to the transition to sustainable energy production. The Cabinet has formulated a number of proposals for this purpose, which are aimed at promoting clean energy and its efficient use: • Clear ambitions for the post-Kyoto period;• Sustainable supply reliability;

• Renewable energy policy after 2010;• The sustainability package;• Energy for development.

and proposals aimed at creating proper preconditions:• Emission ceilings for air quality - clarity for the long run; • Innovating techniques for energy carriers; • Preconditions for nuclear energy.

Clear ambitions for the post-Kyoto periodEurope is striving for a 15-30% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 as compared to 1990 for all developed coun-tries as a whole. This is why the possibilities for measures in the Netherlands have been studied [8]. The climate problem calls for structural changes in our energy supply system that can only be achieved at a considerable cost. Such changes can also have a positive effect on supply reliability and our dependence on producing countries. Yet such changes can only be carried through on a large scale if many countries participate. The rate of change is therefore uncertain. > This is why the Cabinet opts for a balanced and future-proof

approach, which entails the following: • Continuing down the road of energy conservation is a sen-

sible and logical part of the climate strategy. Stressing the area of industry and energy through emissions trade and innovation helps reduce costs. In a recent letter, the Minister of Economic Affairs indicated how the Cabinet would assess how the savings rate can be increased in the coming months.

• From a climatological point of view, nuclear energy appears to be a relatively cost-effective option. Whether expansion will be possible in the case of the Netherlands remains to be seen. In a liberalised market it is up to the sector to come up with initiatives. Any initiatives must satisfy to strict require-ments regarding safety and waste processing.

Supplementary to the amendment of the Nuclear Energy Act , a procedure was started for this purpose in which existing requirements are being examined and brought up to date where

Chapter 3 • Policy Program: Future-Proof

In the long term, this hydrogen bus may make transport possible without causing air pollution in the surrounding areas

8 Publication by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP) and the Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN), sent to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament in February 2006: Daniels, B.W. and I.C.N. Farlal (2006) Potential investigation of climate objectives and energy conservation up to 2020 (Potentieel verkenning klimaatdoelstellingen en energiebesparing tot 2020)

��

advisable. The procedure, which will be complete in 2008, will help bring about clarity for market parties. • Underground storage of CO2 is an appealing option for more

extensive climate policy. Preparations will be made to apply this method, including taking initial steps towards imple-mentation, such as linking it to emissions trade and carrying out large-scale demonstrations. Together with the energy sector and, specifically for the Rijnmond area, investigations into possible applications at existing and new power stations, will be conducted this year.

• Renewable energy (sun, wind and biomass) is a compara-tively expensive way to reduce CO2 emissions. The current approach of large-scale implementation must be better coordinated and combined with cost reduction by means of innovation (see also below in this section).

• The reduction policy for other greenhouse gasses will be intensified (see below in this section).

> The Cabinet has opted to expand the climate agenda to other policy areas and is studying possible incentives to get a wide coalition of countries involved in farther-reaching effective climate policies.

> The Cabinet has recently decided to implement an inter-departmental policy study (IBO) for the post-Kyoto climate policy. This study will focus on the effectiveness and eco-nomic consequences of various forms of international cli-mate collaboration and on expanding climate policy to other policy areas such as technology and international funding policy. The IBO should take about a year to complete.

> In October of 2006, the Netherlands will organise the confer-ence Make Markets Work for Climate. The purpose of the conference is to discuss how the market can be used better to approach climate issues more effectively.

Sustainable supply reliabilityIn late 2005, an advisory report by the General Energy Council and the Advisory Council on International Affairs was published entitled “Energetic foreign policy: energy supply reliability as a new main objective” (“Energiek buitenlands beleid: energievoor-zieningszekerheid als nieuwe hoofddoelstelling”). The government will present a memorandum regarding energy and foreign policy in response to this report in the near future. It will focus on an inte-grated energy policy with the areas of energy reliability, efficient energy markets and sustainable energy management serving as cornerstones.

In addition to climate issues, considerations surrounding energy supply reliability play an increasingly important role in planning future (European) energy supplies. > The Cabinet aims at realising ambitions for the climate, energy

supply reliability, air quality, and competition in a coherent fashion. This also the nature of the effort that will be made in international discussions, especially in the EU, where energy in 2006 will be discussed by energy ministers and heads of gov-ernment on various occasions.

> The Cabinet will actively participate in the series of discus-sions about energy, the climate, air pollution and industrial development provided by the UN Committee for Sustainable Development (CSD). This will be an opportunity to treat various topics in a coherent manner, and to initiate concrete policy and actions with greater involvement and collaboration from UN institutions, the World Bank and the private sector.

Renewable energy policy after 2010The Cabinet is working towards affordable, secure and climate-neutral energy management. In order to secure the reliability of (European) energy supplies, renewable sources will play an increasing role. Combating cli-mate change will also mean increasing reliance on renewable energy sources. At this time, the high costs of renewable energy are an obstacle to their playing a significant role in the energy supply. These costs are even higher than the benefits in terms of extra supply reliability. In case of CO2 reduction, current costs are the only reason other reduction options are more affordable. In order to allow renewable energy to play the required role in the long term, production costs must decrease significantly. Policy must be focussed more on reducing renewable energy costs. Current policy already contributes to this cost reduction of renewable energy techniques. Innovation aimed at cost reduc-tion can, however, be targeted even more as the focal point of policy. Therefore, when implementing policy for renewable energy for the period after 2010, options will be investigated for promoting this cost reduction as much as possible. An even greater effort will be made than before to incorporate the feature of a transitional approach into the policy.

The climate issue calls for structural changes in our energy supply

system at a considerable cost

Chapter 3 • Policy Program: Future-Proof

�6

> In the coming months, the Cabinet will search for possibili-ties to focus post-2010 policy for renewable sources more on significant cost reduction.

• Several aspects will be done expeditiously and in consulta-tion with the sector. The Minister of Economic Affairs will present initial conclusions about feasibility and applicabil-ity this spring in a letter to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament.

• The other EU countries must be convinced of the added value of the transitional approach. Collaboration with EU partners is crucial to the success of the transitional route. Innovation takes place at international level.

Sustainability package The Cabinet has developed a sustainability package parallel to the decision-making with respect to the possible closing of the Borssele nuclear power plant. This package is intended to provide an additional boost for the transition to sustainable energy manage-ment and is aimed at concrete emission reductions of 1.4 Mton of CO2 annually, in addition to innovations in energy management. In particular, the sustainability package focuses on energy conserva-tion, clean fossil fuels (CO2 storage) and renewable energy sources (including innovative biofuels). The Cabinet has added a State con-tribution from additional FES funds amounting to 250 million euros. As a result of consultations with energy providers EPZ, Delta and Essent, businesses will make an additional amount of 250 million euro available for their own projects and for the establishment of a fund.> In the government letter on Borssele of 10 January 2006, the

main issues were described that are relevant to the alloca-tion of FES funds. The energy transition policy will serve as a guideline for working out the details of proposals. The funds for the Sustainability Package will be spent in the period from 2006 to 2012 and will be distributed nearly equally amongst the areas of energy conservation, clean fossil fuels, and renewable energy sources. Sixty million euros will go to the development and application of innovative biofuels. The instruments that are being developed will boost innovations and technological devel-opments in particular all three areas, in addition to CO2 reduc-tion.

In addition to the Borssele package, the Cabinet has earmarked monies for the Wadden Fund. These will also be used to sup-port projects that are aimed at increasing the sustainability of the energy supply (for example, as part of Energy Valley).

Energy for developmentIn developing countries, energy is the engine for economic growth. However, the associated increase in CO2 emissions, especially in the fast-growing developing countries, is a source of great concern. The Cabinet will therefore take specific meas-ures to promote a sustainable energy supplies and infrastruc-ture in developing countries, in part in line with conclusions drawn in the 2004 conference Energy for Development. > The Cabinet will devote itself to establishing a sustainable,

healthy and accessible energy supply in developing countries by taking steps that include the following:

• Applying the World Bank’s set of financial instruments more effectively, so that a sustainable energy supply can be real-ised in developing countries.

• Using the Dutch financial instrument that is aimed develop-ing countries more for energy-related matters. This means that more attention is paid to increasing access to energy and to making energy supplies in developing countries sus-tainable.

• Intensifying the discussion with Dutch businesses and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (BWCSD) in order to promote participation by the private sector.

• Encouraging the transfer of Dutch experience and expertise, in such areas as energy efficiency and long-range agree-ments for energy. Special attention will be paid to PUM, the programme through which retired managers and experts make themselves available to assist and pass on knowl-edge to businesses and institutions that require specialised knowledge and experience which is insufficiently available in the country in question.

Underground storage of CO2 is an appealing option

for climate policy

Chapter 3 • Policy programme: future-proof

A beautiful world is clean ... a world where we can breathe a sigh of relief

Clean

�8

Emission ceilings for air quality: clarity in the long run The Cabinet strives for greater certainty and clarity for the future of air emissions so that businesses can make better investment decisions. In this way, repeated investments and retrofits (additional measures to existing installations) can be avoided. This means the business community will be better prepared for the environmental issues of tomorrow (and the day after). Because NEC goals are determined at European level, the Dutch input is aimed at determining EU objectives for the long term at an early stage. The 2006 NEC review by the European Commission will be the appropriate occasion for this. > At EU level, the Netherlands will make a plea for timely

determination of EU goals for the long term. The Dutch input in this discussion will be determined based on the results of the NEC review. For new NEC substances, such as fine particle dust, the input will be aimed initially at determin-ing target values. The input will be discussed with the sec-tors involved. In addition, coordination will take place with respect to the Dutch input with other European countries that have similar problems as those in the Netherlands.

Innovative techniques for energy carriersThrough technologically innovative procedures for external safe-ty, the costs to society for realising safety standards can be lim-ited. In the U.S., these procedures have been applied for the past 20 years. In this case, innovations for external safety are being developed by the business community on government order. The advantage of this approach is that products and/or approaches become available which contribute to the solution of a govern-ment problem as a result of a relatively short procedure. The Cabinet is considering issuing three ‘tenders’ in 2007 with the abovementioned programme design. In connection with this, the Cabinet has chosen to target tenders related hydrogen in particular. These energy carriers are expected to play a role of increasing importance in the Netherlands’ energy supply. The goal is to implement the innovations developed as a result of these tenders by 2010. This proposal will play a part in the inte-grated discussion concerning the distribution of FES funds. Preconditions for nuclear energyThe present Nuclear Energy Act originates from the 1960s of the last century. This means that it does not include aspects that are important to current insights. As a whole, the design of the act also needs to be reviewed. In the initial phase, a modern-ised Nuclear Energy Act will lay down new rules on a number of issues. This will entail, among others, that the competent authority for issuing licenses to nuclear facilities will taken on a simpler nature, and the term for which licences can be issued will be set to a maximum of 40 years for new nuclear facilities. > The Cabinet will publish a memorandum around the summer

of 2006 that will set out the conditions considered accept-able for the construction of a new nuclear facility in the Netherlands.

> After finalising and implementing these changes, the oppor-tunity for total review of the Nuclear Energy Act will be considered in late 2006. In that context, an evaluation of the Nuclear Energy Act will be carried out, which is aimed par-ticularly at judicial streamlining and achieving consistency with international standards).

The Cabinet wants to work towards clarity about the final desti-nation of nuclear waste. In the modernised Nuclear Energy Act, the option for competent authorities to opt to direct the reprocessing of irradiated fuel (or not) will be included. Criteria will be developed for this. In addi-tion, the policy with regard to dismantling reactors will also be


Clarity as to the destination of nuclear waste

��

In order to combat climate change,

we must increase our use of renewable energy sources

developed. This will largely concern the creation of funds, and criteria for an immediate or delayed dismantling, as well as the return to a “green field” situation, that is the addition of a micro-total energy installation to a functional industrial complex. > In 2006, the Cabinet will adopt a policy position regarding the

dismantling of nuclear facilities. 3.1.2 sustainable mobility

The transition to sustainable mobility is directed at the develop-ment and expedited application of sustainable engine fuels (nat-ural gas, biofuels and hydrogen), economical and clean vehicles, and route guidance and communication systems (to improve traffic flow). The following future-proof proposals are consistent with this:

• ‘Decarburising’ fuels for traffic;• Expanding CO2 emissions trade;• Fees for operating polluting vehicles and vessels;• Coalitions for clean cars.

Decarbonising engine fuelsGreenhouse gas emissions are still increasing in the transport sector. For this reason increased attention will be paid to CO2 reduction in transport. The current policy consists of influencing traffic behaviour (“New Driving” campaign, kilometre pricing), promoting economical vehicles (Private Motor Vehicle and Motorcycle Tax differentiation, ACEA covenant) and biofuels. The climate problem will require much more than emissions reduction in the present propulsion systems. Therefore, it has been included in the Mobility Memorandum that a transition is necessary to behaviour influencing and traffic and trans-portation systems, together with new fuel and propulsion technolo-gies. In the interest of strengthening the policy for this sector, the Cabinet wants to promote the transition to fuels with a lower (long cycle) carbon content. This is called decarburisation. Options to achieve this are still relatively expensive.

> This is why, as with biofuels, a balanced approach has been cho-sen with measured implementation, as well as efforts focused on innovation to decrease costs. In the Progress Report, the Cabinet will indicate whether it is possible and useful to introduce


0

50

100

150

200

1981

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

NOx - petrol NOx - dieselfine particles PM10 - petrolfine particles PM10 - diesel

Inde

x of

allo

wab

le e

mis

sion

s pe

r ki

lom

etre

(100

=req

uire

men

ts in

198

1)

Year car was built

AllowableemissionsofNOxandfineparticlesbycarsafter1981

Cars have become much cleaner during the past decades. However, new diesels still pollute much more than petrol cars do

Sou

rce:

TN

O

60

a coordinating instrument, which can provide a stimulus to decarburisation in such way that will also improve supply reliability.

Expanding CO2 emissions tradeIn order to improve division of responsibilities, the Cabinet wants to extend emissions trade to other sectors and green-house gasses in the coming years. Attention will also be paid to cost-effectiveness, economic impact and the competitive posi-tion of industries. A condition will always be that implementation costs of the trading system must be in balance with the advan-tages of the results to be achieved. For large industrial compa-nies and the energy sector, there is already a European system of CO2 trade in place. A discussion is also underway at European level to extend the system to aviation. > The Cabinet will argue at EU level for the inclusion of avia-

tion in the European system as soon as possible (before 2012). In addition, the Cabinet feels that all options for other economic instruments, such as a ticket tax, kerosene tax or transit fees should also remain available.

> Together with other EU Member States, the Cabinet will study the possibilities for emissions trading in the transport sector, preferably coupled with the European system. This option can then be compared to alternative instruments, such as setting a CO2 standard or a tax.

> The Cabinet will also make a plea at EU level for investiga-tion into the possibility of including the maritime shipping in the trade system.

The polluter pays Passing on environmental costs may help decrease air pollu-tion and other environmental consequences. The desirability of pricing in personal and goods transport has been indicated in the Mobility Memorandum. The pricing per kilometre will lead to a reduction of traffic emissions. In the EU, agreement has been reached about the Common User Charge Directive, which stipulates that the European Commission will develop a model to calculate external costs for all forms of transport. In addition to the pricing of road traffic listed above, the following actions will be introduced: > In the Cabinet position regarding the Inter-Departmental

Policy Study of user fees for goods transportation (Interdepartementale Beleidsonderzoek gebruiksvergoeding goederenvervoer), that will be sent to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament in the first half of 2006, the Cabinet will indicate how passing on the costs to society to the internal navigation sector can be achieved.

> The Cabinet will ask the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) and the EU for financial measures and tightening of standards in order to reduce emissions by maritime ship-ping. The maritime shipping industry’s share of emissions (especially SO2 and NOx) is substantial, and will increase if measures are not taken.

Coalitions for clean carsIn the foreseeable future, new diesel cars, lorries and busses could be marketed that hardly pollute, and are affordable as well. These vehicles should be made available as soon as possi-ble, so that air quality will improve and the European car indus-try can gain opportunities in the USA and Japan, where strict environmental restrictions apply to diesel cars. The Netherlands is looking for coalitions with like-minded countries in order to have a stronger position during negotiations in Brussels.

Extend CO2 emissions trade to the aviation sector?


61

In the foreseeable future, new diesel cars, lorries and busses could

be marketed that hardly pollute and are affordable as well

> The Cabinet aspires - together with like-minded Member States - for a rapid introduction of the so-called Euro 5 Standard for personal vehicles, and adding a Euro 6 Standard that prescribes a level at which diesel personal vehicles can be made clean.

In the Progress Report, the Cabinet will indicate whether it is possible and useful to place large orders, together with like-minded countries and stakeholders from those countries, for clean (Euro 6) and economical vehicles, so that car produc-ers will introduce these onto the market more quickly.

The Netherlands also wishes to see a Euro 6 Standard for lorries, which will reduce the NOx emissions even more, be developed expeditiously.

3.1.3 Green raw materialsThe Netherlands has excellent agricultural, food and chemi-cal industries, as well as an important international port and logistic expertise. Green raw materials can be used for the production of materials, chemicals, transport fuels, electricity and heat. Reusing and recycling raw materials are also ways in which supplies of raw materials can be made more sustainable. > The Cabinet is studying the feasibility of the ambitions of the

Green Raw Materials Platform to replace 25 percent of fossil raw materials for the production of materials and chemicals with green raw materials by 2030.

The Platform wants to achieve this through coproduction of chemicals, transport fuels, electricity and heat on the one hand. On the other hand, it sees the possibilities for innova-tive use of green raw materials in applications (other than for food and energy) and making existing products and proc-esses in the chemical industry more sustainable. By 2030, the Platform wants 30 percent of fossil raw material to have been replaced by green raw materials. The percentage varies per finished product:

25% for electricity, 17% for heat, 60% for transport fuels and 25% for chemicals. Achieving 30 percent is only feasible if Dutch energy use is kept constant until 2030 as a result of substantial energy conservation.

A clear framework for biomassIt is to be expected that, under the influence of the CO2 market, increasing use will be made of biomass as an energy source. It must be avoided that the approach to climate change will result in more environmental problems in other areas. The

entire process of biomass production, transportation, use and waste processing must conform to sustainability criteria. The present policy only covers part of the cycle. A policy for sustain-able biomass production, in particular, is lacking. This could be realised through an international system of certification. Certification could include sustainability criteria in the broadest sense, including ecological aspects like water use, soil quality, biodiversity, land use competition, nutrient balance and socio-economic aspects, but must also be applicable in practice on an international scale for all sectors where biomass is used directly or indirectly (sectors like electricity, transport, agriculture, etc.) > The Cabinet has authorised various exploratory studies

into sustainability criteria for biomass, which should result in a clear framework for sustainable use. Developments in Europe will be followed closely, and knowledge and experiences acquired will be shared with the European Commission and other Member States, so that an interna-tional certification system can be set up as soon as possible.

Under which conditions can biomass become a sustainable source of energy?


62

3.1.4 built areaThe built area (construction, housing and working) accounts for approximately one-third of Dutch energy consumption. Significant reduction is still possible. In addition, many innova-tive applications are available. For this reason, the topic is of great interest for energy transition. A system of quality labelling could contribute to the transition in this area.

Introduction of systems with quality labellingFor sectors that do not fall under CO2 emissions trade, the con-tinuation and/or intensification of an incentives policy is neces-sary. In the built area, new construction is important in the long term, but existing construction will deliver the greatest profits in the short term. However, this does present obstacles. The investing party is not the same as the profiting party, the target group is large (6.7 million households) and the cost-effective-ness of the measures is not clear. All of this has resulted in a low sense of urgency on the part of owners of houses and build-ings, despite sharp increases in the cost of energy. The Cabinet will present a proposal to change over to a system that divides the existing stock of houses and buildings into cat-

egories based on energy quality (with labels based on an energy index, just like the current one for cars). Implementation of the European directive concerning energy performance of buildings (EPBD) offers possibilities for introducing such a system. This system can then form the basis for assigning financial gains, linking performance to the housing evaluation system (rental sector), and for the introduction of a system of “white certifi-cates” (compulsory annual reduction quota, such as for energy providers). Up to now, the Energy Performance Standard (EPS) for new construction and large-scale renovation has been progressively toughened. This always leads to much discussion (costs, rela-tionship to other goals). The Cabinet plans to harmonise the calculation method with the EPBD approach for existing con-struction. The relationship between standards and behaviour is also being studied. The input of the Cabinet lies in the development of a vision that is coupled to the energy transition system with a long-range outlook (of at least ten years) for the development of the EPS. In this endeavour, the coupling with collective innovation options at neighbourhood level (including climate neutral fuels and residual heat supply). Continued innovation in new construction will eventually result in new opportunities for existing construc-tion. The vision will be developed as part of the energy transition together with the target groups. 3.2 clean water

According to the European Water Framework Directive (WFD), European waters must achieve a ‘good status’ by 2015. The aim is to ensure that water quality will not impede the fulfilment of ecological and user functions for agriculture, industry, pota-ble water production and recreation. Unlike current goals, the future ones will be binding.

In the coming years, it will have to become clear exactly which goals are to be valid, and exactly which tasks are to result from limiting the pressure on Dutch surface and ground water. It is, however, already clear that a considerable effort will be required for various chemicals in order to achieve the objectives by 2015.

In order to make sure that the required reductions in pressure on surface water are achieved without excessive economic costs

Great energy savings can still be realised in homes and offices

Strict requirements result in well-insulated homes


63

resulting from future requirements of the Water Framework Directive and other water-related objectives, an efficient approach must be applied on all fronts. The most important con-tributions will be:• Expediency in the water chain;• More efficient use of rainwater;• Public information on water consumption;• Innovation in relation to water decontamination and separa-

tion;• Fitting water systems to improve spatial quality. Meeting the standards is going to require an integrated approach from a variety of sources. 3.2.1 An effective water chainThe water chain consists of three links, namely drinking water supply, as provided by the drinking water companies, collection and discharge of waste water via municipal sewage systems, and the decontamination of water by the Water Boards. All the parties involved agree that significant improvements in efficien-cy can be achieved in the water chain through improved collabo-ration between the various parties involved in the water chain.

In the Amsterdam area, the municipality of Amsterdam and the Amstel, Gooi and Vecht District Water Control Board have incor-porated sewerage and decontamination activities in a single company (Water Management and Sewage Service) some years ago. This has generated considerable improvements in effi-ciency. This company and the drinking water company recently merged (to form the Waternet Foundation). This is going to gen-erate short-term savings of 5% of the total revenue (8 million euro annually). In 2008, residents are going to be sent a single water bill comprising four components, namely drinking water, sewage, wastewater decontamination and surface water man-agement. This will give the public a greater insight into their water expenses.

In addition, a lot of steps have been taken which have less to do with structure and more with substantive collaboration. The‘Future Water chain Gelderland’ initiative is just one example and led to the required efficiency improvements being achieved or laid down as goals.

BenchmarkingThese initiatives clarify how important it is to improve efficiency and transparency vis-à-vis the public by means of successful pilot projects.> The regions involved indicate that State facilitation of such

initiatives is desirable. With this in mind, not only are legal obstacles going to be removed, but a limited budget is also going to be made available in the coming years to support regions with the hard to attribute costs of implementing collaborative initiatives. These would have to be initiatives that serve as examples. The results of the implementation studies have to be made generally available. Together with the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament, an approach has been opted for which leaves as much room as possible for parties in the field to improve efficiency and transparency in their own way, without them being free from accountabil-ity. An evaluation moment has also been agreed in 2007 at which point as assessment will be made as to whether policy adjustment is required. In the meantime, a number of steps have been taken by the various parties involved, including the introduction of structural benchmarking.

> The Cabinet wants to encourage all municipalities to imple-ment a benchmark for sewerage by 2010.

> In 2007, studies are to be performed to see whether, and how, it is possible to arrive at a benchmark in 2010 that includes all three sectors. This initiative links up to a study started in 2006 into the possibilities of benchmarking in the wastewater chain.

An efficiency goalIn order to maintain the speed of the process and to measure progress, it is necessary to make the efficiency goal more con-crete and it would be a good idea to agree on a target.> Based on regional experiences, ongoing studies and data

from benchmarking and monitoring of the water chain, the Cabinet thinks an attainable target goal is 1 to 2% annu-ally within and between the sectors in the next 10 years. The Cabinet also acknowledges that there are considerable regional differences, in part because some regions have already implemented initiatives. There are also big differ-ences per link in the water chain. In the drinking water sector, significant efficiency measures have already been implemented during that past few decades. The challenge lies mostly in the wastewater chain, especially in the case


64

of municipalities in which the level determines an efficient approach to sewage. Following on from agreements made in the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament, the Government Consultative Group on the Water chain (BOW) and the Steering Committee on Drinking Water, Sewage and Waste Water Policy (DRAB) are going to implement the following process:

> In 2006, based on the assumption that the parties have been working on their target goals for years, the Cabinet wants to ask regions to formulate efficiency targets for 2015 at regional level, and indicate what the attainable intermedi-ate position will be in 2007. These regional efficiency goals are to be made known, together with initial monitoring results, in a letter to be sent to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament in the first half of 2007. The letter will also refer to efficiency improvements realised in the recent past.

> These goals will play a role in the evaluation of the water chain policy in 2007 and an assessment will be made as to whether adjustments to the policy are required.

Investing together in a more efficient use of rainwaterSeparating rainwater from household wastewater in the flow to the sewage system allows more efficient decontamination and reduces the spread of contamination from sewer overflows. Linking up with restructuring work in urban areas, or with the replacement of old sewage systems makes effective separation in existing situations. The Cabinet feels that more emphasis needs to be placed on ‘treating rainwater differently’, of which separation is an important aspect. High initial costs constitute a serious bottleneck.> In consultation with municipalities and water boards, the

Cabinet is going to investigate the financial income and expenditure of separation (related to the environmental results). The consultations will also focus on which sectors the revenue and expenditure will apply, as well as what the actual costs will be. The results are to be presented at the end of 2006.

> In consultation with the water boards and municipalities, the cabinet is going to determine what incentives are possible to encourage a different approach to rainwater, and will report its findings to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament in the spring of 2007.

Public information on water use The Cabinet also wants to offer citizens greater insight into their water consumption and the related costs. Public information is to be provided on the way in which citizens can contribute to water chain efficiency. This information will cover the sensible use of drinking water, the importance of not dumping contami-nating substances chemicals (leftover medicines) and waste materials (such as frying oil and cleaning rags which may lead to stoppages), and the unnecessary dumping of rainwater into a wastewater sewer. The Cabinet is also going to encourage households to acquire an insight into the total costs involved in drinking water consumption. This can be done by billing the costs of the three links in the water chain (drink water sup-ply, collection and discharge of waste water, and waste water decontamination) on a single invoice. Another option is to send households an annual specification (with or without the addi-tional local costs) of its annual water chain costs. The Cabinet expressly wants to allow regions to link costs more to consumer use. At the moment, legislation regarding decontamination fees is being changed so as to allow a tax to be charged based on


Keeping rain water out of the sewage system contributes to efficiency

6�

drinking water consumption. This option already exists for sew-age and drinking water.> In order to reinforce consumer behavioural aspects, the

Cabinet wants to develop an information campaign before 2007, together with organisations in the water chain and citi-zens, to increase insight into personal actions and responsi-bilities.

3.2.2 diffuse sources

An integral approachThe Cabinet has determined that, in order to comply with the requirements of the Water Framework Directive, a coordinated, integral environmental approach to diffuse pollution is required. This approach must not only focus on water, but also, through other environmental compartments such as air and soil, on the use of chemicals, products and emissions. In addition, the approach will focus on certain target groups that can be regard-ed as the most important diffuse sources, such as agriculture, traffic and construction.

A coordinated plan should lead to a cost-effective package of measures that covers the various levels from local to interna-tional, with a result-oriented approach being required in addition to a source-oriented one. Based on information that is already available, the conclusion is that a wide range of sources will be involved, but that the focus will be primarily on chemicals, and the main sources of those chemicals with regard to which the targets are being 9substantially) exceeded. Innovations in the field of water decontamination, but also in relation to production methods, products and chemicals can make an important con-tribution to a cost-effective approach.> In the spring of 2007, the Cabinet, as directed by VROM and

in cooperation with all parties involved, is going to develop an integral implementation programme with associated cost estimates for the approach to all the areas of attention listed above for diffuse pollution. This programme is to include agreements about responsibility, distribution of roles and leadership, with the partial aim being to meet the targets set by the Water Framework Directive, and the results of the economic costs and benefits analysis (MKVA) of the imple-mentation of the Water Framework Directive.

Important points of departure as regards drafting the agree-ments are: • Indicated and shared ‘urgency and necessity’ for tackling the

diffuse burden; • ‘Improved relations with Brussels’;• A ‘more efficient and effective policy’ based on transparent

environmental goals; • The ‘long-term perspective clearly illustrated’.

This programme has to also be formulated in, for example, the December memorandum 2007 based on the Water Framework Directive and the ‘21st Century Water Management’ (WB21) rec-ommendations, and also has to be included in the 2009 catch-ment area management plans. The action plan to be developed will include a full range of measures. A number of different lev-els of concrete policy intentions and actions have already been identified.

Significant improvements in efficiency of the water chain can be

achieved through improved collaboration


Medicines are a diffuse source of water pollution

66

Regional levelWithin the framework of the implementation of the Water Framework Directive, the regional partners will be asked in 2006 to specify as clearly as possible the task (required reduction of diffuse pollution) and options for local and regional measures with related cost estimates. In addition, they will be asked to indicate to what degree the task can be realised, or which prob-lems are to be expected regarding implementation. > The Cabinet is going to invite parties to look beyond the

boundaries of water policy when identifying measures (as in the case of pesticide policies, traffic policies, construction material policies, soil policies, etc.) so that a broader inven-tory can be drawn up to support the implementation pro-gramme.

National levelMeasures taken at national level must serve partly to create an adequate judicial instrument and facilitate implementation for the regions. In addition, the Water Framework Directive requires EU Member States to develop measures for themes that are important at Member State level and (partial) catchment area level. This concerns the following areas of attention:

Pesticides: A lot of pesticides do not meet the environmental quality standards for surface water. These are often pesticides that are approved based on European criteria.> The Cabinet has given instructions for a decision tree for the

Pesticides Approval Committee to be formulated which must guarantee that approved usage of pesticides does not exceed environmental quality standards.

> In 2006, an interim evaluation is to be carried out of the Sustainable Vegetation Protection Policy Document. This evaluation will be used as a basis for assessing whether or not policy adjustment is desirable, also in the light of the Water Framework Directive.

> With regard to biocides, a policy programme is being imple-mented for the period up to the completion of European harmonisation. It will include a description of the situation regarding use and prevention, and of the actions to be per-formed.

Nitrogen and phosphates: The Third Nitrate Directives Programme of Action [9] defines the national manure policy with the exception of the nitrogen user standards for sandy areas for the years 2008 and 2009.> Based on the evaluation of the manure policy, these stand-

ards are to be determined at the end of 2007 in such a way that the nitrate standard of 50 mg nitrate per litre in the top surface water layer will become attainable, in sandy areas as well. Given the user standards for nitrogen, phosphates and animal manure, as well as the stricter stipulations for the use of manure products, the Third Nitrate Directives Programme of Action is an important step towards realizing environmental goals for ground and surface water that are part of the commitments of the Water Framework Directive and the Ground Water Directive.

Heavy metals: Concentrations of heavy metals in the ground and surface water are probably too high to fulfil the water quality requirements of the Water Framework Directive. Most of these metals have entered the soil in the past via animal manure and are now being deposited by the ground water in lakes and riv-ers. The net burden of agricultural soil with copper and zinc decreased dramatically between 1980 and 2004, in part because of the smaller quantities that ended up in animal manure via animal feed. Nevertheless, a sizeable area of agricultural ground is burdened with copper and zinc from animal manure. Research indicates that 45% of copper in animal manure comes from copper baths used to disinfect the hooves of cattle. The content of these baths is really chemical waste, but in practice it is often mixed with manure. The other metals (especially copper and zinc, but cobalt as well) come from animal feed.> In the Progress Report, the Cabinet indicates which meas-

ures it wants to take to minimise the diffuse burden from copper baths in a cost-effective way. In addition, the Cabinet is going to look into possible ways of reducing heavy metals in cattle feed even more.

With regard to water usage, the Cabinet wants to provide citizens

with improved insight into their own use and the costs involved


9 Third Dutch Programme of Action (2004-2009) for Nitrate Directives (91/676/EEG). Lower House of the Dutch Parliament, Session 2003-2004, Annex to 28385, no. 40

Rules are good for us, but having too many is not. We want rules that work and limit burdens.

Wellorganised

68

At the moment, legal options are being created to formulate demands at a local level regarding emissions of such things as heavy metals which are the result of materials use and choice, if such is necessary for environmental quality. This will increase the possibilities of achieving an area-specific consideration of the approach.> The Cabinet is going to develop a manual that will facilitate

the application of this set of instruments in the region.

(Animal) medicines: The policy document entitled ‘Dealing with Risks Pragmatically’ and the WFD implementation document draw particular attention to animal medicines. A chain analy-sis has been used to determine the areas in which emission reduction is desirable/attainable. Besides the use of (animal) medicines in general, the emissions from hospitals and care institutions also require attention. On the other hand, there needs to be a focus on the presence of (residual) antibiotics in animal manure and the burden on soil, ground and surface water as a result of animal manure.

> A study is currently being performed to explore in more detail the measures for possible emission reduction of (ani-mal) medicines. The Cabinet is going to inform the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament on this matter in 2006.

Shipping: The Waste Water Household governmental decree includes a ban on the dumping of sanitary waste by recreational vessels as of 2009. This ban is primarily meant to improve the bacteriological quality of surface water in relation to the swim-ming water guidelines, and has the additional advantage of facilitating emission reductions of other chemicals.> The national government is going to study whether other cat-

egories of vessels can be served with a similar ban and the Cabinet will include this matter in the Progress Report.

Social services: An important part of the diffuse burden is caused by entrepreneurial activities. Initiatives to tackle this problem are being held up by economic interests. One solution could be to ask businesses to offer social services, in return for payment, in the form of a more ecological approach to business (such as maintaining field borders and sides of ditches). At the moment, it is not possible to apply such an instrument because of obstructions of a spatial, economic, judicial, organisational and financial nature.> The Cabinet is going to focus on removing these obstructions

and on creating an instrument for social services. International levelFor some chemicals such as PAHs from traffic and phthalates (plasticisers) from plastic, it is clear that a large part of the dif-fuse burden is the result of the application and use of products in the Netherlands and elsewhere. At an international level, attention is focusing on reaching agreements about register-ing environmentally relevant materials and reducing the use of chemicals worldwide. The approach to this diffuse burden is most efficient at European level through regulations on products and/or chemicals. Once REACH becomes operational, it will con-tribute to increased suppression of emissions in the long run. An RIVM study [10] shows that there are various ways of including measures at European Union level for certain substances, for which targets have been formulated in the forthcoming Priority Substances daughter directive, .> The Cabinet is going to have a study carried out into the con-

tribution from various diffuse routes, and which European


Dumping of sanitary waste by recreational vessels will be prohibited

6�

regulations could actually contribute to a reduction in the load, after which it will actively lobby Brussels. The input from the Netherlands concerning the Priority Substances daughter directive is aimed at linking goals to measures at European Union level.

An effective approach through innovationThe innovation platform has designated water as a key area in which the Dutch industrial sector is a strong market player. Various studies have shown that the water decontamination and water division sectors have the potential to grow to become one of the most competitive sectors of the Dutch economy. Not only does the Netherlands have excellent scientific credentials, they also have strong niche players. Applying modern techniques in wastewater decontamination will enable the interception of many more polluting substances (such as heavy metals and materials which decompose poorly). This will help keep surface water and waterbeds clean, have a positive effect on the produc-tion of drinking water from surface water, and avoid unneces-sary health risks. In connection with Water being a key area, the Cabinet is going to study whether there are any relevant innova-

tions that offer opportunities to improve the Dutch competitive position, and is planning to report back to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament early in 2007.> The Cabinet wants to build up a public-private partnership

with the sector. To this end, the Dutch sector must draw up a combined innovation agenda, which should be based in part on the goals of the Water Framework Directive.

> The Cabinet is going to ask the water boards and drinking water companies to act as launching customer for innova-tive water decontamination and water division technology. In order to facilitate the successful international market-ing of technologies, initial application in the home country is essential. The Cabinet is going to study how the financial risks involved for these organisations can be removed as much as possible, and present a proposal by the end of 2006.

3.3 Quality of living environment

The Cabinet wants to offer Dutch citizens a living environment that is sufficiently safe, healthy and attractive. The quality of the living environment around the home is of special importance. This is where daily life takes place, children grow up, people relax, and where they need to have faith that they are not being exposed to exceptional health or other safety risks, with nuisance and hindrances being kept to a minimum. Increasing prosperity and commercial activities in the highly urbanised country of the Netherlands, as well as the increasing demands residents place on their living environment, make this a complex problem which can only be solved through careful alignment between environ-ment and space.

In practice, many of the aspects of the environmental policy are combined in a policy aimed at a healthy, safe and attractive living environment, such as the risk of more of less catastrophic acci-dents in the living environment (such as explosions or floods), the quality of air and soil, the presence of radiation sources such as GSM or UMTS transmitters, nuisance caused, for example, by odours, noise, litter and dog dirt, a lack of greenery in the city and the perception of risks that these entail. The previous sec-tions examined the proposed policy. This section looks in more

Concentrations of heavy metals in ground and surface water are

too high to fulfil the water quality requirements


Innovative water purification using membranes

10 Options for emission control in European legislation in response to the requirements of the Water Framework Directive. JH Vos and MJM Janssen, RIVM-Report 601300003/2005

�0

detail at external safety policy, noise policy, policy focused on local air quality, and Schiphol.

External safety policy must state a clear and powerful standard that will be strictly enforced to ensure the safety of the peo-ple, without safety issues impeding unnecessarily on spatial development at local level. Apart from a clear source policy and minimum requirements, policy which focuses on noise emis-sions and healthy air requires, in particular, support from local initiatives and legal space for local policy and innovation incen-tives. Citizens feel safer if they understand the risks present in their environment. Open communication by companies and local authorities regarding nearby activities is therefore important. 3.3.1 room for local solutions

Air qualityThe Cabinet wants to offer more room for local solutions in two ways.> The Cabinet is setting up the Air Quality National

Collaboration Programme (NSL), together with municipal and provincial authorities. This programme includes meas-ures that all local authorities are going to implement in the period from 2007-2012 in order to improve air quality. These will be related to the proposed spatial developments that contribute significantly to the deterioration of air quality. The Air Quality Task Force is going to coordinate the measures taken by all the local authorities. The Cabinet is studying whether additional funds can be made available for the NSL.

> The Cabinet is going to provide municipal and provincial authorities with knowledge and adequate legislation, and ensure the coordination of local measures where necessary. In twelve pilot studies, the government at national, provin-cial and municipal levels will acquire experience with the Air Quality Decree 2005. In connection with the Air Quality Innovation Programme (IPL), which focuses primarily on highways, the implementation of (innovative) inner city measures is also being encouraged. The national govern-ment is also creating uniform frameworks for environmental zones and differentiated parking rates.

Local approach to noiseNoise emissions are often determined by choices made at a local level, for example in the field of spatial planning. However,

the desired quality of certain areas should also be determined at local level. That is why the Cabinet regards it as very impor-tant that municipalities are offered more space and possibilities to take responsibility for the prevention and constraint of noise pollution.> The Cabinet is going to start an innovation programme in

2006 for local noise regulation, alongside the Innovation Programme Noise for state infrastructure. The purpose of this innovation Programme is to develop new approaches and enable the widespread dissemination of knowledge. The programme is also going to be an opportunity to present innovative ways of involving citizens more effectively in the noise policies of their municipalities. This could take the form of a simple but appealing presentation system to clarify the noise situation in people’s homes.

> In its Progress Report, the Cabinet will indicate whether it is possible for municipalities to develop their own noise poli-cies within the system of the Noise Nuisance Act. The way in which municipalities involve noise aspects which are not regulated by law, but which are important locally, would be up to the municipalities themselves. An example could be actions aimed against noise caused by mopeds.

3.3.2 noise emission standards for products

European source policyThe Cabinet feels that the potentials of source measures as a precaution against noise pollution are being insufficiently applied. Applying source measures on a large scale to vehicles and infrastructure may lead to a cost reduction of up to 50% in comparison to traditional reactive measures such as noise bar-riers. The Cabinet is going to make efforts both at national and international levels to limit the sources of noise emissions.> In the Progress Report, the Cabinet will indicate which

European Member States or regions it thinks it can enter into strategic alliances with in order to lobby the European Committee for increased restrictions on noise emissions.

Quiet tyresThere are quieter tyres on the market that cost approximately the same as regular tyres. Large-scale use of such tyres could decrease traffic noise dramatically, although this is not yet a reality. Leasing companies and tyre fitters have shown an inter-est in making agreements about the use of these quieter tyres.


�1

The Cabinet is happy to take advantage of this. In addition, finan-cial incentives may be needed to increase the market for quiet tyres.> In its Progress Report, the Cabinet has indicated the options

for setting up pilot programs and covenants to speed up the implementation of source measures such as quiet tyres. This includes reviewing whether this can be supported by finan-cial incentives.

Noise in the living environmentNoise produced by mopeds and neighbours are the greatest sources of noise nuisance. The moped is at the top of the list of annoying sources of noise (19% of the population experience considerable nuisance) and causes of sleep interruption (14% of the population). Twelve percent of the Dutch population experi-ence serious hindrance from noise from neighbours. More effective control by police and more attention to moped noise in local policies help to reduce nuisance. Another option is periodic monitoring of such things as noise production by intro-ducing an MOT for mopeds.

> In 2008, the Cabinet is going to decide whether an MOT for mopeds should be introduced. With this in mind, the Cabinet will have a study carried out into the effects of present policy and the pros and cons for society if such a licence is to be introduced.

> In its Progress Report, the Cabinet will describe whether the construction requirements for new construction could help to decrease neighbourhood noise levels.

3.3.3 communication of risks to neighboursMuch of the uncertainty relating to what is happening on the sites of companies dealing with hazardous materials are inter-preted by people as being ‘dangerous’, no matter whether this is true or not. Communication regarding the risks for areas surrounding these businesses is not only a task for municipali-ties but also for the businesses in question. Open communica-tion by a company can (partially) alleviate people’s feelings of insecurity. This task to communicate with people about possible risks has not yet been explicitly explained to all businesses. The Catastrophic Accidents Risks Directive (BRZO) obliges the largest companies that work with hazardous materials to draw up safety reports to describe what is going on in and around the company. Smaller and medium-sized companies are not required to publish safety reports. In the meantime, encouraging results have been achieved by several companies (Shell-Pernis, DSM-Geleen) with so-called neighbourhood councils. Additional agreements still need to be made about the extent, form and frequency of communication. - The Cabinet is aiming to achieve a strong increase in the next few years in the number of businesses that communicate with residents, neighbourhoods, communities and neighbouring businesses about developments occurring at the company itself. The Cabinet is going to present proposals halfway through 2007 regarding the way it thinks it can encourage businesses to take responsibility by paying attention to ‘good practices’. 3.3.4 careful handling of scarce space

Transport of hazardous materialsThe Netherlands has a busy railway network with combined passenger and goods traffic that also crosses through built-up areas. This requires a careful balance between the possibili-ties of transporting hazardous materials by rail on the one hand, and spatial development close to the rails on the other.

The Cabinet wants to offer Dutch citizens a living environment that

is sufficiently safe, healthy and attractive


Quiet tyres reduce the need for noise barriers

�2

Consequently, care is required in handling the available capac-ity for the transport of hazardous materials, especially because future transportation flows from the Tweede Maasvlakte and the chemical cluster in Limburg and other chemical clus-ters referred to in the Spatial Policy Document will have to be accommodated. The implementation of measures referred to in the Cabinet’s Chain Studies Position Document encourages careful use of the available capacity. When looking for a balance between the transport and spatial development possibilities, several specific bottlenecks, such as near Dordrecht and on the so-called ‘Brabantroute’, explicitly require solutions within the framework of the implementation of the ‘Transport of Hazardous Materials’ policy document. This also means influencing the processing of several specific flows of hazardous materials (ammonia and LPG).> In 2006, possibilities are going to be explored to find a solu-

tion for these specific bottlenecks on the basis of consulta-tions with the parties involved. Attention is also going to be paid to the possibilities of using financial instruments to influence the transportation choices of a few specific hazard-ous materials.

Choosing locations for businessesBusinesses that work with large quantities of hazardous mate-rials are often spread across several locations and industrial estates. Various safety limits put a burden on spatial planning around those individual companies, and on the quality of the liv-ing environment. In addition, industrial estates are not always optimally situated as far as the safe receipt and discharge of hazardous materials is concerned. Solutions for such problems often require deliberations at various government levels, includ-ing to provincial level.

An additional; problem is that companies want to establish in suitable locations so that they can be sure of continuity as regards their operational management and possible growth. Clustering activities, businesses and transportation streams is desirable based on the Spatial Policy Document and the Mobility Document (implementation ‘Basic Network’). The local authori-ties involved can group and optimise location preferences for new high-risk companies, which will result in attractive advan-tages for all parties. Clustering can lead to improved infrastruc-ture, aimed at facilitating high-risk activities and catastrophe containment. In addition, companies can set up communal

services, such as communal in-house emergency and first aid services. Relief organisations can prepare in a more focused manner for disaster relief because the risks and possible effects are better understood in advance.> In 2006, the Cabinet is going to coordinate a study together

with municipal and provincial authorities regarding the additional value of a clustered location for establishing new businesses that work with large quantities of hazardous materials.

3.3.5 Amsterdam Airport schipholIn comparison to 1990, serious noise hindrance and sleep inter-ruptions have decreased by 40% around Schiphol. Improved technology and operational measures have played a significant role, while the use of the Polderbaan has had much less of an effect. These measures are not expected to have any additional added value in the near future. The Cabinet is going to issue a separate Cabinet Opinion Schiphol indicate which improvements are possible with regard to noise emissions around Schiphol which cause serious hindrance and sleep interruption around Schiphol. 3.4 Maintaining biodiversity

There is increasing global concern about the ever-increas-ing speed with which nature is being lost. During the past fifty years, the increasing demand for water, food, wood and fibres has caused more changes to the ecosystems than ever before. According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, more than 60% of ecosystems are damaged or are being used unsustain-ably. More and more species are becoming extinct, while genetic information and ecosystem functions are being lost. These prob-lems have, for a number of years, been referred to as the loss of ‘biological diversity’ (in short: Biodiversity).

Besides being an intrinsic and valuable commodity worth pro-tecting, biodiversity is of great importance to humankind. Biodiversity is important as a source of food and raw materials, for genetic material and for medications. However, functional ecosystems are also crucial for non-productive services such as water storage, coast protection, CO2 binding, soil protection, plague regulation, pollination and climate regulating. In short, the term ‘ecosystem services’ is increasingly being used as a collective name for all the goods and services that biodiver-


�3

sity provides for us. These ecosystem services are under great pressure, as indicated in documents such as the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Sustainable development is being hin-dered and one of the millennium targets (the development of a sustainable living environment), determined during the World Summit in Johannesburg, is at risk of not being realised.

During its sustainability study, the MNP examined the issue of whether the present development of the world can be contin-ued based on a number of visions of the world. The focus was on policy options that can be used to steer towards sustainable development. Humans have a negative influence on biodiversity in various ways, for example due to: • The destruction and fragmentation of habitats: the use of

space for agriculture, infrastructure and buildings limits room for biodiversity;

• The over-exploitation of ecosystem services and the products of biodiversity, such as wood and fish;

• The introduction of new species (exotics) that displace other species;

• Negative environmental influences such as drying, acidifica-tion, manure pollution and climate change.

The issue of biodiversity is still in the initial stage of policy development. In recent years, initial steps have been taken towards creating an international policy approach. However, the problems are complex and require measures relating to the trade, economic and social structures of lots of different countries, and in relation to spatial development, nature man-agement, etc. In 1994, the Netherlands ratified the Biodiversity Treaty and, by doing so, accepted the multifaceted targets of that treaty, namely the maintenance of biodiversity, the sustainable use of ecosystem services and a fair distribution of the benefits of that use. In concrete terms, the parties to the treaty, including the European Union, are going to work towards the implementa-tion of a number of working programmes for forests, agro-bio-diversity and wetlands, with the general goal being a significant reduction biodiversity loss by 2010. The EU even wants to stop the loss completely by 2010. 3.4.1 international biodiversity policyThe Netherlands is contributing to a global solution through the Policy Programme Biodiversity International (BBI) and the transition Biodiversity in the NMP4. Priority programme sec-tions of the BBI are aimed at ecological networks, sustainability of biodiversity and reduction of negative effects of Dutch trade abroad. The transition is focused on the long term, and the sup-port of processes that lead to sustainability. With this in mind, work is being carried out with other social actors such as busi-nesses and NGOs on creating a vision and carrying out activities with regard to the international impact of Dutch consumption and production on natural resources and biodiversity. The tran-sition is to be evaluated in 2006, after which methods for further implementation will be decided on. Within the framework of the Biodiversity and Natural Resources transition, three partner-ships are being formed at the moment in which businesses, knowledge institutes and social organisations all collaborate. These focus on sustainable fishing (sustainable fish catch-ing and fish farming), durable land use (durable production of vegetable oils and the relationship between consumption in the Netherlands and production in African and other developing countries) and green raw materials (sustainable biomass pro-duction). The integration of biodiversity in related policy areas such as agriculture, fishing, forestry, tourism, climate, soil and

Communication regarding the risks for surrounding areas

is also a task for businesses


Giving the transport of hazardous materials its proper place

�4

water also play a role. Another goal of the transition is to sup-port vision and capacity development in developing countries in the areas of biodiversity and natural resources. After publication of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the Dutch government initiated the setting up of partnerships with the business community based on sustainable development, with a specific focus on the possibilities of sustainable market-ing of ecosystem services and production with respect to the biodiversity policy. A more inclusive reaction to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment has been included in the Sustainable Action Progress Report (December 2005). The State’s target of eventually including sustainability as an important criterion for 100% of government purchases and investments may also con-tribute to the sustainable use of biodiversity, for example when the government buys wood.> In the coming years, the Cabinet is going to evaluate the

partnerships mentioned above and use the evaluation as a basis for assessing whether expansion to other product chains might be effective. In general terms, the Cabinet will play a facilitating role in shaping the biodiversity policy

of businesses by developing instruments and making ‘best practices’ available.

> The Cabinet wants to reinforce the existing biodiversity policy in a number of ways as explained above. These are selected ‘points for improvement’, which are to be focused on in addi-tion to current policy. These points relate at national level to improving environmental conditions, in part for the mainte-nance and restoration of biodiversity, to the sustainable use of agro-biodiversity and to developing an ecobalance, the lat-ter in relation to the Dutch ecological reputation abroad.

3.4.2 (Agro-) biodiversity in the netherlandsNational policy on biodiversity is largely determined in the policy document entitled ‘Nature for People/People for Nature’, the policy document entitled ‘Sources of our Existence’, the policy letter Agro-biodiversity [11], the policy letter ‘Soil’ and in part in the NMP4. In addition, there is the regional project ‘Biodiversity Waard, by and for the People’. The sustainable use of biodiversity is to be focused on nationally in projects in which the following aspects are central, such as the innovative use of biodiversity in agricultural systems, the sustainability of agricul-ture, maintaining agro-biodiversity and improving environmental quality (reduced use of plant treatment products).

The application of international biodiversity agreements on a spatial level in the Netherlands is a complex activity. The problems and action perspectives can be brought closer to the people by stimulating the composition and implementa-tion of regional biodiversity action plans. Using Great Britain as a model, decentralised governments can take the initiative of developing biodiversity action plans in their own areas. The various actors in an area could make proposals for activities aimed at the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, natural resources and ecosystem services. The basis is formed by successful citizen participation projects, such as those in the Hoeksche Waard (2004). The State has developed resources such as the digital module ‘Biodiversity Works’ which can be found at www.minvrom.nl, which includes step-by-step plans, tips and references to information sources.> The Cabinet supports regional biodiversity initiatives, the

creation of a pilot project (Hoeksche Waard) and the scaling up of successful measures such as the use of functional field

Will there be fish for our grandchildren?


11 Policy Letter Agro-Biodiversity, Lower House of the Dutch Parliament, Session 2004-2005, 26 407, no. 22

��

borders, applying natural plague regulations and combating diffuse pollution. The Cabinet is going to set up new strategic research programmes to identify additional innovations.

3.4.3 The EcobalanceAt the moment, local governments, citizens and businesses lack clear insight into the consequences of their actions regarding the abstract problem of biodiversity. An initial attempt to iden-tify the consequences of our consumption was the Ecological Footprint. However, this method was too complicated and con-centrated only on the negative effects of western consumption patterns.The Ecobalance, which is based on the surface area, is a sim-pler method that takes account of both the positive and nega-tive impacts of human action on biodiversity. The balance can be calculated for the Netherlands as a whole, but also for each individual citizen, an area or a business. It offers various parties a basis which can be used to measure their actions or compen-sate for negative behaviour. The Cabinet regards the Ecobalance as an interesting resource for making the problem of the burden on biodiversity and natural resources more concrete, and it also offers users guidance on how to act. > In 2006, the Cabinet is going to continue expanding the

Ecobalance in order to make it a suitable resource for indi-vidual actions by citizens and businesses and the possible compensation thereof.

> The Cabinet is going to indicate in the Progress Report whether it is useful to embed the Ecobalance into existing initiatives and instruments related to the sustainable use of biodiversity, such as in the area of certification (FSC, MSC), the assessment framework biodiversity, initiatives aimed at sustainable use of tropical wood, quick scan biodiver-sity (developed by the Union for Investors for Sustainable Development for a number of sectors), covenants with the business world aimed at biodiversity, socially responsible entrepreneurship and guidelines.

3.5 More efficient and innovative

In Chapters 2 and 3, the Cabinet described the ways in which environmental policy is being modernised. In order to realise the environmental ambitions of this Cabinet, the environmental policy must become more efficient. Only when the costs of envi-ronmental policies for citizens and the business community are

reduced, will there be support for decisive application in areas in which environmental quality needs improvement. This can be done by optimising existing policy performance. However, the effectiveness of the environmental approach can also be increased dramatically by stimulating (technological) innova-tions. Financial support from the government is often essential to stimulate the development and application of innovations that also serve a social purpose. 3.5.1 increasingly more efficient environmental policy In recent years, this Cabinet has stimulated the efficiency of environmental policy by working on modernizing environmental regulations. Once the implementing programme has been com-pleted, society will save more than 400 million euro annually in administrative costs. The results will also be made visible in the Noise Innovation Programme (IPG) that this Cabinet initiated using 110 million euro. This programme has resulted in cheaper techniques to combat noise pollution. The application of quiet asphalt in combination with fewer and lower acoustic barriers is as effective as using normal asphalt with acoustic barriers. However, it also leads to cost reductions of 10-25%. Applying

There is increasing global concern about the ever-increasing

speed with which nature is being lost

Bloemrijke akkerranden verminderen de noodzaak om insecticiden te gebruiken


�6

rail dampers and using quiet trains means fewer acoustic bar-riers are required to protect homes from railway line noise. This may save about 585 million euro. The costs of the IPG will easy be recouped.

However, the costs to society can be reduced even more. It is now possible to reduce the social costs in areas such as waste, water and soil, for which the basis of policy was created in the early Nineties of the previous century. A reduction in waste man-agement costs can be achieved through innovation and by creat-ing more room for competition in waste markets. An integrated approach and customised work can also increase the efficiency of soil policy. The parties in the water chain are working hard to reduce costs for citizens and businesses through improved organisation. More efficient waste policyThe waste policy can reduce costs in several ways. Optimizing according to the effects on costs and the environ-ment of recycling and the development (innovation) of cheaper recycling techniques could save about 200 million euro. The use

of waste as secondary fuel or secondary construction material is to be encouraged. Expanding the capacity for waste incineration will reduce costs and result in savings for society of about 300 million euro each year. Combustion capacityAt the moment there is a shortage on the combustion mar-ket. Despite this, new waste incinerators (AVIs) are not being constructed quickly enough. The costs for removal are there-fore higher than necessary, and a lot of combustible waste is dumped each year. If there is no increase in combustion capac-ity, the amount of dumped waste will have increased to about 2-4 Mton by 2012.> The Cabinet is intensifying policy (based on the National

Waste Management Plan) for the input of waste as fuel in incinerators with a high energy return (HR). This not only avoids waste dumping but also can reduce costs of waste processing for businesses and citizens and helps climate policy through increased energy production and lower green-house gas emissions from dumps. In order to stimulate addi-tional construction for sufficient (HR) AVIS, the government should:

• Continue its ban on dumping waste that can be recycled or incinerated;

• Remove insecurity caused by (European) waste policy through intensive contact with the sector;

• Aim to create a more level playing field in negotiation with the sector.

This policy optimisation will be completed in 2009, after which results will be published in 2012. Towards a European waste marketWaste management regulations are increasingly being harmo-nised within Europe. For example, a dumping prohibition came into force in Germany as of 1 June 2005 meaning that it is no longer possible to dump untreated waste. An international mar-ket for waste is also emerging. The borders are already open for useful applications and, as of 1 January 2007, the Dutch borders are also going to be open to removable combustible waste. The Netherlands already complies with practically all EU tasks set for 2008, except for the recycling task for plastic packaging waste (the Netherlands has achieved 18% instead of the set goal of 22.5%). The fact that the new Packaging and Labelling Decree


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

woo

d pr

oduc

ts

mea

t

milk

vege

tabl

es

pet f

ood

coffe

e

cott

on a

nd r

ubbe

r

othe

r ag

ricu

ltur

al p

rodu

cts

othe

r (b

uild

ings

, etc

. in

NL)

TOTA

L LA

ND

USE

com

pare

sur

face

are

a N

L

100

156

58

30 1

2

8

6

41 21

321

Inde

x (1

00=s

urfa

ce a

rea

NL)

We need three times the area of the Netherlands to support the consumption of the Dutch

Sou

rce:

RIV

M (2

004)

, Sea

rchi

ng fo

r th

e in

flue

nce

of t

he D

utch

on

glob

al b

iodi

vers

ity

LandsurfacearearequiredfortheproductionofconsumergoodsforallDutchcitizens,percategoryofconsumergoods

��

was activated on 1 January 2006 means this target is now also going to be realised.> The Dutch contribution to the European thematic strategy for

waste which is being developed is aimed at: • The main theme of decreasing environmental pressure,

developing economic instruments and encouraging a level playing field;

• Clarifying definitions, especially of waste, and harmonizing environmental demands for waste processing in order to stimulate improved market mechanisms;

• Viewing the incineration of waste in HR AVIs as a useful application. The lowest limit for energy returns will be deter-mined based on IPPC guidelines.

Cost-efficiency of recyclingThe Netherlands has the highest percentage of recycling of all European Member States. Additional stimulation of recycling may come at relatively high costs. Techniques for waste incineration have become available that can result in very high energy returns. In some cases, it will

be more cost effective to incinerate waste flows rather than increase recycling. However, the European requirements for the European industries to use the best available techniques (BBT) according to ICCP guidelines still have to be complied with. The selective interchanging of certain flows, such as from recycling to (HR) waste incineration, and stimulating innovation at an unchanged environmental impact, may lead to savings of 200 million euro annually.> In 2006, the Cabinet is going to carry out an analysis to com-

pare the costs of incineration and recycling of certain waste flows.

As a wholesale user of raw materials, and supplier of licences and concessions for the excavation of primary raw materials, the government will give preference to the use of secondary materi-als. Innovation and quality improvement of secondary materials will increase application possibilities. This may result in signifi-cant savings on the costs of primary materials. An applicable condition is that this must be done responsibly. With this in mind, the national government is stimulating the application of new decision-making models that were developed in public-pri-vate collaboration.

The government can reduce costs of road construction and dykes by using secondary raw materials such as dredged mate-rial, sewage sludge, and demolition waste instead of primary raw materials such as sand and gravel. Huge quantities of these secondary raw materials are going to become available in the coming years, but they may be mildly to seriously contaminated. Special insulation techniques, and biological decontamination methods, can be used to keep the risks for humans and nature manageable. The construction of 300 kilometres of dikes would, for example, result in savings of 1 billion euro in ten years. SoilPolluted soil can be decontaminated in a much more cost effec-tive way than the current 18 billion euros which is estimated as being needed up to 2030. Taking account of the actual use of a location when determining decontamination goals can save about 10% of costs while, at the same time, the risks to public health and ecosystems can be managed equally well as in the case of extensive decontamination. Additional cost reductions are possible through integrated, location-focused decontamina-tion of locations that pollute ground water. In comparison to a

In order to realise environmental ambitions, environmental policy must

become more efficient. Only when the costs for citizens and the

business community are reduced, will there be support for decisive

application in areas in which environmental quality needs improvement

No dumping of waste, but incineration with energy recovery


�8

location-based approach, which is currently in use, this means about 70% of decontamination costs can be saved. These adjust-ments can decrease the estimated social costs for soil decon-tamination by an average of 160 million euro per year. This will make feasible the goal to have decontaminated all cases of soil at risk of pollution in current or future soil use by 2030 (see sec-tion 4.2.4).

Taking account of soil quality during spatial planning limits decontamination costs. This means that no vulnerable functions may be allowed on polluted locations, and that function allot-ment will also take ground water levels into account.

The water chainSavings can be realised in the water chain through improved collaboration between drinking water companies, municipali-ties and by consumers conserving on water use. Over a period of about ten years, society will be able to make structural savings of up to 300 to 600 million euro annually (see section 3.2.1).

Emissions tradeExpanding the current system of emissions trade to other industries and materials other than CO2 and NOx will allow businesses to achieve their emission goals more cheaply. The Cabinet wants to investigate whether emissions trade in a European context could be expanded to air traffic, road traffic and maritime traffic (see section 3.1.2). In addition, the Cabinet sees excellent possibilities for including the emissions of nitrous oxide by the chemical industry (through nitric acid production) in the European trade system by 2008. One condition is still that the implementation costs of the trade system must be in bal-ance with the advantages of attainable results. Participation of the traffic sector and chemical industry in the emissions trade would save these sectors in the Netherlands (in the event of equal emission goals) an estimated 40 million euro annually.> In the Progress Report, the Cabinet is going to state the

options for expanding the European trade system to include nitrous oxide emissions by the chemical industry.

3.5.2 investing effectively in innovationsIncreasing environmental protection and limiting environmental costs can only be combined if substantial innovations take place. Environment-saving techniques must become more effective and cheaper. As regards energy production this can be achieved by adapting the distribution of existing innovation funds. In the case of other environmental topics, additional money is needed to stimulate innovations. There is room for innovation in the area of biodiversity, local noise control, environmental infrastructure and external safety for support of market introduction of impor-tant environmental innovation opportunities.

Chapter 3 includes the following suggestions to stimulate inno-vations that could effectively contribute to those large policy assignments for energy, clean water, high quality living environ-ments and maintenance of biodiversity. However, the Cabinet sees possibilities for utilising opportunities related to the econ-omy and the environment in the area of waste and biotechnology as well: > Energy: During the coming months, the Cabinet is going to

look into ways of focusing the policy for renewable sources after 2010 increasingly on a significant decrease in the costs of capturing renewable energy. The Minister of Economic Affairs wants to formulate initial conclusions about the fea-


Saving money by reusing slightly contaminated soil where possible

��

sibility and instrumentation by this spring in a letter to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament (see section 3.1.1).

> Water: The Cabinet wants to work together with the water sector to set up a public-private partnership. With this in mind, the Dutch sector has to draw up a combined innova-tion agenda, which should be based, in part, on the targets of the Water Framework Directive. The Cabinet is going to ask water boards and drinking water companies to act as launching customers for innovative water decontamina-tion technology. The Cabinet is also going to study how it can remove, wherever possible, any financial risks for these organisations, and is going to present a proposal in late 2006 (see section 3.2.2).

> Noise: In 2006, the Cabinet is going to set up an innova-tion programme for local noise regulation, alongside the Innovation Programme Noise for State Infrastructure. The national government is also going to contribute to this local innovation programme (see section 3.3.1).

> External safety: In 2007, the Cabinet is going to write three tenders for the programme construction mentioned above. The Cabinet has chosen to focus the tenders on hydrogen in

particular. The goal is to implement innovations developed on the basis of these tenders by 2010 (see section 3.1.1).

> Waste: The Cabinet wants to stimulate innovation in the waste sector, especially as regards the use of secondary raw materials, waste processing and recycling. To this end the Cabinet is going to develop the Action Plan Innovation Waste Management in consultation with the waste sector. The aim of this plan is to increase insight into innovative develop-ments for waste management, and to stimulate these devel-opments through general and specific actions.

> Biotechnology: In 2006, the Cabinet is going to publish pro-posals to facilitate biotechnology projects that can help to solve concrete environmental problems.

The Cabinet attaches considerable importance to the innovation of environmental policy. Within the framework of decision-mak-ing regarding the 2007 budget and the FES, the financing of environmental policy renewal is also to be considered.

Increasing the capacity for waste incineration will lead to

savings of approximately 300 million euros per year

The soil beneath a golf course does not have to be as clean as beneath a vegeta-ble garden


80

Table 1: Increased Efficiency of Environmental Policy as a result of Proposals in the Future Environment Agenda

EnvironmentalTheme Measure IncreaseinEfficiency(€/yinmillions)

Period

Climate Expanding the emissions trade 40 After 2008Water Collaborating in the water chain 300 After 201�Water Separating rainwater from sewage �00Waste Optimizing waste recycling 100 After 2008Waste Innovating waste management in the chain 100 After 2008Waste Expanding incineration capacity 300 After 2008Waste Using secondary raw materials 100 10 yearsSoil decontamination Flexible application of decontamination goals 40 200�-2030Soil decontamination Location-based optimizing 120 200�-2030Synergy with spatial planning Plans for the subsoil pm

TOTAL 1600 variable

a) Savings through modernised environmental regulation and noise regulation have not been included in this table because these adjustments were initiated prior to the Future Agenda

Environmentally friendly techniques must become

more effective and cheaper


resultsLess talk, more action. What we do for the environment, must matter.

GoAloriEnTEd

EnvironMEnTAl

PolicY

83

4.1 Policy tasks

The Cabinet is going to continue working on results commit-ments from the NMP3, NMP4 and the policy document entitled ‘Fixed Values, New Forms’ (2001). In the Environmental Balance of 2005, the MNP indicated in which areas the environmental policy determined on 1 January 2005 is insufficient for realizing the planned environmental targets. Table 2a-c shows an over-view of the MNP conclusions regarding results commitments of the environmental policy. The Cabinet has since taken additional measures for some aspects of the environmental policy, mean-ing that the MNP conclusions can be adjusted in a positive sense (see the last column of Table 2a-c). The following section refers

to those measures that must be applied in order to realise the rest of the policy tasks. The Cabinet wants to differentiate between results commitments that have been included in the EU framework, and commitments that have a national basis. The Cabinet intends to meet European results commitments as effi-ciently as possible. Where necessary, the (sub)goals formulated by the Netherlands itself in NMP3 and NMP4 are to be adjusted in order to increase efficiency. If these commitments can only be met at unacceptably high social costs, they will be reconsidered.

> Within the framework of decision-making regarding the 2007 budget and the FES, financing the additional measures must also be considered.

Table 2a: Results Commitments in the Dutch Environmental Policy and Target Fulfilment of Previously Determined Policy; Divisions Climate and Air Quality

EnvironmentalParameter TargetLevel TargetYear SourceofTargetScopeandpurpose(a)AccordingtoEnviron-mentalBalance

EffectsofSupplementalPolicy2005

National emission greenhouse gasses (CO2-eq).

220 Mton 2008-2012 Kyoto protocol �0% chance �0% chance

Purchase reduction credits - via CDM (CO2-eq.)- via JI (CO2-eq.)

34 Mton6� Mton

2012 EU probably

Share of electricity production from sustainable sources

6%�%

200�2010

EU directive2001/��/EG

SO2 emissions national �0 kton 2010 EU-NEC directive No, another 1� kton required

NOx emissions national 260 kton 2010 EU-NEC directive No, another 28 kton required

NH3 emissions national 128 kton 2010 EU-NEC directive �0% chance: 104-146 ktonb)

VOS emissions national 18� kton 2010 EU-NEC directive �0% chance: 140-213 kton

Air quality NO2: annual average con-centrate

40 μg/m3 2010 EU 1�00-�0,000 pers. above standard

Air quality PM10:- annual average concentrate- daily standard (annual average)

40 μg/m3

31 μg/m3200� EU Standard exceeded

in large parts of the Netherlands (esp. in the conurbation and south), in 2010 as well.

Some improvement, but short of target.

Air quality ozone: 8 hours average

120 μg/m3 2010 EU All of the Netherlands

a) Expected scope and purpose by environmental policy determined according to Environmental Balance 200� (MNP 200�)b) This estimate does not take account of indications that the working in of animal manure would cause 3 to 23 kton more NH3 to be released than

calculated (Environmental Balance 200�, page 60)

4. Goal-oriented environmental policy

84

Table 2b: Results Commitments in the Dutch Environmental Policy and Target Fulfilment of Previously Determined Policy; Divisions Water and Soil

EnvironmentalParameter TargetLevel TargetYear SourceofTargetScopeandpurpose[a]AccordingtoEnvironmentalBalance


Quality of surface water and ground water.

Environmental con-ditions for desired nature target types

201� EU-WFD Water Framework Directive

Standard seriously exceeded by N and P, and moderately by pesticides, heavy metals, PAHs and organotins

Delivery of nitrogen to: • agricultural land• grassland

1�0 kg/ha2�0 kg/ha

200� EU nitrate directive �0% chance

Nitrate in ground water �0 mg/l EU nitrate directive After 200�, depending on lagging.

After 200�, depending on lagging. 160.000 hax ha400.000 ha

2010201�2018

NMP4EU-KRWNMP4

No, only +�0,000 ha recovered

Pesticides: reduction environmental burden with regard to 1��8 level 1��8

��% 2010 Sustainable Crop Protection Policy Document

�0% chance

Table 2c: Results Commitments in the Dutch Environmental Policy and Target Fulfilment of Previously Determined Policy; Division Living Environment

EnvironmentalParameter TargetLevel TargetYear SourceofTargetScopeandpurpose[a]AccordingtoEnvironmentalBalance


Soil contamination Management of soil contamination Decontaminating ��-6�,000 polluted locations

2030 NMP3, Policy Letter Soil Decontamination 2003

Only by 206�

Noise hindrance homes:• from national highways max. 6� dB, • from railways max. �0 dB,

00

20202020

NMP4 Not for: 6,000 homes3�,000 homes

Scope and purpose for all homes

Noise emission Main Ecological Structure (MES)

from 2000 2010 NMP4 Unknown

External safety: neutralise unaccep-table situations

All 2010 NMP4 Volledig en actueel beeld ontbreekt

Waste supplyRecycling wasteIncineration of wasteWaste dumpingDischarging waste

Recycling plastic packaging waste

Max. 66 Mton�� Mton8 Mton2 Mton1 Mton

22,�%

20122012201220122012

2008

National Waste Management Plan 2003

EU directive packaging

All

18%

Scope and purpose

Chapter 4 • Goal-oriented environmental policy

8�

4.2 scope of the objectives

4.2.1 climateThe target of climate policy for 2010 will most likely be attained on the basis of the current climate policy and the policy being prepared. If necessary, policy will be adjusted as necessary as a result of slow progress in the case of foreign measures (joint implementation (JI) and clean development mechanisms (CDM)). In April 2006, the Cabinet is going to send a letter to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament indicating how to incorporate recent developments that will influence attainability of these goals. 4.2.2 Acidification Based on present policy input, the national emission ceilings for 2010 (based on the European directive National Emission Ceiling, or NEC directive) will not be reached for SO2 and NOx, and it is unclear whether they will be reached for NH3 and VOS. The MNP also predicts that emission of these substances will increase after 2010 if current policy is continued. In 2006, all the EU Member States are going to carry out an NEC review and report this to the European Committee.

In anticipation of the evaluation, the following additional meas-ures are being taken: 1. By 31 October 2007, the environmental licenses of large

businesses must comply with European IPPC directives, which require application of best available techniques. The Cabinet thinks that, when determining IPPC licenses, attain-ing NEC targets should be taken into consideration.

2. The Cabinet is considering lowering the maximum permit-ted sulphur contents in ‘red’ diesel, which is used mainly by excavators, bulldozers, stationary engines and agricultural vehicles, by January 1, 2007 to the same level as road traffic. Increased expenditure resulting from these measures will be recouped.

3. The Cabinet is going to insist very strongly in a European context that the (internal) shipping switch to low-sulphur diesel as quickly as possible, equal to the level of road traf-fic.

4. The Cabinet wants to tighten the performance standards for industry in NOx emissions trade as of 2011.

5. To reduce uncertainty about reaching the NH3 ceiling, the Cabinet is going to investigate all the options for increased

reduction of NH3 emissions from agriculture. Attention is to be paid to possibilities such as fodder change and lowering urea amounts for the dairy industry, in order to reduce NH3 emissions.

6. The Cabinet will is going to introduce an incentive regulation for the installation of combination air scrubbers in animal sheds. This will reduce emissions of NH3, stench and fine particles. This incentive regulation is expected to be used by livestock farms that are subject to the IPPC directive. The resulting decrease in emissions from livestock farms will increase opportunities for further development and growth not only for livestock farms, but also for other spatial func-tions such as housing construction.

7. The Cabinet is going to develop a step-by-step plan which allows rapid reaction to any exceeding of the VOS ceiling. This plan will probably focus on reducing VOS emission from gasoline cars, mopeds and motorcycles using the MOT.

The Cabinet is going to continue working on results

commitments from the NMP4

The new generation of combination air scrubbers removes ammonia, fine parti-cles and odours from the stable air


86

4.2.3 Water qualityAccording to the new European Water Framework Directive, there must be a guarantee by 2015 that water quality is not a hindrance to fulfilling ecological and consumer functions for agriculture, industry, drinking water production and recreation.

The 6th MNP Environmental Outlook shows that a great deal of effort will be required to reach 2015 targets for nutrients (N and P), drying out of land and emissions from diffuse sources. Within this framework, the following measures are being taken:1. The Cabinet is going to create an integrated implementa-

tion programme together with all the parties concerned in 2007 to determine an approach to diffuse sources. This programme is to be included in the catchment area manage-ment plans.

2. As regards the innovation policy, sufficient resources are to be focused at stimulating new technology for wastewater decontamination techniques that can reduce the diffuse impact on surface water.

3. In 2006, the Cabinet is going to examine possibilities for an even greater increase in the decontamination returns of sew-age water decontamination installations (RWZIs) for N and P.

4. The Cabinet is also going to assess whether additional measures will be required for manure use after 2010.

5. In order to combat drying trends, and improve environmental conditions in natural areas, various measures are required relating to, for example, organisation, compensating farmers who suffer crop yield losses due to changed water regimes, results and process management.

6. The national goal of 40% restoration of the dried-out area in 2010 is to be expanded on in agreements between the national government and provincial authorities concerning areas, goals and resources. The results are to be included in Water Policy Document in December 2006.

7. When reviewing the targets, two categories have been distin-guished, namely Fulfilling European requirements and set-ting up the main ecological structure (MES). This will ensure that the requirements of Natural 2000 and of WFD (2015) are met, as well as the targets for realisation of water conditions for the MES. In addition, implementation options are to be taken into account during the first ILG term (2007-2013) as indicated by provincial authorities and in agreement with the recommendations for improving implementation expected in May 2006 from the Dryness Task Force.

4.2.4 soil decontaminationBy 2030 the problems with soil contamination must be under control (Soil Policy Letter, 2003). The rate of decontamination must be doubled in order to complete soil decontamination by 2030.

In order to speed up soil decontamination and reduce costs, the following measures are going to be taken: 1. In 2006, the Cabinet is going to determine new decontami-

nation criteria. Decontamination will only be required in situations with an unacceptable risk. In other cases, much cheaper measures will suffice.

2. The Cabinet wants to assign responsibility for the decontam-ination of the subsoil to an existing government institution that will implement an integrated, area-oriented clean-up of ground water contamination. This can save 1 to 3 billion euro on expected costs up to 2030, and will also speed up decon-tamination noticeably.


Verdroogd gebied Binnen de HR-gebieden met grondwaterafhankelijke natuur Binnen de HR-gebieden Buiten de HR-gebieden

In HR areas with ground water dependent natureInside HR areasOutside HR areas

Dry area

The drying trend in the Habitat Directive areas must be solved by 2015

Sou

rce:

MN

P (2

206)

, 6th

Env

iron

men

tal O

utlo

ok

8�

3. Competent authorities will get more room to adjust decon-tamination goals to soil use, and get more flexibility as regards the terms by which decontamination goals must be reached. This means that cheaper but slower decontamina-tion techniques can be applied, assuming that risks remain controllable. Such an approach may save approximately 10% of the expected costs for society as a whole, or 1 to 2 billion euros up to 2030.

4. The government, together with the VNG and UvW, is going to look at options for a local levy on soil contamination that is a threat to ground water which will neutralise the financial advantages of postponing decontamination. The revenue from the levy would then be used for accelerated execution of the decontamination task.

4.2.5 Air qualityAs of 2005, EU standards will apply to the concentration of fine particles (PM10) and after 2010 to NO2 as well. Neither standard is going to be met. The Cabinet wants to meet the EU stand-ards as quickly as is reasonably possible. For this purpose, the Netherlands is going to carry out a wide range of activities to

improve air quality, especially in the traffic sector. The action package is described in the September letter on air quality [12]. Despite the broad scope of this package, it will not be enough to meet EU standards on time. The measures suggested in this Agenda for reduction of the sulphur content in red diesel, and for investments in combination air scrubbers for stables (see section 4.2.2) will contribute substantially to the reduction of emissions of fine particles. The introduction of car pricing , as announced in the Mobility Policy Document, will also help to reduce traffic emissions further.

In addition, the following measures are to be taken:

1. The Cabinet is investigating the cost effectiveness and imple-mentation aspects of a differentiation of vehicle taxation depending on the amount of polluting emissions (fine parti-cles, NOx, VOS) of cars. The results of this study are expect-ed to become available in the spring of 2006. The Cabinet wants to implement such a differentiation as soon as the effects on implementation and income distribution effects have been identified. The measure is an interpretation of the announced fiscal incentive relating to the rapid introduction of Euro 5 diesel personal vehicles that are relatively clean. The possibility of then encouraging a more rapid introduction of Euro 6 diesel personal vehicles is to be investigated within the same framework. In addition, this can stimulate the installation of soot filters in diesel cars.

2. The Cabinet is setting up a National Air Quality Collaboration Programme (NSL), together with municipal and provincial authorities. This programme contains the measures that all local governments are going to take in the period 2007-2012 for improvement of air quality, and relates them to spatial activities that are contributing to deterioration of air quality. The Task Force Air Quality is going to coordinate these meas-ures.

3. The government is going to support municipal and provincial authorities with knowledge and adequate legislation for the implementation of local measures aimed at improving air quality. The measures are especially necessary to reduce the amount by which the NO2 standard and the daily stand-ard for fine particles are exceeded. In order to increase the use of clean vehicles, the national government is going to

Slower but cheaper decontamination techniques are being used

Clean soil to play in


12 Lower House of the Dutch Parliament, Session 2005-2006, 30175, no. 10

88

support municipal and provincial authorities by developing environmental zones, differentiated parking rates, and con-cession and tendering procedures. Inner city measures such as improved traffic circulation and an increased turnover are being studied.

4. The national government is researching possibilities for additional financial stimulation for the acquisition of clean trucks (with soot filters).

5. The Cabinet is going to focus specifically on its intention to generate a reduction in emission standards for fine particles by 1 January 2007 to 5 milligrams per kilometre for new die-sel cars and light diesel vans. This requirement will result in these new vehicles being fitted with soot filters.

4.2.6 noiseWhen implementing the noise policy as determined, about 50,000 houses will be left exposed to unacceptable noise hin-drance until 2020. The Mobility Policy Document (2005) states that in the period 2010-2020 extra resources will have to be applied to solve the noise problem for homes with a noise load of more than 65 dB due to a highway, or more than 70 dB due to a railway. This is expected to be enough to implement the policy task. The Noise Innovation Programme (IPG) has resulted in various relatively cheap source measures, such as quiet road surfaces, rail dampers and quiet train types. These measures will be used to solve the noise problem.

In order to promote the actual implementation of these noise-limiting techniques, the following measures are to be taken: 1. The Cabinet is to initiate noise-differentiated levy for railway

users and is preparing to do so in 2008. 2. The Cabinet is to increase monitoring existing noise require-

ments and is contemplating the inclusion of noise require-ments in the MOT for cars. It is also investigating the feasibility of a MOT with noise regulations for mopeds and motorcycles.

3. The Netherlands is going to initiate a strategic alliance with other countries that will lobby the EU for stricter product requirements for noise.

4. The Cabinet is to hold businesses responsible for limiting excess noise. The Cabinet is to examine the possibilities of increasing the use of silent tyres together with lease compa-nies and tyre fitters.

5. In 2006, the Cabinet is going to decide to include noise pro-duction ceilings in a new package of regulations for govern-ment infrastructure. This will offer neighbourhoods more protection against noise hindrance and give road managers and enforcers a clear upper limit.

6. The introduction of new legislation regarding noise hin-drance is expected to offer less protection to residents than current legislation in a limited number of cases. The Cabinet is therefore looking into possibilities for including additional noise limiting measures in order to deal with the consequences for those houses which have received an order under the current Noise Nuisance Act (maximum allowable higher value), but which no longer need tackling under the new legislation. This includes a transitional arrangement aimed at those houses that have suffered a disproportional increase in noise hindrance (more than 5 dB) because of increased traffic since the order was issued. In the course of this year, the Cabinet is going to complete a study into the number of houses involved, as well as the projected costs. A limiting condition in this context is that the approach is cost-effective approach.

Rail dampers and quieter trains reduce noise hindrance from train traffic


8�

4.2.7 WasteAlmost all the waste policy goals are going to be realised on time. The Environment balance 2005 reported that only the EU target of 22.5% recycling of plastic package waste is not going to be reached. Thanks to the new Packaging Decree which came into effect on 1 January 2006, this goal is also going to be achieved on time. 4.2.8 External safetyIn accordance with the NMP4, the Cabinet wants to have removed all hazardous situations that have been identified as unacceptable by 2010 at the latest. The financial resources which have been made available for the external safety policy seem to be enough to solve external safety bottlenecks. The consequences of the development of a basic network for the transportation of hazardous materials have not yet been includ-ed. It is also still not clear whether the problem areas in the Pipelines dossier can be resolved by 2010.

4.2.9 other environmental policyThe goals for environmental policy in the area of biodiversity, chemicals, genetically modified organisms, radiation and inside environments do not have results commitments, and are there-fore not discussed in this section. 4.3 summary scope and purpose

By implementing the recommendations in this Future Agenda, the environmental goals can be reached in almost all policy areas by 2010, including those where that is not yet possible with current policy according to the Environmental Balance 2005. The following table presents an overview. The Environment and Nature Planning Agency (MNP) is making its own assess-ments of the effects of these policy proposals and is going to publish separately. Future Environmental Balances will only show similar effects after these policy proposals have been transformed into effectively determined policies.

The Cabinet is studying implementation of a periodic motor vehicle

test (APK) with noise regulations for mopeds and motorcycles


0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Road traffic

Neighbours

Air traffic

Industry

Recreation

Railway traffic

% population of the Netherlands

1987 1993 1997 2003

Road traffic is the largest source of serious noise hindrance in the Netherlands

SeriousnoisehindranceintheNetherlands

Sou

rce:

MN

P, E

nvir

onm

enta

l bal

ance

she

et 2

006

De milieudoelen voor 2010 worden op vrijwel alle

beleidsterreinen gehaald

�0

Table 3: Reaching Goals through Policy Proposals in this Future Environment Agenda

Goals:LevelandPointinTime

ScopeofGoalwithoutFEA(MB05)

ProposalsinFutureEnvironmentAgenda(FEA) TargetreachwithFEA

Emission greenhouse gasses: Kyoto goal 2008-12

EU • additional measures from Evaluation Policy Document Climate Policy 200�

Emission SO2 and NOx:NEC goal 2010

EU • Reinforce environmental licences based on BBT from IPPC directive.

• Low-sulphur fuels.• Strengthening PSR for industry in 2011 for NOx emissions trade.

Emission NH3 and VOS:NEC goal 2010

EU Prepare technical reserve measures for: • NH3 (combination air scrubbers, fighting increased emission) • VOS (cars, mopeds, motorcycles).

Water Framework Directive:• environmental conditions in VHR

area in 201� • Stagnation since 1��0

EU • Action plan diffuse sources• Encourage innovation focused on water• Increase decontamination returns sewage treatment plants

Manure usage:Nitrate Directive Standard 200�

EU • No addition to the manure policy renewed in 2006

Recovery dried-out areas: 40% by 2010

• Readjust goal in 2006• Agreements with provincial authorities in 2006

in 201�?

Soil decontamination:decontamination of 60,000 locations by 2030

• New decontamination criterion in 2006• Regional approach to subsurface and groundwater decreases costs• Use standards sensibly• Support implementation

Air quality:Fine particle target concentrations in 200� and NO2 in 2010

EU • Differentiation motorvehicle tax based on emission cars• NSL and local measures traffic

• Strict and timely European source policy• Introduce soot filters in NL more quickly• Combination air scrubbers in stables

NO2 by 201�,

PM10 by 2010

Noise hindrance in homes:• national highways max. 6� dB,• from railways max �0 dB, both by 2020

• Measures from the Mobility Policy Document: quiet road surfaces, quiet rails, rail dampers and acoustic barriers

• Noise differentiated user levies railway use• Financial support source measures• Noise emission ceilings

Environmental targets for 2010 are going to be attained in almost all policy areas.

Targets are probably going to be attained with implemented and projected policy.

The chance of goals being attained with imple-mented and projected policy is about 50% or can-not yet be determined.


WoRKLet’s get going. A clean environment is hard work

�2

This is a publication by:The Ministry of VROMRijnstraat 82515 XP The Hague

PhotographyTineke Dijkstra fotografie, The HagueRob Niemantsverdriet fotografie, RotterdamInge van Mill fotografie Hollandse HoogteNEO B.V. (cover, page 21)EASE-Enabling Access to Sustainable Energy (page 12)Uniqfill (pages 20, 85)Terra Vitalis (page 49)

Additional informationNo rights can be claimed based on any information of this trans-lation. Additional information regarding the Future Environment Agenda can be found at www.vrom.nl/toekomstagenda.

This publication and the separate edition of the Public Edition can be ordered and downloaded from www.vrom.nl. If you need large numbers of the Public Edition, for example to distribute within your organisation, please contact www.postbus51.nl.

Distribution code: VROM 6304

Auustus 2006

Colophon


VRO

M 6

304

/ A

UG

UST

US

2006Dit is een publicatie van: Ministerie van VROM

> Rijnstraat 8 > 2515 XP Den Haag > www.vrom.nl

Ministerie van VROM >staat voor ruimte, wonen, milieu en rijksgebouwen. Beleid maken, uitvoeren en handhaven.Nederland is klein. Denk groot.

Toekomstagenda M

ilieu: schoon, slim, sterk

Future Environment Agenda: clean, clever, competitiveToekomstagenda Milieu: schoon, slim, sterk....

Documents

Transcript of Future Environment Agenda: clean, clever, competitiveToekomstagenda Milieu: schoon, slim, sterk....