Samenvatting

In dit afstudeerrapport is gepoogd antwoord te krijgen op de vraag hoe innovaties om bodemdaling in het Groene Hart te reduceren in gang kunnen worden gezet. In het onderzoek is gekeken naar de mogelijkheden die er zijn om innovaties die als doel hebben de bodemdaling in het veenweidegebied te reduceren, te stimuleren.

Omdat de mate waarin de bodem daalt verschilt, zal per gebied gekeken moeten worden of er maatregelen nodig zijn en of het nodig is aanpassingen te doen aan het huidige landgebruik. Momenteel wordt er geëxperimenteerd met alternatieve manieren van landbouw en het slimmer omgaan met bodem en water, waarbij de drooglegging kleiner kan.

Maar de ervaring is hier dat veel van de experimenten en innovaties tegen beperkende wet - en regelgeving en lange procedures aanlopen. Doel van dit afstudeeronderzoek is om er achter te komen hoe deze beperkingen uit de weg kunnen worden genomen en hoe procedures mogelijk versneld kunnen worden. Dit is gedaan door te kijken naar de toepassing van de crisis - en herstelwet en het sluiten van een Green Deal. Door te kijken naar de procedures achter deze middelen is onderzocht wat beide instrumenten kunnen betekenen voor de te stimuleren innovaties in het veenweidegebied.

Summary
In this report is attempted to answer the question of how innovations to prevent subsidence in the Green Heart (Het Groene
Hart) can be quickly put into motion. ‘Space for Innovation’ is one of the core projects within the theme Water, Soil and
Landuse of the Advisory committee Green Heart (Stuurgroep Groene Hart). This thesis research has taken place within this
core project. The research looked at the opportunities for stimulating innovations that prevent subsidence in the western
peatland area.
These innovations are necessary because in parts of this area the land is subsiding as a result of the dewatering of peatlands.
This involves high costs. This is mainly due to damage to infrastructure and buildings. Another significant indirect head
of expenditure is the CO2-emission, caused by peat oxidation. The speed of subsidence varies by area, therefore it’s not
desired to perform generic policy. Therefore, for each area must be examined whether measures are needed and whether
it is necessary to make adjustments to the current land use. The use of ‘underwater drainage systems’ (Onderwaterdrainage)
can be such an adjustment. But also the (partial) change from dairy farm to the cultivation of alternative (wet) crops is a
possibility. Growing cranberries or reed (miscanthus) are examples of such crops in wet conditions. But to find out if these
alternatives and measures are profitable and effective, land users must be able to experiment and innovate. Now this is
already happening on a small scale at the VIC (Peat Meadows Innovation Center). But the experience here is that many of
the experiments and innovations are faced with restrictive law - and regulations and lengthy procedures.
The purpose of this research is to figure out how to deal with these restrictions and to examine the possibilities to accelerate
procedures regarding law and restrictions. The crisis and recovery act (De crisis - en herstelwet) and the Green Deal
approach could be usable legal tools to achieve this. Characteristic of such a deal is that the Central Government is one of
the participants and that the project is aimed at stimulating a green growth economy. By looking at the backgrounds of,
and the experiences with these tools has been examined what both instruments can mean for the innovations and experiments
to reduce subsidence.
The main conclusion of the research is that many of the legal barriers can be removed by making ‘local agreements’ with
municipalities and water boards. Many things can be arranged locally, among other things thanks to the new Water Board
Regulation (Waterschapsverordening or Keur). Although it’s probably not necessary to involve the Central Government with
the removal of legal barriers, it could still be conducive to conclude a Green Deal. When an experiment or innovation appears
to be successful, the Central Government can play a role in the scaling up of the experiment. For example, to incorporate
the innovations in existing law and regulations. The question is, whether it is efficient to involve the central government
already at an early stage, without knowing which innovations and experiments are fit for upscaling. When the experiments
show that, for example, the cultivation of miscanthus is a cost effective way of farming in the peatland areas and there are
farmers who want to cultivate it on a large(r) scale, the central government can being asked for an ‘action’ in a later stage.
For example, to investigate or decrease the distance to the outlet.
Because the Central Government’s policy is not the main barrier, it’s more effective to make arrangements at local level, with
municipality (ies) and the Water Board. This can be done in the way as the new Water Board Regulation. These arrangements
can also be ‘linked’ to the Research Agenda of the VIC, this agenda makes clear where the examinations and experiments
are focussed on the coming years. All the activities that must be performed to carry out the experiments, are permitted.
Provided that certain conditions are met.