Stephen Teeuw

Tag: sustainability

  • Translated version of KAVBs article from Dutch to English

    I lifted this article straight from the KAVB’s (Royal General Bulb Growers’ Association) website and translated it. I think it is very interesting to understand the difficulties of the bulb industry and how they are working to overcome some of the bigger environmental concerns.

    KPIs Based on the Area Discussions

    Area Pilot: Flower Bulbs

    Colophon

    Project: The circular KPIs project is an initiative of the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, within which the KAVB carried out activities to support the flower bulb area pilot project.
    Editorial staff: Rianne van der Hulst (KAVB) in collaboration with Dorieke Goodijk (KoningBoer)
    Contact: vanderhulst@kavb.nl
    Edition: November 2021
    Publisher: KAVB
    Title: Sustainability: First Draft of KPIs for the Flower Bulb Sector

    Table of Contents

    1. Reason
    2. The Flower Bulb Sector
       2.1 Description of the sector
       2.2 The flower bulb sector: characteristic and unique
       2.3 The challenges now and in the future
       2.4 Research
    3. Key Performance Indicators of the Flower Bulb Sector
       3.1 The starting point for formulating the KPIs
        3.1.1 The solution direction
        3.1.2 The cycle goals
        3.1.3 Set of KPIs for the flower bulb sector
    4. Findings of the Flower Bulb Area Pilot
       4.1 Improving the socio-economic position of the flower bulb sector
       4.2 Improving circularity
       4.3 Anticipating climate change
       4.4 Improving soil quality and management
       4.5 Improving water quality and management
       4.6 Strengthening functional agrobiodiversity
       4.7 Promoting plant health
    5. Necessary changes for policy
    6. General recommendation
    7. Recommendation for further project
      Bibliography

    1. Reason

    The social challenges that agriculture and horticulture currently face are complex and numerous. Entrepreneurs must consider biodiversity decline, combating and dealing with climate change, reuse of raw materials, landscape quality, and air, soil and water quality, as well as animal and plant health. As a determining factor in rural areas, agriculture plays a key role in achieving these goals. This involves not only individual agricultural entrepreneurs (growers, forcers, gardeners, livestock farmers, breeders), but also farmers’ organizations, chain parties, consumers, governments, nature and environmental organizations and other social groups, because effects play out at different spatial levels and an individual entrepreneur has limited options to influence them alone.

    Governments and other parties have set goals for these societal challenges. On climate, biodiversity, air and water quality, goals have been agreed internationally and national and provincial governments have taken on obligations (e.g., Paris Climate Agreement, Birds and Habitats Directives, Water Framework Directive). The policy vision “Agriculture, Nature and Food: valuable and connected. The Netherlands as a leader in circular agriculture” (LNV 2018) advocates agriculture that minimizes waste, reduces harmful emissions, and uses raw materials and end products with minimal losses. The Delta Plan for Biodiversity Restoration has focused on ‘bending the curve’ of biodiversity loss (WWF, 2020). The Horticulture Agreement sets joint government–horticulture commitments based on the LNV vision and focuses on circular and sustainable horticulture.

    To work effectively toward these goals, it is important to offer agricultural entrepreneurs more scope for action by:
    a) focusing on concrete goals linked to target dates,
    b) taking an integral approach, and
    c) making performance clear, transparent and measurable so contributions from agricultural entrepreneurs can be (financially) appreciated.

    The starting point of this project is that development can be facilitated by a Key Performance Indicators (KPI) system for sustainable circular agriculture (the KPI-K system). From the flower bulb sector, the KAVB took up the challenge to indicate which circular KPIs are suitable for this specific sector.

    An online trajectory started in June 2021, facilitated by FarmHack for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, inviting the flower bulb sector and stakeholders to exchange knowledge. Inputs from those online conversations were discussed in KAVB product group meetings, where board members could provide input. Boards from KAVB circles were informed. There were also discussions with knowledge institutions, research agencies and industry organizations. A digital meeting on November 1, 2021, arrived at a supported initial design for flower bulb circular KPIs and evaluation. The findings are described in this paper.

    2. The Flower Bulb Sector

    2.1 Description of the sector

    The Netherlands is the world’s most important producer and exporter of flower bulbs and bulb flowers. More than 60% of all flower bulbs in the world come from the Netherlands. Alongside other agricultural sectors, flower bulb cultivation is an important pillar of the Dutch economy. This position is due to entrepreneurial companies, an appealing assortment, good growing conditions, and in-depth knowledge of breeding, cultivation and trade. The sector is characterized by high-quality products, supported by the BKD (an independent administrative body fulfilling statutory duties for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality) which guarantees independent quality assessment.

    Cultivation is interwoven with Dutch culture, with the tulip as a national icon. To maintain a leading position, the flower bulb sector aims to remain at the forefront of quality and sustainability. This is only possible if entrepreneurs realize profitable operations that create room to invest in the company, the sector and a healthy living environment.

    The sector comprises more than 1,500 companies that together grow approximately 27,000 hectares of flower bulbs (CBS, 2020). Tulips are grown on more than half the area. Lily, hyacinth, gladiolus and daffodil are other large bulb crops. Three types of cultivation can be distinguished:

    1. Growers,
    2. Grower/forcers, and
    3. Forcers.

    Growers usually cultivate more than one bulb crop and sell the bulbs. Grower/forcers force the majority of their own bulbs. Forcers buy bulbs to force, often year-round. The sector therefore produces planting stock, bulbs for sale, and potted and cut flowers. Cultivation is concentrated on dune sand soils along the coast (Northern sandy area, the Bulb Region, Kennemerland). Additional concentrations are found on clay soils in West Friesland and the Noordoostpolder. Elsewhere in the Netherlands, bulb cultivation is often on a contract basis.

    2.2 The flower bulb sector: characteristic and unique

    Underground process. Bulb development occurs largely in the soil. Growers have limited insight into this growth process, making management difficult; soil influences increase vulnerability.

    Small, diverse and capital-intensive. The sector has a leading position but is small globally. It involves heavy investment in machinery and installations for cultivation and storage, making it capital intensive. There is great diversity of crops, species and varieties; the sector is specialized and knowledge-intensive.

    Cyclical cultivation. Bulb growers cultivate their own plants alongside the bulbs they sell. New plants come from existing batches. Without intervention, cyclical cultivation can trap growers in a vicious circle; with space and care, it can lead to increasingly high-quality planting material.

    Slow process. Breeding takes a long time between crossing and market introduction. Tulip bulbs take years to flower and propagate slowly; producing enough bulbs of a new variety can take 20–25 years.

    2.3 The challenges now and in the future

    Ever-increasing demands. International customers impose stricter requirements, especially virus standards. Retailers increasingly demand guarantees on sustainability and varietal purity.

    Fewer resources, less fertilizer, soil fertility under pressure. Approved chemical products are disappearing faster than new (green) products arrive. Alternative methods and techniques are often insufficiently available. Fertilizer use is increasingly constrained. Suitable land is scarce; disease pressure is increasing; rotations are tight; soil fertility is under pressure.

    Shortage of personnel. The sector relies on manual work and specific knowledge. Finding qualified personnel is increasingly difficult; this may limit the sector. Mechanization and automation require significant investments; the market for such machinery is limited; the sector will need to help organize technological development. It must remain attractive to new employees and retain them.

    Administrative burden and bureaucracy. Regulatory pressure consumes time and causes frustration; certification adds to the burden. Reduction—preferably prevention—of this pressure and bureaucracy is essential. Regulations should be trust-based, aiming to achieve goals together.

    2.4 Research

    The sector cannot survive without research. For over 140 years, it collectively gathered funds to solve problems through research. Until 2012, each entrepreneur contributed via a trade levy, enabling practical and fundamental research to solve issues.

    Research is still needed for a future-proof sector (e.g., new diseases and pests as conventional means disappear, new cultivation systems such as alternative weed control). Crop-oriented research is financed by KAVB funds to which growers voluntarily contribute. For future-oriented projects this is insufficient to fully support transition to new systems. From 2022, a Binding Declaration allows substantial annual collection from all growers to fund development and application of new knowledge, enabling more fundamental research alongside practical work.

    3. Key Performance Indicators of the Flower Bulb Sector

    3.1 The starting point for formulating the KPIs

    The sector faces major societal and environmental challenges: circularity; climate; soil, water and air quality; biodiversity; and plant health. Top sectors have set out goals in their Knowledge and Innovation Agenda with key technologies. The flower bulb sector’s 2018 vision Vital Cultivation 2030 explains how it will work toward vital cultivation by 2030. Together with the Horticulture Agreement—focusing on careful use of raw materials, reducing harmful emissions, and energy-efficient cultivation—this forms the starting point for a KPI set to stimulate circular agriculture.

    3.1.1 The solution direction

    By translating governmental circular and sectoral tasks to the company level, it becomes possible to see what is needed to achieve (circular) goals. It is essential that entrepreneurs, organizations and government work together toward goals rather than unilaterally imposing measures. Agricultural entrepreneurs have a wealth of knowledge and experience to apply on their own farms. Collaboration and rewarding good results lead to “a healthy sector with a thriving future.”

    3.1.2 The cycle goals

    In the white paper Integrated management of goals for sustainable agriculture via KPIs (Van Doorn et al., 2021), integrated cycle goals are formulated. In the flower bulb area pilot, these were translated into sub-goals:

    Table 1. Flower bulb cycle goals

    Circular goalsSub-goals
    Improving socio-economic positionSufficient income for the sector
    Improving circularityOptimal land use / stimulating residual flows
    Anticipating climate changeTransition to green (non-fossil) energy
    Improving soil quality and managementImproving soil quality
    Improving water quality and managementImproving water quality
    Restoring/enhancing biodiversityStrengthening functional agrobiodiversity
    Improving plant healthImproving plant health

    3.1.3 Set of KPIs for the flower bulb sector

    In the area pilot, cycle objectives were made concrete. The first set of indicators to operationalize sustainable circular performance should meet these conditions:

    • Joint, clear, demonstrable relationship with circular agriculture;
    • Integrated set (indicators should not work against each other);
    • Baseline measurable at every company;
    • Influencable by taking measures;
    • Minimal administrative burden by using existing registration and monitoring systems;
    • Limited in size yet offering a broad spectrum of management options.

    Proposed indicators (16):

    1. Working conditions
    2. Varied crop rotation plan
    3. Waste-flow action plan and accountability (residual flows and reuse)
    4. Reduction of fossil energy use (electrical energy balance)
    5. Greenhouse gas emissions (CO₂-eq/ha)
    6. Nitrogen uptake/emissions
    7. Organic matter balance (+/- % OM)
    8. Soil quality
    9. MIG (Environmental Impact Indicator for Crop Protection)
    10. Water collection (e.g., rainwater)
    11. Improving regional water management
    12. Water quality measurements
    13. Landscape elements
    14. Stimulation of fauna
    15. Use of more resistant crops
    16. Promote plant health (IPM measures)

    Formulating this set is challenging because entrepreneurs often face constraints beyond the farm that can affect scores. Some measures are still in development. It is important to discuss with companies why choices were made before judging. Bottlenecks observed in area discussions are included in this report. Chapter 4 describes possible measures toward circularity goals and their environmental contributions.

    4. Findings from the Flower Bulb Area Pilot

    4.1 Improving the socio-economic position

    Measures. The sector is labor-intensive; labor costs are a large share of total costs. Tight labor markets put pressure on HR. Seasonal work causes good employees seeking full-time work to leave. Employers can make conditions more attractive via permanent contracts, training, and offering housing.

    Environmental contribution. A better socio-economic position enables investment in measures to improve environmental impact and the sector’s image, strengthening local acceptance and employer appeal.

    Bottlenecks. The KWIN (Quantitative Information on Flower Bulbs) dates from 2005–2006 and is outdated, yet widely used by entrepreneurs, policymakers and advisors. A current edition would help develop more appropriate policy and improve the sector’s socio-economic position. The sector also needs better (tax) legislation for seasonal employment and clearer, more consistent housing policies for migrant workers; many plans fail due to local opposition, leading to shortages in housing capacity.

    Possible indicator. Employment conditions (e.g., average hourly wage, employee availability, length of employment, contract type, housing, training and courses—for entrepreneurs and employees).

    4.2 Improving circularity

    Measures. The sector already exhibits circularity: bulbs are planted; after topping and senescence, bulbs are harvested; small bulbs (planting material) are separated and replanted. The sector also limits waste flows and uses side and residual flows. Choices depend on revenue models, region and business type. Green manures add nutrients and support soil life; organic fertilizers can be used. Partnerships with livestock farmers (e.g., “travelling bulb stall”—land exchange to improve rotations, maintain organic matter and reduce disease pressure) are possible. Regional residual flows (e.g., verge grass, nature reserve clippings) can be composted or made into bokashi.

    Environmental contribution. Green manures reduce nutrient leaching and erosion, fix nitrogen, improve soil life and structure, and extend habitat availability for fauna. Mixed green manures can improve (soil) biodiversity and disease resistance.

    Bottlenecks. On light soils, green manures can increase nematodes, potentially requiring more crop protection to meet strict phytosanitary standards. Some measures (e.g., composting on-farm) are hindered by regulations (e.g., azole-containing agents in compost heaps). Regional partnerships aren’t always feasible.

    Possible indicators. Varied crop rotation plan; Waste-flow action plan and accountability (residual flows and reuse).

    4.3 Anticipating climate change

    Measures. Energy savings via LED lighting, new greenhouse concepts and materials; replacing natural gas with geothermal energy; (sustainable) electricity and heat from biomass, industry and greenhouse environments; drying bulbs with greenhouse air; DC fans; new greenhouse builds with better energy performance; on-site generation (solar, wind), heat pumps; exploring hydrogen (H₂); securing external CO₂ sources.

    Environmental contribution. Reduced fossil fuel use lowers greenhouse gas emissions.

    Bottlenecks. Grid capacity limits feed-in from solar/wind; infrastructure and regulatory certainty are lacking; energy storage is costly. Large solar parks reduce cultivated area; SDE subsidies favor large projects. Insurance reluctance regarding rooftop solar; municipal opposition to wind turbines; hydrogen lacks infrastructure, machinery, and economic feasibility. Not all energy-saving investments are viable on existing sites.

    Possible indicators. Reduction of fossil energy use (electrical energy balance); Greenhouse gas emissions (CO₂-eq/ha), including crop CO₂ uptake; Nitrogen absorption/emission (define forms and reduction pathways).

    4.4 Improving soil quality and management

    Measures. Soil is a key production factor. Focus areas: fertilizers, organic matter, technological developments.

    • Fertilizers: Use efficiently to prevent accumulation/leaching; regular soil analyses; use of organic materials (compost, manure); comply with Fertilizer Act and related regulations.
    • Organic matter: Increase OM with green manures, non-inverting tillage, straw incorporation; choose species by purpose, timing, soil type and rotation.
    • Technology: Explore lighter machinery and lower tire pressure to limit compaction.

    Environmental contribution.

    • Fertilizers: Lower losses and avoiding soil disinfection improve soil fertility.
    • Organic matter: A positive OM balance improves workability, moisture/air availability, structure and soil life; can reduce crop protection needs.
    • Technology: Less compaction benefits soil life and biodiversity.

    Bottlenecks. Generic nutrient limits insufficient for coastal calcareous sands; land scarcity tightens rotations; uncertainty of N/P release from solid manure; current manure policy doesn’t account for soil type differences; administrative constraints on N space with rental/lease; short-term leases via tenders discourage long-term soil investments; lighter machinery may increase labor/time; low tire pressure is impractical for road transport without on-the-go systems.

    Possible indicators. Organic matter balance (+/- % OM); Soil quality (soil life, structure, fertility).

    4.5 Improving water quality and management

    Measures. The sector works to reduce emissions of crop protection products and water use: “Clean yard, clean ditch” projects since 2016 show significant emission reductions; rainwater collection and storage; drainage for water table optimization; drip irrigation; filtration in greenhouses with cleaner discharge; learning from greenhouse horticulture; research into cultivation “without” soil (e.g., bulb coaster project with biodegradable trunks containing growing medium, water and nutrients).
    Crop protection: Comply with Environmental Management Activities rules; licensed use with drift-reducing techniques, closed filling systems, precision spraying; awareness and training; new MIG indicator (PPP started 2019) to quantify environmental impact.
    Technology: Drift reduction; alternative disinfection (ECA water); foaming/coating applications; mechanical weed control (e.g., hoeing).

    Environmental contribution. Reduced chemical use and better practices lessen impacts on surface water; improved collection, purification and reuse; technology reduces drift/runoff.

    Bottlenecks. Shrinking availability of approved products; slow approvals (Ctgb capacity) especially for low-hazard/green products; LDS (Low Dosage System) not labeled for all products; alternative methods (ECA water, mechanical weeding) not yet universally applicable or economical; wet years hinder mechanical methods; risk of plant damage.

    Possible indicators. MIG (crop protection environmental impact); Water collection (e.g., rainwater); Improving regional water management; Water quality measurements.

    4.6 Strengthening functional agrobiodiversity

    Measures. Encourage biodiversity that directly/indirectly supports crops: green manures with positive biodiversity effects; later mowing of ditch edges; herb/flower borders; landscape elements (trees, shrubs, hedges); nesting boxes and shelters for birds, insects, hedgehogs and bats. Measures must be functional, not reduce production land, and fit the region. Collaboration with nature associations helps.

    Environmental contribution. Flowering margins support insects; nesting boxes support bird conservation (e.g., counts via local associations).

    Bottlenecks. Not all measures suit every company (travelling bulb stall); margins may harbor pests (e.g., thrips) leading to more crop protection; vegetation can cause shade reducing yields. Nest boxes have no meaningful downsides.

    Possible indicators. Landscape elements (e.g., herb mixtures); Stimulation of fauna (presence of birds, butterflies, mammals, amphibians, insects).

    4.7 Promoting plant health

    Measures. Research into a one-way system (Fundamental System Leap): start with clean material grown rapidly under protected, optimal conditions before outdoor cultivation—to avoid disease carry-over (not yet ready for practice). Healthy soil life and adequate organic matter (compost, coarse manure) are essential. Grow more resistant crops. Apply IPM: cultural, physical, biological and chemical methods that are cost-effective, environmentally friendly, and socially acceptable—often reducing costs while maintaining high yield and quality.

    Environmental contribution. Greater crop resilience reduces need for crop protection. New breeding techniques (e.g., CRISPR-Cas) could reduce inputs if regulations allow.

    Bottlenecks. Regulation of new breeding techniques prolongs time to market; tulips need at least 15 years for marketable bulbs. Short-term improvements hinge on soil fertility; long-term on breeding and plant improvement.

    Possible indicators. Use of more resistant crops; Promote plant health (IPM measures).

    5. Necessary Changes for Policy

    • Work together toward goals instead of imposing ever more (often contradictory) measures and bans.
    • Long-term regulatory vision (≥10 years); prevent conflicts between national, regional, and EU rules.
    • Design and reliably implement multi-year agreements (e.g., energy), as in 2015.
    • Sector-specific regulations (for the flower bulb sector).
    • Regional policy applicable to each business type.
    • Level playing field within the EU for flower bulb companies.
    • Protect Dutch flower bulb cultivation against threats from abroad (new diseases/pests).
    • Abolish or expand the small-crop definition system (e.g., include lilies and tulips; broader ornamental horticulture or entire bulb sector).
    • Shift manure policy focus to enable good soil management.
    • Reward desired behavior and compensate ecosystem services.
    • Provide exemptions and good (sectoral/ regional) subsidy schemes where needed.
    • Avoid unnecessary regulation of new DNA (breeding) techniques (e.g., CRISPR-Cas).

    6. General Recommendation

    Measuring sustainable circular performance in the flower bulb sector (open cultivation) is challenging due to company diversity. Some firms combine cultivation with forcing, trade, or arable farming; others grow multiple crops year-round. Regional differences and crop differences (e.g., tulips vs. lilies; spring vs. summer bulbs) are substantial.

    Some indicators are strongly influenced by developments outside the company (e.g., government agreements), limiting individual influence. It is sensible to address bottlenecks sectorally (via consultations and sector plans) as well as regionally and at company level. Policy should motivate bulb growers to pursue circularity goals without replacing the entrepreneur’s role—give entrepreneurs room.

    Include key variables in Circular KPIs: farm type, crop, region, sales area, etc., and account for savings already achieved.

    7. Recommendation for Further Project

    Given sector diversity, formulating KPIs relevant to all entrepreneurs is challenging. With field input, a suitable set can be formulated and bottlenecks anticipated. A pilot with at least 15 entrepreneurs should test KPIs in practice.

    Criteria for participating companies:

    • SMEs;
    • Representation from various regions/soil types (sand, clay, mixed);
    • Diverse company types: 1) Growers, 2) Grower/forcers, 3) Forcers; plus companies with arable, livestock, trade, summer crops or perennials.

    During testing, define thresholds and target values, ensuring integrity and coherence between KPIs. Based on this, design a fair reward system to encourage pioneers.

    • Target values: ecological optima for sector functioning—the “dot on the horizon.”
    • Threshold values: levels at which the current situation does not deteriorate further and begins to have a positive effect on cycle goals.

    The starting point for thresholds and targets are the cycle goals: societal objectives for circularity, climate, soil, water, air quality, biodiversity and plant health.

    Remuneration scheme. Besides financial rewards, there is a strong need for regional regulatory flexibility (exemptions) as part of rewards. Income differences per plot can be hundreds of thousands of euros; growers need influence to combine good cultivation with circular goals—exemptions help.

    Before the national pilot:

    • Ensure policymakers and participating growers have read this document.
    • Link knowledge, research and integrated advice to the KPI approach.
    • Work with partners to achieve the best results. KAVB wishes to be kept informed of progress.

    Bibliography

    • A. van Doorn; J. Reijs; J.W. Erisman; F. Verhoeven; D. Verstand; W. de Jong; K. Andeweg; N. van Eekeren; A. Hoes; C. Koopmans; J.P. Wagenaar; P. de Wolf (2021). Integrated management of sustainable agriculture goals through KPIs.
    • KAVB (2020). Implementation Agenda 2021–2024 “Healthy sector, prosperous future”.
    • CBS (2020). Which flower bulbs do we grow most often? – The Netherlands in figures 2020 | CBS.
    • Chris J. Koopmans, Jan Willem Erisman, Marleen Zanen, Boki Luske, Louis Bolk Institute (2017). Biodiverse arable farming: exploration of indicators for agrobiodiversity in arable farming.
    • CAP Pilot (2021). CAP Pilot Sectoral Building Blocks – CAP pilot Common Agricultural Policy (glbuitdepraktijk.nl).
    • Jeroen Wildschut, PPO 32 360658 00 / PT 13375 (March 2009). Carbon footprint flower bulbs: a calculation model.
    • J.W. (Jan Willem) Erisman; C.J. (Chris) Koopmans; M. (Marleen) Zanen; N. (Nick) van Eekeren; J.P. (Jan-Paul) Wagenaar, Landscape/4 (2020). Performance indicators for agricultural soils.
    • J. Zijlstra; P.W. Blokland; N. Van Eekeren; G. Migchels; N. Polman; M. Bestman, Louis Bolk Institute (Oct 2017). Monitoring functional agrobiodiversity in dairy farming: development of KPIs.
    • KIA (Dec 2011). Knowledge and Innovation Agenda 2018–2021: Societal challenges and key technologies.
    • KAVB, WUR, Greenport Dune and Bulb Region, Greenport North Holland North (2021). Vital Cultivation 2030: Vision of the flower bulb sector.
    • KAVB, WUR, Greenport Dune and Bulb Region, Greenport North Holland North (2021). www.vitaleteelt.nl
    • K. Termeer (2019). Achieving a transition to circular agriculture. Wageningen University & Research note for the Dutch House of Representatives Committee on LNV.
    • MPS (2021). Home – MPS (my-mps.com).
    • PlanetProof (2021). Plantaardig – On the way to PlanetProof.
    • Petra Berkhout; Wim de Haas; Martin Scholte, WUR. Advice on the design of monitoring and evaluation circular agriculture. Note for the Ministry of LNV.
    • Topsector T&U (2021). www.topsectortu.nl/kennis-en-innovatie-agenda/
    • WUR (2005–2006). Quantitative Information on Flower Bulbs (KWIN), PPO no. 719.
  • Helpful links on the bulb industry’s environmental impact

    Hey, I didn’t write this. It’s ChatGPT list we made after a long discussion about sustainability and research of the bulb industry. I can’t claim that I’ve read all of it either but I’m working my way through. Some of it is interesting.

    Pick out an article that looks interesting to you and let me know your thoughts.

    1. Residues in Ornamental Plants Marketed as Bee Friendly: Levels in Flowers, Leaves, Roots and Soil”
      This is a study of 54 perennial ornamental plants marketed as “bee friendly,” analyzing whole bulbs, roots, soil, stems, petals for up to 536 pesticide compounds. It shows that all tested plants contained at least one pesticide, sometimes up to 19 different substances. SSRN
      • Use: strong empirical support for your point that “residual is a loose term” and for caution about what “organic” or “pesticide-free” claims might mean in ornamentals.
    2. “Pesticide exposure in dwellings near bulb growing fields — an explorative study” (Hogenkamp et al., Netherlands, 2004)
      This study measured pesticide residues in household dust in homes of bulb growers, and in homes close to bulb fields. They found detectable levels of compounds like chloropropham, flutolanil, and vinchlozolin in non-farming homes too, and higher levels in bulb growers’ homes. aaem.pl+1
      • Use: to show the pathways by which bulb production pesticides may spread beyond fields, strengthening your environmental- and health-oriented angle.
    3. “A review on pesticides in flower production” (Pereira et al., 2021)
      A broader survey of pesticide use in floriculture, discussing effects on human and environmental health, and pointing out how ornamental plant production is less regulated or less scrutinised than food crops. ScienceDirect
      • Use: to ground your argument in a broader literature, and to reference industry-level challenges of reducing pesticide use.
    4. “PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN ORNAMENTAL PLANTS” SSRN (Porseryd et al.)
      The same work noted above but useful as a downloadable reference. SSRN
    5. “From bulb development to postharvest treatments: advances in Hippeastrum spp.” (Shao et al., 2025)
      While not focused on pesticide residues, this paper discusses postharvest treatments and cultivation techniques in bulbous plants — which may include chemical treatments or sanitation steps. maxapress.com
      • Use: for background on how bulb industry handles bulb health, treatments, and postharvest care — helpful for your discussion of bulb industry practices.
    6. “A solution for clean water in the flower bulb sector” — VAM WaterTech (industry report/blog)
      Describes a water-treatment and reuse system for bulb growers that removes fungi, viruses, and pesticide residuesfrom wash water, to reduce chemical load and improve sustainability. VAM WaterTech
      • Use: as a concrete example of a technological mitigation: you can present this as evidence that the industry does try to clean up, but also as evidence of the cost/complexity involved.

    Benefits of Perennial Plants / Cropping Systems

    1. “An agroecological vision of perennial agriculture” (Reynolds et al., 2021)
      Discusses how perennial crops can improve erosion control, soil health, pest management, biodiversity, and ecosystem services. Taylor & Francis Online
      • Use: a conceptual/theoretical underpinning for your argument; use key phrases or results to support claims about perennials’ ecological advantage.
    2. “Potential of Perennial Crop on Environmental Sustainability of Agriculture” (Zhang et al., 2011)
      Outlines environmental advantages of perennial vs annual systems: deeper roots, constant soil cover, reduced nutrient leaching, etc. ScienceDirect+1
      • Use: to support claims about soil, water, and nutrient benefits of perennial planting.
    3. “Does the Use of Perennials in Flower Beds Necessarily Improve Sustainability?” (Poje et al., 2023)
      This article addresses economic and ecological aspects of using perennials in landscaping: fewer replacements, less maintenance, positive soil effects. PMC
      • Use: good to reference when you argue that perennials can be more economical and lower maintenance in the long run.
    4. “Perennial crops provide sustainable environmental benefits compared to annual crops” (News-Medical summary of research)
      A summary noting that perennials reduce soil & water erosion, nitrate leaching, and increase carbon sequestration relative to annuals. News-Medical
      • Use: an accessible summary you can cite (while also tracking down the original research if possible).
    5. “Climate Benefits of Increasing Plant Diversity in Perennial Systems” (Yang et al., 2019)
      This paper shows that plant diversity in perennial systems helps soil carbon storage, reduces N₂O emissions, suppresses weeds, etc. ScienceDirect
      • Use: good support for secondary benefits of perennials beyond just “they don’t die.”
    6. “Perennial Crops Boost Biodiversity Both On and Off Farms” (Civil Eats, 2023)
      Discusses how perennial cropping systems create continuous habitat for insects, birds, microbes — unlike annual systems that keep clearing and disturbing the soil. Civil Eats
      • Use: for the more narrative or “ecological story” side of your article — showing how perennials anchor life.

    KPIs in Horticulture / Agriculture / Grower Metrics

    1. “Top 10 KPIs Every Greenhouse Grower Should Track” (Velosio, 2025)
      Lists metrics such as yield per m², crop uniformity, labour efficiency, resource use (water, fertiliser), input cost per output, etc. Velosio
      • Use: as inspiration for what bulb growers might already measure — helpful to connect your gardener’s pressure to the internal metrics of the industry.
    2. “Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) – making use of production data” (AHDB, UK agriculture/horticulture)
      An agricultural/horticultural guide to choosing meaningful KPIs — with examples of financial KPIs (cost per unit, pounds per unit output) and production metrics. AHDB
      • Use: to ground your claims about industry-level pressures and what growers have to track.
    3. “Production Costs and Profitability for Selected Greenhouse Annual and Perennial Crops” (Wei, Khachatryan & Rihn, 2020)
      A study comparing economic performance of various greenhouse-grown crops, both annual and perennial, using metrics like net income, gross margin, profit margin, sensitivity analysis. It shows that although perennials may have higher initial costs or more uncertainty, they can still produce positive returns under certain conditions. ASHS
      • Use: to lend financial realism to your argument — i.e. that perennials are not an economic fantasy, but a trade-off some growers already consider.
    4. “Use benchmarking to improve your production metrics” (GreenhouseMag, 2010)
      Discusses using benchmarks and KPIs in greenhouse operations to understand how small efficiency improvements can compound in profit. Greenhouse Management
      • Use: as a reference point for how growers might respond to demands from gardeners (i.e. they are always optimizing small margins).
    5. “Decades matter: Agricultural diversification increases financial profitability, biodiversity, and ecosystem services over time” (Raveloaritiana et al., 2024, preprint)
      This meta-analysis shows that over 20+ years, diversified systems (including more perennial or mixed planting) greatly increase soil quality, biodiversity, profitability, carbon sequestration. arXiv
      • Use: as a long-term systems argument: shifting to more perennial/mixed systems does not just trade off yield — it multiplies benefits over decades.

    Residues on bulbs & exposure around bulb fields

    • RIVM “OBO flower bulbs” exposure study (Netherlands) – official Dutch investigation of resident exposure routes (air/soil/dust) near flower-bulb fields. Good for explaining how non-dietary routes work and why “residues dissipate over time” is context-dependent. RIVM+1
    • WUR/LEI – flower-bulb production & crop protection – background on integrated pest management history in the bulb sector and the shift away from heavy pesticide dependence; useful for historic context. eDepot
    • Efficiency & emissions of pesticides in Dutch bulb cultivation (WUR) – explains emission pathways from bulb fields to surface water (drainage, drift), handy for a factual sidebar on “where residues go.” eDepot
    • Progress report of the national environmental forum for bulbs – notes long-term trends in water quality in bulb regions and remaining exceedances; supports a balanced “improving but not solved” framing. eDepot
    • PAN Netherlands report on pesticides & water quality – NGO synthesis showing where exceedances are most common (bulb areas among hotspots). Useful for showing external pressure/critique. pan-netherlands.org
    • VAM WaterTech case – concrete example of bulb-sector wash-water purification aimed at removing pesticide residues, fungi & viruses; good for “industry mitigation in practice.” VAM WaterTech+1

    Real-world Dutch bulb-industry KPIs (and who sets/uses them)

    • KAVB (Royal General Bulb Growers’ Association) – “Duurzaamheid: 1e voorzet KPI’s bloembollensector” (Nov 2021) – this is the KPI paper drafted with the Ministry of LNV and sector groups. It outlines circularity/soil/water/biodiversity/plant-health KPI sets and the rationale. Quote from the table of KPI domains, and the “area pilot” findings section. kavb.nl+1
    • BKD (Flower Bulb Inspection Service) – Annual Report 2024 – ZBO that inspects bulb quality/phyto health; annuals include sector figures (companies/areas/registrations), trends, and compliance signals you can treat as operational KPIs. bkd.eu+1
    • Royal FloraHolland – Annual Report 2024 – while not growers per se, it’s the major cooperative marketplace; use turnover, transaction volumes and energy/cost metrics to illustrate downstream economic KPIs driving the sector. Royal FloraHolland+1
    • CBS (Statistics Netherlands) – bulb area 2014–2024 – hard numbers on total bulb hectares and recent decline/increase; perfect for anchoring scale before you argue for demand-side change. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek
    • WUR & sector media on KPI adoption – notes on KAVB’s November 1 (2021) KPI meeting and sector engagement (use as corroboration of KPI process). eDepot

    Dutch authorities & regulatory context (who’s who to cite)

    • BKD (Bloembollenkeuringsdienst) – statutory body for bulb inspection; EU audit docs explicitly list BKD’s role in plant passport/official controls—great for explaining the compliance backbone. European Commission
    • NVWA (Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority) – advisory reports on risks in the ornamental/flower-bulb chain; cite to show oversight on plant health and (indirectly) chemical use. english.nvwa.nl+1
    • Ministry of LNV (Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality) – annual/ budget docs referencing BKD as an arm’s-length authority; use for formal definitions and governance lines. Rijksoverheid+2Rijksoverheid+2
    • Royal Anthos (trade association for bulb & nursery stock traders) – trade voice and stats gateway; useful for quotes on market dynamics/logistics. anthos.org
    • On the way to PlanetProof (SMK) – the sustainability certification most relevant to bulbs in NL; use criteria/updates to evidence KPI-like targets on biodiversity, water, crop protection and propagation material. planetproof.eu+2downloads.smk.nl+2

    Benefits of perennials (for your “why perennials” sections)

    • Perennials in landscaping—evidence review – peer-reviewed analysis showing lower long-term maintenance, positive soil effects; also warns selection matters (good nuance for your dry wit). PMC
    • Perennial agriculture (review/vision) – ecological mechanisms: erosion control, soil health, biodiversity, carbon; use for your “ecosystem, not catalogue” line. Taylor & Francis Online