Three days workshop financial tools in the Netherlands

In november 2024, a group of around 10 DigitAF members gathered in Bunnik, the Netherlands, for an intensive three-day workshop focused on the development of financial tools for agroforestry.

We were joined by experts outside the consortium, providing valuable insights from the Dutch context. And we visited the Dutch LL case study farm (“Tussen de Hagen”), which provided a real-life case to test the applicability of our tools with regards to supporting farmer decision making.

The workshop was fruitful and next steps were formulated to continue improving financial tools with the help of the LL’s and to work towards delivering Roadmap 2.0 (deliverable 2.4).

Next stop is LL UK, were we will focus on a case study around arable farming.

The goal of the workshop was to facilitate co-creation, by providing ample space and time (and coffee and sugar), in order to align financial tools and formulate development steps. Several tools and models were presented and discussed: Yield-SAFE (CRAN), INTACT (ILVO), AgroforstRechner (DEFAF), FINAL-ALS (VUKOZ/CVUT FEL), FarmTree Tool (FarmTree). In addition, two “local” Dutch tools, one for food forests (Rekentool Voedselbossen 5.0) and one for agroforestry (Agroforestry Rekensheet 1.0).

Case study farm visit

On day 1 we visited the NL LL case study farm “Tussen de Hagen”. Ron van Zandbrink has decided to take over the organic diary farm from his parents, under the condition that he can diversify the farm’s operations. He’s started with trialing different forms of agroforestry in 2019 on small plots of grassland, including fodder hedges and productive walnut and chestnut trees. Ron gave us a great tour, whereafter there was a moment to exchange questions and ideas. Ron had several questions for us researchers and tool developers:

1. At what scale does my walnut cultivation become cost-effective?;
2. How many hedgerow do I need to harvest sufficient wood chips for bedding?;
3. When is it profitable to spend more time on tree maintenance vs. just “keeping the tree alive”?;
4. How will grass and milk quantity and quality be affected by trees and hedges as the system matures?

These questions gave food for thought in regards to which (financial) tools can already answer which of these questions and to what extent. Some questions could probably be already answered on the basis of existing knowledge and experience and with simple calculations; other questions require more research, as the data is simply not there, or more complex calculations. Each tool owner was asked to think about how they can contribute to these questions, which also stimulates thinking on the applicability of each tool, inspiring possible future developments. Expectation management with the farmer is important here, because we cannot promise to answer these questions in full.

Exchange with Dutch experts

On day 2 we had an exchange with Dutch financial tool experts. The objective was to provide some insights on the Dutch context and also from different stakeholder / user perspectives. Maureen Schoutsen (Wageningen University & Research) joined and Hans Pleij (Rabobank) to provide some insights into the two Dutch financial tools (Rekentool Voedselbossen 5.0, Agroforestry Rekensheet 1.0). Additionally, Jacob Haalstra (independent farm advisor) who made over 50 agroforestry cost-benefit analyses, provided some feedback with regards to the tools he uses and what he sees as the current limitations and opportunities for improvement. Some interesting points from the discissions are summarised now. Hans mentioned that he’d like to see more validation of existing models in addition to improvement of models. For a bank, this is key information that decides wether to finance agroforestry or not. Maureen and Jacco (LBI) showed the development of the Rekensheet Agroforestry 1.0 and exchanged ideas with other tool owners. Jacob provided valuable feedback on usefulness and usability of the tools he uses (including Rekentool Voedselbossen 5.0). An important piece of feedback was that for farmer decision-making purposes, financial tools have to be able to demonstrate all synergies and trade-offs of agroforestry to get the complete picture. A partial picture renders agroforestry as costing more than it provides, is his experience. The complete picture should reflect how agroforestry is a “swiss army knife” (as Evert always puts it), a tool that is pretty useful for many purposes, but not extremely useful for one purpose only. Only when that is captured, does agroforestry come out as cost-efficient, is Jacob’s experience.

Formulating next steps and rounding off

Day 3 was used for some bilateral exchange between tool owners, some work on financial tools, some work on DigitAF deliverables, and formulating next steps. Some quick wins would be to upload all financial tools and underlying datasets to the DigitAF catalogue on the website. Perhaps even make video explainers/tutorials on what each tool does/how to use it. Other next steps centre around working towards Roadmap 2.0 (deliverable 2.4), and possible new improvements/developments on tools. A next concrete moment of get-together will be a workshop in the UK with a farm visit to the UK LL case study farm. The focus will be on silvoarable farming this time, with CRAN taking the lead and hosting. Another idea that came up was to write a joint paper comparing the financial tools and describing their applicability on quesions coming from the 6 case study farms from the LLs.

All in all, we had three productive and engaging days! With Christmas we’ll have time to reflect on it and appreciate what’s been done, and New Years to make some resolutions 😉
 Thanks again to all the participants!