‘Trial and error’: the Council for the Environment and Infrastructure observes that citizens are systematically given insufficient consideration in environmental policy

The Council for the Environment and Infrastructure (RLI) concludes in its recently published advisory report 'Failing and standing up' that a great deal is going wrong in Dutch environmental policy. And what is going wrong actually aligns exactly with our thinking and what we call design flaws. On Thursday 3 July, we are delighted to organise a webinar on the advisory report. On behalf of the RLI, Robert Ewing will explain the advisory report in detail. But what exactly is in the report? Platform Weeffouten is a partnership between Fair Resource Foundation, Natuur- en Milieufederatie Noord-Holland, Transparency International and Corporate Observatory Europe. In Dutch environmental policy, we see structural problems that ensure that environmental policy can never become as good as we would actually like. Check www.weeffouten.nl for more info. This article was written for that site, but is also on this website because of the shared interest. Participation is out of balance Environmental policy should put the environment at the centre and come about through balanced cooperation between government, civil society organisations, businesses and citizens. But in recent decades, the center of gravity in this cooperation has shifted to the interests of government and business, the RLI observes. Market forces have become increasingly important in government policy. This means that the focus is on profit, growth, efficiency, etc. This indeed leads to the growth of our wealth in a financial and material sense (we are richer and have more stuff than ever). But the price we pay for this is that our soil is polluted, our air has more and more greenhouse gases and there are fewer and fewer different animals and plants around us (in other words: biodiversity is deteriorating). We as Weeffouten see this too, and that is precisely why we started our platform in the first place. The Council sees that residents' groups, which are committed to a better living environment, are increasingly being sidelined. Policy makers and companies do not involve them, or do so late or insufficiently; they are actively kept out of policy. In the past, communities played a crucial role in safeguarding collective interests, but today their influence is limited. Citizens are often restricted by bureaucratic rules and complicated procedures. The result is that potentially valuable citizen participation does not get any further because citizens get stuck in the bureaucratic web that government policy often is, says the RLI. Meanwhile, the importance of companies has increased. The current flawed interaction between government, business and communities, the Council concludes, offers insufficient solutions to the complex environmental problems that are at issue in the Netherlands. The Council identifies the following bottlenecks in this regard: Absence of public dialogues about values: many people no longer know why the government makes certain choices and takes measures, leaving squabbling over facts. Interaction between government and business yields insufficient solutions: government policy is heavily oriented towards looking after financial-economic interests and some large, established companies have known for years how to block or weaken strict environmental rules with lobbying activities. Often at the expense of the interests of citizens or nature. No eye for the contribution of communities: most politicians and civil servants think from a hierarchical model in which the government forms the steering centre, with the result that initiatives from society must meet government standards and thus lose their power. Lack of overview and decisiveness on the part of the government: the risk-averse culture slows down the government's ability to act and ensures that decisive choices are not made, and the resulting culture of accountability ensures that there is no longer room to fail, nor to really push through. Platform Weeffouten recognises these bottlenecks. We see that there is PFAS pollution, where the interests of companies carry more weight than the health of citizens. Deposit return scheme regulations are in favour of producers, and consumers experience an inconvenient system. Steel slag was allowed to continue to be used, even though the health risks were already known. A study into the health risks for local residents of goat farming was not followed by policy, but by new research. We too see that participation in policy is completely out of balance and that there are non-transparent lobbying practices. Five recommendations for a new approach The Council for the Environment and Infrastructure makes five recommendations to improve the interaction between government, business and communities: Conduct broad 'value dialogues' on environmental issues: public discuss

The Council for the Environment and Infrastructure (RLI) concludes in its recently published advisory report 'Failing and standing up' that a great deal is going wrong in Dutch environmental policy. And what is going wrong actually aligns exactly with our thinking and what we call design flaws. On Thursday 3 July, we are delighted to organise a webinar on the advisory report. On behalf of the RLI, Robert Ewing will explain the advisory report in detail. But what exactly is in the report?

Platform Weeffouten is a partnership between Fair Resource Foundation, Natuur- en Milieufederatie Noord-Holland, Transparency International and Corporate Observatory Europe. In Dutch environmental policy, we see structural problems that ensure that environmental policy can never become as good as we would actually like. Check www.weeffouten.nl for more info. This article was written for that site, but is also on this website because of the shared interest.

Participation is out of balance

Environmental policy should put the environment at the centre and come about through balanced cooperation between government, civil society organisations, businesses and citizens. But in recent decades, the center of gravity in this cooperation has shifted to the interests of government and business, the RLI observes. Market forces have become increasingly important in government policy. This means that the focus is on profit, growth, efficiency, etc. This indeed leads to the growth of our wealth in a financial and material sense (we are richer and have more stuff than ever). But the price we pay for this is that our soil is polluted, our air has more and more greenhouse gases and there are fewer and fewer different animals and plants around us (in other words: biodiversity is deteriorating). We as Weeffouten see this too, and that is precisely why we started our platform in the first place.

The Council sees that residents' groups, which are committed to a better living environment, are increasingly being sidelined. Policy makers and companies do not involve them, or do so late or insufficiently; they are actively kept out of policy. In the past, communities played a crucial role in safeguarding collective interests, but today their influence is limited. Citizens are often restricted by bureaucratic rules and complicated procedures. The result is that potentially valuable citizen participation does not get any further because citizens get stuck in the bureaucratic web that government policy often is, says the RLI. Meanwhile, the importance of companies has increased.

The current flawed interaction between government, business and communities, the Council concludes, offers insufficient solutions to the complex environmental problems that are at issue in the Netherlands. The Council identifies the following bottlenecks in this regard:

Absence of public dialogues about values: many people no longer know why the government makes certain choices and takes measures, leaving squabbling over facts.

Interaction between government and business yields insufficient solutions: government policy is heavily oriented towards looking after financial-economic interests and some large, established companies have known for years how to block or weaken strict environmental rules with lobbying activities. Often at the expense of the interests of citizens or nature.

No eye for the contribution of communities: most politicians and civil servants think from a hierarchical model in which the government forms the steering centre, with the result that initiatives from society must meet government standards and thus lose their power.

Lack of overview and decisiveness on the part of the government: the risk-averse culture slows down the government's ability to act and ensures that decisive choices are not made, and the resulting culture of accountability ensures that there is no longer room to fail, nor to really push through.

Platform Weeffouten recognises these bottlenecks. We see that there is PFAS pollution, where the interests of companies carry more weight than the health of citizens. Deposit return scheme regulations are in favour of producers, and consumers experience an inconvenient system. Steel slag was allowed to continue to be used, even though the health risks were already known. A study into the health risks for local residents of goat farming was not followed by policy, but by new research. We too see that participation in policy is completely out of balance and that there are non-transparent lobbying practices.

Five recommendations for a new approach

The Council for the Environment and Infrastructure makes five recommendations to improve the interaction between government, business and communities:

Conduct broad 'value dialogues' on environmental issues: public discussions provide insight into the diverse interests and a better balancing of them.

Involve communities as equals in the interplay: the government should strive for more flexibility and support for communities for a more creative and innovative approach to environmental problems.

Create forums for collaboration: organise it so that government, business and communities can jointly develop solutions where all stakeholders are given a say in decision-making.

Position companies for future-proof development: companies must be more encouraged to contribute to making society more sustainable, and this can be done through pricing, standards and support.

Strengthen the systemic capacity of the government: the government increases decisiveness by breaking through compartmentalisation and developing a broader systemic vision.

The council therefore argues that the complexity of environmental issues in the Netherlands requires a fundamental change in the interaction between government, business and communities. Platform Weeffouten fully supports this conclusion.

Webinar on 3 July 2025

Because there is so much more to say about the Advisory Council for the Environment's report 'Failing and standing up', we are organising a webinar on Thursday 3 July. RLI researcher Robert Ewing will explain the report and there will be room for questions and answers.Thursday 3 July, 16.00 – 17.00 hoursWebinar with Robert EwingRegister via this link!The webinar will also be recorded, so you can watch it back later.

Related tags

More on this topic

[IMAGE: https://fairresourcefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/plaatje-artikel-weeffouten.png]