1

Eco-innovation in

Netherlands

EIO Country profiles 2010

April 2011

2

Eco-Innovation Observatory

The Eco-Innovation Observatory functions as a platform for the structured collection and

analysis of an extensive range of eco-innovation information, gathered from across the European

Union and key economic regions around the globe, providing a much-needed integrated

information source on eco-innovation for companies and innovation service providers, as well as

providing a solid decision-making basis for policy development.

The Observatory approaches eco-innovation as a persuasive phenomenon present in all

economic sectors and therefore relevant for all types of innovation, defining eco-innovation as:

“Eco-innovation is any innovation that reduces the use of natural resources and decreases the

release of harmful substances across the whole life-cycle”.

To find out more, visit www.eco-innovation.eu

Any views or opinions expressed in this report are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect

the position of the European Commission.

3

Eco-Innovation Observatory

EIO country brief 2010: The

Netherlands

Author: Geert van der Veen

Coordinator of the work package: Technopolis Group Belgium

4

Part 1. Introduction: innovation and environment in The Netherlands The Netherlands is a small (41.567 km

2) and with 16.5m inhabitants very densely populated country

(397.7 inh/km2, 2009). GDP was €572b in 2009; GDP/capita is €30.700 (2009, Eurostat), 2

nd in the

EU, after Luxemburg. An indication of the performance of the Dutch economy is that the Netherlands ranks 8th in the Global Competitiveness Index of the World Economic Forum (2010). Almost 75% of gross added value in The Netherlands comes from the services sector. Industry is responsible for 12.6% of gross added value, agriculture and fisheries for 1.73%. Important industry sectors are food & beverages, metalware & machines, chemical industry, and publishing & printing. Environmental services account for 0.66% of gross added value, utilities companies (energy&water) for 2.3%. Innovation performance of the Netherlands is just above EU27 average, according to the European Innovation Scoreboard 2009. GERD is with 1.71% (far) below the 3% Lisbon target; especially private sector investments in R&D are (too) low. One of the reasons for the relatively low R&D intensity is that the economy includes a relatively large services sector, a relatively small high-technology sector and high concentration of R&D in a limited number of multinational firms, some of which are in low- and medium-technology sectors. Challenges for the Dutch innovation system are the levels of output and quality in higher education, strengthening the innovative capacity of Dutch (small and medium-sized) companies and creation of a more attractive business and investment climate with more room for entrepreneurial activities (Technopolis, 2009). The high population density and the significant economic activities have created large environmental pressure in The Netherlands. The quality of the Dutch environment, however, has improved since 1990: air emissions, connection rate to waste water treatment and municipal waste incineration are in the forefront in the EU (WIFO 2009). There are still large environmental challenges related to greenhouse gas emissions (and related use of renewable energy, reduction of energy consumption), local air quality (dust), noise and pressure on nature (biodiversity, ecological water quality) (WIFO 2009; PBL 2010). The Netherlands is a net-exporter of environmental technologies, and consciousness for sustainability is high, especially within the large multinationals that are important for the innovation potential in the Netherlands. DSM, Unilever, TNT and Air France/KLM are supersector leaders in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index 2010/11 and 10 others

1 are among the sustainability leaders in their sector.

“Eco-innovation” is seen as one of the means to move towards sustainability, but the concept of eco-innovation is not very explicit in Dutch policy making and Dutch debate. Sustainability and innovation are, however, often considered together. When looking at (both science as well as industry oriented) research and innovation programmes supported by the government sustainability plays a large role. Energy efficiency in industry is a long-standing theme for research and innovation (although the pace of improvement has slowed down in the last years, see below). Resource efficiency has only been targeted by policy recently e.g. a special programme by the research foundation NWO on rare earth metals, as well as a number of policy studies Recycling, energy conservation and sustainable energy (which are resource efficiency topics) have been subject of policy attention since the 1980s, but because of other reasons than resource efficiency (waste policy, climate change).

1 Aegon, AKZO Nobel, Crucell, ING, KPN, Philips Electronics, Randstad, Reed Elsevier, SBM Offshore, Wolters

Kluwer

5

Part 2. Eco-innovation performance

The analysis in this section is based on the EU-27 Eco-innovation scoreboard (Eco-IS). The Eco-IS

via its composite Eco-innovation index demonstrates the eco-innovation performance of EU-27

countries compared with the EU average and with the EU top performers. The Eco-IS is based on 13

indicators, which are aggregated into five components: eco-innovation inputs, eco-innovation activities

and eco-innovation outputs as well as environmental outcomes and socio-economic outcomes.

Figure 1 EU27 Eco-innovation scoreboard On the Eco-Innovation inputs composite index The Netherlands performs above the EU27 average. The Netherlands is clearly behind the eco-innovation leaders (Finland, Denmark, Germany, Austria, Sweden) and comparable with Ireland, Belgium, Luxembourg, the UK and Spain (Figure 1). The Netherlands scores more or less average on component „Innovation inputs‟ and „Socio-economic outputs‟; performs really low on component „Eco-innovation activities‟ and is among the leaders in components „Eco-innovation outputs‟ and „Environmental outcomes‟ (Figure 2).

6

Figure 2: Eco-innovation score The Netherlands Eco-innovation inputs The score of The Netherlands on this component consists of a slightly below EU average R&D intensity, an above average availability Cleantech Venture Capital (but below EU15: The Netherlands has a modest overall availability of venture capital and average share of Cleantech venture capital in relation to other venture capital

2), and a low share of the government‟s appropriations for

environmental and energy R&D. This last low score is counterintuitive since, especially in the technical sciences, much university research is focused on sustainability; a significant number of large innovation programmes partly funded by the Dutch government is at least partly oriented towards sustainability, but is probably not labelled as environmental or energy R&D. Furthermore, many large industrial R&D players in the Netherlands have a strong sustainability focus (Philips, Unilever, Océ/Canon, AKZO Nobel, DSM, Tata Steel/Corus, and to some extent Shell) and since these multinationals are responsible for the majority of Dutch industrial R&D it is, therefore, probable that their R&D is for a significant part related to eco-innovation. Bertens et al. (EIM2008) conclude that eco-innovative companies spend at least €300m on R&D annually (which might be an underestimation because it is very hard to identify eco-innovation related expenditure outside environmental technology sectors). Eco-innovation activities The very low score of the Netherlands on ”eco-innovation activities” relates to the low response on material and energy reduction innovation activities as recorded in the CIS5 survey and the very low number of EMAS certified companies in the Netherlands. The former may be related to the large service sector in the Netherlands. The explanation for the low number of EMAS registrations (only

2 In addition: VC cleantech investments in the Netherlands are strongly focused on energy (Cleantech group

2009)

7

seven) is that EMAS never took off in the Netherlands. In fact, when EMAS was introduced its standards were considered less adequate to reduce emissions than previously established voluntary agreements and were therefore not much promoted. Eco-innovation outputs The extremely high score on “eco-innovation outputs” means that the Netherlands has a high number of eco-innovation patents. This is in line with the overall high number of patents from the Netherlands (mainly based on the patent activity of the Dutch multinationals). Environmental outcomes The material productivity in the Netherlands is among the best in Europe. Although this may to a large part be related to the large services sector in the Netherlands, there is also a large heavy industry sector (oil refineries, chemical industry, steel manufacturing, aluminium production). This is represented in the slightly below EU average energy productivity index and slightly above EU average CO2 emissions intensity index. Material productivity is, however, more than twice as high as EU average and water productivity is also very high. Socio-economic outcomes The score of the Netherlands on socio economic outcomes is slightly below EU average. On all indicators the country has an intermediate position: with an eco-innovation industry turnover of 2.86% of GDP Netherlands has the 7

th position in the EU; employment in eco-innovation industries is 1.91%

(15th in EU) and exports of eco-innovation products are 0.18% of national export (16

th in EU), however

in absolute terms (€581m in 2004) sizeable and ranking 6th in the EU.

Part 3. Leading eco-innovation areas

Eco-innovation in the Netherlands has a long-standing tradition dating back to the 1970s. Since then, eco-innovation moved from the traditional end-of-pipe environmental technologies to recycling and more process integrated approaches and a product design. All types of approaches are still valid options, and the approach that is most economically viable is in general applied. Three leading eco-innovation areas that show this are mentioned below: Water technology The field of water technology is generally considered to be the eco-innovation area where the Dutch industry is leading. This relates to water treatment technology, where the scene is set by regional public water bodies (rather small in size), large internationally operating engineering contractors and small machine manufacturers. The Dutch water sector consists of almost 1500 organisations, most of these are SMEs, and only 270 organisations employ more than 100 persons. The turnover of the sector is €6.8b annually divided over wastewater purification (€2.7b per year) and water supply (€4.1b per year). The sector is very export oriented (more than 60% of the organisations is exporting), and export amounts to €2.4b annually (both sub-sectors €1.2b per year; all figures: EIM2008b). Although water treatment is seen as an end-of-pipe technology many treatment processes can help in closing water cycles and reducing (ground)water use (see also the good practice example in this section). Civil engineering technology is also largely related to water; the latter may, arguably, be called eco-innovation because of climate-adaptation use of the technology.

8

Other areas of national strength in eco-innovation are less explicit; these are mainly areas where the industry and often also related academic and institutional research is strong, but the focus is not explicitly on eco-innovation

3.

Chemical sector The chemical (and materials) industry in the Netherlands represents 3% of GDP, and employs 65,000 people (VNCI 2010). It is a knowledge intensive industry spending 2.5% of turnover on R&D. The sector consists for a large part of (subsidiaries of) large multinationals. There is a close relation with the Dutch knowledge infrastructure, which has a world leading standing in this area (e.g. in catalysis, separation technology, polymers, chemical engineering). It also has a strong patent position. Sustainability is considered important by many of the large companies, and eco-innovations are a dominant theme in private-public research and innovation programmes. The main focus is on energy, and a number of directions for improvement are considered: product innovation, process improvement as well as new resources. Examples are to be found within the Dutch Polymer Institute (e.g. research on performance polymers leading to energy reduction, research on functional polymers (e.g. LEDs and solar PV) and research on renewable resources for e.g. coatings); within BE-Basic (research on white biotechnology: chemical products from renewable resources) and on process intensification (leading to 70% reduction of energy consumption). Agrofood sector Within the agrofood sector (10% of GDP, 600,000 employees) there are eco-innovation initiatives along the whole supply chain. The focus is on prevention. In the retail area, the turn-over of biological foods is strongly increasing (in supermarkets 20% increase in 2010 (NRC2010). Biological foods represent about 2% of total foods turnover (NRC 2009), which is low compared to other EU countries. In the area of food processing, there are major developments: e.g. the leading food multinational (Unilever, Unilever 2010) has announced that it will halve the environmental footprint of the production and use of their products by 2020. In the agricultural sector there are two separate lines of development of sustainability: a development towards biological cultivation (small compared to leading countries) and a development towards intensive, closed, agricultural systems (e.g. glass houses that produce energy as well as produce, very large pig farms, that have low emissions), etc. In this last field (agricultural technology) the Netherlands is among the leaders in the world (see good practice example below). Other sectors The electronics sector (around Philips) also has some R&D based strength in the area of eco-

innovation, e.g. in LED-lamps, green TVs etc. However the market value of green products is still

rather low. The building sector in The Netherlands provides numerous examples of sustainable

building (e.g. zero-energy houses, full recycling of demolition waste, etc.). In general the Dutch

building sector is however conservative and not very eco-oriented and far behind the building sectors

in e.g. Germany.

3 Based on EIM 2008 (a survey among a representative sample of 200 eco-innovative companies on strengths and

opportunities for Dutch industry in eco-innovation) and MIKK, updated 2010 (a study to determine the innovation needs and

possibilities to answer to large societal challenges (including sustainability).

9

Good practice example 1

Top Institute Water: New approach to collaboration in the Dutch water technology sector Description Dutch water companies started cooperating by setting up a national knowledge centre on water technology (Top Institute Water, coordinated by the dedicated research institute Wetsus in Leeuwarden: public R&D in water technology almost doubled as a consequence of the initiative), as well as cooperated in marketing and commercial operation. Determinants Innovation has always been a strong point of the water sector, driven by public water companies as well as by levies that industry had to pay for polluting water. In the early 2000s the sector concluded that the international competitive position was deteriorating because of the fragmented innovation approach as well as the international trend towards Built, Own, Operate (BOO) of water treatment facilities. With BOO the clients do not procure a machine or an installation, but they buy the service of purifying water at a given price. This means that investment and operating risks are transferred to the supplier of water technology. The Dutch companies were in general too small to bear these risks. Sustainability effects Various initiatives were also set up to transfer research results to (participating) companies. Examples of innovations are new membrane bioreactors, new sensors for water applications, as well as new techniques for water well management. These lead either to better water quality or to lower treatment costs. The sector, however, remains fragmented on the operations side and large projects under BOO are still a challenge.

Good practice example 2

Energy producing glasshouses Description In the Netherlands many products are grown in glasshouses (or greenhouses) so that products can be produced year round with high yields at low prices. The glasshouse surface in the Netherlands is considerable (100 km2). Production value is around €5b/year (Wikipedia) and in the sector 150.000 people are employed. Glasshouses require large amounts of energy for heating (mainly in winter) and specific lighting to increase growth rate. A series of developments has made it possible to build a glasshouse that produces energy surplus. An „energy-producing glasshouse‟ is a closed system, with a highly efficient insulation and use of energy. As a result, it produces energy – in the form of heat – over and above its own requirements as derived from fossil fuels. The surplus heat can be stored for future use or transported to other users in the vicinity. Determinants One of the key determinants are high energy costs driven by high energy use of traditional glasshouses. Furthermore, the windows of traditional greenhouses are often opened in summer to remove excess heat. When the glasshouse is closed all year round (which is possible with a good cooling system by means of heat exchangers) pests enter the glasshouses less easily; biological pest control can be used (because the predator insects are kept in the glasshouse) and CO2 levels can be increased to promote plant growth (when a CO2 source is available). Innovative farmers (e.g. pot plant grower Stef Huisman), specialised companies (e.g. heat exchanger developer Fiwihex) and the Ministry of Agriculture joined forces in a series of demonstration and research projects and a number of systems are now available. Further research is going on e.g. using LEDs for lighting and using CO2 from other sources than the heater of the glasshouses themselves). Sustainability effects The glasshouses are consuming 10% of Dutch natural gas. Over last 30 year the average annual gas consumption has fallen from 80 m3/m2 to 40m3/m2 of floor space. This also leads to cost reductions.

10

Furthermore the use of chemical pesticides can be reduced and working conditions in glasshouses may improve because of more constant temperatures. Source: http://www.cleantechholland.nl/en/Concepts/Glasshouse_as_source_of_Energy

Part 4. New trends: areas on the rise

Although eco-innovation is not a leading topic in debate in the Netherlands, it is nevertheless emerging in many sectors. Examples of this can be found in many programmes with government support (see e.g. the recently updated environment and technology project database with more than 1000 projects (NL Environment 2010)). Based on interviews with a number of Dutch domain experts from e.g. the Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, agencies and some consultancy firms some conclusions can be drawn. The Netherlands is a service-based economy. Eco-innovation in services is, therefore, a trend that can be expected. In e.g. the banking sector developments are already visible (see the example on „green banking‟ below). In other sectors (e.g. health care and tourism) eco-innovations are less prominent. Green services innovation is actively promoted by the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure Environment. Another area on the rise is the „biobased‟ economy. Many initiatives (research as well as demonstration projects) are supported to replace fossils by other bio-based sources. Examples are the production (and distribution) of bio-ethylene, upgrading bio-ethane to natural gas quality, grass as a source of proteins, other chemicals and energy and algae production (for energy and chemicals) (Platform, 2010). Hard too catch in figures but interesting are developments in the area of sustainable design. From a minor trend in the 1980s, eco-innovation is now becoming of more importance in the design world, supported by research and education at e.g. the TU Delft (e.g. TU Delft 2010) and TU Eindhoven (e.g. Architectenweb 2009).

Even more embryonic are the scientific developments. Enabling technologies like life sciences, ICT-development and nanotechnologies promise enormous opportunities for eco-innovation. Developments are global and applications very broad (by definition: enabling technologies). An eco-innovation development where the Dutch want to excel is nanotechnologies for energy storage and solar PV (see e.g. MIKK 2010).

Example 1:

Green banking

Description

A green (ethical) bank is a bank concerned with the (social and) environmental impacts of its

investments and loans. Ethical banks are regulated by the same authorities as traditional banks and

have to abide by the same rules. While there are differences between ethical banks, they do share a

common set of principles, the most prominent being transparency and social and/or environmental

aim of the projects they finance. Two banks in the Netherlands have recently increased their service

portfolio for clients from savings to all kinds of products (and will increase their services further in the

future with green credit cards, green mortgages, green insurances, etc.) and show enormous growth.

Determinants

The first driver for green banks is social responsibility: The ASN Bank was founded by a Dutch trade

11

union in 1960 to give their members opportunity to save in a socially responsible way. Triodos Bank

started in 1980 to „realise a positive change with the customer‟s money‟. However long term financial

perspectives have grown more important: many customers believe that profitability and share value of

the sustainable operating companies and projects that green banks invest in the long run are better

than those of non-sustainable companies. Finally distrust in traditional (large) banks after the banking

crisis in 2008, in combination with the introduction of current accounts (besides savings accounts and

green/social investment funds) by the green banks at the same time, was a driver for growth.

Sustainability effects

ASN Bank now has more than half a million customers and a capital of €7.5b that is invested in

governments, companies and projects, dealing in a responsible manner with people and animals,

nature and environment.

The Triodos Bank is now present in Belgium, Germany, Spain and the UK and has a capital of €4.9b.

Triodos was Financial Times Sustainable Bank of the year in 2009.

Sources: www.asnbank.nl; www.triodos.nl

Example 2:

Chain approach in the textile industry Description Over the past few years, the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment has initiated a new way to apply waste policy in the Netherlands: the chain approach. The chain approach considers the material chain as a whole, all the stages in the life cycle of a product or material. From raw-material mining, production and use, to waste and possible recycling. For example, it can be considerably less costly to eliminate a particular toxic substance from the product design, early on in other words, so that this substance no longer has to be extracted with a lot of difficulty during the waste stage. The chain approach identifies the stages in the material chain where the greatest environmental benefit can be obtained efficiently and the necessary actions for realising this benefit. Of importance in this context is that the environmental benefit in one stage does not cause a higher environmental impact for another stage or another chain. Since 2009, projects have been running in seven material chains. One of these chains is the textile chain. Determinants With the textile chain, the larger part of the environmental impact is attributable to the manufacture of wool fibres (land use and methane emissions), the cultivation and manufacture of cotton fibres (mainly land use) and washing and drying (energy consumption). The major generic solutions for the chain approach as applied to textiles are: environmentally friendly production of materials with an environmental impact, such as wool and cotton; replacement of cotton and wool with materials that have less environmental impact; environmentally friendly washing and drying; extending the useful life of textile products and more reuse of textile waste in fibre recycling. Sustainability effects The objective of the chain approach for textiles is 20% less environmental impact by 2015. Environmental analyses show however that a reduction of 34% is possible. This requires substantial changes on the part of producers as well as consumers. Five projects are underway in the textile chain. They are focused on manufacturing cotton biologically, purchasing and using materials produced with less environmental impact, and ways to keep waste textile from being incinerated.

12

Source: text adapted from VROM 2010 see: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/milieubeleid/documenten-en-publicaties/publicaties-pb51/succes-met-de-ketenbenadering-engels.html)

Part 5. Public policy in support of eco-innovation

Historical background

Environmental policy making in the Netherlands started already in the 19th century (Nuisance law of

1875). The modern environmental policy took off with an introduction of a levy on water pollution in the 1970s. With this levy a means of financing investments in water purification was created resulting in cleaner surface water as well as a leading position of the Dutch water purification industry based on innovation induced by regulatory requirements. Until the 1990s the Netherlands remained a leader in environmental policymaking (after that political attention for the environment diminished, global problems became more important than national problems and EU legislation more and more prevailed over national legislation). According to WIFO (2009) Dutch environmental regulations are still among the most stringent in Europe as well as, in the same time, they are considered highly transparent and flexible. Environmental policy and innovation policy Within the Dutch environmental policy, innovation has been important since the 1970s (Limits to growth). There have been specific subsidy programmes for developing environmental technologies since the 1980s, most of them using broad definitions of environmental technology aiming at all industries, not only the traditional eco-industries. There has also been significant attention for stimulating the market for innovative technologies with fiscal facilities. Attention for the non-technical side of eco-innovation appeared in the late 1990s (coming from environmental and energy policy), culminating in the transition approach in the early years of the 20

th century, where stakeholders from

academia, industry, NGOs and government jointly try to solve major environmental problems (best examples are energy-transition and agricultural transition). Within the innovation policy environmental aspects were integrated in the evaluation of projects of all innovation subsidy programmes (around 2000), but this had an adverse effect (because environment was only a (minor) evaluation criterion while in the specific sustainability oriented programmes it was a necessary precondition) and sustainability became a less central issue in innovation programmes. A few years later innovation policy support was (apart from a large fiscal R&D support programme

4)

organised in large innovation programmes5, developed by all stakeholders. These programmes (e.g.

in chemical industry, automotive, maritime sector, water, etc.) often have a strong focus on improving environmental performance. Support instruments The Dutch ETAP Roadmap (2006) mentions 11 support instruments, but there are more relevant programmes and initiatives that are not mentioned in the roadmap. Support instruments can be grouped into three categories: organisational support, innovation supply and demand side measures. Executive body is very often the NL Agency. Coordinating Ministry for eco-innovation is the department for the Environment, funding comes from various ministries (often Economic Affairs, recently merged with Agriculture).

4 WBSO, http://www.senternovem.nl/wbso/over_de_wbso/voor_wie/index.asp

5 http://www.nlinnovatie.nl/innovatie-dialoog

13

Organisational support On the R&D side there is active support by the Department of Environment for participation of Dutch stakeholders in “platforms” on eco-innovation (e.g. the Water Supply and Sanitation Technology Platform (WSSTP) and the ERA-net SUSPRISE (the Sustainable Enterprise) have Dutch participants from companies and knowledge institutions. In the area of energy there is the so-called transition-process,

6 where all stakeholders are involved in

realising long-term solutions contributing a sustainable energy supply for the Netherlands (involving not only R&D, but the whole range of government interventions an private actions). Recently (2008) a specific initiative for SMEs started (Doe Mee: Sustainability with and for SMEs)

7 by

the Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment and Syntens (the Dutch organisation supporting innovation in SMEs), aiming at promoting sustainable entrepreneurship (environment, energy and economy) within innovation in SMEs. Objectives include: to promote sustainable entrepreneurship among SMEs; to connect the know-how on sustainability to the methods of Syntens; to develop a sustainability scan; and networking. Innovation supply side measures A number of instruments are aiming at increasing the supply of innovations:

R&D and demonstration grants There are specific schemes for supporting R&D in the energy transition area (EOS

8 and UKR

9, joint

budget €60m/yr) and there is a specific scheme in the area of environmental technology (Environment and Technology programme

10, budget €6m/yr). Not included in ETAP, but in size comparable to the

energy programmes are the Innovation Programmes supporting joint R&D in sectors where the Netherlands has a strong economic and technological position (e.g. high tech materials and processes, water, chemicals). A large share of research in these programmes is oriented towards eco-innovation as can be deducted from the programme descriptions. In 2009 the Dutch government reported an estimate of approximately €500 mln/y on sustainability related innovation support to the Dutch Parliament (€10 mln Department of Environment; €350 mln Ministry of Economic Affairs (Innovation policy and energy policy); €150 mln Department of Infrastructure (Water policy and transport policy); €6 mln Ministry of Agriculture)(Tweede Kamer, 2009a en b).

Grants and fiscal incentives to support availability of capital Also on the supply side are a number of measures aiming at increasing availability of capital. There is a green fund scheme, giving tax rebates for citizens investing in authorised Green Funds, which has resulted in a total availability of green capital of almost €8b (2010), and investments in 2009 of €700m in over 300 projects

11. There is also a Venture Capital Scheme (TechnoPartner SEED facility

12),

realising risk bearing, benefit sharing public participation in VC seed funds. Until 2010 28 funds have started, of which 5 specific cleantech funds. Total available capital within these 5 funds is €38.5m.

Innovation demand side measures

Fiscal support to stimulate demand for eco-innovations in industry On the demand side three are three (relatively large) fiscal schemes to support investments by companies in eco-innovations (one in energy, two in other eco-technologies). Innovative eco-technologies that have been introduced to the market but still have low market share (< 30%) can be

6 www.energietransitie.nl

7 http://www.syntens.nl/doemee/Pages/home.aspx

8 http://regelingen.agentschapnl.nl/content/energie-onderzoek-subsidie-eos

9 http://regelingen.agentschapnl.nl/content/subsidieregeling-unieke-kansen-regeling-ukr

10 http://www.senternovem.nl/milieutechnologie/introductie/index.asp

11 http://www.senternovem.nl/groenbeleggen/

12 http://www.technopartner.nl/wiki/pionierkapitaal/seedfaciliteit

14

listed so that companies that buy these technologies get fiscal support for their investments. Government costs in 2009 were €79m (for the two eco-technology facilities MIA and VAMIL

13),

investments supported amounted to €1.7b. For the energy scheme (EIA14

) investments were €870m, and support was €95m (a decrease with 40% compared to 2008, caused by the crisis).

Fiscal facilities for consumers Specific facilities from recent years (outside the ETAP roadmap) include decreased taxes for low-emission cars and support for consumers making investments in energy saving in their homes (insulation, double glazing, efficient heating, etc.)

15.

Green procurement Apart from these direct investment supports there is on the demand side attention for green procurement (The Netherlands committed itself to 50% sustainable public procurement by 2010)

16.

Negotiated agreements and benchmarking agreement Energy intensity in the industry sector is stimulated by ways of „negotiated agreements‟ at sectoral level between industry and government

17. This seems to lead to increasing energy-efficiency (CE

2010). For some sectors these agreements have been complemented with a benchmarking agreements where industries promise to be among the „best in class‟ in the world with respect to energy consumption

18. Effects of this on energy efficiency are found to be negative (CE 2010).

Part 6. Understanding eco-innovation performance Drivers of eco-innovation

Main driver: Successful business model Eco-innovation is eventually, like any other innovation, driven by the capacity to earn money with it: successful innovations are those innovations that use a successful business model. Since this is a micro-economic driver (at the level of a firm or an individual) it is hard to translate this to the macroeconomic entity of a country: different examples often have different drivers and or different barriers. Regulatory and policy framework As has been mentioned above, eco-innovation in the Netherlands started large scale in the 1970s with the introduction of a levy on water pollution: therefore the regulatory and policy framework was the initial driver that created a financial driver to invest in water treatment facilities. The huge investments created a market for (new) technologies and sparked R&D and innovation and created the technical and technological capital in the area of water technology that is at present still keeping the Netherlands as one of the world leaders in this area. In other areas the chain of cause and effect is less obvious, but at least until the mid 1990s the regulatory and policy framework remained a very important driver for eco-innovation. Although not absent (The Netherlands still have stringent environmental standards) the strength of regulation as a driver has diminished because new EU legislation is now often more stringent than national standards (and will be even more in future since the new Dutch Government has the explicit viewpoint not to be a leader in the EU in the environmental area). Sustainability however is seen as an important opportunity for companies to grow in new markets (Tweede Kamer 2011).

13

http://www.senternovem.nl/vamil_mia/index.asp 14

http://regelingen.agentschapnl.nl/content/energie-investeringsaftrek-eia 15

see e.g. www.belasting.nl or other commercial fiscal support sites 16

http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/duurzaam-inkopen 17

http://www.senternovem.nl/mja/ 18

http://www.benchmarking-energie.nl/index.php3

15

Long-term profitability expectations of investors An important driver at this moment is presented by the economic capital. The large multinationals that drive the Dutch economy and are figuring in the ranks of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index do this from the perspective of long term shareholder value

19: they expect that long term profitability will

improve by sustainable operation: lower costs (by e.g. lower energy consumption and resource intensity), better access to capital and (to some extent) larger demand are part of this. Personal commitment of senior officials Personal commitment of senior officials within these organisations is probably also important: e.g CEO Paul Polman at Unilever, CEO Hans Wijers at AKZO Nobel are known for their drive towards sustainability. A driver of increasing importance in the future is the natural capital: The Netherlands has limited natural resources (apart from some natural gas, and even less oil). Increasing scarcity, and consequently increasing prices will diminish the Dutch competitive position, but might promote eco-innovations to reduce the needs in resources. Barriers to eco-innovation The main barriers in the Dutch eco-innovation system are related to the barriers in the generic innovation system. Lack of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial spirit In the first place the Netherlands has (in most areas) a very strong scientific position but experiences difficulty to translate the knowledge to business (“European disease”). This is both related to human resources (lack of entrepreneurs) and partly cultural capital (lack of entrepreneurial spirit

20).

Risk aversion Another cultural barrier is the risk aversion in the Netherlands. This hampers market introduction of any new technology, but eco-innovations might involve additional regulatory risks (uncertainty about future government regulation). Risk averseness also reduces the availability of venture capital for eco-innovations. Aversion against environmental issues A final additional barrier related to cultural capital is the perception of environmental issues and related public policies and regulations as unfavourable for industry. This is often associated with, growing “climate scepticism” and a more general fatigue with environmental issues.

19

http://www.sustainability-index.com/07_htmle/sustainability/corpsustainability.html 20

The rapid growth of E-concern a few years ago (a company focusing on large scale introduction of all kinds of sustainable energy) showed that bold entrepreneurship could be successful, even in The Netherlands, however as a consequence of the financial crisis the company failed, and now the investors in The Netherlands have become even more risk averse to invest in eco-innovation on a grand scale.

16

References:

Architectenweb2009: Duurzaamheid thema Dutch Design Week, architectenweb.nl, 15-9-2009 CE 2010: Convenant Benchmarking Energie-efficiency: resultaten en vrijstellingen energiebelasting; A. (Ab) de Buck, M.J. (Martijn) Blom, M. (Martine) Smit, L.M.L. (Lonneke) Wielders; CE Delft, juli 2010. Cleantech group 2009: The future of cleantech in Europe, Special report 2009, Amy Carroll, ed., Caspian Publishing Ltd, London, 2010 Dutch ETAP Roadmap 2006: National ETAP Roadmap The Netherlands, The Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning & Environment DG Environment, The Hague, 2006. EIM 2008: Kansrijke eco-innovaties.Resultaten van onderzoek gericht op inzicht in het 'cluster kansrijke Nederlandse eco- innovaties' en een knelpuntenanalyse, Coen Bertens (EIM bv) Arnoud Muizer (Consult bv); Zoetermeer, 26 april 2008 EIM 2008b: Nulmeting programma watertechnologie, EIM, 2Zoetermeer, 2008. MIKK 2010: Meerjaren Innovatie en Kennis Kompas; TNO, 2010. NL Environment 2010: Projectendatabase Milieu&Technologie (in Dutch), on: http://www.senternovem.nl/milieutechnologie/projecten/index.asp NRC2009: Verkoop van biologisch voedsel neemt toe, NRC Handelsblad 15-4-2009. NRC2010: Verkoop biologisch voedsel fors hoger, NRC Handelsblad, 20-12-2010 PBL 2010: Balans van de Leefomgeving 2010, Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving (PBL) Den Haag/Bilthoven, 2010 Platform 2010: Platform Groene Grondstoffen.Speerpunten in 2010, Platform Groene Grondstoffen van EnergieTransitie, Den Haag, 2010. Syntens 2008: http://www.syntens.nl/doemee/home.aspx Technopolis 2009: The Netherlands 2009 INNO-Policy TrendChart – Innovation Policy Progress Report, Jasper Deuten, Technopolis BV, Amsterdam, 2009. TU Delft 2010: website for the BSc Industrial Design, http://www.tudelft.nl/live/pagina.jsp?id=029b06f2-85eb-4500-bad2-79435dab8207&lang=nl Tweede Kamer 2009a: Tweede Kamer, vergaderjaar 2009-2010, 30 196, nr. 85: brief van de minister van Economische Zaken inzake duurzaamheid van het EZ instrumentarium, Den Haag, 13 november 2009 Tweede Kamer 2009b: Tweede Kamer, vergaderjaar 2009-2010, 30 196, nr. 92: brief van de minister van VROM inzake budgetten voor duurzame innovatie, Den Haag, 4 december 2009 Tweede Kamer 2011: Tweede Kamer, vergaderjaar 2010-2011, 32637, nr.1: Brief van de minister van Economische Zaken, Landbouw en Innovatie, Naar de top, Den Haag, 4 februari 2011 Unilever 2010: Unilever Sustainable Living Plan, Unilever, November 2010 (www. sustainable-living.unilever.com)

17

VNCI 2010: VNCI feiten & cijfers 2009, VNCI , Den Haag, 2010 VROM 2010: Getting Ahead with a Successful Chain Approach, the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, The Hague, 2010. WIFO 2009: Assessment of ETAP roadmaps with regard to their eco-innovation potential, Env-map project task 2, Study carried out for the OECD Environment Directorate, WIFO, Vienna, 2009.