Agriculture & Technology: Challenges in Meeting the Demands of Today's Unstable World
A Conversation Between Christopher P. Skroupa, Skytop Editor-in-Chief, and Pieter de Wolf, Program Manager, “Farm of the Future”, Wageningen University and Research / June 24, 2025
Pieter de Wolf is a Senior Applied Researcher for Sustainable Agriculture and Program Manager of “Farm of the Future” at Wageningen University and Research. Mr. de Wolf received his MSc (Master of Science) degree in Plant Sciences at Wageningen University and Research in 2002. “Farm of the Future” combines solutions from agronomy, ecology and technology in an innovative agricultural system for the Flevoland region, and in the coming years in other regions as well. In addition, Farm of the Future has become a platform for dialogue on the future of agriculture. As a researcher, Mr. De Wolf has worked on a wide variety of issues affecting farmers, such as crop protection, entrepreneurship, regional cooperation, soil quality and the interaction between arable and dairy farming. Mr. De Wolf’s focus is on not only technological and agronomic aspects but also equally the institutional context and the human factor.
Christopher P. Skroupa: Soil quality, crop health, climate, biodiversity, circularity, energy, economy, markets and society all represent challenges for farmers. Can you describe how those challenges effect the agriculture sector in meeting the demands of today's world?
Pieter de Wolf: These challenges are real, but it's difficult to meet them all at the same time. There are no solutions, only trade-offs. We can work on these trade-offs, such as combining productive farming systems with higher biodiversity, but in the end we have to consider that trade-offs make choices unavoidable.
In my view, these choices have to consider the regional context: what is possible, what are the opportunities, regarding soil quality, water availability, climatic conditions, and socio-economic context? What is the best land use in the future? This also requires spatial planning, at least at EU level, to meet the demand for food production, but also for production of biobased materials, for nature conservation and urban development.
It also requires productive agricultural systems in regions where that's possible. This also requires innovation, to improve productivity with even less inputs such as labor, land, fossil energy, nutrients, and pesticides, and with less risks for the environment such as soil, water, air, and biodiversity.
Chris: Change is a social human process, supported by technology and ecology. Can you offer how research might contribute to change, the change that is driven through innovation and discovery?
Pieter: The conventional innovation approach is strongly focused on high-tech innovations. The weak point of this approach is that we become pre-occupied with developing fancy solutions for problems that don't exist, and that we don't work on solutions for real problems. We all seem to like drones in agriculture, but what is the problem they should solve? Another weak point is that we overlook other potential solutions. In my experience, many problems can be solved with good old 'low-tech' solutions such as modifications of current mechanization or with different agronomic or ecological measures and principles. For example, we should reduce weed pressure first with a clever crop rotation, and in the end a precision weeder could kill the last weeds. And in general, we tend to overlook the socio-economic aspects of innovation. The use of new technology often implies new practices for farmers, even new arrangements with specialized companies and new regulatory frameworks. For instance, flying drones near an airport is strictly regulated, as we experienced in Lelystad, and colleague farm workers have to get an aviation certificate first. We should identify and address such issues better to speed up innovation.
Chris: On the topic of future proofing through a sustainable agricultural sector, what factors contribute to success?
Pieter: First of all, we should agree on future challenges and set a clear ambition. For some challenges, that's easy, but in some cases it's really difficult. We tend to be busy with short-term problems and forget about what's next. And if we start thinking about mid-term challenges, we tend to disagree about policy ambitions, which are understandable, due to different interests. Another phenomenon is that we as humans tend to neglect the most difficult challenges. If you believe you can't solve a problem, you just try not to think about it.
My view is that we should start experimenting with different solutions and solution pathways to find out. That's hard work, with small wins, high hopes, and big disappointments. But I believe, based on my experience with Farm of the Future, it pays off when you experiment, try your best and be honest about the outcomes. The third step is that we should scale the outcomes. That's not something research could do, but it requires the effort of private and public actors.
Chris: You mention that you co-innovate with farmers, specifically that you are aligned with farmers and their challenges, desires and goals. Please share how "applied" research supports this collaboration.
Pieter: A nice example is the co-design process we did for Farm of the Future. We involved a group of 8 young farmers in a step-by-step approach of discussing challenges, setting objectives and conditions, identifying and selecting solutions and integrating them in farming systems that could be tested and demonstrated. Moreover, we involved these farmers also in the process of informing and involving other stakeholders and stakeholder groups.
Farmers and other relevant stakeholders will also become involved in the monitoring and evaluation of the system experiment in the coming years. And most important, we would like to initiate a network of farms that are supported to experiment with risky innovations to prepare for the future. That requires not only support with knowledge and advice, but maybe also instruments to reduce financial risks.
Chris: During our background review, you mentioned that policy and regulation need to align with innovation. Tell us how this effects advances in AgriTech.
Pieter: In many cases, innovations are not scaling because of regulations. It's understandable that regulation always follows practice, but my concern is that it does not follow at all. Part of the problem is that we are moralizing about some technologies in Europe, believing they are 'unnatural’.
For instance, genomics, pesticides and fertilizers, but also large and closed livestock housing systems. Even hydroponics in greenhouses are discussed as 'unnatural'. This morality is quite problematic, because we are not looking anymore at the pros and cons of such technologies, and work on improving them. But we are framing them as morally wrong. Another part of the problem is that the government is not able anymore to make effective regulations and make them work in practice. In the Netherlands and in Europe, we got lots of new policies, but nothing happened in putting it to practice. It only resulted in a complete standstill, due to very effective court cases by NGOs against the government, against individual farmers and against some systems stakeholders.
The result is not only that there is no adoption of innovations in practice, but it also affects the competitiveness of the Netherlands and EU agribusiness on a global market. We could and should be innovative leaders, but now we are lagging behind compared to other parts of the world. Maybe the big changes in the geopolitical theatre will help the EU to bring back common sense.
