[Fts-research] about a juridical struggle against nitrogen

[flip]

Hi FtS research groupies,

I found some info about a different aspect of the nitrogen discussion.
It could be interesting to have a presentation or discussion about this
at the camp.

In some countries there are juridical campaign against nitrogen
emitters. At this moment many project in the Netherlands are stopped
because of a juridical verdict. The EU nitrogen legislation stops most
new projects that will increase the nitrogen emissions. This is about
new stables, but also a new airport and the expansion of a highways have
been stopped. But so far traffic and animal manure are getting most
attention. That also synthetic fertilizers contribute to the emissions
is acknowledged, but it doesn't play a role in the main discussions.

1st question for FtS: how can we make the use of synthetic fertilizers
part of this discourse?


I found an article from a Lærke Assenbjerg about this topic as well.
(See
http://law.au.dk/fileadmin/Jura/dokumenter/forskning/rettid/Afh_2019/afh4-2019.pdf
- there is an abstract in English.)
Also her article is not focussing on synthetic fertilizers but on
nitrogen fertilizers in general. But she is writing that Denmark will
not reach the targets from several international treaties. I would not
be surprised if the right court cases would be able to stop a lot of
dirty projects in Denmark as well. This is probably not a task for Free
the Soil, but in my opinion this is an interesting topic for a workshop
in the camp.

2nd question: are there possibilities in Denmark for juridical action to
stop the use of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers or the expansion of
industrial agriculture in general? Which organisation could do this?


Is it possible for somebody from Copenhagen in the research group to
contact Lærke Assenbjerg? At the moment she is an environmental lawyer.
And maybe she likes the aims of the campaign and is willing to give a
presentation. (Should also be discussed with programme group though)

A relevant 3th question for a workshop in the camp could be see what the
situation is in Germany. The camp is in Germany, most people involved in
FtS are from Germany and the problems and international laws are the same.


Another interesting question could be if we would ever adjust our
message to increase the chance to a direct success. The strongest
treaties look at air pollution and water quality. This are important
things, but our campaign is so far mainly mentioning soil degradation,
climate change and the social effect of fertilizer addiction/dependency.
Those messages are not at all in contradiction with each other, but if
you have 30 seconds to say something you have to choose. How pragmatic
or pure/idealogical/dogmatic (I don know the best word) do we want to be?

Another consideration is the possible contradiction between the
grassroots bottom up anarchistic approach and a juridical fight. "We
don't care about your rules and law, but we make an exception if they
are in our favour." I have to say that I am sometimes struggling with
this issue myself.

In the cloud there is a working document with overview of the political
discourse and the main (EU and international) legislation that is
relevant for the nitrogen use. See
/FTS-research/political_situation/the-political-landscape-FtS.docx


I am wondering what other people think about this juridical topic.

grtz, Flip