Datum: 6 september 2010

In 1852 the American commodore Matthew Perry

entered the Japanese bay of Edo

on his brand new steamship. 

From the seventh century onwards,

Japan had lived in self-imposed isolation.

Daimyo’s and samurai had dominated the country.

No foreigners had been allowed.

Perry’s modern vessel

inspired both fear and respect.

The Japanese had never before

seen a ship propelled by steam engines. 

Old-fashioned leaders

wanted to “throw out those barbarians”.

But a group of young samurai

chose to come forward.

Instead of running away in fear,

they accepted this new reality.

Japan opened up

to the Americans.

Soon,

they concluded

that their only shortcoming,

compared to the American visitors,

was a lack of knowledge and education.

Japan declared that from then on,

instead of continuing its isolation,

it would

“seek knowledge widely throughout the World”

Toward the end of the nineteenth century,

American steamships arrived

in the ports of Amsterdam and Rotterdam. 

This time,

instead of carrying canons,

they came loaded with cheap grain.

The result

• - 

  however -

was the same.

Years after Perry’s arrival in the Far East,

the Americans set the Old World thinking.

European economies had crashed:

unemployment reigned;

and food prices were high.

Revolution was brewing

in the north of the Netherlands,

as so masterfully described by Frank Westerman

• - 

  a graduate of your University –

in his book “the Grain Republic ”.

The American ships

presented a test

to the liberal Dutch principles of free trade.

American grain was ten times cheaper,

But before the advent of the steamship

high transport costs

had protected European farmers.

Now,

new technology

was levelling the playing field.

Many in Europe advocated “easy solutions”:

shield national markets;

impose high tariffs;

protect our farmers.

But the Dutch borders

remained open for American grain.

Dutch farmers had to fend for themselves

by making the most

of what they were good at:

knowledge and innovation.

No matter how much land

we could claim from the sea, 

our polders could never hope to match

the immense scale of the American wheatbelt.

No,

instead we would harvest our knowledge fields.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Today we face another crisis.

Not instigated by American ships,

but by American mortgages.

The housing bubble burst,

stock markets crashed,

our economies faltered

and jobs disappeared.

Election results show

that the ‘easy solutions’ have

• - 

  once again -

gained popular support:

close the borders;

halt European integration;

protect national companies.

I reject those ‘solutions’.

Strongly.

This crisis

• - 

  like the ones before -

presents a test:

will we sell stagnation

as progress?

Or do we choose real reform

and investment in future knowledge?

What we need 

is a renewed commitment to invest,

long term,

in the entire knowledge cycle.

From education at every level

to research,

innovation

and entrepreneurship.

Not just in the Netherlands,

but in the whole of Europe.

Why?

Because together,

we face a momentous challenge.

We must make the Netherlands

attractive

prosperous

and safe

A cultural,

artistic

and scientific beacon

for the 21^st century.

A place with that special combination of

tolerance

curiosity

and the desire to achieve

That combination demands good education;

the life force of our economy

and the energy that renews our society.

A sustainable source.

The only source which multiplies when shared.

The only source we should strive to exhaust.

History teaches us that cultures,

countries

and companies ,

that fail to invest

in research and development,

sooner or later,

fail to exist.

Often,

that failure comes earlier than expected.

Would Japan have made

its economic leap

without Commodore Perry?

Would Wageningen University

have looked the same today,

if the Netherlands had refused American grain?

Ladies and gentlemen,

Our planet’s population is growing.

Yes,

the green revolution prevented

the gloomiest predictions

• - 

  made by Thomas Malthus and the club of Rome -

from happening.

But the environmental pressure

of an increasing number of people,

each with a growing ecological footprint,

means we need to face up

to some stark realities.

More often,

and ever more severely,

we find ourselves confronted

with the forces of nature:

• - 

  an oil leak beneath the deepest waters

  of the Gulf of Mexico;

• - 

  devastating floods in Pakistan;
• - 

  or untameable wildfires in Russia.

Economic development

has thus far gone hand in hand

with greater pollution

and greater damage to nature.

More people than ever

can afford a ‘western’ diet.

Already,

as much as twelve percent of CO-2 emissions

is caused by meat production.

As my colleague in parliament,

Marianne Thieme

• - 

  of the AnimalParty –

likes to put it: 

“A vegetarian who drives a Hummer

is still more eco-friendly,

than a meat eater in a Toyota Prius.”

The “production” of cheap meat

threatens our wellbeing

in other ways as well.

Epidemics,

like SARS,

Q-fever

or the Mexican flu,

passing from intensively farmed animals

to humans,

have forced us to spend millions on vaccines

during the last couple of years. 

Progress requires

both technological innovations

and awareness of lifestyle changes.

We need not only to improve our fuels,

foods

and farms,

but also to think about

what we eat,

what it means for the planet

and for our wallets.

And I think

the theme you choose for today,

‘Nature as the basis’,

should always be

the starting point.

Unfortunately,

the supply of bright minds

with fresh ideas

on how to solve these growing problems

is slowing down.

Why?

The Innovation platform drew up

a long list of troubling statistics:

• - 

  relatively,

the knowledge and skills

of Dutch 15-year-olds are declining;

• - 

  the number of teachers

who lack the proper qualifications

is rising.

• - 

  too many students drop out of college;

leaving us

with too few science students

and researchers;

• - 

  and investment in R&D is too low.

These very factors

determine a nation’s competitiveness,

and the worlds’ capacity

for solving problems. 

Countries at the top

of the Global Competitiveness Index

have a coherent,

national

research and innovation strategy:

an integrative vision

on knowledge creation,

Ranging from education

to innovation.

Spanning schools and universities,

government and business.

Ladies and gentlemen,

our knowledge economy

needs both focus and mass.

It is fragmented

and driven

by the lowest common denominator.

What we need is not only more money,

but also specialisation,

and participation.

That’s why I want to join forces:

• - 

  I ask you to create world class knowledge,

to be internationally competitive,

and to cooperate with business

to strengthen innovation.

• - 

  I ask businesses to invest in R&D, 

to apply scientific knowledge.

• - 

  In return,

government needs

to formulate clear priorities;

• - 

  And finally,

you may expect significant

additional investment.

Do we have a deal?

Ladies and gentlemen,

I will begin

with my end of the bargain:

long term investments

in education and research.

Our investments in knowledge

fall short

of our ambitions.

Other Western democracies outspend us.

During the election campaign,

education and research

appeared to have found

many new friends.

Unfortunately,

now that the elections are over,

I can only conclude

that few promises

were followed

by actions or Euros.

Yes,

• - 

  public funding is scarce,
• - 

  our public debt is higher

than ever before

• - 

  and shifting the burden of debt

to the generations to come

cannot continue indefinitely.

But,

as Jos Engelen,

the chairman of the Dutch Organisation

for Scientific Research,

recently put it:

“Research isn’t something

you can put on temporary standby”

Although politics and society

are more polarised than ever before

• - 

  a trend I will fight continuously -

the need for good education and research

is something we can all agree on.

We need new political samurai

to convince both sides of the political isle

of the need to invest now.

Left and right.

Progressives and conservatives.

Ladies and gentlemen,

in the book “Globalisations muse”

John Aubrey Douglass analyses

why the United States

is so successful

when it comes to innovation.

His first conclusion echoes that

of the Innovation Platform:

Investment in American R&D is high.

Much higher than in Europe.

The more money,

the better the researchers and students

a university attracts.

Harvard’s equity

equals the entire Dutch education budget.

Five to eight percent

of European researchers

are currently working

in the United States.

And they are not planning

to come back.

No less than 8

of the 10 best universities in the world

are American.

So the United States

makes conscious investments,

aiming to excel

where they are already superior.

This is our problem in the Netherlands:

we simply can’t choose.

Everything

and everyone

is important.

But unfortunately,

we aren’t good at everything.

Still,

every department

and special-interest group

defines its own priorities.

9 ministries

divide 2 billion euros

to stimulate innovation.

2 billion divided between

• - 

  13 themes
• - 

  120 institutions
• - 

  and more than 40 programmes.

The innovation platform

got off to an ambitious start

 by identifying

a number of key areas.

But,

the number of areas has grown

so that they now cover

70% of our economy!

That’s a recipe

for creating a landscape

of speed bumps

rather than mountain peaks.

My party advocates

creating a National Innovation council,

as suggested by Robbert Dijkgraaf,

president of

the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.

Narrowly defined key areas

should be coupled

with a small number

of high class institutions.

We still have far too many small funds,

which together support

a fragmented set

of small-scale,

unsustainable projects.

Government should strengthen our new focus

by simplifying

and combining these funds.

In order to secure

a long term investment horizon

with a minimum of bureaucracy,

more FES money 

should be used

for structural investment

in knowledge and innovation.

Continued funding

should be coupled

with clear targets.

Not for tomorrow,

but for a 10-year period.

In my vision,

you will not be seeing politicians

during that decade.

But they may expect results,

at the end.

Ladies and gentlemen,

public funds alone

can not take us to the top.

As Douglass suggests

in his Globalization’s Muse:

“the US [was] the first to understand

the nexus of science and economic policy”

In other words:

every area of excellence

consists of a network of organizations,

concentrated around

a strong centre of learning.

This major American lesson

has already been followed here:

you have made cooperation

between research,

education

and entrepreneurship

a priority.

The cluster of knowledge-intensive industries

that work together in food valley

delivers results.

But more must be done.

Private investment in R&D

lags behind other countries.

And may I present your business partners

with another comparison:

in the European Union

49% of all researchers

are employed

by the business sector,

compared to nearly 80% in the U.S..

Ladies and gentlemen,

I will finish with education.

One name

• - 

  a name that must still ring

familiar in your ears -

has kept higher education

in its grip for over a year. 

Although,

you might remember

my reluctance about creating

an ever growing stack of reports,

I wholeheartedly embrace

the one by Mr. Veerman,

former politician

and also well-known

here in Wageningen.

Or should I say,

I am glad he embraced

my election programme?

Anyway,

his call for investments,

profile

and excellence

fully reflects

my ideas

for our higher education.

The Netherlands doesn’t have

too many universities and colleges.

It has too many universities and colleges

trying to do the same.

The European academic community

functions as an internal market

for ideas.

In that market,

specialisation

and excellence

are rewarded.

This may sound superfluous here.

I am aware

that I am speaking at a place

which has chosen

a sharp definition for itself.

That marks you as an example.

I want more universities to choose a profile.

That does not mean

everybody has to become

• - 

  Oxford upon the Rhine
• - 

  or Cambridge by the Sea.

Nor does it mean

that everyone should focus

on one sector only.

There is not one

but many different excellencies.

We need excellent education,

as well as excellent research.

We need excellent lawyers,

as well as excellent farmers.

And we need all of the above

on a regional,

national

and international level.

I want universities

to be explicit

about their benchmarks.

And I want government

to judge universities

on the basis of that profile.

I challenge you

to make that profile

globally comparable.

The U-map,

a new European classification structure,

makes that possible.

I hope you will use it.

So,

Wageningen,

what will be your league? 

Which international academic hotspot

will soon be queuing up

to offer a joint degree with you?

I think that you should be able

to make that leap.

To become a global testbed

for green innovation

because of the clear priorities

and choices

you have made.

And I want other Dutch

and European institutes of higher education

to follow that example.

Ladies and gentlemen,

college level education

is globalisation’s muse.

Universities and colleges

spread knowledge around the world,

and prepare students for life

in an international society.

But they also bring

international society to our cities.

As a former mayor of Wageningen

I am proud to refer,

not just

to the wonderful military parade

and the history

of Hotel De Wereld,

but also to the diversity of the people

who work and live here together.

Together with New York and Amsterdam,

Wageningen boasts

the greatest number

of different nationalities

on earth.

They are your students,

teachers,

and researchers.

They are our future source

of welfare.

So wouldn’t it be

the least we can do

to help foreign students

find a room ?

Ladies and gentlemen,

I come to my conclusion.

The question is:

do we have a deal?

A deal that will see government,

education,

science

and companies

take joint responsibility

for the future

of our country.

With more money

and less priorities

we can bring our country

back to the top

of the innovationlists.

Where the Japanese

were frigthened

by a steamship ,

this summer

I had the honour

to baptize

the worlds first

Solar Energy Boat .

A Dutch innovation

created by Dutch students

and researchers.

Let’s load it,

not with canons,

not with grain,

but with Dutch knowledge and innovation.

And let’s sail it out

over the world.

Do we have a deal?

I wish you

a wonderful year.