WS1.

2CareFarming:Challengesininnovationsacrossthedomainsofagricultureandsocialcare

RegionalplatformsforgreencarefarmingintheNetherlands
AdeE.Roesta,SimonJ.Oostingb,ReinaT.FerwerdavanZonneveldcandJ.FranciscaCaron Flintermanc
AgriculturalEconomicsInstitute,WageningenUR,P.O.Box29703,2502LSTheHague,TheNetherlands, aide.roest@wur.nl b AnimalProductionSystemsGroup,WageningenUniversity,P.O.Box338,6700AHWageningen,The Netherlands,simon.oosting@wur.nl c WageningenURLivestockResearch,P.O.Box65,8200ABLelystad,TheNetherlands,reina.ferwerda@wur.nl, francisca.caronflinterman@wur.nl Abstract:AccordingtotheFarmStructureSurvey(annualfarmdatacollection)thenumberofgreencarefarms intheNetherlandsgrewrapidlyfrom372in2003to638in2008.From1998till2008thesocallednational supportcentreforgreencarefarmingwasactiveasaplatformforthedevelopmentofthesector.Atthesame time,inmanyregionsgreencarefarmersorganizedthemselvesinregionalplatforms.Suchregionalplatforms for green care farms can have a wide array of roles varying from coordination of client allocation to farms, support in finding finances for care activities, to facilitation of study groups among green care farmers. We hypothesized that roles and structure of regional green care platforms, which differ widely between regions, affectthedevelopmentofgreencarefarmingintheregion.Themereexistenceofaplatformmakesiteasierfor farmers to start with care farming, and the role and structure of a platform affect, directly or indirectly, the inclusionorexclusionofcarefarmsintheplatform.Inordertocheckourhypothesiswestudiedtherelationship betweenregionalplatformsandthedevelopmentofgreencarefarmsforthreeregionsintheNetherlands.We foundthatregionalplatformsplayanimportantroleintheparticipationofgreencarefarmersinnetworksand social activities and therefore in the professionalization of green care farms. In addition, regional platforms influenceroutesoffinancialcompensationoffarmcareandwaysofclientallocation.However,wecouldnot observeasignificanteffectonclientoccupationratesnoronincomelevels. Keywords:farm/clientcoordination,clientoccupancy,financialresources,farmersparticipation.
a

Introduction
Greencarefarminghasbeendefinedinseveralways(e.g.Dekker,1999;Hassinketal.,1999;Hassink andTrip,2000;NationalSupportCentreAgricultureandCare,2001).Inthepresentstudywefollow the definition given by Van Schaik (1997, p. 20) who explicitly stated: On a care farm there is a moneyflowfromagriculturalproductionaswellasfromcareactivities.Whenbothmoneyflowsare present and there is a connection between both activities we speak of a care farm. Agricultural activitiesarecroporanimalfarmingorhorticulture,whilecareactivitiescanbedaycare,weekend care,livingonthefarmorsocioprofessionalreintegration.Inthispaperpeoplewhoreceivecareon acarefarmarecalledclients. In the Netherlands green care farming has gone through a fast development in the last decade. Between1998and2008greencarefarmingasasectorhaditsowngovernmentalsubsidizednational supportcentretosupportandpromotegreencarefarmingintheNetherlandsandtoprofessionalize thesector.However,tosupportthedevelopmentandsocietalembeddingofgreencarefarmingata more regional level green care farmers platforms developed at a regional level as well. With the term regional we refer to the level of Dutch provinces or parts of provinces. In some cases such regional platforms arose from farmers platforms around multifunctional farming (Meerburg et al., 2009), in other cases platforms were initiated by formerly unorganised green care farmers. These regionalplatformshadothergoalsthanthenationalsupportcentre. In 2009 the national support centre for green care farming had to end its activities because its financialsupportwasterminated.Theministriesthatsubsidizedthenationalsupportcentrestopped thesubsidyandwantedthesectoritselftopayfortheactivitiesofthesupportcentre.Someofthese
9 EuropeanIFSASymposium,47July2010,Vienna(Austria)
th

306

WS1.2CareFarming:Challengesininnovationsacrossthedomainsofagricultureandsocialcare

activities,liketakingcareofthecarefarmdatabase,weretakenoverbyotherorganizations.Atthe moment a number of active organizations in the field of green care farming, such as the national farmers union and some regional platforms of green care, are trying to set up a new national platform,butthisappearstobeaslowanddifficultprocess.Hence,lookingatthelandscapeofgreen care farming in the Netherlands one sees a still very weak central organisation while the decentralized, regional platforms have grown strong and play important roles in their parts of the country.Regionalplatformscanplayaroleinclientallocation,financialsourcingand/ororganising farmersstudygroups,dependingontheneedsofgreencarefarmsintheregion. Earlierstudiesaboutgreencarefarmingandtheprocesstostartandexploitagreencarefarmwere publishedbya.o.HassinkandTrip(2000)andVanderPloegetal.(2002).Inthesestudiestherewas nofocusontheinfluenceofregionalplatforms.Thepresentpaperdescribestheinteractionbetween platformsandgreencarefarmersinsomeregionsoftheNetherlands.Westartwithdescribingthe nationalsituationinthreeregionsofcarefarming.Thenresultsofastudyamonggreencarefarms from three different regions with different structures and functions of the relevant regional platformsarepresented.

Materialandmethods
Data were collected in 2007. Three regions with different types of care farming platforms were selected: the provinces Gelderland, NorthHolland and SouthHolland. These regions were chosen because the client to farm coordination and as a result of that the financial compensation for the farmsdiffered.Thenationalsupportcentrecountedin200676carefarmsinNorthHolland,75care farms in South Holland and 145 care farms in Gelderland. Within each region 15 green care farms that participated in the regional platform were selected for inclusion in the study to have a representative group of farms. A total of twenty farms appeared to be willing to participate: six in Gelderland,seveninNorthHollandandseveninSouthHolland.Thetwentyparticipatingcarefarms wereconsultedbymeansofaquestionnaire,focussingonfarmcharacteristics,processtostartthe carefarm,humanresources,clientsandfinanceofthecareonthefarm,economicsituation,effects ofthecarefarmsandinfluenceofnatureandlandscapemanagement. The collected data from the survey were used for generating specific information concerning the relationbetweenregionalcarefarmingandthetypeofregionalplatform.Generaldataonthefarms were derived form the Farm Structure Survey (FSS). The Farm Structure Survey includes all agriculturalenterpriseswithasizeofatleastthreeESU(EuropeanSizeUnits)whichisameasureof theeconomicsizeofafarmbusinessbasedonthegrossmarginimputedfromstandardcoefficients foreachcommodityonthefarm.

Dutchsituation
In 1998 75 care farms and in 2008 638 care farms were registered in the Farm Structure Survey (BerkhoutandvanBruchem,2009).Careismostlyprovidedondairyfarmsandonfarmswithsheep, goats or beef cattle (see Table 1). Only on farms with horticulture there is an increase in number between2005and2007.Itisnotclearwhythereisanincreaseinnumberandwhatkindoffarms stopped.
Table1.Agriculturalproduction(>3ESU)oncarefarmsbetween20032007. Production Cropfarms Dairyfarms Sheep,goatandbeeffarms Poultryorpigfarms Horticulture Otheragricultureproduction Source:Roestetal.,2009 2003 26 111 105 21 58 51 2005 29 193 135 31 73 81 2007 37 196 185 36 65 86

9 EuropeanIFSASymposium,47July2010,Vienna(Austria)

th

307

WS1.2CareFarming:Challengesininnovationsacrossthedomainsofagricultureandsocialcare

ThecarethatisprovidedoncarefarmsintheNetherlandscanbefinancedinthreeways: Firstly, finances to the green care farm can come directly from the national health care reimbursement system via a socalled care in kind construction within the framework of the General Act for Exceptional Medical Expenses (Algemene Wet Bijzondere Ziektekosten; AWBZ), which deals with the financing of longterm and chronic care. For this purpose, green care farms need to meet certain requirements and receive an official AWBZacknowledgement or accreditation. This can be achieved by the green care farm itself but also in a collective way by a regional platform. When a client get care in kind the client gets directly care and never sees any money. Secondly, finances can come from the clients themselves, who pay the green care farmers directly from their Personal Budgets. Clients can get these Personal Budgets as another kind of reimbursementintheframeworkoftheabovementionedAWBZ,andthusasanalternativeforcare in kind. A Personal Budget allows clients to purchase their own care, without any specific requirements. Thirdly,financescancomefromcareinstitutions,greencarefarmshaveanagreementwith.Many greencarefarmsmakeagreementswithcareinstitutionstoofferaspecifictypeof(day)caretotheir clients.Financialcompensationforthisserviceisnegotiatedbetweenfarmerandcareinstitution.

Typologyofregionalplatforms
RegionalcarefarmingplatformshavedevelopedindifferentwaysintheNetherlands.Someregional platformshavebeenestablishedwiththepurposetofacilitatethefinancingof,andclientallocation on,carefarmsforclientswhochoseforthecareinkindconstruction(suchplatformsmayhavea collective AWBZaccreditation for their members). Other platforms aim to formulate study groups and provide information to green care farmers. In some provinces the development of regional platformsforgreencarefarmershasbeenstimulatedbyaprovincialsubsidy,forexampleviaaso called Regional Development Program (RDP), or by an European subsidy in order to achieve a strongerrepresentationofgreencarefarmingonaregionallevel(Heymannetal.,1999;Ketelaarset al.,2002;Oomen,2002). Thepresentstudyfocusedontheroleofregionalplatformswithregardtoclientallocationoncare farms,financialcompensationandnetworkactivities,likeparticipationinstudygroups,amongcare farms in the regions. The regional platforms: BEZIG in Gelderland, Landzijde in NorthHolland, and Den Hneker/Buitenkans in SouthHolland were studied. In South Holland there are two different regionalplatformsbuttheyworkwithinthesameregionandwithsometimesthesamefarms.Den HnekerhasitoriginsinnatureconservationandBuitenkansisanadvisoryorganisationforfarmers andentrepreneursinthecountryside. Tocharacterizetheplatformswedistinguishtheinfluenceoftheregionalplatformandtheinfluence ofindividualgreencarefarmsonclientallocationandfinancialflows.Theregionalplatformcanhave aminor(expressedbyr)ormajor(expressedbyR)roleinclientallocationandfinancialflows(see Fig. 1). A platform with an R has an AWBZ accreditation which implies that money flows from the healthcaresystemtocarefarmsareregulatedbytheregionalplatform.Thismeansthattheregional platformreceivesthemoneyforcareinkindandgivesthistothefarmsfortheprovidedcare.With anrtheregionalplatformonlybringsclientsincontactwithfarms.Thenmoneyflowsgotothefarm viaotherroutes(PersonalBudgets,anownAWBZaccreditation,orafinancialagreementwithacare institution)withoutinvolvementoftheregionalplatform. Carefarmsthemselvescanhaveaminor(expressedbyc)ormajor(expressedbyC)roleinfinancial flowsandclientallocationaswell.Itisalsopossiblethatboththeregionalplatformandthegreen carefarmhaveanimportantroleintheclientallocationandfinancialflow.Inthissituationthefarm receivesclientsfromtheregionalplatformandbesidesthathasitsowncontactswithclientsorcare institutions.
th

9 EuropeanIFSASymposium,47July2010,Vienna(Austria)

308

WS1.2CareFarming:Challengesininnovationsacrossthedomainsofagricultureandsocialcare

Landzijde (platformNorthHolland)

BEZIG (platformGelderland)

DenHneker&Buitenkans (platformsSouthHolland) r

Figure 1. Typology regional platforms, R/r = regional platform, C/c = care farm (yaxis importance of the role of regional platforms in financial flows and client allocation, xaxis importance of the role of green care farms in financial flows and clientallocation.Capital=importantrole,small=minorrole).

TypeRc,Landzijde In the province of NorthHolland the regional platform Landzijde (foundation) is active. In 2007 around70greencarefarmswereconnectedtoLandzijde.Landzijdeisastrongcentralactorinclient allocation and financial flows within green care farming in North Holland. It has a collective AWBZ accreditation, attracts clients with an indication for care in kind and is in close contact with care institutions as well. Landzijde has a central office with a care coordinator who facilitates the placement of clients with an indication for care in kind on participating green care farms. Also financial compensation is received via Landzijde (see Fig. 2). The client never sees any money, because the care is provided in kind. Green care farms connected to Landzijde with a contract are hardlyactiveinattractingclientswithpersonalbudgetsorfromcareinstitutionsthemselves.Asthe farmsseeLandzijdeasacareinstitutiontheyfilledinthesurveythattheyreceiveclientsfromacare institution. HealthCareSystem Clienteligibleforcareinkind

RegionalplatformLandzijde

Greencarefarm

Figure2.ClientallocationandfinancialflowsfortheplatformLandzijdeinNorthHolland.

TyperC,DenHneker&Buitenkans In the province SouthHolland the regional platforms Den Hneker and Buitenkans are active. Den Hnekerhasitsoriginsinagriculturelandscapemanagement.Atthetimeofthesurveyneitherofthe platformsdidhaveanAWBZaccreditation.Buitenkansisanexpertisecentrewerecarefarmscanget advice.Bothplatformshaveasmainrolethesupportandcoordinationofcontactsbetweenclients
9 EuropeanIFSASymposium,47July2010,Vienna(Austria)
th

309

WS1.2CareFarming:Challengesininnovationsacrossthedomainsofagricultureandsocialcare

andcareinstitutionsattheonesideandgreencarefarmsattheotherside(seeFig.3).Thegreen carefarmsthemselvesareresponsible toattractclientsandto organizefinancial compensation.In addition,DenHnekerandBuitenkansofferthepossibilitytosupportgreencarefarmswithadvice withclientswhohaveapersonalbudget. ClientwithPersonalBudgetorclients fromacareinstitution

Den Hneker

Buitenkans

Greencarefarm

Figure3.ClientallocationandfinancialflowsfortheplatformsDenHneker/BuitenkansinSouthHolland.

TypeRC,BEZIG In the province Gelderland the platform BEZIG is active. In 2007 around 40 green care farms were connected to BEZIG. BEZIG has a union with its own AWBZaccreditation (hence R). It thus offers participating care farms the possibility to provide care in kind, meaning that clients with an indication for care in kind can receive care on a care farm which is paid by BEZIG (see Fig. 4). However, green care farms connected with BEZIG are responsible for their own client allocation (henceC);theplatformBEZIGonlyprovidessomeadministrativesupport.Sowhenaclientwithan indicationforcareinkindgoestoacarefarm,thecarefarmhastogotoBEZIGtogetthefinancial compensation for the client. As a result care farms joining BEZIG also have clients with a personal budgetorclientsfromacareinstitutionbesidesthecareinkindclients.Onanaverage,theratioof the clients with care in kind, clients with a personal budget and clients from a care institution is respectively10%,3040%and5060%onthefarmsofBEZIG.

Clienteligibleforcareinkind

Greencarefarm FoundationBEZIG HealthCareSystem

Figure4.ClientallocationandfinancialflowsfortheplatformBEZIGinGelderland.

Agricultureoncarefarms
Thegreen carefarmsofLandzijde(Rc)havethelargestfarmsize,witharangefrom33.6to155.4 ESU/farmandatotalareabetween27.0and53.0hectares.ThoseofBEZIG(RC)arethesmallest(see Table 2). Of all farms studied, 12 produce in a conventional way and eight organically; four out of
9 EuropeanIFSASymposium,47July2010,Vienna(Austria)
th

310

WS1.2CareFarming:Challengesininnovationsacrossthedomainsofagricultureandsocialcare

seven are conventional in NorthHolland, five out of seven are conventional in SouthHolland and threeoutofsixareconventionalinGelderland. Allfarmsinvolveduseagriculturalfarmactivitiestoprovidedaycare.Onthreeofthefarmspartof dailyagriculturalfarmactivitiesaredonebysubcontractors.Thiscanbearesultofprovidingcareon thefarmandthereisnotenoughtimelefttodotheagriculturalactivities.
Table2.Rangeoffarmcharacteristicsofgreencarefarmsinthestudy(betweenbracketsmean). Parameter Rc (Landzijde,North Holland,n=7) 33.6155.4(79.3) 27.053.0(38.0) 0.94.8(1.0) rC (DenHneker/ Buitenkans,South Holland,n=7) 32.1139.6(65.1) 0.369.0(33.3) 1.73.0(1.2) RC (BEZIG,Gelderland,n=6) 5.1107.1(54.5) 0.836.0(15.4) 1.13.5(1.1)2

ESU/farm Totalhectares/farm FTE1agriculturalfarm activities/farm 1 FTEmeansfulltimeequivalent.2n=5,dataofonefarmisnotavailable.

Clientoccupationoncarefarms
Theprovidedcareonthegreencarefarmsstudiedvariesfromjustoneortwoclientsonedayaweek to groups of 10 clients who come five days a week to the farm. Green care farms of Den Hneker/Buitenkanshavethehighestnumberofclientscomingtothefarms,withadispersionof6 to18clientsperweek(seeTable3).ThecarefarmsofBEZIGhavethelowestoccupancyratewith 18.8to81.3%.
Table3.Rangeoffarmcharacteristicsofgreencarefarmsinthestudy(betweenbracketsmean). Parameter Rc (Landzijde,North Holland,n=7) 1.06.0(3.3) 114(7.0) 130(14.4) 130(12.0) 63.6100.0(86.4) rC (DenHneker& Buitenkans,South Holland,n=7) 1.05.0(2.9) 618(9.8)1 654(24.7) 533(16.1) 50.0100.0(72.4) RC (BEZIG,Gelderland, n=6) 2.05.0(3.7) 17(4.0) 550(25.4) 232(13.6) 18.881.3(46.9)

Numberofweekdayswithclientsperfarm Totalnumberofclientsperfarmperweek Availableclientplacesperfarmperweek Occupiedclientplacesperfarmperweek Occupancyrate(%) 1 n=6.

Financeofcareactivities
Financialsources,budgetand/orfunding,forthegreencarefarmsaregiveninTable4.Carefarms usedthefinancialcompensationtoprovidefoodanddrinksfortheclients.Inaddition15carefarms regardedthefinancialcompensationtopayforthefamilylabouranduseofthelocation.
Table 4. Number of clients and revenues per source of financial compensation and annual income from care activities (betweenbracketsmean). Financialsource Rc (Landzijde,North Holland,n=7) N Income 2 25.0(25.0) 5 25.0(25.0) 1 25.0() 7 2.548.8(30.0) rC (DenHneker& Buitenkans,South Holland,n=7) N Income 6 22.550.0(38.4) 5 20.032.5(23.9) 0 7 13.5113.9(51.2) RC (BEZIG,Gelderland,n=6)

PersonalBudget(/clientday) Fromcareinstitution(/clientday) Careinkind(/clientday) Totalannualincomefromcare k/year/farm

N 5 4 1 6

Income 25.0112.0(45.3) 7.530.0(21.1) 43.0() 1.5131.9(49.7)

9 EuropeanIFSASymposium,47July2010,Vienna(Austria)

th

311

WS1.2CareFarming:Challengesininnovationsacrossthedomainsofagricultureandsocialcare

InNorthHollandfivecarefarmsonlyreceiveclientsfromLandzijde,onereceivesalsoclientswitha personalbudgetandoneonlyreceivesclientswithapersonalbudget.InSouthHollandnoneofthe carefarmsreceiveclientswithcareinkind,oneonlyreceivesclientswithapersonalbudgetand fourfarmshaveclientswithapersonalbudgetaswellasclientsfromacareinstitution.Datafrom onefarminSouthHollandregardtheclientsismissing.InGelderlandonefarmreceivesclientsfrom all the ways, so with personal budgets, care institution and care in kind. Two farms only receive clientswithapersonalbudget,oneonlyreceivesclientsfromacareinstitutionandtwofarmsreceive clientswithapersonalbudgetandfromacareinstitution.OnepossibilitythatcarefarmsfromBEZIG didnotusedtheconstructionofcareinkindcouldbethatthiswasjustasmallamountofcarefor 2007thatBEZIGcouldprovide.

Influenceofaregionalplatformonthedevelopmentofcarefarms
Majorproblemsduringstartandexploitationofcarefarmsexperiencedbycarefarmersaregivenin Table 5. Problems with transportation of clients tended to differ between regional platforms; care farmsofBEZIGdonotreportanyproblemswithclienttransportation.WithinLandzijde(Rc)lackof clients and transportation of clients are mentioned by most farmers as a problem, within Den Hneker & Buitenkans (rC) lack of cooperation of professional care and of policy makers are most mentioned and within BEZIG (RC) no cooperation with care institutions is the most mentioned problem.Theseproblemscanhaveanegativeoutcomefortheexploitationofthecareactivitieson thefarms.
Table5.Problemsmentionedduringstartandexploitationofthecarefarminnumberoffarms,2007. Problems Rc (Landzijde,North Holland,n=7) 2 2 2 4 2 3 rC (DenHneker& Buitenkans,South Holland,n=7) 5 5 3 3 4 0 RC (BEZIG,Gelderland, n=6) 3 2 5 2 0 1

Lackofcooperationofprofessionalcare Lackofcooperationofpolicymakers Nocooperationwithcareinstitutions Lackofclients Transportationofclients Noproblemsfaced

Inordertoprofessionalizegreencare,oneofthetasksattheregionallevelistoenlargetheexpertise ofcarefarmers(KattenbroekandHassink,2003;FerwerdavanZonneveldetal.,2008).Thiscanbe established by offering courses and by sharing experiences among care farmers in study groups. ParticipationofcarefarmersinnetworksandsocialactivitiesisgiveninTable6.
Table6.Participationinnetworkandsocialactivitiesinnumberoffarms,2007. Networkandsocialactivitiesofcarefarmers Rc (Landzijde,North Holland,n=7) 4 6 4 3 rC (DenHneker& Buitenkans,South Holland,n=7) 5 5 4 0 RC (BEZIG, Gelderland,n=6) 4 1 1 0

Receivinginterestedvisitorsatthefarm Providinginformationaboutgreencarefarmingto interestedpeople1 Meetingsandactivitieswithothercarefarmers2 Participationineducationalprogrammesprovide bytheregionalplatformorotherorganization3

Theprovisionofinformationaboutcarefarmsdifferssignificantlybetweenplatforms.Thecarefarms connected with BEZIG (RC) hardly spread any information. There is also a difference between platformswithregardtoorganizingmeetingsamongcarefarmers.Landzijde(Rc)andDenHneker& Buitenkans(rC)offerthepossibilitytoparticipateinstudygroups.Intheplatformsdifferentformsof
9 EuropeanIFSASymposium,47July2010,Vienna(Austria)
th

312

WS1.2CareFarming:Challengesininnovationsacrossthedomainsofagricultureandsocialcare

educationareoffered.Landzijde(Rc)offerscarefarmersthepossibilitytojoinacoursedevelopedby GroenhorstCollegeDronten. The financial sources of the care farms are listed in Table 7. Care farms may have more than one financial source. Farms in Landzijde (Rc) predominantly have care in kind as a financial source, while farmers in the other platforms receive their revenues from personal budgets or via care institutions. The total number of clients does not match with the number of clients in Table 3 because some clients come more days per week on the farms. So both Tables need to be seen separatefromeachother.
Table7.Financialsourceperregion. Numberofclientsperweekonallthefarms intheregion Personalbudget Careinstitution Careinkind Nocompensation Totalnumberofclients Rc (Landzijde,North Holland,n=7) 9 30 8 0 47 rC (DenHneker& Buitenkans,South Holland,n=7) 25 31 0 3 59 RC (BEZIG, Gelderland,n=6) 12 11 3 0 26

Discussion
Networksplayanimportantroleintheprofessionalizationofcarefarming.Earlierstudiesconcluded thatnetworksareneededtohaveabetterclientallocationandimbeddingofgreencarefarmsinthe caresector(Elingsetal.,2004;FerwerdavanZonneveldetal.,2008KattenbroekandHassink,2003; Ketelaarsetal.,2002;Oomen,2002).Wefoundthatparticipationofcarefarmsinnetworkscanbe stimulatedbyregionalplatforms.Platformscanarrangecontactswiththehealthcaresectorofwhich the platforms members can have their benefits. Our results showed that green care farms of Landzijde(Rc)werethemostactiveinnetworksandsocialactivities.ThismaybebecauseLandzijde hasanAWBZaccreditationandneedsacertainlevelofprofessionalismofthecarethatisprovided by care farms, which in turn requires a minimal level of education, networking, and knowledge exchange. One of the problems faced in the daily practice of care farms is that of limited possibilities of transport of clients to the farm and back. In earlier research this problem also was mentioned (Ketelaarsetal.,2002;Roest,2005).Whenitisdifficulttogettheclientsonthefarmthisalsohasan effectontheclientoccupation.Strikingisthatcarefarmsinurbanregions,suchasthegreencare farmsofLandzijde,alsoexperienceproblemswithtransportation. The type of financial compensation that green care farms receive is influenced by the regional platforms.GreencarefarmsofLandzijde(Rc)receivedpredominantlyfinancialcompensationviathe careinkindroute.Toreceivethiscompensation,thegreencarefarmhastofollowtherulesand regulationssetbyLandzijdebasedonitsAWBZaccreditation.Forsomegreencarefarmsthisrelative lack of freedom can be a threshold to join a platform like Landzijde. Within the platform of BEZIG (RC), which also has an AWBZ accreditation, there was however a limited money flow via care in kind.MaybethisiscausedbythefactthatBEZIGdoesnotmediateinclientallocation;greencare farmwhoaremembersofBEZIGthemselvesareresponsibletohaveenoughclientsontheirfarms. ThegreencarefarmmembersofDenHneker&Buitenkanscouldnotreceiveclientswithcarein kind,at the momentofthesurvey,becausetheseplatformsdidnot haveanAWBZaccreditation. Thetypeofregionalplatformthusinfluencesboththefinancialcompensationroutesofgreencare farmsandthewaysofclientallocation.Thispartlyinfluencestheoccupancyrateandtheincomeof green care farms although other factors, such as the success of personal efforts of care farmers, influencethisrateaswell.ItisremarkablethatgreencarefarmmembersofLandzijdewithahigh client occupancy (85% and on four farms even 100%) stated they experienced a lack of clients. Apparently,farmerspersonalexperiencesdonotalwayscorrespondwithobjectiveobservation.
9 EuropeanIFSASymposium,47July2010,Vienna(Austria)
th

313

WS1.2CareFarming:Challengesininnovationsacrossthedomainsofagricultureandsocialcare

Itisthecombinationofboththecollectiveactionsofregionalplatformsandtheeffortsofindividual carefarmersthatcreatesaprofessionalizedandeconomicallysuccessfulcarefarmsector.

References
Berkhout, P.and C. van Bruchem (red.) (2009) Agricultural Economic Report 2009 (LandbouwEconomisch Bericht2009).LEIWageningenUR,DenHaag,report2009047,pp112. Dekker,J.(1999)Workonacarefarm:anaddedvalueforthecaresector(werkenopeenzorgboerderij:een meerwaardevoordezorgsector).HandboekDagbesteding,BohnStafleuVanLoghum,Houten. Elings,M.(2004)Farmerstayafarmer(Boerzorgdatjeboerblijft!Eenonderzoeknaardespecifiekewaarden vaneenbedrijfsmatigezorgboerderij).WetenschapswinkelWageningenUR,Wageningen,report194B. FerwerdavanZonneveld,R.T.,J.M.RommersandS.J.Oosting(2008)Greencarefarmsforchildrenwithautism spectrumdisorders(Zorgboerderijenvoorkinderenmetautismespectrumstoornissen).AnimalSciences Group,Wageningen,report121. Ferwerdavan Zonneveld, M. Schoone, A.A.M. van Diepen, S.J. Oosting, J.F. CaronFlinterman (2009) The transformation of a farm into a care farm (Van boerderij naar zorgboerderij). Wetenschapswinkel WageningenUR,Wageningen,report254. Hassink, J., F. Heymann, and A. Slokker (1999) Quality provided with care (Kwaliteit met zorg geproduceerd. Een onderzoek naar de aspecten die kwaliteit van landbouw en zorg benvloeden). Instituut voor AgrobiologischenBodemvruchtbaarheidsonderzoek,Wageningen. Hassink, J. and G. Trip (2000) Agriculture and care: between good initiative and profitable business design (Landbouwenzorg:tussengoedwillendinitiatiefenlonendbedrijfsopzet.Bedrijfseconomischeanalyse van verschillende bedrijfsopzetten voor zorgboerderijen) Wetenschapswinkel Wageningen UR, Wageningen,report160. Heymann, F., S. Nieborg, P. Welboren and B. Winants (1999) Agriculture and care a healthy cooperation (Landbouwenzorg:eengezondmakendesamenwerking)VerwijJonkerInstituut. Kattenbroek,I.andJ.Hassink(2003)Howcangreencarefarmsorganizeonaregionallevel(HoekanLandbouw &Zorgzichregionaalorganiseren).PlantResearchInternational,Wageningen,report72. Ketelaars, D., N. van Erp and J. Hassink (2002) Agriculture and care in sight: glance on present and future ( Landbouw en zorg in beeld:; blik op heden en toekomst). Plant research International, Wageningen report50. Meerburg,B.G.,H.Korevaar,D.K.Haubenhofer,M.BlomZandstra&H.vanKeulen(2009)Thechangingroleof agricultureinDutchsociety.JournalofAgriculturalScience1467:511521. National Support Centre Agriculture and Care (2001) Quality system care farms (Kwaliteitssysteem zorgboerderijen).Concept3.0December2001,DeGlind. Oomen,E.(2002)Careandagricultureonthewaytoconnectionagriculture(Zorgenlandbouw,opwegnaar verbindingslandbouw).Innovatienetwerkgroeneruimteenagrocluster,DenHaag,report02.3.028. Roest, A. (2005) Dairy farms and care hand in hand: in the province ZuidHolland (Melkvee en zorg hand in hand:indeprovincieZuidHolland).HogeschoolInHollandDelft,Delft. Roest,A.,K.Oltmer,G.Venema,J.Jager,H.Schoorlemmer,V.HendriksGoossens,A.Dekking,J.Kamstra,A. Visser, L. Jeurissen and E. Gies (2009) A window on multifunctional agriculture, turnover and impact: backgrounddocument(Kijkopmultifunctionelelandbouw,omzetenimpact:achtergronddocument).LEI WageningenUR,DenHaag,report2009041. Van Schaik, J. (1997) Encounter agriculture and care: inventory practical experiences care farms Ontmoeting landbouw&zorg:inventarisatiepraktijkervaringenzorgboerderijen).Omslag,Stichtingterbevordering vandeontmoetingtussenlandbouw,ambachtengezondheidszorg,Vorden,pp20. VanderPloeg,J.D.,A.LongandJ.Banks(2002)Newonfarmactivities.Livingcountrysides,ruraldevelopment processesinEurope:thestateoftheart,Doetichem,pp6371.

9 EuropeanIFSASymposium,47July2010,Vienna(Austria)

th

314