ºÚÁϸ£ÀûÍø

Professor of Socio-Technical Innovation and Climate Change at ºÚÁϸ£ÀûÍø and Radboud University Heleen de Coninck was instantly excited when she first heard about the initiative to set up a dedicated climate council. ‘I immediately thought it was a good idea to establish an organization to advise the government on long-term climate policy. There certainly is a lot of room for improvement. Since I am dedicated to impacting policy and bring in 25 years of experience in climate policy research, the role of climate council member fits me like a glove.’

The Netherlands Scientific Climate Council (Wetenschappelijke Klimaatraad, WKR in Dutch) consists of ten members. With their diverse disciplinary backgrounds they reflect the interdisciplinary nature of the council, encompassing research fields such as climate, energy and agriculture, and scientific disciplines like economics, governance, physics, behavioral sciences, and ethics. In addition to the council members, who take up this role next to their jobs as academics, there also is a staff office that is in constant communication with the ministries about relevant issues and questions, De Coninck explains.

Solicited and unsolicited

The WKR provides parliament and cabinet with both solicited and unsolicited advice. De Coninck: ‘Sometimes a question comes from a specific ministry or department, and sometimes topics arise that we feel we should address in a dedicated advice ourselves.’ This was the case, for example, in a recent advice the WKR published about more effective behavioral policies to promote sustainable and climate-adaptive behavior, called ‘Aan de slag met gedrag!’ (Engage with behaviour change!). ‘A main message of that report was that the image of behavioral policies as being patronizing needs revision. A majority of the population wants to make different choices, but they are not able to. The government must provide them with the opportunity to lead the lifestyle they want. So in the report we argue that behavioral policies can actually increase freedom of choice, not limit it. We hope such insights can change the conversation.’

The WKR also seeks interaction and discussion on its advisory reports. Media coverage is extensive, thanks to press briefings the WKR organizes. ‘Usually, we organize a meeting with the policymakers for whom the topic is relevant, or the relevant minister receives a summary of the report. Increasingly, we are asked to present the results in a technical briefing in the House of Representatives. For example, last January we issued

an advice about the future of Dutch industry, and we discussed that in both the House of Representatives and in the Senate,’ De Coninck says.

Necessity of choosing

That advisory report, called ‘Kiezen of verliezen’ (To choose or lose), was initiated by the council itself, she explains. ‘Industry is responsible for nearly 25 percent of Dutch greenhouse gas emissions. Over the past years, we have seen very limited progress in that sector when it comes to meeting climate goals, CO2 emissions barely came down in the past 15 years. In the report we bring up the need to select which industries would and would not fit in a future climate-neutral Netherlands, and we offer ways to choose. We face a multitude of scarcities: in terms of government finances, physical space, and electricity grid capacity. If industry becomes more sustainable it will only require more space, more money, and more energy. Current government policy primarily supports established players and leaves little room for new initiatives. We urge the government to choose for industrial sectors with a future in a climate-neutral Netherlands, and a structural change in industry policy.’

Systems perspective

A hallmark of the WKR’s approach is that the council takes a systems-level view, or, as De Coninck says, ‘We’re not just counting tons of CO2. Instead, we look at the broader perspective of well-being, which includes topics like social issues, quality of work, pollution, and the health of local residents. This leads to different conclusions than if you were to adopt solely an economic or a climate-focused perspective.’

Over the past three years, the council has increased its output. ‘As the staff bureau grew and matured, more could be done. In 2024, two reports were produced, and so far in 2026 we have already published four, with at least two more to come. We’ve recently assessed the impact our reports have had so far. Recommendations on climate adaptation, an advisory report solicited by the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, has served as input into the recently updated National Adaptation Strategy.’

Intergenerational justice

Another report that was well received by policymakers was an unsolicited advice about carbon dioxide removal, which the council published in July 2024. One of the issues the report addressed had to do with intergenerational justice. ‘By 2050, we will have significantly reduced emissions, but will want to remove previously emitted CO2 from the atmosphere to lower the ambient temperature. It’s not fair to make future taxpayers pay for that, when we are the ones causing those emissions today. We recommended that the government, already now, should make provisions to pay for that. An option to do that is to introduce some kind of a removal fee for every ton of CO2 we emit now, so that the polluter pays, and not the future generation.’

Despite the additional burden on her already rather full schedule, De Coninck appreciates the added value of her council membership. ‘There is a clear relationship and cross-pollination between scientific work and the work for the WKR. Policy relevance is the main driver of the research I am trying to pursue. Through my membership of the WKR and other organizations, I’m have a much better understanding of the broader issues at play in The Hague and elsewhere. The research in my group has a place to land as the questions we ask ourselves are not just academically interesting but politically salient. Because of the presence of various disciplines in the council, I gain insights into their key questions and approaches. And it’s also a lot of fun to learn from the staff members, policymakers and others that I meet through the WKR.’

Moral ambition

All in all, De Coninck strongly recommends her colleagues to look outside university and take up these types of meaningful side jobs. ‘At ºÚÁϸ£ÀûÍø, there is a strong culture of collaborating with industry. Yet, there could be more interaction with other types of stakeholders. As a university that aims to have an impact on society, we need to look beyond technology alone. The urgency of climate change has not diminished. We must demonstrate greater moral ambition. Institutions such as EIRES and ºÚÁϸ£ÀûÍø as a whole can and should play a pioneering role in this.’