'Archive detective' Floor Haalboom is driven by concerns about a livable planet

Floor Haalboom is an assistant professor at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, where she teaches courses on the history of environmental problems, intensive livestock farming, veterinary medicine, zoonoses and planetary health.

Her most recent research project focuses on the animal feed industry and its impact on agriculture, a task that required perseverance and determination, as well as a considerable amount of idealism. However, she prefers to avoid the label “activism”.

So you are not an activist, but rather a true idealist?
"I have a bit of a hard time with the term 'activist'. If you call me an activist, can we please also call the scientists who are committed to maximising profits for certain industries activists as well? Or lobbyists? After all, they are activists too.

The word 'activist' is often used as a pejorative term; a term to dismiss someone. It quickly takes on a negative connotation. I am driven by my concerns about the future of our planet and its livability. I deliberately ask critical questions about contemporary environmental problems because that is a key democratic task of academia. It is a counterweight to 'business as usual'.

In my view, scientists owe this to society. First and foremost, I am a researcher, which means that I conduct my scientific research with integrity and care. If I discover something that does not fit the picture, I take it seriously."

You call yourself an "archive detective”. Is that what your research is? Detective work?
"Yes, I mainly do classic historical source research. I analyse a lot of archival material, as well as published sources such as scientific journals, digital newspaper databases, parliamentary and policy documents, and interviews. In short, I collect evidence, so I sometimes need to adopt a detective's mindset.

In recent years, I have been working on a Veni project on the environmental history of the Dutch mixed feed industry. This project mainly involved poring over source material for days on end and staying sharp. After all, the devil is always in the details, and plot twists are not out of the question."

What unexpected plot twists did you encounter?
"I had a number of questions for this research, such as what exactly the role of the animal feed industry has been in the industrialisation of livestock farming, what consequences the use of antibiotics has had on health and the environment, and what impact the animal feed industry has on the rest of the world. The most surprising discovery was that many issues, such as the use of antibiotics and animal feed from the Global South, have been incredibly controversial from the outset. This was also the case within the scientific community and the animal feed industry itself.

But the private animal feed industry, which is linked to the food industry, was so well organised and so strongly represented that it won all the arguments, normalised harmful developments and, with the help of government officials and the same scientific community, neutralised criticism. Certain economic interests were given priority. I have found a lot of evidence for this in some pretty boring and 'technical' minutes."

As a scientist, you must continue to ask yourself which questions are not being asked

Why does this motivate you?
"I think it's important to do this research because there are so many stories out there about how we ended up in this 'mess', but they are often inaccurate. Narratives such as 'we will never be hungry again' or 'people simply didn't know any better' have been proven to be untrue. When it comes to livestock farming, that's complete nonsense."

And, in this process, you came across the dubious role of science?
"As a science and environmental historian, I study not only a particular sector, but also the science that deals with it. That doesn't mean, however, that I only criticise academia in my research. Academia is also the place where well-founded knowledge is developed about environmental and health damage. At the same time, academia has played a significant role in supporting harmful developments, such as the rise of the biotechnology industry.

Committees of experts formed an important lobbying route for the well-organised private animal feed industry. Through these committees, the industry established a reputation for scientific authority, thereby determining the direction of livestock farming. Most experts were sincere in this regard. They saw it as their social responsibility. However, one must be cautious when the money comes from influential economic sectors. Even today, scientific funding is still heavily dependent on the business community. That is not always a problem, but scientists must keep asking themselves which questions are not being asked as a result, or which topics are receiving less attention."

An earlier article published by DUB in 2018 stated that, as a historian in Veterinary Medicine, you always have a lot to explain. For example, you must explain the social relevance of your research. Is that still the case?
"I have certainly noticed that people in academia seem more interested in the connection between existential environmental problems, health issues and the fate of other living beings. Academia is paying increasing attention to the importance of interdisciplinary work; the importance of combining knowledge to understand complex problems and find innovative solutions.

Humanities scholars are therefore extremely important. The stories we tell about historical changes, for example, help determine the directions we choose in the present. It matters whether you think that 'people didn't know any better back then' or whether you know that 'people were already critical back then'. Unfortunately, sowing scientific doubt seems to be gaining the upper hand in the public debate. Scientific evidence is being strategically misused to continue harmful activities. The interests at stake, such as those of industry, are not only considerable but are becoming increasingly apparent. People are more afraid of losing or having to give something up. This is also true among the public."

How do you view your role in this context?
"UU has room for all kinds of voices. That's my experience. Of course, there are people within the university who view my findings differently, based on their own backgrounds or experiences. But that's only a good thing. The exact extent of the damage caused in livestock farming, for example, will ultimately become clear through the accumulation of evidence from various scientific disciplines. That combination will ensure that measures are taken. Interdisciplinary education and research are therefore essential."

What is it like to be able to tell this story at the Opening of the Academic Year ceremony?
"It is very special and also very exciting. I sometimes experience imposter syndrome, but, above all, I consider it an honour to do so. It is up to the wealthiest and most highly educated to bring about change, and that includes the academic community. We must realise that scientific expertise has not only clarified problems, but also helped to obscure the view of major environmental issues. That story also needs to be told."

In addition to Floor Haalboom, there is a second keynote speaker today: Lidwien Smit, Professor of One Health and Environmental Epidemiology. She researches the complex interactions between human, animal and environmental health – for example, in places where pathogens and pollutants tend to spread, such as livestock farms, poultry houses and schools. In her keynote speech, she will present a seemingly simple solution to reduce the transmission of pathogens, such as SARS-CoV-2, in schools.

The Opening of the Academic Year will be livestreamed through this link. It starts at 4:00 pm.