INTRODUCTION

The European Commission has adopted an agrifood research strategy without earmarking alternative-protein funding, according to Green Queen. The gap matters because the same plan calls for more fermentation capacity and faster commercial scale-up.

The Commission adopted the strategy on 8 September 2026, according to its Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development. It combines AgRI 2040, which covers farming, forestry and rural communities, with Food 2040, which covers food systems, fisheries and aquaculture. The Commission says both frameworks will shape research support through Horizon Europe and parts of the European Competitiveness Fund.

Green Queen reports that the plan recognises protein diversification and Europe’s shortage of industrial fermentation sites. Yet it sets no specific financial measures for alternative proteins. GFI Europe also objects to the absence of dedicated research support for plant-based, fermentation-made and cultivated food. The group says work remains necessary on flavour, texture and cost. Novel foods also remain outside the first Biotech Act’s proposed regulatory sandboxes, according to Green Queen.

CORE DECISION

The Commission’s stated aim is broader than alternative protein. Its communication seeks to connect laboratory research with testing, deployment and sales across the agrifood sector. The Commission says researchers, businesses and intended users should develop and test solutions together in working settings. Start-ups, scale-ups and smaller companies are among the intended beneficiaries.

That broad design also limits what the document decides. The Commission describes long-term policy direction but says it does not settle the European Union’s next budget negotiations. Green Queen consequently reads the fermentation provisions as objectives rather than funded commitments. The publication reports that Brussels will consider ways to draw private capital into new or upgraded shared facilities instead of allocating a defined public sum.

POLICY DESIGN

AgRI 2040 contains eight initial action fields, according to the Commission. They cover soils, agricultural ecosystems, crops, livestock, the bioeconomy, forests with several functions, rural communities and stronger food value chains. Digital tools, artificial intelligence and robotics also fall within its remit. This side of the strategy therefore addresses farm production and the systems around it rather than food technology alone.

Food 2040 has six action fields, according to the Commission. These include local food systems, healthier diets, lower resource use, pollution reduction, consumer choice and the expansion of new business models. Aquatic food also appears in the framework. The design places alternative proteins within a much larger programme, rather than giving them a separate research track.

The Commission identifies six priorities shared by both frameworks. These concern commercial strength and company growth; food supply and crisis readiness; resources and circular production; safety, nutrition and health; fairness; and international work. Governance, technology and the role of places and communities act as common supporting themes. None amounts to a dedicated alternative-protein funding line.

EVIDENCE

The Commission says an accompanying staff document assesses the earlier agricultural research approach introduced in 2016 and the record of Food 2030. That review covers investment, results and lessons from implementation. Green Queen reports that the evidence credits alternative-protein projects with addressing climate pressure, scarce natural resources, nutrition and food supply. It also associates those projects with lower exposure to animal-borne disease and antimicrobial resistance.

Green Queen says the review points to successful research on new plant proteins. GFI Europe argues that this record supports continued targeted work across plant-based products, fermentation and cultivated food. The new strategy does not renew such a programme, according to the group’s assessment. That distinction matters: favourable evidence does not by itself provide money for another research cycle.

FERMENTATION

Green Queen reports that the strategy treats advanced fermentation capacity as an infrastructure problem. Precision fermentation requires production plants beyond the laboratory and pilot stages. Shared sites can let younger companies test processes without first paying for their own factories. The proposed policy response is to attract private investment into open facilities that several businesses can use.

The same report says the Commission views Europe as effective at financing early research but weaker when companies move towards full production. That transition requires larger plants, more capital and proof that a process works beyond a pilot line. Green Queen characterises this stage as a second financing gap between technical validation and commercial output. The strategy identifies the obstacle but does not attach a funding instrument to it.

Private investment already favours fermentation within the alternative-protein category. Fermentation companies received 84% of the sector’s private finance during the first half of 2026, according to GFI analysis reported by Green Queen. That concentration helped total alternative-protein investment rise by 56% from the equivalent period a year earlier, the publication says. The figures suggest investor interest, but they do not show that enough manufacturing capacity will follow.

FUNDING CONTEXT

The absence of a specific allocation contrasts with earlier Commission activity. Green Queen reports that Brussels previously offered €350m in opportunities connected with food and biotechnology research. The Commission’s life-sciences strategy described fermentation as having substantial potential, according to the publication. The new research plan keeps the manufacturing goal but does not identify how much of any future programme would reach fermentation or cultivated-food projects.

The strategy is intended to guide Horizon Europe decisions covering 2028 to 2034, according to the Commission. Relevant parts of the European Competitiveness Fund will also support the two frameworks. Those routes may eventually finance food technology, but the supplied Commission statement assigns no amount to a protein category. Future budget negotiations could therefore determine whether the plan becomes a spending priority or remains general guidance.

REGULATION

Funding is only one part of the scale-up problem. Green Queen reports that the strategy supports regulatory sandboxes for agrifood products. Such schemes allow companies, researchers and regulators to test methods, shape guidance and prepare standards within a controlled process. The document presents them as a way to assist approvals before products reach the market.

Novel foods were not included in the food and feed sandboxes proposed under the first Biotech Act, according to Green Queen. That exclusion affects ingredients made through fermentation and products developed through cultivated-food methods. Experts cited by the publication want the second part of the legislation to list fermentation-derived food ingredients as an eligible technology. Green Queen says that second instalment is due during the quarter in which its report appeared.

POLITICAL CONTEXT

The Commission’s separate Protein Plan refers to precision and biomass fermentation, according to Green Queen. It says those methods could create circular commercial options for farmers and animal-feed businesses. Critics cited by the publication say the plan gives less attention to farmers growing protein crops for direct human consumption. They argue that it instead favours crop production for livestock feed.

Labelling policy creates another point of tension. Green Queen reports that European Union rules prevent plant-based businesses from using dozens of terms associated with meat, while officials continue to discuss further limits. That position sits beside the research strategy’s stated support for protein diversification and public understanding of biotechnology ingredients. The policies address different legal questions, but they send competing signals to producers seeking a route to consumers.

REACTION

Alessandro Gardino, a policy officer at GFI Europe, welcomes the attention given to fermentation manufacturing, according to Green Queen. His criticism concerns the missing research commitment. GFI Europe says scientists still need support to improve sensory quality and affordability if alternative proteins are to contribute to the Commission’s goals for health, sustainability and food-system resilience.

The Commission frames the problem differently. Agriculture and Food Commissioner Christophe Hansen says research should move beyond laboratories and adapt to local farm conditions. Startups, Research and Innovation Commissioner Ekaterina Zaharieva focuses on helping companies move scientific work towards consumers and markets. Neither commissioner’s statement names cultivated food, fermentation-derived ingredients or a dedicated protein budget.

OPEN QUESTIONS

The Commission says consultation participants asked for tighter links between research, use in practice and market entry. They also sought better monitoring, clearer governance and closer attention to user needs. Other concerns included commercial strength, resilience, health, circular production, fairness and public trust. The Commission says stakeholder engagement will continue while AgRI 2040 and Food 2040 are put into effect.

The supplied material does not identify a timetable for alternative-protein grants, criteria for access to shared fermentation plants or a route for cultivated products into regulatory sandboxes. It also gives no capacity target for industrial fermentation. Those omissions make progress difficult to measure. GFI Europe’s criticism rests on that lack of delivery detail, while the Commission presents the communication as a framework rather than a settled budget.

CONCLUSION

The next formal test is the EU AgRI 2040 Conference in Brussels on 24 and 25 September 2026, which Hansen and Zaharieva will open, according to the Commission. A policy that identifies both a manufacturing shortage and a research gap needs funding and regulatory routes before its scale-up language carries much weight.