The European Parliament's Agriculture Committee on 2 June 2026 debated a study on the bioeconomy's role in farm economic sustainability, alongside the Commission's Fertilisers Action Plan, revealing divergences on biogas use and wool reclassification. Study author Miroslav Hayek (Czech University of Life Sciences) presented findings that diversification via other gainful activities can reduce income per hectare by 19% and that public support is the most consistent stabilizer. He stressed the need for clear policy frameworks, investment in biomass infrastructure, regional clusters, long-term contracts, and EU-wide quality standards.
EPP's Daniel Buda (Romania) questioned why manure is not processed into energy, citing high EU energy costs. S&D's Eric Sargiacomo (France) argued that wool and leather should be treated as strategic materials, not waste, and criticized green alternatives derived from fossil fuels. EPP's Jessika Van Leeuwen (Netherlands) called for innovation-driven sustainability, faster approvals for bio-based products, and regional bioeconomy clusters. Renew's Elsi Katainen (Finland) highlighted biomethane potential for heavy transport and urged predictability. Greens/EFA's Thomas Waitz (Austria) pushed back on biogas for electricity, arguing it should replace fossil gas, and questioned the net biomass potential after soil fertilization needs. Greens/EFA's Cristina Guarda (Italy) warned that bioeconomy is not an automatic solution and that cooperation and public support are essential. EPP's Maria Walsh (Ireland) urged reclassifying wool from waste to enable value chains.
Commission official Schultes (DG AGRI) noted the study aligns with the EU Bioeconomy Strategy, stressed scaling up via the post-2027 CAP and European Competitiveness Fund, and advocated coproduction of food, feed, materials, and energy rather than a rigid cascade. The study will inform CAP post-2027 discussions. Affected stakeholders include farmers, cooperatives, biogas producers, livestock and wool sectors, and investors in bio-based value chains.
The debate exposed a cleavage between those prioritizing energy production from biomass (EPP, Renew) and those cautioning against overexploitation and emphasizing soil health and material uses (Greens/EFA, S&D). A positive impact of the study's recommendations could be increased income stability for farmers through public support and long-term contracts, while a negative impact could be higher costs for biogas producers if biogas for electricity is restricted. The reclassification of wool from waste to a strategic material would benefit the wool sector but may require new processing infrastructure.