This document should be regarded solely as a summary of the contributions made by stakeholders during the public consultation for the initiative ‘Towards a circular, regenerative and competitive bioeconomy’. It cannot in any circumstances be regarded as the official position of the Commission or its services. Responses to the consultation activities cannot be considered as a representative sample of the views of the EU population.

1.Background and objectives of the public consultation

This public consultation is a key part of efforts to develop a new EU Bioeconomy Strategy, in line with the Better Regulation Guidelines, which ensure that EU policies are evidence-based, effective, and involve relevant stakeholders in shaping decisions. The strategy is aligned with the goals of the European Commission’s Competitiveness Compass, 1 which provides a framework to strengthen Europe’s industrial base and global competitiveness. It also supports the Clean Industrial Deal, 2 which focuses on decarbonising industries and boosting green innovation to achieve climate neutrality.

The initiative is vital for EU economic and industrial competitiveness and its broader strategic goals, while ensuring the sustainable and regenerative use of biomass as the raw material of the bioeconomy, contributing to climate change solutions, maximising circularity in the European bioeconomy and increasing long-term value of biomass. It aims to empower the most relevant economic sectors such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, biomanufacturing and biotechnologies industries, but also EU citizens, to harness the potential of biomass in a sustainable and environmentally sound way. This non-legislative initiative is expected to be published in the last quarter of 2025.

The public consultation was published on the European Commission’s Have your say and was open to all interested parties and stakeholders from 31 March to 23 June 2025. 3 This report gives a concise, factual summary of the responses received. This initial overview of stakeholder input provides a neutral, brief look at what has been said, and it does not contain any deeper analysis or interpretation of the public consultation’s results.

The stakeholder views were collected through open and closed questions 4 and the respondents were invited to provide feedback in an open text form in English or any other EU official language. They were also encouraged to upload their responses in the form of position paper files.

2.Responses to the public consultation

2.1Breakdown of the respondents

The public consultation has gathered a total of 362 responses, out of which 149 included additional uploaded files, in most cases, documents to support the answers, but in some cases position papers as well. 5  

Figure 1 . below displays the distribution of respondents by country, where only countries that have two or more respondents are shown. Belgium 6 and Germany lead, with 88 (24%) and 62 (17%) respondents respectively, succeeded by France with 40 respondents (11%), the Netherlands with 26 (7%) and Italy with 23 (6%). Many countries have only one respondent: Australia, China, Croatia, Czechia, Hungary, Lithuania, Malta, Norway, Peru, Slovakia, Slovenia and South Africa.

As shown in Figure 2 . below, when it comes to the split by types of organisations participating, the business association and company/business categories lead with 101 participants (28%), and 88 participants (24%). Non-governmental organisations see a significantly lower representation with 40 participants (11%), similarly to the academic/research institutions with 36 participants (10%).

In terms of EU citizens, the public consultation had 28 respondents (8%), and the same number of participants in terms of public authorities. The least represented were non-EU citizens, trade unions and consumer organisations.

Zooming in on participants’ organisation size, as shown in Figure 3 ., the largest group consists of large organisations, which make up 35% of the total responses with an actual number of 127, followed closely by micro organisations, accounting for 28% (102 respondents). Small organisations represent 20% (71), while medium organisations make up 9% with 33 respondents. The remaining 8% of respondents (29) did not provide information on their organisation’s size.

3.2.Key issues raised by stakeholders

When asked what the main objectives of the new EU Bioeconomy Strategy should be, public consultation respondents emphasise several priorities. As shown in Figure 4 . below, 63% (229) of respondents believe that increasing circularity across bioeconomy value chains should be the main priority. This is followed by fostering environmentally sustainable production, supply, and use of biomass, particularly to halt biodiversity loss, supported by 56% (204) of respondents. Another goal seen as important by respondents is contributing to climate mitigation and adaptation, cited as the main objective of the new EU Bioeconomy Strategy by 55% (200) of respondents. Improving the position of the EU bioeconomy in global competition is recognised as the main objective by 44% (158) of respondents, while 40% (145) of respondents see strengthening the biotech and biomanufacturing sectors in the EU as the top priority. 

Regarding the challenges to the EU bioeconomy, the risk labelled “Loss of competitiveness of the sector due to an altering landscape and uncertain regulatory framework” obtained the highest share of “Very important” and “Important” answers, 199 (55% of all 362 respondents) and 96 (27%), respectively. Finally, “Improve policy consistency and harmonisation between EU and national regulations and reduce administrative burden“ was seen as the most needed among regulatory and policy measures, with 208 (57%) respondents answering that this measure is “Very Important” and 101 of them (28%) saying it is “Important”, while only 4 participants (1%) responded with “Slightly important” and the same number opted for the “Not at all important“ option (see Figure 5 .).

When it comes to regulatory barriers that hinder or slow down the most the growth of the EU bioeconomy in the view of public consultation respondents, the results indicate that they see regulatory barriers related to unfair competition and complex regulatory requirements as the most important. Namely, the barrier Unfair competition of bio-based products with conventional fossil-based products (e.g. lack of a regulatory level playing field in the single market, insufficient regulatory incentives) is chosen as one of two most important ones by 212 respondents (59%).

The barrier also seen important by respondents (181 of them, or 50% selected it) is the Complex regulatory requirements and lack of harmonisation at the EU and national level for bio-based materials and products. Other barriers are also perceived as important by respondents, such as Lengthy and burdensome permitting and administrative procedures that are slowing down uptake of bio-based products (92 respondents, 25%) and Unclear or insufficient rules on what constitutes sustainable sourcing of biomass within the planetary boundaries (57 respondents, 16%). The remaining four offered options received less than 50 votes each. See FIGURE 6. below for more details.

The public consultation also gathered responses on the key areas of innovation and opportunity for the new EU Bioeconomy Strategy. As Figure 7. shows, the results indicate that Advancements in biotechnology and agriculture are selected by 249 respondents (69%) as one of the most relevant areas for innovation in the new EU Bioeconomy Strategy. Sectors beyond medicine and food are also highlighted by 247 respondents (68%) as important. Sustainable biomaterials as alternatives to plastics were chosen by 212 respondents (59%), and Improved biofuels and sustainable energy solutions were selected by 182 respondents (50%).

(1)

  https://commission.europa.eu/topics/eu-competitiveness/competitiveness-compass_en .

(2)

  https://commission.europa.eu/topics/eu-competitiveness/clean-industrial-deal_en .

(3)

  https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14555-Towards-a-circular-regenerative-and-competitive-bioeconomy_en .

(4)

The stakeholders were classified per respondent group they belonged, what is the name and size of their organisation, their country of origin and basic personal information.

(5)

Namely, the public consultation allowed respondents to upload files to support their answers, but only 149 out of 362 respondents did so. Some of the 149 participants that used this opportunity uploaded more than one file, but for the purposes of this report only the number of respondents who uploaded files to the public consultation was counted.

(6)

It is important to note that most responses from Belgium are coming from EU organisations, meaning that they do not really represent a national position.