BRUSSELS — The European Commission has unveiled a new plan to end the dominance of planet-heating fossil fuels in Europe’s economy — and replace them with trees. The so-called Bioeconomy Strategy, released Thursday, aims to replace fossil fuels in products like plastics, building materials, chemicals and fibers with organic materials that regrow, such as trees and crops. “The bioeconomy holds enormous opportunities for our society, economy and industry, for our farmers and foresters and small businesses and for our ecosystem,” EU environment chief Jessika Roswall said on Thursday, in front of a staged backdrop of bio-based products, including a bathtub made of wood composite and clothing from the H&M “Conscious” range. At the center of the strategy is carbon, the fundamental building block of a wide range of manufactured products, not just energy. Almost all plastic, for example, is made from carbon, and currently most of that carbon comes from oil and natural gas. But fossil fuels have two major drawbacks: they pollute the atmosphere with planet-warming CO2, and they are mostly imported from outside the EU, compromising the bloc’s strategic autonomy. The bioeconomy strategy aims to address both drawbacks by using locally produced or recycled carbon-rich biomass rather than imported fossil fuels. It proposes doing this by setting targets in relevant legislation, such as the EU’s packaging waste laws, helping bioeconomy startups access finance, harmonizing the regulatory regime and encouraging new biomass supply. The 23-page strategy is light on legislative or funding promises, mostly piggybacking on existing laws and funds. Still, it was hailed by industries that stand to gain from a bigger market for biological materials. “The forest industry welcomes the Commission’s growth-oriented approach for bioeconomy,” said Viveka Beckeman, director general of the Swedish Forest Industries Federation, stressing the need to “boost the use of biomass as a strategic resource that benefits not only green transition and our joint climate goals but the overall economic security.” HOW RENEWABLE IS IT? But environmentalists worry Brussels may be getting too chainsaw-happy. Trees don’t grow back at the drop of a hat and pressure on natural ecosystems is already unsustainably high. Scientific reports show that the amount of carbon stored in the EU’s forests and soils is decreasing, the bloc’s natural habitats are in poor condition and biodiversity is being lost at unprecedented rates. Protecting the bloc’s forests has also fallen out of fashion among EU lawmakers. The EU’s landmark anti-deforestation law is currently facing a second, year-long delay after a vote in the European Parliament this week. In October, the Parliament also voted to scrap a law to monitor the health of Europe’s forests to reduce paperwork. Environmentalists warn the bloc may simply not have enough biomass to meet the increasing demand. “Instead of setting a strategy that confronts Europe’s excessive demand for resources, the Commission clings to the illusion that we can simply replace our current consumption with bio-based inputs, overlooking the serious and immediate harm this will inflict on people and nature,” said Eva Bille, the European Environmental Bureau’s (EEB) circular economy head, in a statement. TOO WOOD TO BE TRUE Environmental groups want the Commission to prioritize the use of its biological resources in long-lasting products — like construction — rather than lower-value or short-lived uses, like single-use packaging or fuel. A first leak of the proposal, obtained by POLITICO, gave environmental groups hope. It celebrated new opportunities for sustainable bio-based materials while also warning that the “sources of primary biomass must be sustainable and the pressure on ecosystems must be considerably reduced” — to ensure those opportunities are taken up in the longer term. It also said the Commission would work on “disincentivising inefficient biomass combustion” and substituting it with other types of renewable energy. That rankled industry lobbies. Craig Winneker, communications director of ethanol lobby ePURE, complained that the document’s language “continues an unfortunate tradition in some quarters of the Commission of completely ignoring how sustainable biofuels are produced in Europe,” arguing that the energy is “actually a co-product along with food, feed, and biogenic CO2.” Now, those lines pledging to reduce environmental pressures and to disincentivize inefficient biomass combustion are gone. “Bioenergy continues to play a role in energy security, particularly where it uses residues, does not increase water and air pollution, and complements other renewables,” the final text reads. “This is a crucial omission, given that the EU’s unsustainable production and consumption are already massively overshooting ecological boundaries and putting people, nature and businesses at risk,” said the EEB. Delara Burkhardt, a member of the European Parliament with the center-left Socialists and Democrats, said it was “good that the strategy recognizes the need to source biomass sustainably,” but added the proposal did not address sufficiency. “Simply replacing fossil materials with bio-based ones at today’s levels of consumption risks increasing pressure on ecosystems. That shifts problems rather than solving them. We need to reduce overall resource use, not just switch inputs,” she said. Roswall declined to comment on the previous draft at Thursday’s press conference. “I think that we need to increase the resources that we have, and that is what this strategy is trying to do,” she said.

BRUSSELS — The European Commission published its long-term “vision” for the European Union’s agriculture and food policy on Wednesday, setting out ambitions for a sector that has been at the center of political protests, trade tensions and regulatory headaches. Agriculture Commissioner Christophe Hansen’s paper lays out a roadmap through 2040, promising better conditions for farmers, fairer supply chains, and a rethinking of sustainability policies. “Food and farming are vital for Europe’s people, economy and society. We need the agri-food sector to flourish and compete in a fair global marketplace, with enough resilience to cope with crises and shocks,” Hansen said as he unveiled the plan.  “The roadmap we are presenting today sets out the path for tackling the many pressures that EU farmers face.” But while the EU executive wants to ease some regulatory burdens, it’s also laying the ground for bigger fights over trade rules, food pricing and supply chain fairness. Here are the five key takeaways from the EU’s master plan for agriculture: 1. MAKE FARMING ATTRACTIVE AGAIN (OR AT LEAST SURVIVABLE) European farmers are getting old: Just 12 percent are under 40, and many are struggling with low incomes, bureaucracy and volatile markets. Hansen’s vision acknowledges that, unless something changes, Europe won’t have enough farmers left by 2040 — or the ones who remain will just be fewer and bigger. His plan? Better pay, fewer administrative burdens and new income streams like carbon farming and bioeconomy projects to keep young people in the business. The Commission is also set to deliver a generational renewal strategy this year, focusing on easier access to land and financing for young farmers. A revamp of the Common Agricultural Policy after 2027 will be key to delivering on these promises. But there’s already an emerging fight over whether the CAP should remain a standalone fund in the EU budget or get folded into a larger money pot. The Commission is signaling a shift toward more targeted CAP support, prioritizing active farmers, young entrants and those producing essential food. There’s also talk of simplifying direct payments and adjusting subsidy distribution. The big question: Will this actually attract new farmers — or just stop existing ones from quitting? 2. THE FIGHT OVER FOOD CHAIN PROFITS ISN’T OVER Hansen’s vision takes aim at power imbalances in the food supply chain, signaling that the Commission isn’t done cracking down on unfair trading practices. Farmers have long argued that retailers and food manufacturers squeeze them on prices, forcing them to sell below production costs — a practice the Commission wants to curb further by revising the UTP directive. However, while farmer groups see this as essential, the Commission’s free-market hawks remain uneasy about an outright ban on below-cost sales that could distort competition. So, the vision emphasizes rules against “systematically” compelling below-cost sales, rather than writing a strict, blanket ban into law. The plan also includes a greater role for the new Agri-Food Chain Observatory to track who makes what margin in the food supply chain — a move that could add transparency, but also more friction, between farmers and bigger actors. And it’s not just farmers feeling squeezed. The Commission is also acknowledging concerns about rural workers, women in agriculture, and foreign laborers, saying the industry needs to be more attractive and fair. A Women in Farming platform will be launched, though it’s unclear how much impact it will have. There is also a call to improve conditions for low-wage workers in agriculture and food processing, but no new enforcement tools to back it up. Expect pushback from other players, like retailers and food manufacturers, who argue that higher farm-gate prices will drive up costs for consumers, but also concerns that the EU isn’t doing enough to protect farm and food-sector workers from low pay and poor conditions. 3. SUSTAINABLE CARROTS, NOT UNSUSTAINABLE STICKS The Commission wants farming to decarbonize and pollute less, but farmers should be seen as part of the solution, not the problem, the vision argues. That means fewer penalties and more incentives, while food companies and retailers should bear as much of the climate and environmental burden — though how they’ll be held accountable remains unclear. The slew of environmental derogation requests from farmers shows that “one-size-fits-all approaches” don’t work, the Commission says. That’s why the midyear CAP simplification will give EU countries more flexibility, shifting the CAP “away from conditions to incentives,” including for “streamlined” ecosystem services. The plan includes stronger support for carbon farming, bioenergy production, organic and agroecological practices, and the bioeconomy and circularity. Brussels also wants biopesticides and new genomic techniques to reach the market faster — with a proposal on biopesticides promised this year — while biotechnologies need scaling up. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) should get a larger budget to speed up safety assessments and clear regulatory bottlenecks. That said, not all innovations are welcome. The paper warns that “certain food innovation is sometimes seen as a threat” — a not-so-subtle nod to cultivated meat. It “calls for an enhanced dialogue,” which effectively means a freeze. Meanwhile, livestock “is and will remain an essential part of” the EU’s food system, with its own dedicated “work stream” to boost competitiveness. Feed additives “will be essential” to making the sector more sustainable. 4. MORE HOMEGROWN FOOD AND FEED, AND A CRACKDOWN ON IMPORTS The final text slightly tones down some of the trade protectionist language from an earlier draft, but the Commission is still sounding the alarm over Europe’s dependency on imported agricultural inputs, from fertilizers to animal feed. Right now, the EU heavily relies on key fertilizer imports from Russia, Belarus and North Africa, while soy for animal feed comes mostly from South and North America. To fix this, Hansen’s vision includes a new protein strategy to boost EU-grown plant proteins, increased production of low-carbon and recycled fertilizers, and more investment in domestic agritech innovation. The Commission is also exploring the idea of food stockpiles — a move that signals greater concern for supply chain resilience. One of the most politically sensitive parts of the vision? A trade reciprocity plan is expected in 2025, outlining how the EU will enforce equal standards for imports on pesticides, animal welfare and sustainability. To back this up with enforcement, the Commission wants to set up a dedicated import control task force, working with member countries to strengthen border checks and prevent banned substances from entering the EU market. The challenge? Replacing imports without driving up costs — or setting off trade conflicts with key partners. But in a key change from the earlier leaked draft, there’s now no explicit ban on EU companies exporting toxic pesticides that are prohibited at home. Instead, the Commission will begin with an impact assessment, leaving open what future restrictions might look like. 5. CRUMBS FOR THE CONSUMER Neither food, nor consumers get much in the way of new rules. The Commission will propose strengthening the role of public procurement, though a desire stated in last week’s version to ditch the “cheaper is better” mentality has been deleted, emphasizing merely that procurers should seek the “best value.” The document calls for shorter supply chains. Eating healthy also means eating local, it argues, since unfortunately “food is more processed, eating habits are changing and supply chains have gotten longer.” For that reason, there will be a Food Dialogue with stakeholders every year to discuss product reformulation, food affordability and collecting data on dietary intake. The Berlaymont will launch a study on the health impact of ultra-processed foods and it intends to extend country-of-origin labeling. Another change from last week is a paragraph on how consumers should receive “trustworthy information” and that the EU will crack down on “misleading environmental claims and unreliable sustainability labels.” Consumers should also be “supporting farmers in the transition” toward more environmental production, since “markets fail to reward the progress already made.”  There is no mention of front-of-pack labeling (like the forgotten Nutri-Score), nutrient profiles for marketing sugary, salty and fatty products, or plant-based diets. CAN THIS VISION SURVIVE THE POLITICS? Brussels’ new vision is full of big promises — simpler rules for farmers, a more balanced food supply chain, a crackdown on unfair trade and a pivot to carrots over sticks on green rules. But in scrapping an explicit export ban on toxic pesticides and watering down rules on public procurement, the Commission shows it’s wary of imposing new hurdles that could spark backlash. That leaves a big question mark over whether this plan can actually change Europe’s farming model — and if it will do enough to ease the concerns of farmers, consumer groups and environmental campaigners.  With the upcoming CAP reform, looming budget fights and intense trade negotiations ahead, it won’t be an easy harvest for Hansen. This story has been updated.

Call it the evaluation before the job interview. Ahead of the aspiring commissioners facing a grilling from the European Parliament in early November, they must respond to lawmakers’ written questions. And the answers are in. Many of the incoming top brass are new to the Brussels’ policymaking machine. The written answers, in theory at least, are an opportunity to share their vision of their upcoming roles. Don’t get too excited though.  The majority of commissioner nominees rehashed previous statements from various Brussels institutions, whether from the political guidelines of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen or the so-called mission letters that she sent to her future commissioners. The answers were also partly written by the Commission’s civil servants, who have crafted and executed EU policies for decades.  The real test will be facing unexpected questions from European lawmakers when commissioner nominees can no longer rely on advisers to whisper the answers.  Still, the written answers give some indications to how the newcomers want to set the tone or change direction — which makes them worth combing through.  And POLITICO got stuck into more than 400 pages of written answers so you don’t have to. Here are our key takeaways.  MARIA LUÍS ALBUQUERQUE Portugal’s Maria Luís Albuquerque, the commissioner candidate for financial services and the Savings and Investments Union, said the bloc must “not roll back” global bank capital standards — the so-called Basel III accords, which aimed to make the financial system safer following the 2008 global financial crisis — and “must implement the rules,” pushing back against calls from EU countries to scrap some elements of existing regulation. Albuquerque, who will answer questions from European Parliament lawmakers at her confirmation hearing on Nov. 6, said in written responses to MEPs’ questions that the EU is “giving banks ample time to adapt to the new rules.” VALDIS DOMBROVSKIS Latvia’s Valdis Dombrovskis, the commissioner candidate for economy, productivity, implementation and simplification, gave his strongest support yet for conditions to be attached to European Union funding in the next budget, saying the bloc may draw inspiration from the successful linking of investment and reform within its pandemic recovery fund. His remarks formed part of his written answers to European lawmakers ahead of his Nov. 7 confirmation hearing in the European Parliament, and follow a similar push from von der Leyen. The remarks of Valdis Dombrovskis formed part of his written answers to European lawmakers ahead of his Nov. 7 confirmation hearing in the European Parliament, and follow a similar push from von der Leyen. | Sajjad Hussain/AFP via Getty Images CHRISTOPHE HANSEN Luxembourg’s Christophe Hansen, the commissioner candidate for agriculture and food, said the European Commission won’t publish a flagship framework law on sustainable food systems, in written answers ahead of his grilling by lawmakers on Nov. 4. “Rather than new legislative proposals, we can achieve our objectives by better implementing and enforcing existing legislation while using incentives and new market-based tools to promote change,” Hansen said in reply to a question on whether the EU’s executive would propose the framework next year. COSTAS KADIS Cyprus’ Costas Kadis, the commissioner candidate for fisheries and oceans, made it clear he won’t compromise on environmental protection ahead of his Nov. 6 confirmation hearing. In his role, Kadis will have the delicate task of balancing the interests of the EU’s fishing industry with those of imperiled ocean biodiversity — which are often diametrically opposed. Kadis, who has a background in biology, said his “top priority” was to “ensure that the fishing and aquaculture sectors remain sustainable, competitive and resilient.” HADJA LAHBIB Belgium’s Hadja Lahbib, the commissioner candidate for preparedness, crisis management and equality, dodged MEPs’ questions over the future of the Health Emergency and Response Authority (HERA) and hinted funding for health crisis planning could be hard to come by, ahead of her hearing on Nov. 6. MEPs asked whether she foresaw an expansion of HERA’s capacity and how she would manage financing issues that have already affected its work. In her statement Lahbib didn’t answer directly but said she would draw on HERA’s expertise for the EU preparedness strategy and for the Critical Medicines Act. TERESA RIBERA Spain’s Teresa Ribera, the executive vice president candidate for the clean, just and competitive transition, promised “swift and effective state aid” to back the EU’s Clean Industrial Deal, pitching public funds as a way to unlock private sector investments in “considerable” decarbonization costs, she told the European Parliament ahead of her Nov. 12 confirmation hearing. The Clean Industrial Deal — a bill to help companies meet the EU’s ambitious carbon-cutting targets and boost climate-friendly technologies — is one of Ribera’s top agenda items. The EU has vowed to release the legislation within 100 days of Ribera taking office. Spain’s Teresa Ribera, the executive vice president candidate for the clean, just and competitive transition, promised “swift and effective state aid” to back the EU’s Clean Industrial Deal. | Javier Soriano/AFP via Getty Images JESSIKA ROSWALL Sweden’s Jessika Roswall, the commissioner candidate for environment, water resilience and a competitive circular economy, stressed her commitment to the farming, forestry and bioeconomy industries ahead of her hearing on Nov. 5. In doing so, the lawyer-by-trade and former European affairs minister made it clear the European Commission’s green agenda will no longer take priority over support for the agricultural sector — addressing what became one of the biggest controversies of the last mandate. STÉPHANE SÉJOURNÉ France’s Stéphane Séjourné, the executive vice president candidate for prosperity and industrial strategy, said that the European Commission will thoroughly assess the way it scrutinizes foreign subsidies impacting takeover deals and public procurement in the EU. He commits to a review of the implementation of the rules in responses submitted ahead of his confirmation hearing on Nov. 12 and highlights the “appropriateness of the level of the notification thresholds.” He also says that Brussels will come up with a possible legislative proposal depending on the outcome of this review, as planned in the text of the regulation. OLIVÉR VÁRHELYI Hungary’s Olivér Várhelyi, the commissioner candidate for health and animal welfare, was opaque on pushing ahead with front-of-pack labels in written answers to MEPs on how to tackle ever-rising rates of noncommunicable diseases such as diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular disease, ahead of his hearing on Nov. 6. While he acknowledged that mandatory food information “can help consumers to make healthier consumer choices,” he nonetheless favors a “comprehensive approach” (EU-speak for nonlegislative measures). This could signal a line in the sand over stalled European Commission proposals to introduce front-of-pack health labels for all foods in Europe, as well as for alcoholic drinks. Hungary’s Olivér Várhelyi, the commissioner candidate for health and animal welfare, was opaque on pushing ahead with front-of-pack labels in written answers to MEPs. | Joe Klamar/AFP via Getty Images EKATERINA ZAHARIEVA Bulgaria’s Ekaterina Zaharieva, the commissioner candidate for startups, research and innovation — who is also tasked with leading the EU life sciences strategy — only briefly mentioned the hotly anticipated proposal ahead of her hearing on Nov. 5. But in her nine-page replies to the questions posed by MEPs, published Tuesday night, Zaharieva only said she will “engage with the relevant players to develop a Strategy for European Life Sciences, which will cover also biotechnology … (to) support a faster green and digital transition.” Helen Collis, Rory O’Neill, Claudia Chiappa, Aude van den Hove, Francesca Micheletti, Camille Gijs, Leonie Cater, Marianne Gros and Louise Guillot contributed to this report.