{"id":119567,"date":"2026-01-22T10:56:03","date_gmt":"2026-01-22T09:56:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/eeb.org\/?p=119567"},"modified":"2026-01-22T11:00:58","modified_gmt":"2026-01-22T10:00:58","slug":"eu-livestock-strategy-talks-in-ebaf-undermined-before-they-begin-commission-stacks-the-table-with-big-business-interests","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/eeb.org\/it\/eu-livestock-strategy-talks-in-ebaf-undermined-before-they-begin-commission-stacks-the-table-with-big-business-interests\/","title":{"rendered":"EU Livestock Strategy talks in EBAF undermined before they begin: Commission stacks the table with Big Business interests"},"content":{"rendered":"

Brussels, 22 January 2026<\/b> \u2013 The first plenary meeting of the European Board for Agriculture and Food (EBAF) of 2026, taking place today and meant to address the forthcoming EU Livestock Strategy, has cast serious doubt on the credibility, balance, and integrity of the European Commission\u2019s approach to this process.<\/span><\/p>\n

The EU Livestock Strategy, expected in mid-2026, will shape Europe\u2019s food system, ecosystems, public health, animal welfare standards, and farmers\u2019 livelihoods for decades. Against this backdrop, it is alarming that EBAF members were informed late last Friday afternoon that the Commission had unilaterally decided to invite eight additional representatives of the industrial livestock sector, one non-for profit umbrella organisation, and two think tanks (IDDRI and Farm Europe) to the very packed plenary session. This raises questions about the quality of the discussion and \u201cstrategic\u201d deliberations.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Commission describes these invitees as \u201ceight sectorial organisations\u201d and considers them \u201cexternal experts\u201d, offering them a possibility to share their views during the meeting. In reality, the list is dominated by Big Meat and Dairy industry interests. This choice blatantly tilts the discussion in favour of Big Business and dominates the space that was meant for trust-based, balanced exchange.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This move runs directly counter to the EBAF\u2019s stated strategic purpose. The Board was established following the Strategic Dialogue on Agriculture and Food launched by Commission President von der Leyen in 2024, which promised to \u201cdepolarise the agrifood debate\u201d and build a new culture of trust and inclusive dialogue. Instead, last-minute and opaque decisions that further amplify already powerful industry voices seriously undermine trust in this Commission and lend weight to concerns that EU agrifood policy is increasingly being shaped by corporate interests.<\/span><\/p>\n

When pressed, the Commission simply repeated that these participants are \u201cexternal experts\u201d. This claim does not withstand scrutiny. These same industry actors are already formally represented in the <\/span>Livestock Workstream<\/span><\/a> set up under the Vision for Agriculture and Food by Commissioner Christophe Hansen, where they enjoy ample access to policymakers and influence over outcomes. Furthermore, most of these lobbies are also members of organisations that have EBAF membership, which means their interests are already represented in that space. The EBAF was supposed to be different, a space for deeper, more strategic, and more balanced discussions.<\/span><\/p>\n

If the Commission genuinely wanted independent expertise, it could have invited veterinary authorities, territorial food councils, environmental impact assessors, or independent scientists, whose perspectives remain among the least heard in decisions with impacts far beyond the livestock sector. Small-scale livestock actors and peasants remain underrepresented. Business interests, however legitimate, can not replace independent experts.<\/span><\/p>\n

The stakes could not be higher. Europe is facing intersecting crises, biodiversity collapse, climate breakdown, public health risks, deteriorating animal welfare standards and growing pressure on farmers\u2019 incomes and agricultural resilience. Citizens across Europe have been promised evidence-based policymaking that delivers solutions, not talk-shops, not excuses, and not the quiet capture of EU policymaking by unaccountable corporations.<\/span><\/p>\n

The undersigned organisations remain committed to a constructive and balanced EBAF process. But this will only be possible if the Commission restores transparency, balance, and trust. Over-representing industrial food and farming interests in a forum where they are already represented fundamentally undermines evidence-based debate and calls into question the Commission\u2019s intentions at a critical moment.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Isabel Paliotta<\/strong>, who has been representing the EEB and our members at the EBAF today, notes:<\/p>\n

\u201cPolarisation has stalled EU agrifood policymaking for years. The Strategic Dialogue and EBAF were meant to break that deadlock and rebuild trust, and we remain committed to engaging in good faith. But the European Commission is running this process, and it is failing in its responsibility to act transparently, respect the integrity of the space, and serve the public interest.<\/p>\n

By prioritising Big Business interests over independent science, balanced representation, farmers, animal welfare, public health and nature, the Commission is undermining the very purpose of this process. That approach is unacceptable, and without a serious course correction, our continued participation cannot be taken for granted.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

 <\/p>\n

Participating organisations:<\/strong><\/p>\n