Hosted by the Forum for the Future of Agriculture together with Anglo American, this interactive session examined how Europe’s innovation potential – from new mineral fertilisers to bio-based inputs, digital diagnostics and regenerative approaches – can support a more resilient, secure and sustainable food system. Panellists and participants also tackled the real-world barriers farmers face and the structural issues shaping Europe’s agricultural markets.

Innovation and resilience in Europe’s crop nutrition future

For agriculture to meet its challenges, we need to bring different change agents into one conversation, said Moderator Mark Titterington, Member of the Advisory Council, Forum for the Future of Agriculture, in opening the session. He highlighted the Forum’s host partner, Anglo American, whose mining expertise may seem unexpected in this context but is increasingly relevant as Europe explores new directions in crop nutrition. “They have an important role in providing some of the solutions to the transformation of the food and agriculture system,” he said.

MEPs Maria Grapini and Barry Cowen then set the policy context. Ms Grapini outlined the mounting pressures facing European farmers: climate change, unstable markets, high input costs, soil health decline and lack of a new generation of farmers.  Clear policies, flexible tools and strong support for innovation and research are essential, she said. Crop nutrition is “essential for Europe’s future”, shaping food security, consumer safety and rural prosperity.

Europe also cannot rely on “one-size-fits-all” approaches; different soils, climates and crops require different strategies. Competitiveness is also vital; European farmers operate under high standards and need policies that allow them to remain viable on global markets.

Mr Cowen echoed the importance of innovation, arguing that environmental ambition must be matched by practical, workable incentives. Sustainability, soil protection and biodiversity must not come at the cost of farmers’ livelihoods. He drew attention to the relationship between food security and defence security and called for a Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) that rewards adoption of new technologies and practices. Europe, he argued, must “innovate before it regulates”, ensuring farmers are not unduly burdened at a time when fertiliser imports remain vulnerable to geopolitical shocks.

Both MEPs emphasised that EU policymakers now have both an opportunity and an obligation to align regulation and incentives in ways that strengthen both food security and competitiveness.

 A natural mineral approach to crop nutrition

Mark invited Anglo American’s Rachel Dolby to explain why the company has invested in natural mineral fertilisers and how this relates to Europe’s strategic resilience.

Ms Dolby, Head of Corporate Affairs, Land and Permitting, described the company’s project to mine polyhalite: a low-carbon, multi-nutrient fertiliser extracted from deep under the North Sea, the remnants of a prehistoric evaporated ocean. Polyhalite supplies potassium, magnesium and calcium in a form that “works with nature, not against it”, she said. It is produced with no waste, has a low carbon footprint, and can improve nutrient-use efficiency when used alongside nitrogen and phosphate fertilisers, reducing losses and runoff. The product is an example of “the direction that crop nutrition needs to go in”, said Ms Dolby.

The mine itself is notable: located at Woodsmith, in a UK national park, it has been designed with the vast majority of its infrastructure underground, a model that has contributed to strong local support. While construction is well advanced, it remains a large, capital-intensive project and further investment decisions lie ahead.

Audience questions focused on the price, circularity and long-term sustainability of polyhalite. Ms Dolby acknowledged these considerations, while emphasising that polyhalite can provide a lower-impact, scalable addition to Europe’s fertiliser supply at a time of heightened vulnerability.

Panel discussion: Innovation, soil stewardship and the future of crop nutrition

The discussion then turned to the role of innovation in addressing Europe’s challenges and its place within wider policy.

Gijs Schilthuis, Director of Sustainability at DG AGRI, highlighted Europe’s vulnerabilities, in particular its reliance on imported fertiliser, feed and energy, and argued that domestic innovation is essential. That innovation must combine public and private initiatives and must also focus on soil stewardship. Soil health, he stressed, is the foundation of long-term productivity. “Innovations come from mining, new products, new ideas, but also from working with the resources we have…soil resources, human resources,” he said.

Incentives are key. Recent EU research efforts have invested heavily in soil monitoring and agro-ecological practices, and future CAP tools are expected to lean more on incentives and less on burdensome regulations. Several Member States already operate flexible, incentive-driven environmental schemes that are oversubscribed – evidence, he said, that well-designed measures attract farmer uptake. One core element is to monitor and measure success, and it has to be remembered that “incentives are expensive”.

The discussion turned to the question: What is innovation? Marilda Dhaskali, Senior Agriculture and Land-use Policy Officer at BirdLife Europe and Central Asia, urged policymakers to define the problem clearly before pursuing solutions. Innovation should not be understood as simply replacing one product with another; substituting a single input risks “locking us into the same system”. She suggested that new technologies should be evaluated against core questions: will they reduce food prices, nitrate pollution and dependency on external inputs?

Rachel Dolby reiterated that “there is no silver bullet”. Single products can make a difference, but only when people come together to build comprehensive solutions.

Bringing the conversation back to soil health, Maurits Voogt, Director of External Affairs at Eurofins Agro, described the company’s work analysing soil and crop samples across Europe. A significant proportion of nutrients applied to fields are never absorbed by crops: for nitrogen, often less than half. Precision farming and better soil monitoring can reduce waste, improve structure and resilience, and enhance profitability. Many soils also lack key micronutrients and biological functions, which testing can help identify and correct. Regular data-driven advice helps farmers reduce inputs and better withstand droughts and extreme weather. “The moment you start measuring, you can always do better,” he said.

Asked by Mark whether high fertiliser prices are accelerating the uptake of technology, Mr Voogt said awareness is rising but adoption ultimately depends on a clear business case.

 Open dialogue: Farmer realities and systemic challenges

After the panel discussion, audience members joined in an open dialogue, which brought farmer realities, market pressures and systemic barriers sharply into focus.

Farmer economics and transition pressures

Much of the dialogue centred on how to finance the transition. A French farmer raised the imbalance between fertiliser and machinery costs and crop prices. This leaves farmers absorbing the financial risk of adopting new technologies, even when these contribute to sustainability and compliance. Mr Schilthuis acknowledged the issue, saying that while CAP income support, investment support and innovation measures exist, added-value production and better-designed incentives will be essential in the next CAP cycle.

Innovation also requires capital and confidence, and weather uncertainty compounds risk. Ms Dhaskali said farmers need both short-term safety nets for extreme events and long-term investment in resilient, nature-based landscapes. Mr Voogt suggested making soil testing a requirement for CAP payments. This idea was proposed in 2013 but rejected; he argued it should be reconsidered as a practical way to strengthen nutrient-use efficiency, resilience and long-term viability.

Structural barriers and the role of advice

Audience questions also highlighted a series of structural issues that shape farmers’ choices, among them European energy prices and circularity barriers. Wastewater systems are designed to clean water, not to recover fertiliser-grade nutrients. These systemic constraints limit Europe’s ability to scale recycled, circular or low-carbon fertilisers.

The diminishing bargaining power of cooperatives was another concern. One attendee said farmers no longer feel treated as members but as customers, which weakens their influence in the marketplace. Panellists agreed that cooperatives remain a vital tool but may require renewed governance and member engagement to deliver value.

Advisory companies were also discussed as a critical part of the transition. Mr Voogt highlighted innovative models where farmers pay only if advisory recommendations generate real input savings, a “no success, no fee” approach. He stressed that Europe’s innovation ecosystem often involves “too many scientists and not enough farmers”, and that lighthouse projects must reach far more people on the ground if they are to drive real change.

Policy alignment and regulatory pathways

Tiffanie Stephani, of Yara International, asked whether, as Member States prepare their next CAP strategic plans, the Commission intends to encourage stronger incentives for nutrient-use efficiency, noting that many proven practices remain underused. Mr Schilthuis replied that the Commission has begun preparing recommendations on this topic for the next CAP cycle, while emphasising that effective uptake depends on farmer knowledge, advisory support and implementation at Member State level.

Europe’s regulatory processes for biocontrol and biological inputs were also highlighted, with one farmer stating they remain slow, with approvals taking up to seven years: however, the Commission will shortly propose a faster authorisation pathway for biopesticides.

Questions also focused on how to better join up policy, given the complex landscape of regulatory bodies that farmers must navigate. In response, Mr Schilthuis explained how the EU attempts to create coherence through its research, testing and advisory programmes – from Horizon funding to lighthouse farms and EIP-AGRI groups – but emphasised that these mechanisms only work when farmers are closely involved.

Closing reflections

The dialogue concluded with reflections from Ms Dolby, who highlighted lessons from the Woodsmith mine that could inform innovation elsewhere: integrating sustainability into design from the outset, and engaging communities early and meaningfully in the process. She reiterated Anglo American’s commitment to contributing to a more efficient, resilient agricultural system and expressed the company’s intention to remain part of the conversation for the long term.

Mark closed the session by thanking the panellists for their contributions and the audience for a lively and thoughtful debate.