Invest-NL warns Dutch food biotech could lose ground as companies struggle to finance commercial production

The Netherlands risks losing ground in food biotechnology because companies cannot secure the financing, production access and customer commitments needed to turn scientific advances into commercial businesses, according to a new Invest-NL report. Without intervention, it estimates the Dutch share of the global biotech ingredients market could fall from approximately 3% today to around 1% by 2040.

• Invest-NL warned that Dutch biotech ingredients companies faced declining global market share.
• Financing, infrastructure access and customer commitments constrained commercialization.
• The report recommended coordinated support for industrial production.

Published on October 30, Deep Dive Agrifood Biotech calculated that Dutch biotech ingredients and food applications could generate approximately €8 billion (US$8.9 billion) in annual revenue by 2040 under improved conditions. Under current policies, it expects revenues of around €2 billion (US$2.2 billion).

The category covers fermentation-derived ingredients, upcycled food streams and cultivated meat. The figures are scenarios rather than guaranteed outcomes, with the report acknowledging substantial uncertainty about future adoption and market growth.

Across its three areas of research, which also included seed breeding and biological agricultural inputs, Invest-NL identified approximately €17 billion (US$18.9 billion) in potential additional annual Dutch revenue by 2040.

For food ingredient developers, however, the report’s central finding was that scientific capability and early investment were not consistently translating into industrial production. Regulatory delays, uncertain demand, difficult access to suitable facilities and unsuitable financing models reinforced one another.

“The science is becoming increasingly effective. The real challenge is financing the journey to commercial scale,” said Corjan van den Berg, Co-founder of Revyve, in the accompanying announcement. “Venture capital alone is not enough. Scaling food biotech also requires loans, guarantees and grants to make the transition to industrial-scale production.”

The research drew on more than 150 interviews and stakeholder discussions, alongside investment data covering 2010 to April 2026. It examined market demand, capital, infrastructure, regulation, talent and collaboration across each value chain.

For ingredients, Invest-NL recommended concentrating on differentiated, higher-value products and specialized bioprocessing. It argued that the Netherlands was unlikely to compete structurally on low energy prices, inexpensive feedstocks or production volume.

Its advantages instead included fermentation science, process engineering, food application expertise and proximity to established ingredient manufacturers and customers. The report identified companies including FrieslandCampina, dsm-firmenich, Corbion, Cosun and Unilever as potential customers, investors and industrial partners.

That assessment did not translate into a recommendation to manufacture everything domestically. Invest-NL argued that commercial production should sit within competitive European value chains, with facilities located where the economics were strongest. Retaining knowledge, companies and strategically important activities remained the priority.

A particularly difficult stage was financing the first commercial facility. Projects could require tens or hundreds of millions of euros while retaining technical and operating risks that conventional lenders were unwilling to accept.

At the same time, companies often lacked the predictable revenues needed to support debt. Production volumes remained too small to secure substantial customer contracts, leaving businesses caught between successful pilot work and commercial manufacturing.

The report found that the Dutch ingredients funding base remained active at early stages, with more than half of completed transactions occurring at seed stage. Capital was concentrated in Series A and Series B rounds, while later growth funding was limited and debt financing remained almost absent.

Existing public instruments did not necessarily resolve that problem. Eligibility criteria, departmental policy boundaries and state-aid requirements could prevent otherwise relevant funding from reaching companies.

Invest-NL specifically identified restrictions associated with the EU’s “undertaking in difficulty” rules. Businesses accumulating losses during lengthy development periods could encounter barriers precisely because they had not yet reached commercial production.

The report recommended reviewing existing instruments before establishing new ones, including whether their requirements adequately reflected biotech development timelines and benefits spanning different policy areas.

Its proposed financing approach also required commitments from industry. Technology developers, industrial operators and customers should form project groups that shared technical, execution and commercial risks. Where feasible, operators and customers should invest alongside projects rather than provide contracts alone.

Public guarantees, blended finance and patient capital could then address the remaining demonstrable financing gap. Invest-NL emphasized that public support should follow credible technical, operational and market commitments rather than replace them.

Customer demand presented another complication. Large food manufacturers faced qualification, supply and product launch risks of their own, making them reluctant to commit firm purchasing volumes years before a supplier had demonstrated commercial production.

The report therefore questioned whether fully binding, long-term purchase agreements should be treated as the only credible evidence of demand.

Instead, it recommended building commercial evidence progressively through application testing, paid trials, joint development agreements, customer qualification and conditional volume commitments. Financiers should recognize those intermediate steps when assessing projects.

For more standardized ingredients, purchasing coalitions or launch-customer programs could bring demand from several buyers together. The report proposed testing this approach on two or three projects, potentially through existing industry groups such as AB4S.

It also distinguished between early and eventual customers. Smaller and medium-sized food manufacturers could often move faster on testing and initial adoption, while multinational companies offered larger volumes but typically required longer qualification processes.

Ingredient developers would benefit from working with both groups in parallel, establishing early commercial evidence while preparing for larger customers’ requirements.

That evidence needed to extend past environmental claims. The report identified functionality, nutrition, taste, consistency and supply resilience as reasons for adoption, alongside competitive costs.

Ease of use was equally significant. Even a technically strong ingredient could struggle commercially if customers needed substantial equipment investment, formulation changes or adjustments across several internal functions.

On infrastructure, Invest-NL challenged the assumption that the answer was simply to build more pilot facilities. Overall pilot capacity was not the main constraint, it found.

Companies instead struggled to access equipment suited to their processes at the right time and an affordable price. Existing capacity could remain underused because it was too expensive or technically unsuitable, while specialized capabilities were unevenly distributed across Europe.

The recommendation was to improve access and utilization, coordinate facilities and fund sustainable operations, while investing selectively in genuine gaps.

Shared facilities should operate as a coordinated national resource connected to complementary European infrastructure. Potential measures included vouchers or innovation funding to help companies afford access, with investment decisions supported by credible plans for operating costs and utilization.

Equipment access alone was insufficient. Companies also needed experienced operators capable of transferring processes, running repeated production campaigns and managing performance. Invest-NL recommended stronger connections between shared facilities, commercial operators and contract development and manufacturing organizations.

Regulation remained another source of cost and uncertainty. The report described European novel food approval trajectories lasting two to six years or longer, adding approximately one to three years compared with the United States and encouraging some companies to prioritize US market entry.

It recommended better guidance before applications were submitted, stronger regulatory expertise and more predictable procedures. Regulatory sandboxes could support controlled testing and learning while maintaining food safety standards.

“The Netherlands is well positioned to lead in agrifood biotech, but this opportunity will not wait,” said Jellie Banga, Chief Business Officer at Invest-NL, in the accompanying announcement.

“New technologies need regulators willing to authorise them, farmers willing to test them, consumers and food companies willing to buy them, and investors willing to finance them. Making this happen requires collaboration across the entire value chain.”

The report assigned Invest-NL a leading role in developing financing solutions with technology developers, operators, customers and public and private financiers. Its proposed first steps included identifying where current instruments failed to reach companies and developing a common approach to validating industrial projects before financing.

Meta description: Invest-NL warns Dutch food biotech could lose global market share as financing gaps, infrastructure access and uncertain demand delay commercial production.

If you liked this, check these out...‍

• Revyve targets whey alternatives with yeast protein for shakes and bars‍

• The Protein Brewery extends winning streak with €18 million funding boost ahead of European launch‍

• The Netherlands bets big on alt-protein infrastructure as two new scaleup facilities open their doors