![[Translate to English:] Stefan Beuermann, UFOP](/fileadmin/images/DLG-Studien/Alternative-Proteine/Beuermann.png)
Marketing protein crops: structures and challenges
Demand for meat and dairy alternatives is growing in Germany, while protein crops are still cultivated on only a small proportion of arable land.
How is the market for protein crops in Germany structured?
The market for protein crops used in human nutrition is difficult to quantify. In 2025, the area planted with the main grain legumes amounted to approximately 276,000 hectares. This corresponds to around 2.5% of Germany’s arable land and is well below the target of 10% legume cultivation set out in the Federal Ministry’s protein crop strategy.
The current harvest volume of around 860,000 tonnes exceeds the needs of the food industry. Overall, the market for plant proteins in the food sector is often overestimated, while demand remains greatest in the animal feed sector.
![[Translate to English:] Stefan Beuermann, UFOP](/fileadmin/_processed_/8/f/csm_Beuermann_ba67cfbef3.webp)
Who are the key buyers in the processing industry?
Key players include the Emsland Group, Fava-Trading and Beneo. Around half of the peas processed into protein isolates are imported from other EU Member States, while Fava-Trading and Beneo rely entirely on contract farming in Germany.
Beneo is expanding its capacity but is currently facing sales challenges. At the same time, international competitive pressure is increasing—particularly from Chinese suppliers offering products at dumping prices and from Canada, which supplies high-quality products at comparatively low prices. This primarily affects protein isolates, whose production requires a great deal of energy.
Is there a need to expand cultivation in Germany?
Demand in the food sector is currently limited. Demand is considerably higher in the animal feed sector, for which the EU imports more than 30 million tonnes of soybeans every year. Germany has halved its import dependency by using rapeseed meal in animal feed, but it still relies on imported protein feed. Domestic soybeans have stable sales opportunities because ADM has established two processing lines for non-GM soybeans in Germany, with substantial capacity. For other grain legumes, however, price transparency and attractive market conditions are often lacking.
What marketing channels are available to farms?
Without contract farming, crops are generally marketed through agricultural traders, often at unattractive prices. Under these conditions, using the crops on the farm—particularly as animal feed—is frequently the most economically viable option. Grain legumes also have many positive effects on crop rotations.
What advantages does contract farming offer?
In principle, contract farming provides planning security through agreed prices and purchase volumes. In practice, however, the guaranteed quantities are often lower than the actual yields, and prices are only slightly above the level of the animal feed market.
What risks are associated with contract farming?
In the food sector in particular, additional requirements—such as restrictions on crop protection products—can increase production risks. These risks are not always adequately compensated. Contract farming tends to work more reliably in the animal feed sector, where agreements are generally based on a defined area and quality requirements are less stringent.
What approaches could strengthen cultivation and marketing?
The protein crop strategy is being implemented through various programmes and networks, including LeguNet, as well as numerous research projects. Producer organisations can also play an important role. They can pool larger volumes, standardise quality and thereby create better market conditions. Joint purchasing of farm inputs can also help reduce production costs.
What are the greatest structural challenges?
One major problem is the strong dependence of cultivation on support programmes. At the same time, farmers often benefit only to a limited extent from the value created, while processors and retailers achieve high margins. Low producer prices are sometimes justified by referring to support payments. This creates the paradoxical situation in which support does not primarily benefit farmers indirectly, but instead stabilises the downstream stages of the market.
From crop to protein: requirements for agricultural raw materials
Many farms are considering cultivating protein crops that can serve as the basis for producing alternative proteins for meat and dairy alternatives.
What are the key requirements for agricultural raw materials to be suitable for producing alternative proteins?
At the Bindewald & Gutting milling group—and therefore also at BiGuPro GmbH—we always consider the entire value chain, from sowing to delivery of the raw material. Along this chain, there are several requirements that make it easier for us as processors to produce an optimum ingredient.
One key quality requirement is the selection of the right variety. Only when we know the functional properties of a variety and their impact on the end product in detail can we ensure consistently high quality for our customers in the food industry.
In addition to selecting a variety for a specific application, keeping varieties separate is also crucial. Allergen-free production is another important aspect. Manufacturers of soy products, for example, often want to guarantee that their products are “gluten-free”. This means that not only our own handling is relevant; practices on the farm are important too: Have harvesting machines and storage containers been cleaned properly? Which preceding crops were transported?
Naturally, all food-law requirements must also be met. These include pesticide requirements, microbiological limits and mycotoxins, among other things. We inspect delivered crops very carefully because food safety is our top priority. If farmers follow the principles of good agricultural practice, this can generally be achieved. We also provide active support where needed, for example through our own crop advisers.
Do these requirements apply equally to protein crops such as peas, field beans, lupins, chickpeas and soybeans, or are there differences?
The requirements differ in certain respects depending on the crop. For soybeans, for example, moisture at harvest is crucial. Breakage should be avoided as far as possible in order to reduce lipid oxidation. Any subsequent drying—if carried out by the farmer—must also be performed particularly gently. The German Soybean Promotion Association provides useful guidelines for this purpose.
The challenges are different for peas and field beans: pest pressure is considerably higher, for example from pea moths or bean weevils. Depending on the variety, field beans may also contain antinutritional compounds. This means that the choice of variety must be considered particularly carefully in relation to the intended processing route.
Each crop therefore has its own specific characteristics and preferred marketing channels. Peas, for example, are often used in meat alternatives, where texturates are employed and the raw material consequently undergoes several processing steps. Soybeans, by contrast, are often found in more traditional, less processed products such as tofu or tempeh, but are also suitable for dairy alternatives. Requirements vary depending on the processing route, so it is always important to consider the system as a whole.
Which requirements are currently most difficult for farms to meet—and why?
To be honest, I have so far encountered very few farmers who were either unable or unwilling to meet the requirements we set. In the area of bread grains, for example, our arable farmers have been successfully growing wheat, spelt and rye of high quality and with good yields for years—in precisely the varieties required for specific flour qualities.
I see the challenge more in the fact that requirements for legumes are not always communicated or rewarded consistently, transparently and in an understandable way. If farmers do not know early enough which variety they should grow or which parameters they need to consider during harvesting and storage, uncertainty arises. The crop may perform well—or it may not meet the requirements and have to be sold at a lower price.
Economic incentives also play a central role. Why should a farmer harvest soybeans at a higher moisture content if the drying costs are charged entirely to them? Or why should they accept lower yields if a higher-quality variety does not receive a better price on the commodity market? The economic situation of farms must therefore be taken into account.
What should farms consider when growing protein crops to ensure that the raw material is suitable for producing alternative proteins?
It is crucial to clarify the following questions at an early stage: Who is my buyer? What will the crop be used for? How will it be processed? And what requirements result from this along the entire value chain?
The greatest risk is that a farmer grows a crop with considerable effort and then cannot find a buyer or suffers economic losses. Cultivation can therefore only succeed through cooperation between all the stakeholders in the chain.
In recent years, however, I have found the industry increasingly open to this kind of dialogue. More and more projects are being established that involve all stakeholders along the value chain. Food processors and retailers are also becoming increasingly aware that close cooperation with agriculture is essential.
This gives me cause for optimism. I believe we are moving towards a future in which the entire value chain works together in partnership—and in which growing legumes is also economically attractive and worthwhile for farmers.
Plant proteins in processing: technological challenges and advances
What technological challenges currently exist in processing plant proteins?
The challenges are diverse. One key task is to improve the functionality of plant proteins. Compared with animal proteins, they often have lower solubility and limited emulsifying and gelling properties. However, these characteristics are crucial for the texture, juiciness and stability of alternative products.
There is also a sensory challenge. Many protein crops, such as peas and field beans, contain flavour compounds that are perceived as “grassy”, “beany” or bitter. Texturisation is demanding as well: producing fibrous, meat-like structures requires precisely coordinated process conditions and depends heavily on raw-material quality and processing.
In addition, processing steps such as fractionation or thermal treatment can lead to denaturation or aggregation, thereby impairing functionality and nutritional value.
Finally, scalability and costs are also major challenges. Gentle processes are often expensive, while cost-efficient processes can affect product quality.
What requirements must the plant-based starting material meet?
First and foremost, it needs a high protein content with a balanced amino-acid profile. Good techno-functional properties—such as solubility, emulsifying capacity, and water- and oil-binding capacity—are equally important. The content of antinutritional compounds should also be as low as possible so that digestibility and functionality are not impaired. Raw materials with a largely neutral sensory profile are advantageous as well, because they reduce the processing effort required.
Other important criteria include high process stability and reliable availability of the raw material. Factors such as low allergenicity, regional sourcing and the avoidance of genetically modified raw materials are also becoming increasingly important.
Which protein crops are particularly suitable for processing?
The most important raw materials include soybeans, peas, field beans and lupins, as well as wheat, rice, oats, sunflower, hemp, potatoes and rapeseed. Soybeans remain the technological standard because of their functional properties and good processability. Peas are particularly relevant because of their low allergenicity and broad availability. Field beans and lupins are characterised by high protein contents and favourable amino-acid profiles, but they often have a distinctive sensory profile.
Wheat protein has very good viscoelastic properties and is particularly suitable for meat-like textures, but it is an allergen. Rice and oats are more suitable for dairy alternatives, usually in combination with other proteins. Sunflower and hemp offer interesting functional properties and a positive image, while potato protein is convincing because of its good gelling capacity. Rapeseed also has functional advantages, but presents sensory challenges.
Which raw materials are particularly challenging to process?
Some protein crops, such as field beans, lentils and chickpeas, contain higher levels of antinutritional compounds and have more pronounced off-flavours. In sunflower and rapeseed, polyphenols often result in darker colours and bitter notes. Oats also present challenges because their protein content is comparatively low and interactions with other ingredients can make processing more difficult. In general, difficulties often arise from complex raw-material matrices and the limited functionality of isolated proteins.
What are the current research priorities?
The focus is on new and gentler fractionation technologies that better preserve the native protein structure. Understanding structure–function relationships is equally important—in other words, how process parameters influence the properties of proteins. Intensive work is also under way on new texturisation processes, such as wet extrusion and innovative structuring approaches like fibre spinning. Fermentation and enzymatic processes are gaining importance as well, both to reduce off-flavours and to modify proteins in a targeted way.
Another focus is the combination of different protein sources in order to compensate for the functional weaknesses of individual raw materials. Overall, these developments aim to enable products that are convincing in sensory terms, nutritionally high-quality and economically viable—ideally with more regionalised value chains.
Success factors for meat and dairy alternatives from a consumer perspective
Many consumers still rarely or never consume meat and dairy alternatives. One frequently cited reason is that these products do not always meet their taste expectations.
What do consumers expect in terms of taste and texture?
Many consumers—particularly flexitarians—expect meat and dairy alternatives to offer a mouthfeel, bite and taste that come as close as possible to conventional products. For this broad target group, it is crucial that alternative products fit seamlessly into everyday life, without requiring changes in established routines, and provide familiar moments of enjoyment.
A similar use case plays a key role in acceptance. Oat milk, for example, is well accepted even though its taste differs from cow’s milk because it can be used in the same way—for instance in coffee. Overall, consumers’ willingness to switch increases significantly when products are sensorically convincing and integrate seamlessly into existing consumption habits.
At the same time, food is always about enjoyment, culture and responsibility. A sustainable transition will succeed when plant-based diets are perceived not as a sacrifice, but as an enrichment—in terms of taste, culture and health. This requires solutions that respect familiar eating habits while incorporating better ingredients, new production processes and balanced nutritional profiles.
Why do many products not yet fully meet these expectations?
Meat and dairy alternatives are based on entirely different raw materials, which naturally have their own sensory characteristics. Plant-based ingredients such as soybeans, peas and field beans often have distinctive flavour notes that do not disappear completely during processing. Bitter or “beany” off-flavours and different colours make it difficult to reproduce the familiar sensory profile of animal-based products.
What are the greatest technological challenges?
Texture is a key challenge. The aim is to use plant-based raw materials to create a structure that imitates the bite and mouthfeel of meat without making the product seem mushy. If the consistency or mouthfeel is not right, this is noticed immediately.
Appearance and aroma also play a decisive role in the eating experience. Differences are often judged negatively at an unconscious level because our perception is strongly shaped by experience. Taste therefore always results from the interaction of all the senses. Recipe development also involves a tension: achieving the desired sensory properties often requires complex formulations and therefore longer ingredient lists. This conflicts with many consumers’ desire for products with a natural, clean-label profile. At the same time, production processes differ significantly from those used for animal-based products, meaning that existing processes must be adapted or reconsidered.
Which new approaches are currently improving product quality?
There are many promising developments across the entire value chain. Plant breeding is increasingly focusing on varieties with improved functional and sensory properties. Projects at companies such as KWS and Veprona show that variety selection can deliver milder flavour profiles and better processing properties.
Fermentation is another important approach. It can reduce off-flavours while improving texture and juiciness. Initial products already show that clean-label solutions with convincing sensory properties are possible, for example from manufacturers such as Planted.
What role does technological development play in production?
Technology has also come a long way. Understanding of plant-based raw materials and their behaviour in different processes is continuously improving. Equipment manufacturers such as Handtmann and Multivac have further developed existing technologies and adapted them more closely to plant-based raw materials. Overall, the market is undergoing rapid change. The combination of breeding, new raw materials, fermentation and technological innovation is helping products to improve and meet consumer expectations more effectively.
Do stand-alone plant-based products without a meat or dairy equivalent have market potential?
In principle, alternative protein sources can also be used to develop stand-alone products with their own identity. At present, however, their market potential remains limited. For many consumers—especially flexitarians, who are a key target group—the departure from familiar products is still too significant. Such products are currently found mainly in the vegan or strongly plant-focused segment and tend to occupy niche markets. Products such as tempeh have become established to some extent, but they are mainly consumed by people who are already receptive to plant-based foods and are not yet part of the mainstream diet.
This could change in the long term. As plant-based diets become more widespread, people are also likely to become more open to new product categories. In the future, stand-alone plant-based protein products could therefore develop further and become more widely established.
Meat and Dairy Alternatives at Lidl in Germany
Meat and dairy alternatives have become an established part of the product range at many food retailers.
How important is the range of meat and dairy alternatives for a retailer such as Lidl in Germany?
A broad range of dairy and meat alternatives is highly important within Lidl’s product assortment in Germany. On the one hand, we are seeing growing demand for alternative products, particularly among younger consumer groups. We want to meet this demand with an attractive range, which is why we are continuously developing and expanding our offering. On the other hand, Lidl Germany is pursuing a clear sustainability strategy that also encompasses the composition of its product range. In this context, expanding the selection of plant-based foods plays an important role—and this includes the continued development of our range of dairy and meat alternatives.
Are there specific focus areas within the meat and dairy alternatives segment that play a particularly important role in business development at Lidl in Germany?
Overall, sales of dairy and meat alternatives have developed well. It is therefore difficult to single out individual product segments as being “particularly important.” Nevertheless, there are categories in which demand has increased especially strongly in recent times. Oat milk is one example: it has now become an established category within our product range.
Other areas still offer considerable growth potential, such as cheese alternatives. In terms of taste and appearance, these products do not yet always fully meet consumer expectations. Product quality therefore needs to be further improved.
What requirements must suppliers of meat and dairy alternatives meet?
Our suppliers’ products must meet our high quality standards in all cases. These include, in particular, requirements relating to taste, ingredients and nutritional values.
In addition, price parity with animal-based products is a key factor for us. A shopping basket containing plant-based alternatives should be less expensive than a comparable basket of animal-based products. This is an important element of our strategy.
Are there areas in which suppliers’ products still have potential for improvement? If so, what are they?
One important aspect for us is optimising the nutritional profile of plant-based alternatives. We therefore work closely with our suppliers on an ongoing basis to further improve the quality of our products. Vegan cheese is one example: at present, many consumers are still not fully convinced by its sensory qualities. To drive product development in this area, we organised a “vegan cheese competition,” among other initiatives.
Does Lidl Germany have any measures in place to encourage consumers to consume more meat and dairy alternatives instead of animal-based products?
Ensuring the price parity mentioned above is an important lever: alternative products should not be more expensive than comparable animal-based products. This creates a targeted incentive to consume plant-based alternatives.
In addition, we use a range of marketing measures to raise awareness of our products and encourage consumers to try them—from outdoor advertising and social media to entire campaigns, such as the campaign with Wigald Boning in summer 2026. We have also been participating in Veganuary for many years. In the Lidl Plus app, we regularly offer discounts on products from our private-label range.
What are Lidl Germany’s medium- to long-term plans in the area of meat and dairy alternatives? Will the range continue to expand?
Yes, we plan to continuously expand our offering in both the private-label and branded-product segments. We regularly launch new products. As we expect demand for meat and dairy alternatives to continue growing, while technological advances will enable new and improved products, we also anticipate further adjustments and expansions to our range in the future.
Plant-Based Proteins in the Diet: Opportunities, Limitations and Recommendations
How should the avoidance of foods of animal origin be assessed from a nutritional counselling perspective?
Many people want to make their diet healthier while also making it environmentally responsible—in other words, more sustainable. Reducing or avoiding foods of animal origin can be a first step in this direction. However, anyone who partially or completely eliminates entire food groups must adapt their diet accordingly to ensure an adequate supply of all essential nutrients. From a nutritional perspective, a balanced vegetarian diet is entirely feasible. A vegan diet, by contrast, requires well-founded nutritional knowledge, and supplementation of certain critical nutrients is generally advisable. Particular attention should also be paid to protein intake. It is not only the quantity of protein that matters, but above all its quality. Alongside carbohydrates and fats, proteins are one of the main nutrients and provide essential amino acids. Qualified nutritional counselling is therefore recommended in order to prevent nutrient deficiencies or an imbalanced diet.
How are nutrition professionals responding to the growing importance of plant-based protein sources? Have the recommendations changed?
The German Nutrition Society (DGE) already adapted its dietary recommendations in 2024, placing a stronger emphasis on plant-based foods. Since 2024, the—by now no longer entirely new—Food-Based Dietary Guidelines (FBDG) have been presented in a revised nutrition circle featuring segments of different sizes. The development of an evidence-based protein guideline is also part of these adjustments.
Legumes are increasingly becoming recognised as important sources of plant-based protein. Since pulses are still underrepresented in current diets, nutrition professionals recommend that their clients increase not only their consumption of vegetables and grains, but also—ideally—of locally grown legumes. Nuts and seeds are also becoming more important.
Do meat and dairy alternatives play a role in nutritional counselling?
Dishes based on legumes offer a good way of reducing the proportion of animal-based products while also adding greater variety to the diet. However, there are currently no specific recommendations for plant-based meat and dairy alternatives. Although their presentation and established consumption habits often suggest that they can be directly substituted for animal-based products, a differentiated assessment is necessary. For example, dairy alternatives made from legumes, grains or nuts can have nutritional profiles that differ considerably from those of their animal-based counterparts.
What developments can be expected in alternative protein products in the future?
It is currently difficult to predict how these products will develop. However, the food industry is highly innovation-driven and is working intensively on new products designed to make it easier to avoid foods of animal origin—without compromising nutritional value or sensory quality. It can therefore be assumed that the range and quality of such products will continue to increase.