The transition to more plant-based protein consumption is widely recognized as essential for both sustainability and public health. While food producers are introducing more plant-based options and consumers are showing increased interest, the role of government in driving this change remains unclear. Should policymakers take a more active stance, or can the transition succeed without stronger government intervention?

The Current Landscape

The protein transition is often framed as a dual opportunity: improving public health and reducing environmental impacts. In 2023, the Dutch Health Council explicitly recommended shifting toward more plant-based diets, citing the benefits for both personal health and the planet. However, current government policies lag behind these ambitions.

Lara Sibbing, Program Manager at Transitiecoalitie Voedsel, notes a lack of targeted action: “There’s no real policy framework for the protein transition itself. Instead, agricultural policy still focuses on maximizing production, much of which is animal-based. While the government has set a goal for 50% of consumed protein to be plant-based by 2030, we are still at 42%.”

The Dutch National Protein Strategy (NES), introduced in 2020, aimed to reduce dependency on imported proteins and encourage local innovation. While the strategy acknowledges the importance of consumer acceptance and product development, critics argue that progress has been slow and uneven.

Challenges in Policy and Implementation

The government has tools at its disposal to drive the protein transition, ranging from public awareness campaigns to more interventionist policies, such as true pricing (factoring environmental costs into food prices) or restricting marketing for animal-based products. The Nuffield Intervention Ladder outlines these options, ranging from “soft” measures like information campaigns to “hard” measures like regulating the availability of animal-based foods.

Hans Dagevos, a researcher at Wageningen University, observes that the Dutch government currently focuses on the lower rungs of the ladder, such as monitoring and consumer information. “While public awareness campaigns like the Nutrition Center’s ‘Eetwissel’ are valuable, they’re insufficient on their own. A true mix of softer and harder policies—like those used in anti-smoking campaigns—is needed to achieve meaningful change.”

Innovation and Technology as Catalysts

Beyond dietary shifts, the protein transition also hinges on technological innovation, such as precision fermentation and cultivated meat. The Dutch government has allocated funds to develop cellular agriculture and biotech applications, including €60 million for cellular agriculture research and €248 million for biotech commercialization projects.

However, Annemiek Verkamman of Hollandbio notes a disconnect between the ambition and the execution: “The government acknowledges biotechnology’s importance, but regulatory hurdles and lack of clarity hinder progress. You can’t accelerate innovation while simultaneously pressing the brakes.”

The Role of Europe

Dutch policy is also shaped by European frameworks, which aim to create a level playing field for all member states. For example, the EU has the power to set stricter import standards for products like soy, supporting local protein production. However, Europe’s regulatory environment for novel foods, such as cultivated meat, remains slow and cumbersome, further delaying market adoption.

What Needs to Change?

Experts agree that the government must take a stronger leadership role in the protein transition. Sibbing argues for measures that actively shape consumer choices, such as making plant-based options the default in public institutions. “Small changes, like defaulting to vegetarian meals while keeping meat as an option, can normalize plant-based eating without reducing consumer freedom.”

Dagevos highlights the importance of clear government direction: “When the government sets ambitious goals and leads by example, it signals to the private sector that the transition is a priority. This inspires confidence in supply chains and accelerates change.”

A Shared Responsibility

While businesses and advocacy groups have driven much of the progress so far, the government’s role is pivotal in creating an environment where plant-based eating becomes the norm. Whether through subsidies for innovation, regulatory adjustments, or public awareness campaigns, the government has the tools to act.

For now, the burden remains with businesses, regions, and advocacy groups to keep the transition moving forward. The question is no longer whether the protein transition will happen, but how quickly—and whether the government will lead, follow, or stand aside.