At the European Committee of the Regions plenary on 14 October 2026, the EU bioeconomy framework, the common market organisation for agricultural products and the EU school scheme highlighted a connected challenge: how can Europe combine competitiveness, responsible resource use, fair markets and opportunity for rural communities?<\/p>\n
I spoke in the debate on the common market organisation and school scheme. Separately, in preparing the bioeconomy opinion, I worked on the draft and put forward amendment AM 9 to point 18. These are distinct policy files, but each raises the importance of bringing territorial knowledge into European policy before decisions are finalised.<\/p>\n
A competitive and sustainable bioeconomy connects renewable biological resources and by-products with knowledge, processing, innovation and viable markets. Potential local opportunities include wool processing, more effective use of wood and food-industry by-products, and materials based on renewable resources. Such examples require feasibility assessments; they are not announced investments or guaranteed funding.<\/p>\n
AM 9 calls for county authorities and equivalent intermediate levels to be explicitly recognised as implementing partners, and for dedicated consultation mechanisms to connect their operational experience with future European coordination platforms and investment instruments. Counties do not replace producers, companies or researchers; they can connect them. A submitted amendment should not be confused with an adopted outcome.<\/p>\n
The common market organisation can strengthen producer cooperation, processing, storage, logistics and bargaining power. This matters particularly for smaller farms and mountain communities facing higher costs and more difficult access to markets. Fair producer income should reflect actual production costs and the additional standards farmers are asked to meet.<\/p>\n
I also supported the concern that common European objectives should not lead to unequal opportunities because Member States have different capacities to provide national cofinancing. Technical assistance, research, innovation and territorial participation in food security planning can help translate common rules into fairer outcomes.<\/p>\n
The EU school scheme should be more than periodic food distribution. It can combine access to healthy products, food education and opportunities for local producers. Local and regional authorities know the schools, farmers, distances, storage constraints and procurement challenges. Their involvement in programme design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation is essential.<\/p>\n
Small farms, short supply chains and recognised quality products need practical routes to participate. Local initiatives such as Harghita County\u2019s Kiskert\u00e9sz programme illustrate how children can learn the value of cultivation, food and work. Food education makes this connection more lasting.<\/p>\n
The next EU multiannual financial framework is still under negotiation, including the proposed role of national and regional partnership plans. This is the moment to identify territorial needs, not to promise automatic funding. Counties, municipalities, producers, schools, businesses, universities and research institutions should prepare sectoral visions, actionable partnerships and credible project pipelines.<\/p>\n
The first step is to map resources, demand and gaps in processing, logistics and skills. The next is to build pilot proposals with committed economic and research partners. The longer-term ambition is to connect territories across Europe through viable rural innovation and market opportunities.<\/p>\n
There should not be one Europe that designs and captures value and another that merely supplies resources and implements decisions. Competitive markets and cohesion belong together. The next generation will inherit not only infrastructure, but the trust, cooperation and practical opportunity we build today.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
At the European Committee of the Regions, I called for fair producer incomes, meaningful territorial participation and more value retained where resources are produced.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":2082,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[82,1,84],"tags":[108,107,109],"class_list":["post-2081","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cor","category-hirek","category-news","tag-agriculture","tag-bioeconomy","tag-rural-development"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2081","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2081"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2081\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2083,"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2081\/revisions\/2083"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2082"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2081"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2081"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cor.borbolycsaba.ro\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2081"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}