The world has entered a period of acute geopolitical uncertainty, and Europe has responded with urgency. While it has acted on energy, defence and critical raw material supply chains, food security has remained largely absent from the wider resilience and preparedness agenda. This is a gap increasingly hard to justify. The EU’s food system carries dependencies every bit as concentrated as those in energy or critical materials, and any disruption would deepen the affordability challenges many households already face today. Soy is one of the most acute vulnerabilities. The EU imports roughly 91% of the soy protein it consumes, and sources the overwhelming majority from just three countries: Brazil, the United States and Argentina. Soy is the protein backbone of European livestock farming, and this concentration therefore has significant implications for the entire sector. Without access to imported high-protein meal, the EU would lose up to 40% of its livestock production capacity, with the steepest losses in pork, poultry and eggs. Soy disruption is not a hypothetical risk. In 1973, the United States abruptly embargoed soybean exports, jolting global markets and pushing other importers to secure their own supply. Europe did not, and half a century later the same concentration of dependency persists in a far more volatile world. The question today is whether Europe would be prepared when such a shock recurs.

Preparing for disruption is both possible and necessary, with protein diversification as a key lever to reduce our dependence on imported soy. This report sets out four practical strategies that span the full value chain to reduce that dependency. The first expands European protein crop production, growing more legumes and protein crops for feed and food. The second optimises circular feedstock use, redirecting safe, protein-rich agri-food side streams back into the food and feed system. The third scales innovative protein production, using biotechnologies such as advanced fermentation to add new protein that needs no soy. The fourth diversifies protein consumption, broadening the mix of protein sources across European diets. 

Three strategies act on supply and one on demand. To test how best to combine these strategies, the report models four scenarios against a set target: a 20% reduction in soy protein imports by 2035, equivalent to 3 Mt of protein. Scenario A is a business-as-usual baseline, reflecting current trends without additional intervention. It falls short of any meaningful import reduction, nor does it offer relief for the societal and economic challenges the EU already faces today. Scenario B concentrates effort on agriculture and circularity, Scenario C on innovation and consumption, and Scenario D spreads effort in a balanced way across all four strategies. 

Each of the three active scenarios is modelled towards the same soy import reduction target of 20%, with a subsequent analysis exploring which pathway is most realistic and delivers the greatest systemic benefits. Scenario D, the balanced path, proves the most feasible. Every strategy rests on levers with realworld limits: the land that can be turned over to protein crops, the agri-food side streams that can be safely repurposed for food and feed, the realistic growth of innovative protein production capacity, and the dietary change that can actually be sustained. Scenarios B and C hit the target only by pushing one or two of these levers beyond reach. The balanced scenario, however, reaches the same target with every lever working comfortably within its limits and no single strategy overburdened.