Processing Power, Not Acreage, Will Decide Hemp’s Future in Europe

Inside Europe’s bast-fibre mills, optimism about hemp often ends at the loading bay. Bales arrive in volumes that suggest a new industrial era, yet few lines are ready to handle them. Machines built for flax clog under thicker stalks; spinners complain about inconsistent fibre length and moisture; and mill operators prioritise flax because it offers steadier margins. For all the talk of innovation, much of the hemp entering the system still depends on borrowed infrastructure.

Valentine Donck, Project Manager for Bio-based Textiles at Valbiom, describes the imbalance clearly. “It’s true that European hemp acreage has increased—for example, around 2,000 hectares of long-fibre hemp have been cultivated annually in France over the past two years. But cultivation is only the starting point: turning hemp straw into high-quality yarn requires several complex steps. … At present, processing capacity remains the bottleneck.” She notes that scutching units are often reluctant to handle hemp because it is technically more demanding than flax. Retting quality, baling uniformity and line adjustments all determine whether a run succeeds—and each failure raises costs.

The numbers reinforce Donck’s argument. Across the continent, only about a dozen plants are equipped for large-scale decortication, and just six perform cottonisation. The remainder of Europe’s crop feeds into small regional facilities that operate intermittently or process short fibre for non-woven uses. Even when fibre is produced, consistency is elusive: processors report variations in stalk diameter, retting adhesion and fibre fineness from one harvest to another. Without uniform inputs, spinners blend multiple seasons or import part of their supply from China, which dominates global hemp refining capacity.

Sophie Waegebaert, Croop Researcher at Inagro, adds a complementary view from the field. “I only have knowledge about the market in Western Europe (France, Belgium, The Netherlands). In this region, a well-established flax value chain is present. Flax growers are also interested in hemp for the production of long fibre. However, we see that, although we have the knowledge and the machines, we notice that demand for hemp fibres and yarns is low. … So before we can talk about minimal market guarantees we still need more experience with hemp in my opinion.” Her observation connects mill reluctance to market hesitation: production stops where predictable orders end.

At Lin et Chanvre Bio, Nathalie Revol explains how adaptation is advancing. “In Europe, water retting is prohibited. Field retting does not pose any ecological problems, but it can only take place in areas where there is alternating rain and sun in August, which is why textile hemp for long fibre originates in the same geographical area as flax.” That restriction limits where high-grade hemp can be produced and processed. Fibre mills cluster accordingly in Northern France, Flanders and the Netherlands — areas with both the climate and the expertise to manage retting windows.

As a result, the economic effect is stark. European-processed hemp costs more than imported fibre from Asia because labour, energy and regulatory compliance raise unit prices. Factories that could modernise face a financial Catch-22: low volumes discourage investment, while the lack of investment keeps volumes low. The obvious result is a loop of under-capacity that policy alone cannot break. Even EU-funded programmes struggle to translate pilot lines into commercial operations. As long as mills depend on modified flax equipment and a patchwork of local cooperatives, Europe’s processing sector will remain the weak link in an otherwise promising chain.

For now, every bale of stalk arriving at a mill is a small-scale experiment. Some end as fine fibre; many return to storage or are diverted to insulation and composites. The continent has proved its capacity to grow hemp, but the machines to turn that growth into industry remain few and fragile. Without reliable processing infrastructure, Europe’s hemp revolution will stay literally half-finished — a crop without a factory floor.

Europe’s hemp revival narrative is increasingly becoming an engineering story. Agronomy can explain how hemp grows, but only technology can determine whether it becomes a textile fibre. There’s no disputing that. Across the flax belt of northern France and Flanders, research teams and cooperatives are designing machines and processes to bridge the stubborn gap between field and factory—turning what was once artisanal into something replicable and industrial.

Revol, Hemp Project Manager at Lin et Chanvre Bio, recalls how incremental advances can shift an entire sector. “Our work resulted in the construction of a prototype of mowing tool in 2021 that allows the stems to be paralleled to the ground for uniform field retting on a flax model. This year there were 1,700 hectares in France with 20 mowers in operation across the territory. Then the hemp is scutched on linen scutch lines into long fibres for wet spinning.” The mower might appear modest, but its design solves a long-standing problem—aligning stems to the ground so that retting is even. Such precision can make the difference between fibre that spins and fibre that shreds.

Revol’s work underscores how progress in hemp processing often follows the flax template, adapting proven systems to new material demands. Retting, the biochemical process that loosens fibres from woody stalks, has traditionally relied on alternating rain and sun—a method that limits production to narrow climatic zones. Researchers are now testing microbial and enzymatic alternatives that shorten retting time, reduce environmental dependence and deliver more consistent fibre quality. Advanced enzymes, developed from plant-degrading microbes, target the pectin layer that holds the bast fibre to the stem, effectively replacing weeks of field exposure with controlled bioreactors. Pilot studies in France and the Netherlands show that enzymatic retting can halve process times while improving softness and dye uptake.

Still, scaling up these methods is not that simple. Enzymatic retting requires precise temperature control, water management and post-treatment filtration—facilities that small cooperatives often lack. The technology is therefore concentrated in research projects such as Hemp4Circularity, which brings together growers, scutchers and spinners to standardise fibre specifications. The consortium’s pilot lines demonstrate how mechanical innovation and biological treatment can work in tandem: combining prototype mowing tools with enzymatic retting and adapted scutching lines. But these integrated systems remain exceptions in a continent still dominated by retrofitted flax plants.

Revol points out that even with better tools, hemp’s technical difficulty persists. “As flax, hemp is much more difficult to spin than cotton and polyester. Spinning long fibres is very labour-intensive and, moreover, the tool allowing mechanisation for a quality long fibre did not exist and was created with few financial means; the polyester and cotton lobbies are very powerful. But now that the tool exists, we hope that the new sector will grow.” Her comment highlights both progress and fragility: invention without capital can only move so fast.

Investment remains that proverbial final barrier. EU programmes such as the Circular Bio-based Europe Joint Undertaking fund demonstration plants and composite research, but commercial adoption still depends on private mills willing to retrofit or rebuild their lines. For now, Europe’s hemp revolution runs on prototypes—machines that prove the concept but not yet the scale. Each advance brings the field a little closer to the factory, yet the distance remains measurable in missing equipment.

Europe’s attempt to rebuild its hemp-processing capacity now depends on research consortia rather than commercial mills. While the private sector remains cautious, public–private projects have become the backbone of technical progress — connecting farms, labs and pilot plants across the region. They serve as incubators for the industrial methods that commercial investors still consider too risky. Among them, Hemp4Circularity stands out as a rare example of a complete value-chain experiment: from field trials to fabric development.

Donck explains the role of this research network. “It’s important to recognise that lifecycle assessments for long-fibre hemp are still at a very early stage. Within Hemp4Circularity, we are collecting the data needed to calculate a Product Environmental Footprint (PEF). But for results to be reliable, data must cover several years and multiple regions—which is challenging when only a few hectares are cultivated today. This is why we believe it is too early to draw definitive conclusions about the environmental profile of European long-fibre hemp. The role of Hemp4Circularity is precisely to build that evidence base, so we can move beyond simplistic ‘green narratives’ and provide robust, transparent data that reflect both benefits and trade-offs.”

Her argument connects science to strategy. Hemp’s market credibility depends not only on its technical performance but also on verified environmental metrics. The PEF system Donck mentions is part of the EU’s broader sustainability-accounting framework. By quantifying carbon balance, water use and land impact, projects like Hemp4Circularity aim to convert anecdotal claims into defensible evidence. That evidence, in turn, shapes investment confidence: mills are more likely to modernise when certification systems guarantee a premium market.

Other EU initiatives reinforce the same logic. The Circular Bio-based Europe Joint Undertaking (CBE JU) finances demonstration-scale projects such as SSUCHY-Next, which focuses on circular composites made from hemp and flax for use in automotive and wind-turbine applications.

The ambition is to prove that natural fibres can substitute synthetics not only in clothing but also in high-value industrial sectors. Meanwhile, the LIFE Programme continues to fund pilot insulation materials combining recycled paper and hemp fibres, aligning with the EU’s Circular Economy Action Plan. Together, these programmes create a distributed research ecosystem where innovation is sustained even without strong commercial uptake.

The challenge, however, is converting experimentation into permanence. Pilot projects can showcase feasibility but rarely reach operational scale once funding ends. Researchers point to gaps in capital continuity, skilled labour and downstream buyers. Each successful trial still relies on temporary partnerships rather than market demand. Yet resilience is emerging through accumulation: every project leaves behind data, equipment and trained staff that become part of a slowly thickening industrial base.

The long-term outlook, therefore, depends on Europe’s ability to link its research infrastructure to business models. If the current momentum continues, future mills could emerge not from corporate investment but from the laboratories and pilot lines built under EU grants. Hemp4Circularity’s quiet achievement is precisely that—proving that progress can occur even when profit remains distant. In a sector defined by scarcity, knowledge itself has become the most durable form of capital.