In 2026, Belarus is entering a new five-year phase of restructuring its agri-food sector. The state programme often rendered in English as “Agricultural Industry of the Future” or “Agro-Industrial Complex of the Future” (2026–2030) is intended to raise productivity, strengthen the resilience of the food system, and improve the competitiveness of Belarusian products on the domestic market and in exports.
According to government and agriculture-ministry communications, the programme is built around three consolidated indicators meant to organise priorities for 2026–2030: an increase of the industrial production index within the agriculture-ministry system by 15% over five years (i.e., to 115% for the period), maintaining an “integrated food security index” of at least 1 each year—understood as preserving self-sufficiency in ten key product groups (grains, milk, meat, sugar, vegetable oil, potatoes, vegetables, fruits and berries, eggs, and fish)—and a rise in labour productivity in agricultural organisations to 130% by 2030 compared with 2025 (measured in terms of gross value added).
In policy terms, this signals an attempt to shift growth away from a purely “extensive” model (more land and more labour) toward a “technological and managerial” one: better organisation, investment, and digital tools are expected to deliver higher output and stability without simply expanding inputs.
The programme is divided into ten sub-programmes that cover the entire value chain—from fields and livestock to water infrastructure, processing capacity, and digital solutions. The list includes measures for more efficient crop production, more intensive animal production, the development of aquaculture and fisheries, protection of agricultural land from flooding, land reclamation and water management on farmland, the development of the processing industry, mitigation of the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster in agriculture (targeting affected regions), support for smaller forms of farming, sector-wide digitalisation (including precision agriculture), and the sustainable development of agriculture—encompassing education, science, innovation, and crop-insurance instruments.
Two pillars stand out particularly strongly in the programme’s logic. The first is digitalisation and precision agriculture, with the ambition to introduce digital platforms and automated management systems and to “digitise processes comprehensively”—from soil analysis to the recording and accounting of harvests. If this translates into real investment in data, equipment, and skills, it could push farming toward a more “industrial” operational model: fewer losses, more accurate fertiliser and crop-protection planning, and more stable yields with similar resources.
The second pillar is the processing industry as a lever for higher value added and export capacity. The programme emphasises the expansion of deeper processing—especially in sectors such as dairy, meat, grains, and potatoes—aiming to move beyond raw-commodity exports toward products with higher margins and more predictable market access. In theory, processing can create better-paid jobs, stabilise demand for farm output, and support branding and quality standards—provided that quality control, logistics, and market channels develop in parallel.
On financing, official messaging refers to support for programme implementation amounting to 119.039 billion Belarusian roubles across 2026–2030. The programme is also presented as part of a broader architecture of state policies for 2026–2030, within which Belarus has approved dozens of sectoral state programmes spanning different areas of the economy and social policy. In the wider backdrop, international organisations also note Belarus’s stated focus on modernisation and diversification, including in agriculture and digital technologies.
What will determine whether this is genuine modernisation rather than an ambitious plan on paper are early, practical implementation tests in 2026–2027: whether measurable digital projects appear (platforms, data standards, regional rollouts of precision tools), whether investments in land reclamation and flood protection translate into more stable production, whether processing grows faster than raw output, and whether support for smaller farms becomes tangible through access to finance and technology rather than remaining declarative.
