Growth in the food and beverage processing equipment market remains steady after a boom following the COVID-19 pandemic, according to new research from the Food Production Solutions Association (FPSA) and PMMI, the Association for Packaging and Processing Technologies.

The organizations, which have long published parallel industry reports, have joined forces to publish the "2026 Processing State of the Industry Report," which offers food manufacturers and original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) an overview of market performance and a glimpse at what to expect going forward, says FPSA President and CEO Chris Lyons.

“There is a good deal of overlap in our memberships, and they both want the same thing — some headlights into how prices are moving, where to find growth opportunities and what are the big risks they have to factor into planning,” Lyons says. 

Lyons, who says he appreciated the interview data incorporated into PMMI’s State of the Industry report, was interested when PMMI CEO Jim Pittas suggested their associations collaborate on the this year’s joint report, as well as future editions.

“We worked with (Pittas’) research team to identify FPSA members to survey and interview,” Lyons says. “I am very happy with the product, and I think FPSA members will find it (to be) an excellent membership value.”

FOOD ENGINEERING recently asked Lyons to provide background on the collaboration and to give an overview of the top insights. 

FE: What do you hope food manufacturers get from this research?

CL: We hope food and beverage manufacturers use this research as a decision tool — a way to prioritize and benchmark their own capital plans against a credible view of the market’s size, growth outlook and the key forces shaping equipment investment. Each year, this report establishes a baseline view of the U.S. processing machinery market, and it’s designed to help manufacturers understand where demand is strongest by sector and by equipment category, and how trends like workforce constraints, sanitation pressure, health-driven formulation shifts and AI-enabled inspection are influencing process strategy. 

I also think this is a valuable tool to be used by OEMs, food producers or private equity when looking at mergers or purchases of food industry firms. The report shows where growth has been and expected to be in the next several years.

FE: What do you hope OEMs get from this research?

CL: For OEMs, the goal is to provide market clarity and prioritization: where the dollars are, where growth is expected and what design attributes buyers are looking for. This report is meant to estimate size of the market and provide “directional insight into growth and investment trends” across industries and machine categories, so OEMs can align product roadmaps with high-growth end markets and competitive improvement in features driven by labor, sanitation and data/inspection requirements. 

FE: How would you characterize the food equipment market now that we’re past the post-COVID high?

CL: The market looks more steady — yet still positive. The research pegs 2025 U.S. food and beverage processing machinery shipments at $6.2 billion, with modest growth (~3.2%) over 2024, and projections continuing upward to about $6.7 billion by 2027. In other words, we’re past the surge, but the baseline remains strong and continues to grow, supported by structural drivers like automation, sanitation and efficiency investments. 

The U.S. continues to be the biggest market for food equipment. I keep hearing anecdotally about firms who don’t already have a U.S. footprint, investing to create one as they look for growth opportunities.

FE: How does food facility construction compare to equipment demand? How do you expect that to change over the next couple years?

CL: The report’s macro view highlights a gap between new facility construction and demand signals. Demand is higher than construction — facility construction lags broader order activity and equipment demand indicators. That pattern suggests caution in the near term. There is still a lot of uncertainty for any business with tariffs, inflationary pressure and skills shortages. Spending will remain focused on brownfield upgrades, line expansions and targeted modernization. I think construction will eventually catch up. 

Over the next couple of years, I’d expect equipment demand to remain supported by retrofits tied to labor automation and sanitation, with greenfield construction recovering more gradually as financing, lead times and project pipelines normalize. With technology changing rapidly, it’s hard to plan a greenfield project that might limit adoption of the next new thing.

FE: Looking at individual food sectors, where do you expect to see growth in equipment purchases? What is driving this growth?

CL: From the sector forecasts (2024–2030), several end markets stand out for stronger growth rates, including these which align with FPSA verticals:

• Animal feeds and pet food (~4.1% CAGR)
• Prepared foods (~4.8% CAGR)
• Dairy (~4.0% CAGR) 

In terms of current market share (2025), the largest sectors are meat and poultry (29.2%), prepared foods (14%), and dairy (12.4%). So, growth in prepared foods and dairy is especially impactful because you have a large percentage growth on an already large base.

What’s driving it: The report emphasizes structural drivers such as workforce shortages pushing automation, heightened sanitation/recall visibility and shifting consumer preferences toward simplified ingredients and higher protein density — all of which stimulate investment in new or upgraded processing capability. 

FE: Looking at types of machinery, where do you expect to see growth? What is driving it?

CL: By equipment type (2024–2030), the fastest-growing categories in the report’s forecast include:

• Inspection equipment (~4.0% CAGR)
• Liquid, paste and slurry processing (~3.7% CAGR)
• Specialized equipment (~3.7% CAGR)
• Forming, shaping and decorating (~3.8% CAGR)
• Material handling and conveyance (~3.1% CAGR) 

What’s driving it: Growth is being pulled by needs to (1) do more with fewer people (automation and intuitive controls), (2) strengthen quality monitoring/inspection and decision support, and (3) accommodate more complex products and sanitation demands — especially where higher SKU complexity and evolving formulations increase process variability. 

FE: What role do workforce challenges play in equipment design and purchasing?

CL: Workforce constraints are a primary constraint in processing, and they translate directly into both purchasing and machine design priorities. Buyers increasingly prioritize automation and equipment that reduces manual intervention. 

On the OEM side, “machine design” priorities include intuitive controls, less reliance on specialized internal engineering oversight, and smoother system integration because plants can’t assume they’ll have abundant skilled labor to run, maintain or reconfigure lines. Plants also, in general, have high turnover in service technicians, so they are looking to OEMs to provide technical support. This puts pressure on both the OEM and the processor to maximize up time and increase automation.

FE: How are shifting consumer preferences around health and wellness affecting process design and equipment purchasing?

CL: The report frames health and wellness as a major demand signal: consumer preferences are shifting toward simplified ingredients, higher protein density and perceived nutritional quality. That drives changes in formulation and product mix, which in turn affects process design — often requiring greater flexibility, tighter control and sometimes new processing approaches or equipment upgrades to handle different inputs and quality expectations. 

FE: With greater visibility around recalls, how does sanitation and food safety factor into equipment design and purchasing?

CL: Yes, recall visibility is rising — and that is a risk to the brand name. Look at Boar’s Head’s issues in 2024. The more complex the mixture of ingredients is for a particular food, the greater the risks around food safety. And formulations are getting more complex. So, sanitation and food safety are increasingly central to equipment decisions because changes can introduce new sanitation challenges. 

The report highlights the importance of hygienic design, cleanability and repeatable sanitation workflows, which pushes buyers toward equipment upgrades and system designs that build sanitation in from the start rather than treating it as an add-on. 

FE: What would you like to see happen in the food processing equipment market over the next five years?

CL: I’d like to see the market move to accelerate solutions for the issues outlined in the report. Higher-performance, easier-to-operate systems that address the core structural pressures identified in the research:

1. More automation that is practical and scalable for existing mid-sized plants — not just large greenfield projects.
2. Hygienic-by-design equipment becoming the default, with faster, more repeatable sanitation and better documentation.
3. Broader adoption of data monitoring and inspection enhancement (AI used as decision support) to reduce defects, improve traceability and increase uptime without overpromising autonomous control where risk is high.
4. Continued progress on efficiency and sustainability, particularly around water, energy and waste reduction that makes business sense operationally. 

FE: Beyond the research report, are FPSA and PMMI planning further collaboration?

CL: Yes, in addition to the report and infographic, FPSA and PMMI have a companion interactive dashboard for the report. It provides more granular, filterable access to the dataset (by machine type, subcategory and industry), enabling tailored queries depending on the users’ needs.

Beyond research, I am also interested in seeing if there are synergies between the training PMMI offers and our Food Industry Technician (FIT) training program. There may be a path for continuing education of our FIT grads by partnering with PMMI on some of their training.

FE: Is there anything else you’d like to add?

CL: First of all, big thanks to the FPSA and PMMI members who participated in generating data for this report. Both organizations hope it is welcomed as a valuable tool for their business planning and decision making. 

This is, in a sense, a baseline — a shared, broad, fact-based report the industry can use to make better decisions. That’s valuable. However, future editions may refine that value with deeper segmentation, trend analysis and greater survey response from both of our memberships. 

Lastly, the throughline across the report is that processing investment is being shaped less by short-term cycles and more by structural realities: labor constraints, sanitation/recall expectations, and the need for better monitoring and operational efficiency. Those drivers are why the market can be “modest growth” today yet still point to a steady expansion outlook. Food production and packaging is a really robust industry. It’s good news for the industry as a whole.