I notice that one of the UK grants for alernative proteins which you cite says, “Cultured meat, insect-based proteins and proteins made by fermentation” (my emphasis). I find this quite concerning.
I didn’t previously realise the term “alternative proteins” includes insects. Has this always been the case? Is the definition contested or is a different term needed?
From the NAPIC website, they include Entocycle, “a world-leading provider of insect farming technology”, as one of their partners (though this may not be representative). Interestingly Entocycle do have two pages on insectwelfare.
Thanks for flagging that Hugh. I wavered on whether to include that grant given its inclusion of insect-based protein, which I agree is concerning.
Thankfully most alternative protein grants don’t include insects. (And, as CB points out, GFI doesn’t include insects in their definition.) But the term is increasingly contested, as insect producers—with the backing of the pet food and aquaculture industries that are their primary customers—are pushing for alt protein funds to cover them.
Insect based foods tend to apply to alternative protein grants—although the share of the insect market dedicated to meat substitutes is very small.
From what I’ve seen, The Good Food Institute doesn’t include insects in their definition of alternative proteins (since, well, they are animal proteins).
It also wouldn’t be very strategic to include insects in the list since they perform worse than plant based alternatives from an environmental and, most importantly, acceptability standpoint. I’m on mobile so I don’t have a source right now but it was from a Smetana 2023 paper on meat substitutes iirc.
I notice that one of the UK grants for alernative proteins which you cite says, “Cultured meat, insect-based proteins and proteins made by fermentation” (my emphasis). I find this quite concerning.
I didn’t previously realise the term “alternative proteins” includes insects. Has this always been the case? Is the definition contested or is a different term needed?
From the NAPIC website, they include Entocycle, “a world-leading provider of insect farming technology”, as one of their partners (though this may not be representative). Interestingly Entocycle do have two pages on insect welfare.
Thanks for flagging that Hugh. I wavered on whether to include that grant given its inclusion of insect-based protein, which I agree is concerning.
Thankfully most alternative protein grants don’t include insects. (And, as CB points out, GFI doesn’t include insects in their definition.) But the term is increasingly contested, as insect producers—with the backing of the pet food and aquaculture industries that are their primary customers—are pushing for alt protein funds to cover them.
Oh, that’s a good catch.
Insect based foods tend to apply to alternative protein grants—although the share of the insect market dedicated to meat substitutes is very small. From what I’ve seen, The Good Food Institute doesn’t include insects in their definition of alternative proteins (since, well, they are animal proteins).
It also wouldn’t be very strategic to include insects in the list since they perform worse than plant based alternatives from an environmental and, most importantly, acceptability standpoint. I’m on mobile so I don’t have a source right now but it was from a Smetana 2023 paper on meat substitutes iirc.