Plant-Based Proteins Are Too Expensive

Plant-Based Proteins Are Too Expensive

User Rating: 5 / 5

Star ActiveStar ActiveStar ActiveStar ActiveStar Active
 

The global food system is reeling from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the reverberating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and devastating droughts across Africa, India, and the Middle East

. Looking to the future, a warming climate threatens to reduce crop yields worldwide, while unpredictable severe weather will introduce many opportunities for localized crop failures and supply chain disruptions. One of the best ways to strengthen the globalized food system is to reduce our reliance on its most inefficient and highest-emitting sector: animal agriculture. 

Consider that, amid a critical shortage of grain, which threatens to destabilize entire economies in the Middle East and beyond, the global animal agriculture sector uses one-third of the world’s supply. Only a fraction of that is converted into edible protein. This contributes to global food insecurity by pushing prices for grains and other crops used as animal feed higher than they would be

But while a systemwide transition to alternative proteins would benefit people and the planet, it is not inevitable. Moreover, it will not proceed rapidly enough on its own to counteract the dangers of a changing climate and growing demand for protein.
Right now, the primary obstacles to wider uptake of alternative proteins are that they cost too much and don’t taste as good as conventional meat. Importantly, the key to scaling these innovative protein technologies is emphatically not government action to replace, restrict, or disincentivize animal products in the marketplace. Nor is it browbeating and moralizing to consumers. Rather, what’s needed is concerted government action to accelerate the innovations needed to reduce costs and improve how these proteins taste. 

In this respect, too, the state of alternative proteins today is comparable to that of renewable energy. Renewable energy was once generally more expensive than fossil fuels. Now in many, maybe even most, parts of the world, wind and solar are actually cheaper than new fossil fuel power plants. That same rapid innovation is transforming the transport sector, with electric vehicles moving into the mainstream. While the private sector deserves the bulk of the credit for innovation in these sectors, government policies—such as public research and development and tax credits—have been important factors, too. To make alternative proteins less expensive, that sector needs the same type of government action. Crucially, creating new financial incentives for alternative proteins would merely level the playing field with livestock production, which receives considerable subsidies in many countries. New policies encouraging innovation would expand consumer choice and speed consumer acceptance.

 
In addition, on the supply side, governments need to help alternative protein producers scale up production to meet burgeoning demand. While alternative protein production is much more efficient and scalable than conventional animal agriculture, programs to fund, finance, and insure early capital expenditures are needed to help the industry increase production capacity rapidly.

What specific policies are most needed? To make progress, countries should take four steps. 

First, governments should begin a concerted and well-funded research effort aimed at making alternative proteins taste as good or better and cost the same or less as traditional animal proteins. Funding public, open-access research that benefits the entire sector can address the industry’s biggest technical challenges, inspire additional research, and create new opportunities for growth. As detailed in the Good Food Institute’s forthcoming State of Global Policy Report, the U.S. government has to date allocated only $25 million to alternative protein research, compared with $473 million in animal agriculture research in 2019 alone. Governments should at the very least provide the same funding for alternative proteins. Even better would be if they allocated funding for alternative protein research on the scale that they provide to other major innovation priorities, such as renewable energy. 

Protein innovation can be the next big step that nations take toward a vibrant, secure, and green economy. 

Second, strategic incentives—investment tax credits, loan guarantees, demonstration projects, and other forms of financial support—have catalyzed explosive growth in the renewable energy sector and can stimulate similar progress for alternative protein infrastructure. As with renewable energy, the key challenge to systemic reform is the vast scale of production that will be required on a short timeline. The Good Food Institute has done modeling on capital requirements for plant-based and cultivated meat, and it’s clear that setting up factories and building out the infrastructure for alternative protein production would profit from government incentives similar to those that were essential to the growth of renewable energy and electric vehicles. More specifically, government investment assistance will help alternative protein companies purchase or lease expensive processing equipment or manufacturing facilities for a lower cost than is available via private equity financing. 

  With its planet-friendly protein, Farmless wants to dramatically outperform animal agriculture

Third, a switch to alternative proteins can revitalize rural economies by bolstering rural manufacturing and food processing—so long as policymakers prioritize training for the alternative protein technical workforce. For example, programs could train existing agricultural and meat processing workers to transition from conventional to alternative protein manufacturing, while public-private partnerships could be used to create apprentice programs for alternative meat production facilities. 

Finally, governments should pursue multilateral R&D partnerships among leading countries that will advance global alternative protein science. Mission Innovation, a multinational partnership that works to accelerate innovation on clean energy, should expand its scope to include alternative proteins, or a similar but parallel initiative should be created. Climate Advisers and the Good Food Institute, with which we are affiliated, are calling on nations participating in this alliance to mobilize a combined $10.1 billion a year toward alternative protein research and commercialization by 2025—the amount needed to scale alternative proteins to meet their food security and climate potential. Also at the international level, alternative proteins should be integrated within the Agriculture Innovation Mission for Climate, an initiative currently led by the United States and the United Arab Emirates to reduce agricultural emissions through innovation. The more than 40 nations that have signed on to this effort should embrace collective goals on alternative proteins.

As the world grows, develops, and warms, our reliance on conventionally produced animal protein increases food prices, makes our food system more vulnerable, and exacerbates climate change. And with demand for meat set to rise inexorably for decades, these external costs will only increase. The growth of renewable energy and the emerging success of electric vehicles have shown that the global economy can transition in ways that spur economic growth, create new jobs, and add choices for consumers. Moreover, as growing demand for electric vehicles makes clear, this transition can happen even in the face of long-standing cultural preferences. With strong domestic leadership and global cooperation, protein innovation can be the next big step that nations take toward a vibrant, secure, and green economy.