Beff Cattle Farmer Economic Loss Cultured Beef

Introduction

Animal agriculture presents major sustainability challenges. Livestock production is associated with extensive greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, land use modify, freshwater consumption, and biodiversity loss (Machovina et al., 2015; Poore and Nemecek, 2018). Loftier rates of consumption of some creature products is associated with elevated man wellness risks (Ekmekcioglu et al., 2018). At the aforementioned fourth dimension, the animate being agriculture sector is a pregnant contributor to many economies, and animal production and consumption in many places is grounded in strong cultural and social traditions (Herrero et al., 2009). Global need for beast products is expected to increase dramatically in coming decades, as a part of both population growth and increased per capita consumption as individuals grow wealthier (Godfray et al., 2018).

Alternative meat (alt-meat) products are substitutes for creature meat products, made using innovative food technologies. Plant-based meat products mimic the gustation, texture, and gustatory feel of conventional meat, and tin part equally a direct replacement for meat merely contain no animal products (Cameron and O'Neill, 2019). The Impossible Burger and Beyond Burger are two of the brands to take first come to market, merely a multitude of other products and companies are becoming commercially available (Cameron and O'Neill, 2019). Cultured meat products are produced through a process of cellular agriculture, which grows products (variously referred to as "clean," "cell-based," "cultivated," or "lab-grown" meat) that are molecularly identical to conventional meat just produced through bioprocesses from beast cells extracted through biopsies (Specht et al., 2018; Mail et al., 2020) rather than through raising and killing livestock. Multiple companies have developed cellular agriculture products at pilot stages (Post, 2012). Commercialized production is predictable in the nearly-term, at least at a small-scale calibration.

If cultured and/or plant-based meat production reach a scale and price at which they are widely available and consumed, they could have significant environmental, social, and economic implications, presenting both opportunities and challenges. Starting time, alt-meat products could have a much smaller environmental footprint than many conventional animal meat products. Life cycle analyses propose that GHG emissions, state use, and water use could be lower than some animal meats for both plant-based (Goldstein et al., 2017; Heller and Keoleian, 2018) and cultured meat (Tuomisto and Teixeira de Mattos, 2011; Tuomisto et al., 2014; Tuomisto, 2019), and that constitute-based meat is likely to have a lower aggregate footprint than cultured meat (Santo et al., 2020). However, some LCAs suggest that energy demands could be much higher for cultured meat than animal meat (Mattick et al., 2015b; Tuomisto, 2019). Second, cultured and plant-based meat products could substantially reduce concerns nigh creature welfare in the meat production process. Third, cultured and institute-based meat products could confer public and individual wellness benefits, past reducing antibiotic utilise and lessening the likelihood of foodborne disease (Mayhall, 2019; Espinosa et al., 2020; Santo et al., 2020).

Finally, cultured and/or plant based meat production could have socio-economic implications for jurisdictions (i.east., countries, states, and provinces) with strong rural economies that depend on animal agronomics (Santo et al., 2020). On the one hand, they could alter the livelihoods, civilization, and traditions of rural producers and communities. At the aforementioned time, some jurisdictions may be able to create jobs and income past harnessing new economic opportunities associated with an emerging cultured and/or plant-based meat sector and their supply chains. These potential social and economic impacts of cultured and institute-based meat have received less attention specially equally they relate to rural communities (Stephens et al., 2018; Wide, 2020). Ranchers, farmers, and others involved both in beast agriculture and crop agronomics supply bondage may experience threats and as well new opportunities from the emergence of cultured and plant-based meat sectors at scale (van der Weele and Tramper, 2014; Stephens et al., 2018; Broad, 2020).

This paper addresses the research question: What are social and economic opportunities and challenges of cultured and plant-based meat for rural producers in the Us? The paper focuses on the Us: while these are potentially global transitions, the early plant-based meat products launched starting time in the Usa and the United states of america may be among the first places that cultured meat products are commercially produced and sold.

Methods

Information Collection

Nosotros conducted semi-structured interviews with 37 skillful informants. Interviewees included representatives of cultured meat companies, establish-based meat companies, non-profit organizations, funding agencies, governmental agencies, and the beef, soy, and pea sectors, too equally researchers and farmers (Tabular array 1). We aimed to go representation from a wide variety of perspectives, and identified interviewees in three ways: through our own networks of relevant contacts; by soliciting suggestions from two colleagues working in the establish-based and cultured meat sectors; and through snowball sampling whereby each interviewee was asked whether they had suggestions of other experts with whom it might exist useful to talk. In add-on to the 37 interviewees, we reached out to a further 27 people who for various reasons (eastward.g., declined, did non respond, were unavailable) we were unable to interview. We practice non have sufficient information to determine whether there were any meaning differences between those people that we interviewed and those that nosotros reached out to but did not interview. Amidst our interviewees, at that place were a larger number of individuals whose experience was in culling protein sectors than in conventional agronomics. This skew may have been indicative of the types of people who had spent time thinking most these topics and who were thus recommended to us past other interviewees.

Table i. Interviewees and their relevant expertise.

Interviews were structured around a common gear up of questions (Supplementary Tabular array ane). The principal aim of the interviews was to empathize the perspectives of dissimilar stakeholders equally to (a) the opportunities and/or threats that plant-based and/or cultured meat represent to rural producers in the US, including any bear witness of these opportunities and/or risks or threats manifesting, and (b) the pathways or mechanisms that might optimize these outcomes for rural producers. Interviews were conducted by Zoom and were recorded, with the consent of the interviewees, to facilitate note taking. Interviews were conducted between April eight and June eighteen, 2020. Interviews lasted between xxx and 95 minutes (mean = forty minutes).

Data Assay

The qualitative interview information were transcribed in OneNote (Fernando and Barbeiro, 2014). Nosotros used these transcribed interviews to identify a suite of social and economic opportunities and threats that might conceivably result from a scaled-up cultured and/or plant-based meat sector. Nosotros report our findings in aggregate and anonymously, not attributing any specific thought or perspective to any individual interviewee. The entire content of the Results department that follows is drawn direct from our interviews. In the Discussion section that follows that, we add our own interpretation of our findings and chronicle those findings to the broader literature.

Results

Our interviews revealed a range of ways in which a plant-based and/or cultured meat (alt-meat, from hereon) sector might nowadays opportunities or threats for rural producers in the Usa. Hither, we outline these potential impact pathways in detail, organized past the constituencies of people that might be principally affected by each. These constituencies include ranchers and farmers currently working in the animal agriculture sector (e.g., raising animals or producing animate being feed), besides equally farmers that might produce the crops needed for emerging alt-meat sectors, and rural communities in ranching and farming regions.

Although we did not ask our interviewees about their opinions on the likelihood of alt-meat scaling up, our questions did ask them to presume a scenario in which this occurred. As such, many respondents did offer an opinion on the feasibility, timescale, and/or probable magnitude of these scaling upward processes every bit a precursor to, or caveat of, their responses. Interviewees held a range of views on the degree to which they thought alt-meat volition scale up, and what "to scale up" might hateful. These views related both to the likelihood of alt-meat gaining significant market place traction, and to the extent of the impact of alt-meat on animal agriculture. On the offset bespeak, a minority of respondents (principally from the brute agriculture sector) did not believe that it was likely or possible that alt-meat would calibration to any meaningful degree. However, most respondents idea that alt-meat would gain significant market traction. On the second point, some respondents believed that alt-meat would principally meet a growing demand for protein, every bit a result of full poly peptide need growing as fast or faster than alt-meat production. Other respondents idea alt-meat would scale to such a degree that information technology would reduce creature meat product from its current level. Once again, opinions varied widely on the probable magnitude of that reduction and the proportion of the protein marketplace that alt-meat might eventually account for, but none thought it likely that animal agriculture would be completely displaced in the foreseeable futurity.

Opportunities

The growth of alt-meat sectors could generate several opportunities for people who work in agronomics, with crops or livestock. Such opportunities could accumulate to new and starting time farmers who might exist attracted to agronomics past new opportunities, also as to those currently working in agriculture, whose products might gain boosted value in these new sectors and/or who might diversify or transition their livelihoods. A cross-cutting observation that many interviewees made is that the emergence of alt-meat sectors alongside traditional fauna agriculture would, broadly speaking, offer more choices for rural producers in terms of which markets they sell to and what forms of production they adopt or pursue. To the extent that some rural producers currently accept limited options, additional sectors and supply chains could offering more alternatives. Many interviewees too noted that the emergence of new sectors could represent an opportunity for transitions to systems that are more equitable and fair for farmers and rural workers than the condition quo.

Opportunities for Ingather-Growing Farmers

Growing Ingredients for Establish-Based Meat

Growth in the establish-based meat sector is likely to create additional demand for various crops as sources of plant proteins, in turn creating a suite of opportunities for farmers that currently grow those crops or who could prefer them into their rotations. Demand for commodity crops from found-based meat companies may create boosted market place opportunities for some farmers. For example, since soy is the chief plant protein in Impossible Foods' products, soy farmers now have the possibility of selling to plant-based meat companies as well as to traditional commodity markets. While the first found-based meat companies are to some caste constrained in their ingredient option past the availability of existing commodity crop supply bondage, as the sector expands there is probable to exist opportunities for a greater diverseness of specialist and college-value plant protein crops, such every bit peas, lentils, mung beans, and other legumes. Exemplifying this opportunity, interviewees noted that pea demand in the US has increased dramatically in contempo years, in part in response to demand from Beyond Meat, a institute-based meat company that uses pea protein every bit its master institute ingredient. As the plant-based meat sector grows, and other companies achieve the calibration of Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat, many of our interviewees expected that demand for plant proteins would continue to increase.

Growth in demand for US-grown soy, peas, lentils, and other legumes for plant-based meat could result from a greater emphasis on domestic sourcing and on traceability. Currently, a bulk of plant proteins are sourced from exterior the United states and in that location is little traceability of crops. But growing demand amid companies and their consumers for domestically-sourced inputs could expand opportunities for U.s.a. growers.

There may exist several economic opportunities for farmers who are willing and able to conform their production and to sell to some of these emerging supply chains. First, some of these crops could exist more profitable. 2d, production could represent a chance for farmers to diversify their income sources, in turn offering greater resilience. 3rd, because many leguminous crops can be incorporated into rotations with double-cropping, they could represent an additional rather than alternative source of income.

Finally, adoption of plant poly peptide crops could bring environmental as well as economical benefits. Leguminous crops could raise soil health, reduce the need for fertilizer application, stabilize soils, increment water holding capacity and infiltration, and reduce runoff.

Growing Feedstock for Cultured Meat

The need for feedstock as an input for the cultured meat sector (e.m., to produce jail cell culture medium, growth factors, and scaffolding), and the associated opportunities and challenges for rural producers, are much less certain. Largely, this is considering cultured meat is currently being produced simply at R&D scale, using inputs adult primarily for the pharmaceutical industry. There was broad understanding among our interviewees that when cultured meat scales up, it will need culling non-pharmaceutical class sources of cell culture medium and growth factors (including amino acids, sugars, and an culling to fetal bovine serum). But there was divergence of opinion near the likely source of these products.

Some interviewees considered it likely that traditional agricultural crops would be the source of those inputs. If crops (e.g., barley, beets, corn, peas, soy, sugarcane, wheat) are demanded, that may create additional market place opportunities for farmers growing those crops. For instance, a company in Europe is using barley as a key ingredient for producing growth factors for cultured meat production, and soy has been demonstrated as a viable basis of scaffolding.

In dissimilarity, some interviewees, including those working direct on developing cell civilization medium for cellular agriculture, thought it more probable that sources other than traditional crops would exist more important. Algae, fungi, seaweed, yeast, and fermentation processes were all mentioned every bit possible sources. Such alternatives could however provide opportunities for rural producers. But some of these alternatives may not exist optimally produced on the same country equally traditional agricultural crops, and the transition for a ingather farmer to produce some of these alternatives might not straightforward. Some interviewees noted that some of these options could present greater flexibility than traditional crops in terms of where and how they are grown. For case, cell culture fermentation could use feedstocks and inputs that could be grown in places that are not currently suitable for arable crops, though this would not necessarily result in ecology benefits.

Opportunities for Ranchers and Livestock Farmers

Genetic Cloth for Cultured Meat

Cultured meat production requires a small number of cells that are originally sourced from a living animal. Many interviewees identified an opportunity inside the cultured meat sector for livestock producers who might maintain a small herd of animals as a source of cells. Particularly of interest might be heritage breeds and other loftier-value animals, including those that thrive in specific geographies. Such herds might be maintained in perpetuity, since i model of cellular agriculture would demand frequent input of new animal cells. A specific example is that of the visitor Simply collaborating with cattle ranchers in Japan to provide cells from specialty Wagyu cows. We did not gain any insights equally to how financially lucrative such a venture might be. Merely it is likely that only a tiny fraction of all livestock producers could benefit from this business model, since the amount of cultured meat that can be produced from one cow is much greater than the amount of animal meat that tin exist produced from the same moo-cow. This is both considering the same beast could be used as a source of cells for many years, and considering one pocket-sized biopsy could generate a large amount of cultured meat. A final constraint on this possible opportunity is that at least one prominent cellular agriculture visitor expressed an ambition to eventually achieve indefinite self-renewal of animal cells (i.eastward., immortal jail cell lines), which would eliminate any reliance on new animate being cell inputs into the system.

Bioreactors on Farms

In relation to cultured meat, many interviewees discussed the possibility of a highly distributed production arrangement. This may be possible in principle because the bioreactor technology needed to produce cultured meat can be developed at a range of sizes, and can be located anywhere. This flexibility in scale and geography could lend itself to a model of more than localized production, including on farms themselves. In such a model, an individual farmer might operate a small-scale- or medium-scale bioreactor on their farm. Coordinating models might include arts and crafts breweries, or dairy farms that produce their own yogurt. Such a model would enable pocket-sized-batch production of cultured meats on individual farms. Information technology would fit with consumer need for small, local, micro-customized, niche products. A grade of agri-tourism could develop around this. Possibilities mentioned included local variations in meat flavors and profiles; opportunities to acquire well-nigh the cultured meat product process; and having the original animals from which the prison cell lines were sourced still living on the same subcontract. Indeed, this model could also be uniform with maintaining traditional fauna agriculture on the same farm.

Some interviewees were skeptical of this kind of hyper-localized model, citing concerns most the affordability and cost effectiveness of small bioreactors, the investment required from farmers, and the skills required to operate the technology. Other interviewees thought that cultured meat product would likely be relatively centralized and close to more densely-populated areas, but that it is believable that subcontract-scale entrepreneurship could exist contemporaneously with industrial-scale product facilities. They over again cited the brewery illustration, whereby the largest breweries are centralized only arts and crafts brewers are as well successful.

Transition Into New Sectors

Alt-meat sectors could offer opportunities for beast farmers to diversify or transition completely into the production of plants, algae, mycoprotein, seaweed, or other alternative poly peptide products. Such a diversification or transition could include repurposing some of their country and/or existing infrastructure. Some examples include former dairy farmers in the Usa and elsewhere (eastward.g., those who have worked with the oat beverage company Oatly) who have transitioned into oat production. A 2d instance is quondam chicken farmers (e.thou., those who take worked with Mercy for Animals' Transfarmation project) who have converted their poultry sheds as part of a transition into mushroom production. As a concluding example, Refarm'd is working with former dairy farmers to transition into brute sanctuaries and to produce plant-based milk. Some interviewees suggested that many livestock farmers, particularly contract farmers in vertically integrated supply chains, might transition to alternative forms of production if they could.

Regenerative Agriculture and Loftier-Animal Welfare Farming

Most of our interviewees believed that fifty-fifty in a future scenario in which alt-meat accounted for a large proportion of protein demand, and thus replaced some or fifty-fifty most animal meat from large-scale animal agronomics, there would probable remain a office for some forms of animal agronomics. In detail, many interviewees pointed to the possibility that lower-intensity, relatively high-animal welfare, beast agriculture could flourish nether such a scenario. They speculated that alt-meat might primarily compete with animal meat on taste, cost, and convenience and that it would therefore compete foremost with large-scale animate being meat production. More traditional forms of animal agriculture could offer a different value proposition. For example, such farms could retain nutrient narratives (e.g., the story of ranching in the American West), could highlight the role of minor-calibration, independent, and family-farmers, and could differentiate themselves with value claims such equally being pasture-based, organic, and/or regenerative. Producers operating such farms might actually do good from these greater distinctions between their products and those of alt-meat products, relative to their current competition with big-calibration animal agronomics.

Co-production

Interviewees mentioned two ways in which alt-meat production might be relatively uniform with current livestock farming. First, there is already a marketplace for hybrid or blended products that combine found-based meat with fauna meat. If cultured meat tin can eventually exist produced at lower cost than conventional meat, it could also be used in blended products that are nevertheless primarily comprised of animal meat. This could reduce the price of the product and maintain the competitiveness of animal agriculture. Information technology could also enable beast farmers to access new markets or to create products with a lower environmental footprint. Second, farmers could play a role in creating consumer products using cultured meat or dairy products. For case, the cellular agronomics milk company Legendairy Foods is because supplying milk proteins to others for them to produce cheese and other dairy products. At that place may exist an opportunity for existing artisanal dairy producers to utilise their product.

Opportunities for Rural Communities

Jobs in Production Facilities

Plant-based and cultured meat production facilities could create new employment opportunities in rural areas. One possible model for a plant-based or cultured meat sector at scale could involve relatively large production facilities, which might exist situated in traditionally agricultural states (e.k., Maple Leaf recently constructed a new $310 chiliad facility in Indiana; Beyond Meat'due south production is in Missouri). Similarly, bioreactors could exist in rural areas rather than cities. Both forms of alt-meat production are somewhat geographically flexible. Only in both cases, depending on the feedstocks demanded, locating facilities in rural communities could situate them near input crops, thus reducing transportation costs at that stage in the supply chain. Any such plant-based or cultured meat facility in a rural area could create numerous jobs, though some interviewees indicated that plant-based meat facilities tend to be more automated (and thus create fewer jobs) than animal meat processing facilities. If jobs in alt-meat production facilities are available every bit an alternative to jobs in animal meat production facilities, and then that could correspond an improvement for those laborers, since jobs in slaughterhouses are ofttimes viewed equally among the about hard and dangerous of labor roles, including depression pay, exploitation, and high gamble. Alt-meat product facilities could offering an improvement in safety, standards, and opportunities.

A related opportunity is to repurpose existing infrastructure. The company Rebellyous Foods has converted animal meat processing facilities into plant-based meat processing facilities. Since the ii types of food processing facilities are fulfilling similar functions, the scale of operations, and the types of jobs are somewhat similar.

Food Security

A few interviewees mentioned opportunities for greater nutrient security, particularly if the cost of alt-meat were to be lower than the current costs of beast meat. In addition, the anticipated geographic flexibility over where cultured meat tin can exist produced could mean amend nutrient access for rural and remote communities. For instance, cultured seafood could exist produced in locations far from coasts, and communities with limited accessibility to traditional beast meat supply chains could be better-positioned to produce cultured meat locally.

Health, Safety, and Quality of Life

Interviewees noted that alt-meat product could reduce some of the health risks faced past rural communities, which are associated with animal agriculture. For example, air and water pollution generated by manure would not exist a business concern for communities living almost alt-meat facilities.

Other Uses for State

The amount of land required to cultivate ingredients and feedstocks for plant-based and cultured meat, respectively, is projected to be far less than the corporeality of land required for animal agriculture. Then, all else beingness equal, if alt-meat displaced some significant proportion of beast agronomics that could release significant areas of rangeland, pasture, and/or arable cropland from food product. In such a scenario, one potential revenue stream for landowners could be payments (e.one thousand., from governments) for ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration or biodiversity conservation generated past habitat restoration.

Threats

The degree to which alt-meat represents a direct take chances to farmers, ranchers, and livestock producers depends not only on whether alt-meat technologies calibration upwards, but too on whether they will scale to such a degree that they will reduce brute meat production from its electric current level. Our interviewees held differing opinions on that bespeak. Well-nigh interviewees believed that information technology is extremely unlikely that in that location could be a consummate transition from animal meat consumption to alt-meat consumption in the virtually future. Many interviewees too believed that alt-meat would principally meet a growing demand for poly peptide and would not therefore dramatically reduce electric current need for animal meat in the about future. Such interviewees therefore concluded that the fear that farmers and ranchers within traditional brute agriculture would necessarily suffer economic and livelihood loss is not well-founded. In any case, they noted, any transition would be gradual over a course of decades rather than abrupt. As such, farmers and other incumbent actors would take time to accommodate, suit, and/or transition as appropriate. Some interviewees pointed to past transitions in food systems (e.g., the Greenish Revolution; the growth of aquaculture; the trend toward craven as a preferred animal meat in the US) as sources of lessons about the charge per unit, type, and impacts of any such changes.

The scale of any threat from the emergence of alt-meat was also weighed past many interviewees against other threats to the social, economic, and cultural well-being of ranchers, farmers, and rural communities. They collectively named several concurrent trends that many of them idea might affect the fauna agriculture sector more than whatsoever possible competition from alt-meat. For example, the aging farmer population and the gap that could exit in the demographics of the rural sector was frequently mentioned. A second trend was that of consolidation, whereby smaller farms and ranches tend to be subsumed by larger operations. Several interviewees cited the dairy industry as an example whereby many farms are struggling or have closed, which may in part be driven past consumer shifts toward non-dairy alternatives but is besides a consequence of consolidation, falling margins, and trade wars.

A number of possible risks and threats were identified past our interviewees that, similarly to the opportunities, related to crop growing farmers, ranchers and livestock producers, and rural communities more broadly. We report on each of these in turn below, just first outline some more generic and cross-cut risks identified in our interviews.

Kickoff, some interviewees noted that the big size of the animal agriculture industry in the US, including the feed manufacture, ways that even a pocket-size percentage decrease in demand (including due to competition from alt-meat products) could accept a large and meaning absolute impact in terms of income and livelihoods. Every bit such, some interviewees thought that many individuals and communities dependent on animate being agriculture for their livelihoods or business viability did in fact view the emergence of alt-meat industries every bit a direct threat, fifty-fifty while it may not threaten the survival of the sector as a whole. For example, one interviewee cited a project past consultancy grouping AT Kearney that past 2040 less than half of meat consumed will come from animals; the report received significant media attention and and then may have informed the take chances perception of some producers.

Second, and in contrast, a business raised past several interviewees who were not directly involved in the alt-meat sectors was that much of the expectation and optimism from those who abet for, or who are working on developing, alt-meat products could be overblown or unfounded. That is, several interviewees did not share any certainty that alt-meat would scale upward and account for whatever pregnant proportion of meat consumption. This scenario would represent risk for farmers if they made investments or committed to transitions in anticipation of a scaled upwards alt-meat sector that did non subsequently materialize.

3rd, some interviewees idea that a significant run a risk is that in a scenario where alt-meat production and consumption did scale up significantly, a few large companies would capture the majority of the benefit. They highlighted the risks to individual farmers if a few producers monopolized the sector. This could occur if the technologies involved (e.1000., bioreactors) adult in such a way that they were unaffordable or inaccessible to farmers or if there were other economies of scale. As such, interviewees thought that while farmers could benefit from the emergence of these sectors, there was no guarantee that a new system would be fairer, more equitable, or beneficial to individual farmers. Many interviewees emphasized a need to include farmers and ranchers in discussions and decisions around transitions, to stand for their interests and to ensure best-possible outcomes for them.

Finally, a broader, more than conceptual risk that one interviewee identified is if there were to exist a rapid shift in the social narrative effectually food, and meat in detail. They considered information technology plausible that the advent and adoption of alt-meat at pocket-size scale could speedily make traditional farming methods seem out of appointment and inefficient, or immoral. A social sentiment might course, and spread, that animals should not be farmed at all.

Threats for Crop-Growing Farmers

Many of the threats or risks to crop-growing farmers that were mentioned in the interviews related to the barriers to transitioning into alternative crops. Interviewees noted that many article crop-growing farmers are relatively locked into product for the beast feed sector. Much of their concrete, homo, social, and financial capital may exist tied to corn and soy production in ways that could make information technology hard to transition into alternatives or that would make transitions as well costly. For example, to adopt culling establish poly peptide crop rotations might require different tillage and harvesting equipment, and it might be more than difficult to secure ingather insurance or to persuade lenders to honor credit for new crops that might be considered riskier. Factors across the farm gate could besides present barriers, including a lack of reliable well-established markets to sell into, and an absence of infrastructure (e.g., elevator facilities) to back up those supply bondage.

Some interviewees speculated that if alt-meat displaced fauna agronomics to any degree, the projected efficiency, relative to animal meat, of conversion ratios of crop inputs to alt-meat outputs could lead to a internet reduction in the total corporeality of crops required. This could then reduce the total arable country expanse, and in plough perhaps reduce the number of farmers needed to cultivate that land.

Threats for Ranchers and Livestock Farmers

Cattle Ranchers

Fewer risks were identified by interviewees for cattle ranchers. In particular, interviewees were relatively unconcerned about risks for cow-calf ranchers. They noted that a majority of calves come from small (<200 head) operations, whose owners commonly have other sources of income. Many cow-calf ranchers keep cattle on their properties equally a second class of income, or for tax benefits (since farmland in many states is taxed more favorably). Others maintain herds of cattle for the pleasance, civilisation, or lifestyle of doing and so. Fifty-fifty if the sector were to reject, many such ranchers are not solely financially dependent on that income.

In contrast, a small-scale number of ranchers account for a majority of cattle feeding and fattening operations. These big cattle feeders are not hobbyists, and would be more affected past any pass up in the sector. However, as we notation higher up, many interviewees did not believe that the animal meat sector was threatened by the alt-meat sector in the near future. Even if information technology were to be, it is possible that the contest would be primarily with chicken and pig meat rather than with cattle.

Chicken and Pig Farmers

The risks were considered to be greatest for individuals raising chickens and pigs, many of whom are locked into consolidated, vertically-integrated systems by virtue of unfavorable contracts. Several interviewees noted that the large corporations (eastward.m., Cargill, Tyson) that contract with these farmers have themselves invested in alt-meat and could relatively easily shift their business organization model if they wanted to. Even so, at that place are fewer obvious opportunities or alternatives for these individuals, and this situation is compounded by the debt that many are in. Additionally, in many cases their land may not be feasible for alternative forms of food product. In that location are cases where former chicken farmers had repurposed their sheds (due east.g., to grow mushrooms) but such transitions have not happened at large calibration. As such, a shift away from these forms of meat product for any reason could leave contract farmers behind without viable alternatives.

Threats for Rural Communities

While a localized model of alt-meat production is one possibility (section Opportunities for Rural Communities), another plausible pathway is that bioreactor facilities could exist located in or near urban areas. Companies might exist motivated to situate facilities in proximity to urban areas to reduce transportation costs of their products, or in rust-belt cities to stimulate job creation and economic opportunities. Additionally, it could be impractical to plant alt-meat production facilities in very rural communities, due to an absence of networks and infrastructure. Every bit such, at least in principle, the procedure of meat product could exist decoupled from a dependence on rural areas and rural communities, depriving those communities of opportunities from these new sectors.

Potential Roles for Dissimilar Actors Outside the Private Sector

Interviewees referred to a number of potential roles for actors exterior the private sector that could help to maximize the benefits and minimize the threats that they had identified. We discuss these briefly beneath, categorized into roles that could be played, respectively, past universities and research organizations, government agencies, and non-profit organizations.

Universities and Enquiry Organizations

There are numerous opportunities for researchers to contribute knowledge and agreement in ways that might maximize the benefits and minimize the risks described above. First, if alt-meat sectors will bring opportunities, and then research that accelerates the rate at which those products accomplish the market place and scale up, for example through open-source technology and publicly-available data, could exist beneficial. There are multiple common needs across the cultured meat industry, including the demand for effective scaffolds and prison cell culture media. At that place is as well a need for basic crop science and evolution of new variants optimized for alt-meat products. Second, interviewees chosen for inquiry on the impacts of transitions. There is footling systematic understanding of the pathways that could support just transitions for farmers from a protein arrangement oriented around animal agriculture to one where plant-based or cultured meat play a larger role. Rigorous social science and systems thinking, including analyses of the economic costs and benefits of alt-meat for farmers in the U.s., could aid to identify and quantify the opportunities for rural America. Finally, there may be a office for agricultural extension staff in supporting crop transitions.

Government Agencies

Various governmental agencies could play a office in facilitating and catalyzing transitions to a globe in which alt-meat plays a part in meeting poly peptide demand. Outset, regulatory clarity could assistance to provide a articulate path to market for alt-meat products. Pregnant issues to resolve include those of labeling and of inspection processes. 2d, governments could play a role in incentivizing country transitions, for case past providing tax credits for rewilding unused land. Third, public funding could help to back up the types of enquiry indicated in section Universities and Research Organizations, including the development of open source technologies that are needed across the alt-meat sector and that would be more than costly and slower to develop privately. Fourth, governments could remove, reduce, or reallocate subsidies and back up for brute agriculture, to create a more level playing field for alt-meat companies. Fifth, governments could create and/or support policies and programs that support but transitions for farmers and rural communities, including debt forgiveness, compensating for losses incurred, and funding (re)preparation initiatives. Finally, governments could promote job cosmos and economical benefits by incentivizing companies to establish production facilities in historically marginalized or disadvantaged communities.

Non-profit Organizations

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other non-profit organizations could play various roles to facilitate and catalyze transitions. Offset, some NGOs could play a useful role in communication and dialogue. They could convene a variety of stakeholders for open conversations that are amicable rather than adversarial. Avenues for collaboration and communication may be critical throughout the development of alt-meat products, including to navigate complex and potentially political discussions around labeling. Such dialogues could be of import to enable farmers and ranchers to thrive both in the animal meat and alt-meat sectors. 2nd, there could be a part for non-profit groups in facilitating rural transitions, including through retraining, and subsidizing transition costs. Transition programs can be imperative to support farmers in gap periods as they shift betwixt production models, although such programs could as well be led past authorities agencies. Non-profits could likewise advocate for coalitions of labor groups that correspond the interests of rural workers. 3rd, some non-profit organizations accept demonstrated utility in advocating for an even playing field. A single non-profit may exist able to represent the interests of a majority of alt-meat companies as they relate to policy, regulation, labeling, and research funding. The Expert Nutrient Institute is a prominent case of this part. Integral to all iii of these roles is a cross-cutting theme of pedagogy and sensation. This could include alerting farmers, ranchers, and communities to forthcoming change, and giving them the data and tools they demand to set and to capitalize on opportunities or to mitigate risks. It could also include engaging specially with younger people, and drawing their attending to the skills and noesis that they might need in order to appoint in and benefit from jobs in these new alt-meat sectors. Finally, some interviewees cautioned that while non-profits tin facilitate positive change, there is besides possibility for harm. Many not-profits are mission-driven, and are variously motivated by ecology, health, or beast welfare concerns. To the extent that this leads to mixed messaging, inaccurate information, or disharmonize with incumbent actors there exists the possibility of hindering rather than helping outcomes for rural producers.

Discussion

Summary of Results

Our research identifies and maps out unlike ways in which the advent of commercialized cultured meat and/or a scaled-up found-based meat sector (collectively, alt-meat) could touch outcomes amongst different stakeholders in rural parts of the US. Our interviews revealed that if alt-meat scales up, it could create a range of opportunities and challenges. Most of our interviewees did non imagine a well-nigh-term scenario in which alt-meat completely replaces animal meat. A complete substitution has been prominently advocated by some groups (due east.g., Good Food Establish), and has been stated every bit an objective by some companies (e.chiliad., Impossible Foods). But among our interviewees, even most of those that envisioned rapid growth in and adoption of alt-meat thought it probable that it would form an boosted form of protein that captured some or all of the anticipated growing demand for protein rather than 1 that displaced animal meat entirely.

Nosotros categorized the opportunities and threats identified by interviewees as variously being relevant to crop farmers, ranchers and livestock producers, and rural communities more broadly. While much of the media coverage and narratives told about cultured meat and constitute-based meat have envisioned these sectors as necessarily existence at odds with animate being agriculture, our interviews revealed a range of opportunities and complementarities that might also emerge. Opportunities included growing crops as ingredients for plant-based meat or feedstock for cultured meat; raising animals for genetic material for cultured meat; producing cultured meat in bioreactors at the subcontract level; transitioning into new sectors; new market opportunities for blended and hybrid animal- and alt-meat products; and new value around regenerative or high-animal welfare farming. Threats included loss of livelihood or income for ranchers and livestock producers and for farmers growing crops for animal feed; barriers to transitioning into emerging alt-meat sectors; and the possibility of exclusion from those sectors. Finally, interviewees identified a range of roles for universities and research organizations, government agencies, and non-profit organizations that could help to maximize the benefits and minimize the risks from emerging alt-meat sectors.

Boosted Opportunities and Costs

Our interviewees represented a range of experiences and perspectives across the found-based meat, cultured meat, and animal agriculture sectors. Nosotros do not know how close our interviews came to exhausting the list of possible opportunities and threats, although we did notice a plateauing of our exposure to new ideas every bit we neared the end of our interview process. That said, every bit authors, we can excogitate of other plausible social and economical impacts that could affect rural producers. For example, opportunities might sally if alt-meat were to cost less than animal meat, since full demand for meat could then increment. Similarly, if blending alt-meat with niche (due east.g., pasture-fed or heritage) animal-meat were to reduce consumer prices then that could also increment total need. Plausible threats that were not mentioned in our interviews include the possibility that if cropland or grazing country falls in value due to reduced demand for animal products or animal feed, producers could face greater pressure to sell it to other producers, leading to greater consolidation, or to real estate or other land use developers. Second, if cropland is increasingly used to abound ingredients for alt-meat markets, the supply of land for other markets (e.g., biofuel, animal feed) may shrink. Third, to the caste that ranchers or feedlots are affected by the emergence of alt-meat, the livelihoods of people working in other parts of the livestock supply chain (e.yard., feedlot workers, veterinarians, and employees of animal feed manufacturers) could also be affected. Finally, whatever reduction in domestic demand for animal meat or feed crops in the US could potentially exist compensated for past the expansion of exports, mitigating the affect on domestic producers but negatively impacting producers in other countries.

There are also nuances that did not arise in the interviews but that are relevant to these opportunities and risks. For instance, while some farmers may be able to produce the aforementioned crops (e.k., soy) for a plant-based meat sector as they currently do for the beast feed sector, the institute-based meat sector may demand different varieties (e.g., with higher poly peptide content) or management practices (eastward.one thousand., organic) that could complicate a transition.

Prior Research on the Socio-Economic Impacts of Alt-Meat

Relatively little inquiry has addressed the organisation-wide socio-economical dimensions of alt-meat. Much more research on alt-meat focuses on the technological breakthroughs and limitations, and on the anticipated consumer credence of and attitudes toward alt-meat (Bryant and Barnett, 2018; Post et al., 2020). This is understandable, given the nascent nature of these technologies and the limited degree to which even institute-based meat has scaled up to date. Yet there is a demand for systems-wide analyses for alt-meat, including to anticipate unintended and equally yet unforeseen consequences (Mattick et al., 2015a). A few of the issues raised in this paper have received at least some attention from researchers, including discussion of potential sources of prison cell civilisation medium for cultured meat and of potential distributed production models. We briefly discuss the intersection of our findings with previous research on alt-meat hither.

Our interviewees mentioned various possible sources of ingredients for plant-based meat and feedstock for cultured meat. A recent review of the scientific, sustainability, and regulatory challenges of cultured meat similarly named inputs created through fermentation and biomass (e.g., algae) as possible sources of cell civilization medium (Post et al., 2020). More traditional crops may also be used as inputs for both plant-based and cultured meat, though the impacts of alt-meat on rural landscapes will depend in role on the production systems used to grow these inputs (Broad, 2019, 2020).

Many of our interviewees mentioned the possibility of decentralized models of alt-meat product, including production of cultured meat with small-scale-scale bioreactors on private farms. Often likened to the micro-brewery model, the possible benefits of and limits to such a distributed system take been considered past a number of authors (Stephens et al., 2018; Jönsson, 2020). Some evidence suggests that such a model could promote societal acceptance of cultured meat and reduce concerns related to the perceived unnaturalness of cultured meat (van der Weele and Driessen, 2013; van der Weele and Tramper, 2014).

Some of the other ideas raised past our interviewees have as well been discussed in the literature, though oft only to a limited degree. For instance, Broad (2019) discussed alt-meat from a nutrient justice lens. Stephens et al. (2018) identified a suite of knowledge gaps about the system-wide implications of cultured meat. Mylan et al. (2019) observed crop diversification among farmers who were engaging with the emerging plant-based milk sector. And both Mylan et al. (2019) and Tziva et al. (2020) identified the challenge of farmers being locked into animal agriculture equally a barrier to embracing plant-based alternatives.

Future Research

Many of the impact pathways identified in this newspaper have not been well-explored by researchers. Every bit such, this paper identifies numerous research gaps, to which natural and social scientists could usefully apply their attention. Kickoff, while this study identifies possible touch on pathways, the data collected here were insufficient to differentiate these possible impacts with respect to their likelihood, predictable timeframe, magnitude, or the stakeholders affected. To the extent that these characteristics can be quantified, these refinements might assistance decision-makers and researchers to understand the possible impacts of these sectors and to strategically target or prioritize any response. Second, information technology may be useful to map the opportunities and challenges associated with alt-meat, to generate a amend understanding of the spatial distribution of these impacts across geographies at a refined resolution. 3rd, this study restricted its focus to the US, and it may be useful to understand the degree to which the opportunities and challenges associated with constitute-based and cultured meat could vary between countries. Finally, information technology may of class exist useful to measure and monitor these social and economic impacts every bit alt-meat sectors calibration upward.

Policy-Relevance

A range of factors volition determine whether and when plant-based and cultured meat are consumed at scale (Stephens et al., 2018). These factors include the technologies themselves, and the perceptions, attitudes, and preferences of consumers (Bryant and Barnett, 2018; Mancini and Antonioli, 2020). But in add-on, a suite of decisions and (in)actions by different actors could also dramatically influence the food and agricultural systems in which these technologies develop and the impacts that they have on both people and the environment. This research identifies arenas in which decision-makers may exist able to secure the all-time possible outcomes and minimize harms for rural constituents and stakeholders to whom they are accountable. Having this information before cultured or plant-based meat scales upwardly may enable decision-makers to act proactively and strategically rather than reactively. For instance, decision-makers may be able to aid rural communities to develop the infrastructure and supply chains needed to abound cultured meat products locally and to abound the crops needed equally cell civilization medium or every bit ingredients for plant-based meat.

Caveats and Limitations

Many responses to our questions are necessarily largely speculative. Undoubtedly, some of the opportunities and threats identified past our interviewees and reported above are more plausible than others. Even amidst our interviewees, there were notable differences betwixt individuals in their perception of the likelihood that alt-meat products could take significant impacts on the lives of people living in rural parts of the US. Cautious skepticism may turn out to be well-founded. But there is also a case to be made for thinking through these potential impact pathways and the possible consequences for rural producers, particularly since piddling previous research has been conducted on these questions. By reaching out to informed experts, nosotros believe that we have gathered thoughtful and informed insights near conceivable impact pathways from people who take spent time thinking deeply about these problems. Nevertheless, we did non ask our interviewees, nor do we make any claim here, well-nigh the likelihood, timeline, or magnitude of any of these potential impacts. Nor do nosotros land here any opinion here on whether whatsoever of these touch pathways would be more than or less desirable than others: dissimilar stakeholders may hold preferences for particular outcomes, and our role as researchers was just to synthesize the reported possibilities. Nosotros note that the positionality of each interviewee likely shaped their perspectives, including their relative optimism about the possible impacts of these technologies. Finally, we note that our interviewees did not include many farmers or ranchers: all the same as establish-based and cultured meat brainstorm to calibration, it will be of import to include producers more centrally in research projects.

Conclusions

Our paper characterizes potential affect pathways that might sally if establish-based or cultured meat were to calibration up to a pregnant degree. Our research identified a number of opportunities and threats that could affect a multitude of stakeholders across a range of spatial scales. Characterizing these pathways before plant-based meat scales further and before cultured meat becomes commercially bachelor may enable decision-makers to deed proactively rather than reactively and to take actions to secure the best possible outcomes. Doing and then likewise identifies knowledge gaps that researchers might usefully explore.

Data Availability Argument

The datasets presented in this article are not readily bachelor because the dataset consists of transcripts of semi-structured interviews. Individual interviewees would be identifiable from those transcripts, and so the dataset cannot exist made available. Requests to admission the datasets should exist directed to Peter Newton, peter.newton@colorado.edu.

Ethics Statement

This report involved homo subjects and was reviewed and approved past University of Colorado Boulder Institutional Review Board. Written informed consent for participation was not required for this written report in accordance with national legislation and institutional requirements.

Writer Contributions

PN and DB-R: conceptualization, writing—review and editing, and funding acquisition. PN: methodology, investigation, analysis, and writing—original draft. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Funding

This enquiry was supported by a Research Fellowship from the Breakthrough Institute to PN. Publication fees were supported by start-upwards funds to PN from the Environmental Studies Program at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Conflict of Involvement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absenteeism of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the two reviewers for their helpful comments, which strengthened the paper. We give thanks Waverly Eichhorst, Margaret Hegwood, Saloni Shah, and Alex Smith for comments on an earlier draft. We thank all of the interviewees for their time and for sharing their ideas.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2021.624270/full#supplementary-cloth

References

Broad, G. M. (2019). Found-based and cell-based animal product alternatives: an assessment and agenda for food tech justice. Geoforum 107, 223–226. doi: x.1016/j.geoforum.2019.06.014

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Wide, G. M. (2020). Making meat, amend: the metaphors of plant-based and cell-based meat innovation. Environ. Commun. fourteen, 919–932. doi: 10.1080/17524032.2020.1725085

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Cameron, B. C., and O'Neill, Southward. (2019). State of the Industry Report: Plant-Based Meat, Eggs, and Dairy. The Practiced Food Institute.

Ekmekcioglu, C., Wallner, P., Kundi, One thousand., Weisz, U., Haas, W., and Hutter, H.-P. (2018). Scarlet meat, diseases, and salubrious alternatives: a critical review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 58, 247–261. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2016.1158148

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Godfray, H. C. J., Aveyard, P., Garnett, T., Hall, J. W., Key, T. J., Lorimer, J., et al. (2018). Meat consumption, health, and the environment. Science 361:eaam5324. doi: 10.1126/science.aam5324

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Goldstein, B., Moses, R., Sammons, Due north., and Birkved, M. (2017). Potential to adjourn the environmental burdens of American beef consumption using a novel plant-based beef substitute. PLoS One 12:e0189029. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189029

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Heller, 1000. C., and Keoleian, G. A. (2018). Beyond Meat's Beyond Burger Life Cycle Assessment: A Detailed Comparison Between a Plant-Based and an Fauna-Based Protein Source. Ann Arbor, MI: Center for Sustainable Systems, University of Michigan.

Herrero, K., Thornton, P. K., Gerber, P., and Reid, R. S. (2009). Livestock, livelihoods and the environment: understanding the trade-offs. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. ane, 111–120. doi: 10.1016/J.COSUST.2009.x.003

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Jönsson, E. (2020). On breweries and bioreactors: probing the "present futures" of cellular agriculture. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. Tran. 45:12392. doi: 10.1111/tran.12392

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Machovina, B., Feeley, K. J., and Ripple, W. J. (2015). Biodiversity conservation: the cardinal is reducing meat consumption. Sci. Total Environ. 536, 419–431. doi: ten.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.07.022

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Mancini, M. C., and Antonioli, F. (2020). To what extent are consumers' perception and acceptance of alternative meat production systems affected past information? The case of cultured meat. Animals 10:656. doi: 10.3390/ani10040656

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Mattick, C. S., Landis, A. Due east., and Allenby, B. R. (2015a). A case for systemic environmental analysis of cultured meat. J. Integr. Agric. 14, 249–254. doi: x.1016/S2095-3119(14)60885-vi

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mattick, C. S., Landis, A. E., Allenby, B. R., and Genovese, N. J. (2015b). Anticipatory life wheel analysis of in vitro biomass cultivation for cultured meat production in the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 11941–11949. doi: ten.1021/acs.est.5b01614

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mylan, J., Morris, C., Beech, E., and Geels, F. W. (2019). Rage against the government: Niche-regime interactions in the societal embedding of plant-based milk. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 31, 233–247. doi: 10.1016/j.eist.2018.eleven.001

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mail service, M. J., Levenberg, S., Kaplan, D. L., Genovese, N., Fu, J., Bryant, C. J., et al. (2020). Scientific, sustainability and regulatory challenges of cultured meat. Nat. Food 1, 403–415. doi: ten.1038/s43016-020-0112-z

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Santo, R. E., Kim, B. F., Goldman, South. E., Dutkiewicz, J., Biehl, Due east. M. B., Bloem, M. Westward., et al. (2020). Because plant-based meat substitutes and cell-based meats: a public health and food systems perspective. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 4:134. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2020.00134

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Specht, E. A., Welch, D. R., Rees Clayton, East. M., and Lagally, C. D. (2018). Opportunities for applying biomedical production and manufacturing methods to the evolution of the clean meat industry. Biochem. Eng. J. 132, 161–168. doi: ten.1016/J.BEJ.2018.01.015

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Stephens, N., Di Silvio, L., Dunsford, I., Ellis, M., Glencross, A., and Sexton, A. (2018). Bringing cultured meat to market: technical, socio-political, and regulatory challenges in cellular agriculture. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 78, 155–166. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2018.04.010

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Tuomisto, H. 50., Ellis, M. J., and Hasstrup, P. (2014). "Environmental impacts of cultured meat: alternative production scenarios," in Proceedings of the ninth International Conference on Life Bike Assessment in the Agri-Nutrient Sector. eds R. Schenck, D. Huizenga (Vashon, WA), 1360–1366.

PubMed Abstract

Tziva, Thousand., Negro, Due south. O., Kalfagianni, A., and Hekkert, M. P. (2020). Understanding the protein transition: the rising of plant-based meat substitutes. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 35, 217–231. doi: 10.1016/j.eist.2019.09.004

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

hausmanthernat.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2021.624270/full