Welcome to the land world
Hype of the Livestock Aquaculture and Alternative Protein Industries
2022-04-19

  Public awareness of current issues in the agri-food system has increased, and governments have recognized the urgency of taking action. Livestock systems rely on vast fodder crops and occupy as much as 80 percent of the world's farmland; there is no doubt that the sustainability challenges we face cannot be met. While there is broad consensus on the general picture of healthy and sustainable diets, there is much discussion in this area as industry groups, investors, influential media and many other stakeholders have joined the debate Contradictory claims. There are currently eight key prevailing narratives in the field that set the conditions and premises for debate and drive self-questioning, contradictory responses.

Statement 1: " We need more protein to meet the needs of the growing population

  The idea of a "gap" between protein supply and population needs has long been rife in debates on the global food system. As nutrition becomes more popular and valued, the meat and dairy industry seeks export opportunities, with programs developed for decades dominated by the marketing of protein-enriched therapeutics and milk. Although some of these methods were debunked in the 1970s, the debate still centers on proteins. In the face of supply constraints and rising demand, the focus is now on producing enough protein to meet the world's needs. However, there is evidence that there is no "protein gap" in terms of global supply and nutritional needs, and that poverty and poor access to food are the main drivers of inadequate intake of all types of food.

  Today, the excessive focus on protein is also reflected in the media coverage of the agri-food system, the emergence of “protein companies,” marketing more and more “high-protein” foods to consumers, and specialized high-protein diets. While these are indirect and sometimes unintentional, calls for a shift to protein tend to reinforce a protein-centric approach to agri-food system problems.

Who came up with, exploited and promoted this claim?

  Animal food industry; large farmer groups; alternative protein industry; international organizations and research institutes

What is the problem they define?

  Protein deficiency; population growth; underdevelopment

What is the suggested solution?

  Increased production and trade of meat and dairy products; nutritional interventions; high-protein foods

Which issues are ignored?

  Poverty alleviation; access to nutritious diets; micronutrient deficiencies; environmental concerns

Statement 2: "Eating raw meat is bad for your health"

  The claim that red meat affects health is based on a wealth of evidence linking chronic disease risk to consumption of raw and processed meat. These claims are often accompanied by recommendations to limit or eliminate raw meat diets, or to promote flexitarian and vegan diets.

  However, popular media narratives generally exaggerate the health risks of raw meat, as health risks depend in part on how livestock are raised and processed, and how the meat is prepared and consumed. At the same time, the fact that raw meat is an important source of micronutrients and high-quality bioavailable protein for many people around the world is often deliberately overlooked.

  Furthermore, such claims often lack a holistic view of how livestock (meat) interacts with human health. Although they are not as direct as nutritional effects, some serious human health risks are caused by environmental pollution caused by industrialized animal husbandry.

Who came up with, exploited and promoted this claim?

  Several medical associations and health activists; vegetarian groups; alternative protein industry

What is the problem they define?

  Raw meat causes chronic disease

What is the suggested solution?

  Reduce or eliminate raw meat from the diet

Which issues are ignored?

  Access to nutritious diets for food insecure people; the impact of different production systems and preparation methods; environmental health risks from livestock farming

Statement 3: "Livestock production is incompatible with climate and SDGs"

  Numerous studies point to livestock as a major driver of global climate change, land degradation and biodiversity loss, leading many to question its compatibility with the transition to sustainable development. However, claims in this area often rely on simplistic approaches that fail to take into account the complexities of livestock-ecosystem interactions and the vast differences between industrialized and agro-ecological livestock systems and between regions of the world .

  Focusing only on narrow indicators such as proteins against greenhouse gases ignores other key and interrelated aspects of sustainability (eg, biodiversity, resource efficiency, livelihoods, etc.). Also overlooked here is the multifunctional role that livestock plays in many farming communities, and the fact that in many cases livestock can be more beneficial than other land uses and economic activities.

  Life cycle assessment allows for a more comprehensive capture of impacts, but boundaries and methods remain controversial. As a result, sweeping statements about the sustainability impacts of livestock farming are extremely misleading and end up lumping together production systems that are barely comparable.

Who came up with, exploited and promoted this claim?

  Alternative protein industry; vegetarian groups; many environmental groups, civil society organizations and scientific institutions

What is the problem they define?

  Livestock causes environmental problems such as climate change, land degradation, biodiversity loss, water and soil pollution

What is the suggested solution?

  Livestock production and consumption should be drastically reduced and replaced by a plant-based diet (including alternative protein)

Which issues are ignored?

  Differences between livestock systems; multifunctionality of grazing and rangeland systems; regional livelihoods

Statement 4: "Meat, dairy and fish are part of our diet"

  The cultural roots of animal-sourced foods are often cited as a major barrier to dietary transition and one of the arguments in favor of "alternative proteins." Some in the industry believe that innovative products that are highly meat-like are the only viable way to reduce meat and other animal-derived foods.

  It's clear that raising and eating animals has played an important role in shaping human development, so eating meat is part of many culinary traditions and food cultures around the world. However, cultural norms surrounding animal-sourced foods remain highly diverse, reflecting diverse relationships with animals, and are constantly evolving.

  Corporate strategies and government policies guide reshaping consumer habits. The current trend toward high consumption of animal-derived foods stems from the industrialization of fast food systems, the promotion of Western-style diets, and re-engineered food access channels.

  Despite marketing efforts to capitalize on cultural attachment to meat, current trends do not yet constitute a long-term cultural norm, so the roles of meat and animals in our society could undergo further major shifts.

Who came up with, exploited and promoted this claim?

  Meat and Dairy Industry; Alternative Protein Industry; Farmers' Organizations; Consumer Groups

What is the problem they define?

  Eating meat is central to culture and identity and cannot and should not simply be eliminated

What is the suggested solution?

  Continue to eat animal-sourced foods or use highly similar meat substitutes

Which issues are ignored?

  Diverse meat food culture; fluidity of food culture; role of marketing/lobbying in shaping dietary preferences

Statement 5: "Alternative protein is a win-win for animals, people and the planet"

  Plant-based meats, plant-based milks, seafood alternatives, and cell-cultured meats are rapidly being developed and launched as they all claim the ability to reduce environmental impact, improve diets, and save animals from slaughter.

  Alternative proteins may improve individual sustainability metrics through direct comparison with industrially produced similar products. However, the evidence so far has been limited and speculative, especially for cell-cultured meat. The impact on health and sustainability ultimately depends on what ingredients are used, how they are produced and processed, and what they are replacing and where they will be sold. Many of the newest alternatives to them rely on energy-intensive ultra-processing processes to produce key ingredients, as well as sourcing from industrial monoculture systems.

  Alternative protein also represents a new phase in the industrialization of the food system, which may instead weaken the resilience of agri-food systems, jeopardize the livelihoods of millions of ordinary agri-food producers, and reinforce a “plate-centred” diet, rather than supporting changes in eating patterns. Therefore, bold claims that alternative proteins are a "win-win" are misleading.

Who came up with, exploited and promoted this claim?

  Alternative protein industry; some vegan organizations, animal welfare groups; influential investors; meat companies investing in alternative proteins; the media

What is the problem they define?

  Effects of animal-derived foods on the environment, health and animal welfare

What is the suggested solution?

  Substitute some or all of animal meat with plant-based alternatives and cell-cultured meats

Which issues are ignored?

  Labour and livelihoods; adaptation; innovation and power relations; holistic diets and agri-food system change

Statement 6: "Wild fish catches are stagnant, aquaculture production should increase"

  Fish and seafood are an important source of nutritious food for more than 3 billion people. With wild fish harvesting stagnant for decades, aquaculture has been promoted as a sustainable way to increase fish production, address protein gaps and meet broader nutritional needs. However, the impacts of aquaculture systems vary widely, depending on the species farmed, the requirements for external inputs (eg fish feed), the form of the farming system and the political and economic context. Input-intensive, single-species aquaculture systems are growing rapidly and have a range of negative impacts.

  In general, the promotion of aquaculture gives the green light to further expand production patterns that threaten food security and sustainability, and instead makes the problems they are supposed to solve worse. Approaching aquaculture through a global protein-centric lens also means ignoring the overall benefits of ecological aquaculture (eg polytrophic systems) and the needs of many communities around the world. For some communities, small-scale fisheries and aquaculture systems are a source of guaranteed livelihoods, healthy and sustainable diets.

Who came up with, exploited and promoted this claim?

  Aquaculture; Marine Scientists; Environmental Organizations; Governments and International Organizations

What is the problem they define?

  Wild capture fisheries are unsustainable and more protein-rich foods are needed

What is the suggested solution?

  Continued expansion, upgrades and technological improvements in aquaculture, especially input-intensive single-species farming

Which issues are ignored?

  Community livelihoods; environmental pollution, resource depletion and knock-on effects on food security; ecological aquaculture models; power relations

Statement 7: "Technological advances can rapidly reduce the negative impacts of livestock farming"

  Technological innovation is often highlighted as a means to reduce impacts and increase the productivity of industrialized livestock systems. "Precision farming" technology packages and new breeding methods marketed by agribusinesses may bring initial gains, but they will still enhance the consistency and density of animals produced, creating environmental and epidemiological risks and causing further problems ( There is usually a time lag) and weakens the resilience of the industry.

  In addition, technological improvements are often designed for large farms, ignoring the needs of small producers. As such, these innovation paths are unlikely to replace broader reforms of the current agri-food system, often simply shifting the focus away from systemic issues.

Who came up with, exploited and promoted this claim?

  Agribusiness; Livestock Association; Meat Processor; Global Partnership for Agricultural Development

What is the problem they define?

  The problem of animal source food production is a technical problem

What is the suggested solution?

  Better farming techniques, precision digitization, waste digesters, vaccines, and more

Which issues are ignored?

  Diversifying agroecology; path dependence and opportunity costs; small-scale farming and redesign of livestock systems

Statement 8: "Regenerative livestock systems can solve environmental problems such as climate change and soil degradation"

  According to a series of claims, moving large numbers of animals to rotational grazing systems is the answer to livestock environmental problems. Evidence confirms that well-managed pasture systems show considerable soil carbon sequestration potential by dedicating marginal land to animal husbandry to increase efficiency. However, some claims about the potential of "regenerative livestock management" and "carbon agriculture" risk exaggerating the ability of soils to sequester carbon while separating greenhouse gases from other interconnected challenges, such as biodiversity loss.

  At the same time, corporate-led programs have reduced regenerative agriculture to a universal management remedy, lacking the overall vision and structural support needed to redesign production systems for farmers. All in all, the discussion around regenerative livestock solutions may just serve to justify future high levels of production and consumption of animal-based foods.

Who came up with, exploited and promoted this claim?

  Large landowners and livestock producers; major food processors, manufacturers and retailers; influential investors; carbon credit companies; some civil society organizations

What is the problem they define?

  Soil degradation, climate change and industrial farming

What is the suggested solution?

  Rotational grazing and regeneration management to sequester carbon in degraded soils

Which issues are ignored?

  Limits on carbon sequestration in agriculture; climate responsibility in other industries; social and political challenges, including land use complexities and legacy issues

  There is a lot of hype around meat and protein these days, but they focus narrowly on carbon emissions and ignore how food is produced. The hype fails to see the bigger picture of the entire food system, ignores differences between regions of the world, and focuses on oversimplified "magic" solutions. We should focus on achieving the transition to a 'sustainable food system' rather than a 'protein transition'; reforms in all aspects of agri-food sustainability should be prioritized, starting at the local and regional level, and realigning the innovation path of the agri-food industry and the public interest.