Report on circular economy potential of alternative proteins
Creators: name: Agnarsson, Sveinn
name: Sigurjónsson, Hafþór Ægir
name: Dillman, Kevin
name: Rúnudóttir, Anna-Bryndís
name: Smárason, Birgir Örn
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2022
Subjects: Protein, alternative protein, sustainability assessment, circular economy

description: Food systems are of vital importance as they sustain human life and play a fundamental role in contributing to socio-economic sectors globally. Human population is expected to reach 9.7 billion by 2050, according to the United Nations’ (UN) report on World Population Prospects. Recent research suggests that agricultural production globally must rise by 70% to meet this demand. However, there are significant challenges present in meeting this demand. These include the substantial negative environmental and social impacts the current system produces, including natural resource and land depletion, GHG emissions, waste generation, and resource and pollution inequality. In order to face these challenges, the EU has set a research and innovation policy which covers the entire food chain to develop resilient and sustainable food systems. One means of achieving this objective is to increase the circularity and resource efficiency of food systems, especially via the production of alternative proteins. This report aids the EU policy by showing the circularity and environmental benefit potential of alternative proteins (algae, single cell protein, black soldier fly, and crickets). Alternative proteins are an important field of research because protein is an essential macronutrient that is found throughout the body. Protein is made from amino acids, nine of which – the so called essential amino acids – must come from food. As such, protein is therefore a key part of any diet. In the scientific opinion of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the average requirement of protein for healthy adults should equal 0.66 g protein/kg body weight per day. This rate is applicable to both high quality protein and to protein in mixed diets. A person weighing 80 kg should therefore consume 53 g per day. Alternative protein forms an important subset of protein, defined by protein-rich ingredients sources from plants, insects, fungi (mycoprotein), or by means of tissue culture as a substitution for conventional animal-based protein. Research has already hinted at some benefits compared to traditional proteins, including higher nutritional values and less environmental impacts. However, further research is needed to confirm these initial studies. Another recently rapidly expanding field of interest in the study of more sustainable food systems is the application circular economy (CE) principles to food systems. Most of the current research focuses on the circular economy approaches to food waste, however, the circular economy is much broader. CE principles are concerned with the creation of selfsustaining and sustainable value chain systems, in which materials are used repeatedly. Several studies have highlighted the benefits of circular food production, as opposed to traditional production, to the environment by using less resources and producing less waste and emissions. In addition, several case studies have highlighted the benefits of alternative proteins, in terms of nutritional value and the environment. Furthermore, socio-technical transition theory highlights how niche innovations, such as CE integration in food systems and alternative proteins, have the potential to disrupt socio-technical regimes, thereby bringing positive change. Others highlight the challenges associated with CE integration into food systems, in particular concerning alternative protein production. This work addresses both the potential benefits and challenges, specifically in relation to alternative proteins and circularity. Still, further research into CE principles in food systems is needed as it is difficult to apply one circular economy approach within the industry as broader applications are rarely relevant to individual food systems. In this work, we took a case study approach to analyze four niche innovations in alternative protein production. The results of this work show that alternative proteins have the potential to reduce the environmental impacts from traditional protein production when compared to proteins which have a high environmental impact such as beef, where it was found that across all case studies alternative proteins had a 79-99% lower carbon footprint per kg protein. However, their processes still need to develop and scale in order to improve beyond lower carbon protein sources such as fishmeal derived from anchovy, which may be more representative of what alternatives may need to replace. It was seen that implementing circular economy actions into these processes would serve to reduce the carbon footprint of the different case studies (2-72% reductions across case studies). However, the results of the circularity assessment, indicators, and LCA results showed that not all circularity options are made equal. Even in the early development stages, alternative proteins production processes have been shown to differ substantially. Therefore, finding one-size-fits-all approach to implementing circular economy principles to the broader food system is difficult and would be of little practical use. However, applying a combined LCA and circular economy approach provides the benefits of understanding the most critical inputs and potential circular approaches to them, while simultaneously identifying outputs to be of use to other agents or which can be used repeatedly within the production process. While this study is valuable to bridge the research gap within the circular economy literature especially relating to food systems, this work has several limitations. Firstly, there is some degree of criticism associated with the application of the theory of multilevel socio-technical transitions. This criticism concerns delineation, possibilities of cross-fertilization between regimes, and specific characteristics of niches to be able to be a platform for further development of the new technology. Another limitation more relevant refers to the differences in data quality of the four niche innovations studies. The results of an LCA are reliant on the data quality of the inputs, and thus for example in the case of cricket rearing in which all processing data beyond the rearing of the crickets could not be attained because they are performed by third parties, the quality of the results is then reduced. Lacking data can make a process seem more beneficial than it may actually be. The results presented in this study are valuable, as they highlight policy implications to support the transition towards a circular economy in food systems. Future policies to support CE practices and sustainable food production could be aided through R&amp;D funding. In addition, the EU could support the creation of a system for companies to report inputs and outputs, thereby acting as a circular economy database. This policy would add tremendous value to support CE implementation as low quality data forms one of the greatest challenges to date. Moreover, such a system might help facilitate partnerships between companies, which otherwise might not have formed due to the lack of a platform to find suitable partners.