Meat products contribute to almost one-third of humanity’s protein intake1. With population growth and increasing global wealth, meat production will have to increase by 200 million tonnes by 2050 to meet increasing demand2. However, the livestock sector is a significant contributor to environmental and human health problems and therefore safely and sustainably satisfying this demand will be a challenge. Innovative technologies such as lab cultured or in-vitro meat, have the potential to provide an alternative to conventional meat production. This document summarises the advantages and disadvantages of in-vitro meat and considers potential policy actions.
The livestock sector is globally important. It employs 1.3 billion people worldwide of which 600 million are smallholder farmers in the developing world3. It has a global value of $1.4 trillion4, accounting for 40% of agricultural gross domestic product2. Livestock products make up 33% of protein consumption globally5 and in the UK, government nutritional guidelines include meat as a source of protein for a healthy and balanced diet6. However, meat production poses a threat to both the environment and to public health. Livestock farming is currently the single largest anthropogenic user of land. Occupying a total area equivalent to 26% of the planet’s land surface it accounts for 70% of all agricultural land, 33% of which is used for animal feed alone1. Through land-use change, the livestock sector is also responsible for 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions making it the second largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions after the burning of fossil fuels7. Water use by the livestock sector is also substantial with livestock rearing in the UK accounting for 119 million m3 of water8. Public health implications of meat production are a further concern. For instance, antibiotic resistance is worsened by the high use of antibiotics in agriculture9,10 with around 45% of antibiotic use within the UK in farm animals11. Additionally, two of the world’s most serious viral outbreaks in recent years can be attributed to livestock farming12,13. In light of this, the UK government is committed to sustainably meeting increasing protein demand whilst minimising environmental and human health impacts. One way it aims to achieve this is through the development of new food technologies14.
One innovative approach that could support the sustainable intensification of agriculture is in-vitro meat production. This technology makes use of techniques in stem cell science and tissue engineering to cultivate meat outside of an animal. Muscle derived stem cells are isolated and cultured under controlled conditions where they proliferate into muscle tissue. Once mature, the new tissue can be harvested into an edible product15,16. As an alternative protein source, in-vitro meat offers a number of advantages. With no live animals required for production, the spread of animal-borne diseases should be prevented17. Furthermore, strict control over the manufacturing process has the potential to enable products to be nutritionally enhanced. Therefore, in-vitro meat could therefore provide the equivalent nutritional value of conventional meat and therefore satisfy UK government nutritional guidelines6,18. Environmental benefits are also promising. UK based research suggests that in-vitro meat production could produce up to 78-96% less greenhouse gas emissions, require 99% less land and use 82-96% less water than conventional meat production19. However, analyses in this study make assumptions based on the industrial processes used for scaling up in-vitro meat production. Follow up analyses predict higher levels of energy use than conventional meat production20 highlighting the large amount of uncertainty in these predictions21.
The in-vitro meat research field remains small. Currently, there are around 50 researchers globally working on its development22 with privately funded start-up companies also beginning to emerge23,24,25. Despite this, since the development of the first synthetic hamburger in 2013, notable progress has been made. In 2015, the first artificial meatballs were unveiled, and in March 2017, California based Memphis Meats produced the first lab cultured chicken and duck26. However, the technology required to mass produce cultured meat is not yet available and production costs remain high. Memphis Meats report a value of around £31,000/kg beef27, although this is substantially less than the £218,000 burger unveiled in 201328. For cultured meat production to reach a commercial scale, scientists and in-vitro meat developers are calling for sustained and increased investment so that research into refining production methods can be prioritised18,27. Researchers have also emphasised that technological assessments are necessary to highlight the challenges of integrating in-vitro meat into the existing food distribution system22.
Currently, a premarket safety assessment under the Novel Foods Regulation would be necessary before cultured meat could be legally marketed29. If approved, this would serve to define both conditions of use and labelling procedures29,30. However, as the food industry in the UK is mostly governed by EU law, the implications on existing novel food regulation of Britain leaving the EU are uncertain. However, Brexit may present opportunities for cultured meat products. Yet, given the infancy of cellular agriculture, new regulatory and classification frameworks may be necessary31. To increase chances of investment, in-vitro meat companies are suggesting the need for early involvement by regulatory bodies to ease the policy work required if cultured meat were to become commercially viable22.
Consumer acceptance is another concern for the prospect of in-vitro meat29. Questionnaires in the US and the Netherlands revealed 70% and 43% of participants would be keen to try in-vitro meat respectively32,33. However, the number of people willing to consume it regularly was substantially lower, with product appeal, safety and cost being the main concerns32. Since 2013, media and digital coverage of cultured meat has increased. For instance, TED talks34,35, a presentation at the World Economic Forum36 and even a fictitious proof of concept restaurant ‘Bistro In Vitro’37, are available online. All serve as avenues to engage the public with the possibility of in-vitro meat and assess the potential impact on food culture. Researchers are calling for further studies and public engagement to identify potential barriers to future in-vitro meat consumption and possible marketing strategies27.
With the global population expected to reach 9 billion in 2050, global meat production is projected to more than double from 229 million tonnes in 2001, to 465 million tonnes in 205038. It is therefore critical that alternative solutions to conventional meat production be explored that will address issues of food security whilst mitigating environmental and human health impacts. In-vitro meat could provide a promising solution, yet considerable research and funding is required before the product could become commercially available and socially acceptable to consumers.