While the US has made significant strides in recent years, it still lags behind its international peers in public investment for alternative proteins, Carter told FoodNavigator-USA.
“When we look at the leaders in that space, it is a lot of countries that have nationally determined a strong economic and social benefit to alternative proteins,” Carter noted.
Countries like Denmark and Canada have identified protein-rich crops as a key export market and invested heavily in developing high-protein content crops and new products, fostering economic growth and sustainable agriculture, according to the report.
The European Union also has made substantial investments in biotechnology and biomanufacturing infrastructure. In contrast, the US has only recently begun to catch up, with alternative proteins mentioned in President Joe Biden’s executive order on the bioeconomy and subsequent funding opportunities from various government agencies.
Alternative proteins experienced a pivotal year in 2023
Governments and regulatory bodies worldwide demonstrated increasing support for alternative proteins, marked by substantial investments and groundbreaking policy changes.
The cultivated meat sector reached a significant milestone as the first products from UPSDE Foods and GOOD Meats were approved by FDA and USDA. However, following the regulatory green lights, this year both Alabama and Florida passed legislation banning the production and selling of cultivated meat, with additional states examining similar laws.
Global public investment in alternative proteins grew in 2023, totaling $523 million, for “an all-time investment total” of $1.67 billion, according to the report. Government funding directed $190 million toward research and development, $162 million for commercialization, and $170 million for initiatives that combined both.
While 2023 brought notable advancements, challenges persisted regarding producers’ market freedoms. Despite these obstacles, overall government support expanded. However, to fully unlock the economic and climate benefits of alternative proteins, significantly more investment is required. GFI estimates an annual funding need of $10.1 billion, with the 2023 investment of $348 million representing less than 4% of this target.
Public and private investment: A dual approach
Carter stressed the importance of both public and private investment in accelerating the alternative protein sector. While recent investments, such as the $51 million grant from the Department of Commerce to the iFAB Tech Hub in Illinois, are steps in the right direction, they pale in comparison to the investments made by other countries.
“We are over the moon to see a $51 million investment from the US, but that is just vanishingly small compared to other research priorities, other economic priorities. … I would say the chief difference with Europe [is] … green policies [are] more compelling for policymakers … but we are seeing the business case start to actually win over many more policymakers,” he said.
He highlighted that despite alternative proteins serving as a “compelling climate solution” to provide domestic agricultural economies, strengthening biotechnology and other benefits like mitigating the risk of a pandemic and reducing the risk of antimicrobial resistance, building the case for economic development will help expand the sector.
Carter underscored that government support is crucial for building a “successful and thriving” alternative protein ecosystem. Public research plays a vital role in pre-competitive research, developing breakthroughs that can benefit the entire sector. Carter cited examples like NASA’s development of memory foam that translated into a consumer product and DARPA’s Cornucopia program originally designed for fermentation in a highly specific battlefield application which could be leveraged for to increase food production for more people.
Public-private partnerships also play a critical role in bridging the gap between government resources and private sector innovation. Carter highlighted Canada’s Protein Industries Supercluster as an exemplary model, where government and private funds are matched to work on specific projects, fostering innovation and economic development, while avoiding duplicative research and “solving the problems that need to be solved.”
Cultivated meat: Challenges and opportunities
Cultivated meat, a promising technology within the alternative protein sector, faces both opportunities and challenges. Carter expressed disappointment over state-level bans on cultivated meat, viewing them as counterproductive to economic growth and innovation. However, he remained optimistic about the global trend towards government support for cultivated meat, with significant backing from countries, including the US, Israel, South Korea, Japan and China.
“By and large, the story is one of government support for cultivated meat – government confidence in this technology as something that’s going to bring a lot of jobs and a lot of good to consumers, and the trend line is going up,” Carter stated. He emphasized that public investment is critical for the sector to reach commercial scale operations and meet consumer demand.
Strategic national plans, industrial policy
One of the key highlights of the 2023 report is the inclusion of alternative proteins in national biotechnology plans. Countries like China, the US and the UK have integrated alternative proteins into their bioeconomy strategies, leading to increased support and a cohesive whole-of-government approach.
“Alternative proteins as part of these national strategies is a significant development,” Carter noted, citing the decrease in bioreactor costs in China and increased funding opportunities in the US and UK.