EASAC has published a new report, Meat Alternatives, which examines how meat substitutes could reduce the environmental impacts of the food system and support public health. The report provides policymakers with a science-based roadmap towards more sustainable protein production and consumption – but also highlights that EU policies and regulatory frameworks are not yet keeping pace with technological development.
The European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EASAC), a collaboration of the national science academies of EU Member States, presents in the report a comprehensive overview of meat alternatives – from plant- and insect-based proteins to microbial proteins and cultivated meat. The sector is growing rapidly, opening new opportunities but also presenting challenges. The report evaluates the scientific, technological, societal, and regulatory developments associated with these alternatives. The publication is particularly timely as the EU is currently preparing a Protein Strategy to strengthen sustainable food systems.
According to the Chair of the Working Group, Professor Bert Rima: “The EU needs to act now if it wants to stay at the forefront of the protein transition, ensure food security, and achieve its climate and biodiversity goals. Policies are needed that support innovation in meat alternatives, while at the same time safeguarding food safety and consumer protection. Europe’s future generations are likely to grow up with diets containing less meat – and that may be both necessary and beneficial. The report provides guidance on how people can reduce their meat consumption and make better choices.”
Environmental and health perspectives
The report shows that many meat alternatives have a significantly smaller environmental footprint than conventional meat, particularly compared with beef production. Insect-, plant- and microbial proteins provide efficient protein sources with minimal environmental impacts when produced using sustainable feedstocks. Cultivated meat could also deliver sustainability benefits if powered by renewable energy.
However, the picture is not simple. Alongside environmental benefits, the report stresses the need to consider health and nutrition impacts, consumer attitudes, as well as technological, economic, and regulatory aspects. Meat alternatives can support diverse and balanced diets, but not all products are nutritionally equivalent – some processed plant-based foods contain excessive salt or saturated fats. Moreover, more research is needed on the long-term impacts of new products such as cultivated meat and microbial proteins.
Consumer trust is key
Policymakers, industry, farmers, researchers, and consumers all need to work together to ensure regulation is transparent, communication honest, and innovation safe and sustainable. For consumers, one of the most important steps would be the adoption of clear, mandatory labelling standards covering nutrition, processing, and environmental footprint. Ongoing research and proactive policy measures are also essential to ensure new technologies support sustainable protein production and enable informed dietary choices.
Consumer trust is a decisive factor in the uptake of meat alternatives. Perceptions of naturalness, taste, price, and clear labelling are critical in shaping purchasing decisions. Younger and urban consumers are generally more open to alternative proteins, especially those concerned about animal welfare and climate change.
“Consumer trust can break easily – especially if products are overhyped or misleadingly labelled,” warns Professor Hanna Tuomisto of the University of Helsinki and the Natural Resources Institute Finland, one of the report’s authors. “We need full transparency – not only on ingredients, but also on environmental impacts and processing.”
“In Finland, for example, we already have consumer groups who are ready to eat these new products regularly. But there is also a large group of sceptics and even those strongly opposed. Transparency in production, reliable information, and encouragement to try the products could help increase acceptance of alternative proteins,” explains Senior Researcher Toni Ryynänen from the University of Helsinki’s Ruralia Institute.
Policy recommendations
The report sets out six key measures for EU policymakers to advance sustainable protein production and consumption: clear and mandatory labelling standards; a coherent policy and regulatory framework; stronger environmental sustainability standards; better consumer awareness; support for innovation and farmer adaptation; and attention to ethical and societal aspects.
“Europe has the tools and innovation power to be a global leader, but we need more than technological solutions. The social and political shaping of the protein transition will determine its success. Without coordinated action, there is a risk of losing both environmental benefits and public trust,” Professor Hanna Tuomisto notes.
Read the report: Meat Alternatives
The European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EASAC) is a cooperation organization of European science academies. The Council of Finnish Academies (CoFA) is a national member of EASAC.