Protein Diversification Think Tank BLOG: Engaging farmers in protein diversification

Farming must evolve in response to the pressing challenges posed by rising geopolitical tensions, the health and obesity crisis, climate change and others, which have put matters like food security, resilience, affordability or secure supply chains back on the table. To thrive in this new landscape, farmers and other food system actors need to consider adopting practices aligned with the principles of protein diversification and regenerative agriculture.

However, achieving this paradigm shift requires meaningful engagement with all actors in the food system, starting with farmers, to understand their perspectives and concerns. By collaborating closely, we can design models and pathways that enable these actors to lead the way in this transformation. This is why the EIT Food Protein Diversification Think Tank has initiated direct engagement with a broad range of stakeholders along the farming value chain.

In our conversations with representatives of farmers, food producers, non-profit organisations, academics and other food system actors, we have identified a communication gap between advocates of protein diversification and some of these stakeholders. This gap indicates the need for a new way of talking about protein diversification. This should start with engaging farmers in discussions about their opinions, needs, problems and expectations and emphasise the benefits of protein diversification for the different food and farming actors as business operators, environmental stewards, and members of their rural communities. To do so, it is crucial to frame protein diversification as a pathway to a robust, resilient and sustainable food system and to new, competitive farming business models, rather than an end goal. Sustainability should be viewed through a broader lens, recognising it as a multifaceted concept that encompasses more than just environmental considerations.

To effectively convey the advantages of protein diversification, we need clear terminology, examples of successful adoption and implementations, and practical solutions that emphasise its benefits. These include income diversification, risk spreading, enhanced role in food production chains, as well as improved food security and economic viability.

Many farmers who have taken part in the Think Tank’s roundtable discussions feel that policymakers often impose decisions without fully grasping the realities farmers face, resulting in unfeasible policies. A notable example is the 2030 goal of allocating one-quarter of all agricultural land to organic farming. Similarly, policies like carbon credits need to build credibility by demonstrating their value as viable solutions that can support the many actors involved in the farming value chain.

The participants in the discussions expressed a need for greater clarity regarding the transition to a new business model. The transition from conventional to regenerative agriculture is estimated to take roughly five years, and during this time, farmers also expect support in the form of guidance and financing.

Synthesising these conversations, the Think Tank has proposed a three-way model for transition scenarios: the triptych. This model advocates for the integration of three pillars (agroecological practices, carbon co-financing, and protein diversification) to create a promising business model for food production. This approach will require further work to explore its various iterations and pathways.

Our conversations with various stakeholders indicate a general preference for a multi-pronged approach. This approach, which can take several forms, can help meet the growing demand for high-quality protein, while freeing up land for the cultivation of plant crops currently imported into the EU and ecosystem services. This opens new income opportunities for farmers and food producers while bolstering the economic and environmental sustainability of their operations, ensuring long-term competitiveness.

• New Lands for New Uses: A paradigm shift from yield- to circularity-focused models could free up to 71% of current agricultural land for other purposes (1). By shifting towards more diversified sources of proteins, we can reduce imports and allocate more land to agroecological farming and ecosystem services.
• Technological Opportunities: Biotechnology is set to play a key role in helping farmers and other food producers adapt to and mitigate climate change. As harvests become more unpredictable, innovative biotech solutions can help with income diversification and valorisation of side streams.
• Meat and Dairy as Partners: Respecting the role and value of livestock farmers has to be a cornerstone of the new approach, as diverse sources of proteins are intended to complement, not replace, meat and dairy consumption. Engaging with livestock farmers is crucial, in order to learn about their businesses and to explore potential benefits for them, such as their role as suppliers of initial cells and nutrient components required for the cell culture process.

Established networks, like EIT Food, can play a key role by supporting early adopters who wish to co-create a new business model. By providing financial support and connecting with expert advice, EIT Food can help alleviate the expected costs of transition, while simultaneously working as lighthouse projects.

The triptych approach can support the transition of the European agri-food value chain to more diversified sources of protein, but it can only succeed by understanding and managing the needs of all the different actors involved in the food system. It must address three crucial priorities: minimising risk for farmers, increasing their revenues and providing agroecological services.

To achieve these goals, the Think Tank recognises the importance of developing new business models that enable all different food system actors to integrate their existing practices into innovative frameworks. We can already draw lessons from ongoing projects and collaborative initiatives.

Implementing three-to-five-year contracts and fostering value chain collaboration will provide operators with much-needed certainty. For example, cooperatives can support farmers in making the shift to more diversified protein sources and in building plant-based value chains so that risks are spread and farmers receive guidance they require.

Food producers and farmers also highlighted that cooperation with retailers is essential, as retailers are key drivers of supply and demand for sustainable proteins. A great example of this in action is EIT Food’s GROW Project.

Companies across Europe are cutting down their emissions in line with science-based sustainability targets, and aiming for sustainable sourcing. There are also notable initiatives like Arla’s economic incentive-driven reward systems enabling farmers in the cooperative to reap financial rewards for practices which lower their farm’s carbon footprint, protect nature and improve biodiversity.

Protein diversification allows different food and farming actors to diversify their income sources. One such approach is for farmers to grow and process protein crops on-site. Renting on-site facilities to biotech companies offers another potential revenue stream, though it does require significant upfront investment.

Added value options are another avenue. One such initiative involves using grass for protein production, moving beyond its traditional use as feedstock. This initiative is a perfect example of integrating a conventional practice into the new paradigm, and one that has been very positively received by farmers in the Nordics.

While carbon farming schemes and credits offer potential benefits, they are also met with scepticism. Our discussion with farmers and other stakeholders revealed concerns about monitoring challenges, potential fraud, and issues with reversibility and scalability. Initiatives like Valio’s Climate Programme aim to provide solutions to these challenges by training farmers in effective carbon practices, but this remains an area in which much more data is needed.

Just as retailers can drive demand for different sources of proteins and engage in sustainable sourcing, public authorities stand to play a key role through procurement programmes. To do this successfully, they have to treat the farmers who supply produce as business operators. This means presenting them with solid, long-running business plans that make a strong economic case for the transition to more sustainable practices and diversified proteins.

The EIT Food Protein Diversification Think Tank is committed to further dialogue and providing a platform for farmers, other stakeholders and policymakers to collaborate in shaping a food system in which the adoption of diversified sources of protein helps to improve human health and agricultural sustainability.

We are at the cusp of necessary transitions in the agriculture and food sector that can offer new types of successful collaboration and business models with farmers at their centre. In the meantime, EIT Food and its Protein Diversification Think Tank welcomes any further contributions to advance and consolidate the reflection on farming and protein diversification. Please share your ideas and join the discussion by contacting us at PDThinkTank@eitfood.eu.

References:

1. Van Zanten, H. H. E., Simon, W., van Selm, B., Wacker, J., Maindl, T. I., Frehner, A., Hijbeek, R., van Ittersum, M. K., & Herrero, M. (2023). Circularity in Europe strengthens the sustainability of the global food system. Nature Food, 4(4), 320–330. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00734-9