To eat or not to eat: Cultured meat and its barriers ahead in transition

Abstract

Conventional meat (CVM) and the related livestock industry are considered to contribute significantly to negative environmental impacts, animal suffering and threats to public health. Nevertheless, the demand for meat is still growing which is majorly due to global population growth. Lab-grown cultured meat (CM) is anticipated to be environmental-friendlier, animal-friendlier and potentially allows for public health benefits. However, it is not yet introduced in the market and faces multiple development challenges related to the technology, consumer acceptance and socio-politics. Furthermore, while CM stakeholders possibly aim for a meat transition, the challenges are hardly addressed in transition context. Transitions are generally studied across the levels of landscapes, regimes and niches using the Multi-level perspective (MLP). Moreover, Strategic niche management (SNM) can be used for assessing the internal processes that determine the success of a niche. On the basis of the MLP, SNM and the CM niche industry, this research therefore is intended to answer the following research question: What are the barriers to the transition of cultured meat from niche to regime perceived by stakeholders? Hence, this study provides niche stakeholders insight into supporting and accelerating a CM transition. For this purpose, the case of the Dutch CM industry is chosen. By means of conducting interviews with academic, business, government and society stakeholders combined with an analysis of related policy documents, 12 barriers are identified. The landscape level involves mutually reinforcing barriers (The environmental paradox & The Dutch political climate). The CVM regime level also involves reinforcing barriers that provides its dominant and stable character (Socio-Cultural lock-in, Techno-Economic lock-in, Institutional-Political lock-in and Regime perspectives). The CM niche industry level in turn, involves barriers that impede the process of the articulation of expectations (Operational constraints & Imagining), impedes network formations (Insufficient incentives & Network disunity) and impedes learning processes (Limited accumulation of knowledge & Dependent on innovation diversity). As these niche processes also reinforce each other, the CM niche industry possibly is entangled in a vicious circle, affecting niche nurturing and hindering reciprocal interactions between the levels. The barrier interactions and reciprocal interactions between the levels combined, determine that the window of opportunity for a CM transition is potentially only limitedly on the rise. Moreover, the effects of moderate landscape change, gradual regime reorientation to the landscape, limited institutional change and an insufficiently well-developed niche, are indicators that the transition is potentially on a transformation pathway. Based on the theoretical implications of this study, future research should aid a better articulation of niche expectations by the CM industry to attract new stakeholders and enhance learning processes. Furthermore, studying the CVM regime capabilities and specifying intentions in relation with CM, especially since the regime barriers could become CM enablers, potentially gives further insight into how the transition could be governed. With regard to practical implications, the potentially occurring transformational directionality failures could be addressed with mission-oriented innovation policies. Moreover, the possible transformational demand articulation failures would optimally be resolved if participation possibilities with the general public for exploration would be implemented. The mentioned failures also relate to transformational reflexivity failures for which CM stakeholders should anticipate the effects that impact the pathways for transition. Furthermore, when comparing the used policy documents with the interviews, the documents predominantly address the need for facilities and incentives regarding the CM niche industry. Although this also is constructive and necessary for the establishment of the Dutch CM industry, the influential landscape and regime developments are hardly considered. Hence, addressing the regime with true pricing for CVM and the landscape with implementing societal challenge-based mission policy instruments, possibly also accelerates the transition. Although CM is still fraught with uncertainty and has not yet been introduced in the market, approved by the regulatory authorities and is yet to be scaled up, it could have a major impact on a better sustainable future. In the end, as it will benefit all, that projection in itself makes CM worthy of further investigation.