Novel technologies such as precision fermentation and cellular agriculture have the potential to be leveraged by low-income nations as well as developed economies, says think tank RethinkX.
Precision fermentation and cellular agriculture have been hailed as two technologies that could revolutionise the food system by decoupling food production from land use and contributing to food supply security.
With much of the noise around these technologies emanating from the US and UK, it is easy to assume that these markets will lead their implementation. However, according to thinktank RethinkX, this does not necessarily have to be the case – any region, nation, or even city or local community can reap the rewards of early adoption of precision fermentation and cellular agriculture.
“In the case of precision fermentation and cellular agriculture, both the technologies and the disruption they cause have the potential to be economic and geopolitical equalisers. This is because there are no major geographic or economic barriers to the food disruption, and the technologies themselves are inherently amenable to decentralisation,” wrote RethinkX in a recent blog.
We caught up with the blog’s author, RethinkX research analyst Taylor Hinds, to delve into some of these ideas in more depth and discuss how this disruption could play out in practice. How can it be that there are no economic barriers to the adoption of precision fermentation and cellular agriculture when it requires large investments in concrete, steel, plastic and electric utilities, for example?
Hinds agreed that the infrastructure required to create a full-scale precision fermentation food system in any country or region will require significant capital, materials and expertise, but pointed out that this is on the same scale as other fundamental infrastructure that countries of all income levels have implemented in the past.
“Energy systems, sanitation infrastructure, transportation and communication networks all fall into this category. We must consider that government leaders would allocate similar resources to a sector as fundamental as food – especially because once full-scale infrastructure is complete, the entire region will have access to efficient, clean and abundant protein at just about the cost of sugar,” she told this publication.
She added that full-scale implementation does not have to be achieved at once or by one single entity, thereby easing the investment burden.
“An inherent feature of precision fermentation as a food production system is that it is both decentralised and viable at multiple scales,” she said.
To illustrate this point, she used the example of the beer brewing industry, saying: “The production process is not as complex, but is similar enough to precision fermentation that industry scale-up and expansion could happen in a similar fashion; individuals or businesses can begin food production at the single tank or craft brewery scale. Corporations and governments can develop industrial scale.
“Precision fermentation does not need centralised operation, financing and system control; these decentralised distributed production hubs will be able to produce and distribute their goods independently and at reasonable capital cost.”
Even if a decentralised, staged approach can ease the economic burden of infrastructure development, there is still the environmental burden to consider. If the sector wishes to have a significant impact, it will require the buildout of thousands of fermentation tanks and dozens, if not hundreds of facilities. How will this affect communities already dealing with the environmental and social impacts of mining, tech manufacturing, and waste disposal?
According to Hinds, countries that have an animal agriculture system that is currently contributing to the environmental and social issues of the community will find that through disruption, these issues will resolve themselves.
“Whether it is water or air pollution from manure, greenhouse gas emissions, water scarcity, land use disputes, animal welfare violations, or adverse worker conditions, precision fermentation will have a net positive effect in the community,” she said.
“Precision fermentation is about 100 times more land efficient, 10 to 25 times more feedstock efficient, 20 times more time efficient, and 10 times more water efficient than industrial animal agriculture, and will produce an order of magnitude less waste.”
Lower income regions and nations may even be better placed than more developed economies to adopt these novel technologies, according to RethinkX.
“Countries that do not have established industrialised food systems in place already may even have an advantage. They are not bogged down by incumbents, stranded assets, lobbyists or entrenched ideas about what a food system should look like. They can leapfrog over the production inefficiencies and negative externalities of the old systems, build a new food system from the ground up, and reap the benefits from the outset,” said Hinds.
However, she said that in order for this to happen, governments and policymakers need to ensure that the regulatory environment and end markets are conducive to and supportive of new businesses, infrastructure projects and finished products starting up within the country and perhaps coming from abroad.
While it is still early days for precision fermentation and other novel food technologies, there is promising startup activity in the Global South, according to RethinkX.
Hinds said South Africa was proving to be “a bit of a hub”, with De Novo Foodlabs, New Form Foods, Wild Bio and Sea-Stematic all hailing from there. Then there is MUU and Fermbox Bio in Thailand, Phyx44 and Mycovation in India, and Forma Foods in Mexico.
“We have no doubts that many more regions, countries, governments, companies and individuals will embrace these technologies in the coming years,” she said.
