Fi Global Insights is part of the Informa Markets Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Debunking alternative protein myths: What’s true and what’s holding the category back?

Article-Debunking alternative protein myths: What’s true and what’s holding the category back?

© iStock/ArtMarie RS, Plant-based alternative protein, veggie burger, ArtMarie, iStock-1480628272.jpg
Misconceptions about the alternative protein market may be stifling innovation. David Brandes, CEO and co-founder of Planetary Group, discusses these perceptions and offers advice for companies looking to overcome such challenges.

While speaking at the Hack Summit in Lausanne this June, Brandes, from Planetary Group – a B2B company that produces mycoprotein and operates a global network of industrial-scale precision fermentation facilities – explored myths about the alternative protein market that often mislead companies, investors, and stakeholders alike.

Myth # 1: The plant-based meat market is declining

There is a perception that the plant-based meat market is in decline. Investors may make this assumption and question the market’s growth based on a specific companies performances. Brandes used the example of plant-based meat company, Beyond Meat, which has witnessed slumping sales and as a result in 2023 had to cut 19% of its staff. “Sales were less in the last quarter than in the previous quarter. So, is that indicative of the industry?" Brandes asked.

He pointed to data from Statista which suggests that the global plant-based meat market is actually on a growth trajectory – from 10 to 22% globally from 2024 to 2028.

This growth does vary by region and market segment but remains high overall. "It's a double-digit growth rate, which I think is a fantastic message. And we shouldn’t forget that,” Brandes added.

Myth # 2: Current alternative protein products are sufficient

According to Brandes, more innovation is needed, and it is certainly on the horizon. When it comes to product choice, the alternative protein industry has evolved through different generations. We are currently in the second, and on the brink of the third generation. 

The first generation included basic meat alternatives like tofu and seitan, while the second generation introduced meat analogues, albeit with long ingredient lists and moderate taste, Brandes added. Now the emerging third generation, which Brandes finds exciting, aims to address these gaps with fermentation and cell cultivation, offering improved products.

Some of these third generation innovations include French startup Edonia’s micro-algae replacement for minced meat, Bosque Foods range of mycelium-based alternative proteins, and Ivy Farm’s cultivated meat, which has one of the largest pilot plant facilities in Europe, according to its CEO Rich Dillon.

Myth # 3: Attributes like sustainability, taste, and clean label are the only factors needed for market success

These attributes are essential, said Brandes, but consumers consider them to be basic requirements.

"It has to taste good, it has to have a good texture, that's a given. It should be sustainable, but nobody's paying for that, it should be clean label, but nobody's paying for that,” Brandes said. The primary factor influencing consumer purchases is cost. "The answer is only cost because all of the above is a given," he added.

In times of economic difficulty, affordability becomes even more crucial, and consumers prioritise affordable alternative protein options that offer good value for money. According to a report by the non-profit organisation that advocates for an animal-free food system, ProVeg International, consumers are more likely to buy plant-based meat alternatives over animal-meat alternatives when the former is cheaper. The report also noted that most consumers want plant-based meat alternatives to be priced equivalently to animal-based meat and similarly subsidised by the government.

We're voting with our wallets and we're buying what's, at least in economically challenging times, obtainable and what is closest to parity with, for example, a chicken product,” said Brandes.

Myth # 4: Achieving cost parity with traditional meat is unattainable for alternative protein products

There is a lot of scepticism surrounding whether alternative protein products can match the cost of traditional meat. Brandes said that mycoprotein (also known as mycelium-based protein) is already at a stage where it can match the cost of chicken, demonstrating the potential for other alternative products to do the same.

When it comes to precision fermentation products, it’s a mixed bag. Brandes noted that lactoferrin, a protein found in cow milk, is a very high-value compound, with a retail price of up to $1,400 per kilogram. He argued that precision fermentation can make high-value compounds more economically viable, but the story is slightly more complex for lower-value compounds.

Reaching parity for lower-value compounds, like whey, through precision fermentation is a challenge. The cost of producing precision-fermented whey is high, while the sales price for traditional whey is much lower.

Elaborating on this, Brandes explained that the cost challenges stem largely from production, which includes feedstock costs and other production expenses. He said that feedstock alone, which refers to the materials used to feed the fermentation process, can account for about 50 to 60% of the total cost.