Research comparing funding for alternative proteins by 10 governments around the world puts Australia in last place, alternative protein think tank, Food Frontier, found. But there were some positives regarding regulation and R&D.
Food Frontier’s Government support for alternative proteins scorecard reveals countries including Singapore, Israel, US, and Canada are “picking up the pace” when it comes to transitioning towards more alternative proteins.
The scorecard examined government support for alternative proteins in 10 countries across 10 key areas critical to the success of the alternative proteins industry:
- a national strategy that is either exclusive to alternative proteins or includes alternative proteins in some capacity, such as Denmark’s national action plan for plant-based foods or the UK’s national vision for engineering biology, which includes cellular agriculture;
- a climate strategy that includes mention of alternative proteins;
- plant protein farmer incentives, like Germany’s funding for farmers transitioning away from traditional animal agriculture;
- a regulatory framework dedicated to the approval of novel proteins;
- cultivated meat products are approved for sale;
- precision fermentation dairy products are approved for sale;
- total public funding is over US$100m (up to 2023), as reported by GFI’s 2023 State of Global Policy;
- sufficient support for alternative protein infrastructure development;
- support for research and development; and
- dietary guidelines prioritise plant proteins.
The research found Australia fell dramatically short across 10 key parameters considered crucial for the growth of the industry, scoring just 1.5 compared to Canada and Singapore’s score of 7.5.
Food Frontier CEO, Dr Simon Eassom, said, “This comparison clearly indicates where Australia is lagging and should serve as a wake-up call to the opportunities available.
“Certain countries have already established themselves as global leaders in the plant-based and cultivated meat industries and capitalising on the benefits of this. With the right government support, Australia can thrive in this sector too and cement its own place as a leader in food and agricultural production.”
There were some positive scores, including a regulatory framework suitable for novel proteins and strong research and development.
But Australia had not progressed in several key areas, including dietary guidelines that prioritise plant proteins (although the guidelines are currently being updated, with the potential for sustainability messaging to be included), plant protein farmer incentives, sufficient support for infrastructure, and adequate funding.
This places Australia at a significant disadvantage, the think tank said.
According to the Good Food Institute’s 2023 State of Global Policy, the US, Canada, Denmark, and Singapore have each surpassed US$100 million for total public funding (up to 2023). The amount in Australia was US$53.7 million.
Food Frontier said Australia was the only country on the scorecard to not have a national strategy that includes alternative proteins, however it was aware of government bodies, like the Climate Change Authority, that are investigating alternative proteins in their recommendations to government.
Globally, governments are setting clear targets and roadmaps for success by implementing these strategies, such as Singapore’s ‘30 by 30’ food security initiative and Denmark’s plant-based action plan.
Eassom said, “It’s great to note that six out of 11 countries have implemented a climate strategy that mentions alternative proteins. This is a significant step forward, as we know food systems contribute between one-quarter and one-third of all greenhouse gas emissions and must evolve to be more sustainable if we hope to mitigate the effects of the climate crisis.”
In its recent Alternative proteins and food systems transformation report, Food Frontier recommended a national food plan that supports existing agrifood industries to become more sustainable and prioritises the growth of innovative food industries including alternative proteins.
Australia should take advantage of its proximity to Asia, as it is well positioned to tap into the region’s growing appetite for plant-based and cultivated proteins, it said.
“Not only will embracing alternative proteins provide value add to the economy, it also presents a chance for Australian farmers and grain growers to diversify their revenue streams and adapt to changing consumer preferences.
“Australia has the potential to remain competitive in the global food industry, but to do so we need far more decisive action across all 10 critical areas,” Eassom said.
