A REPORT led by the Royal Agricultural University (RAU) has looked into the possibility of farmers helping in the production of cultured meat. 

Titled Culture Clash? What cultured meat could mean for UK farming, the report was led by a team at the Cirencester university. It suggests that using by-products from farming could make cultured meat more environmentally sustainable and cheaper. 

The research also investigated the threats and opportunities of cultured meat, as seen by a range of farmers. 

Professor Tom MacMillan, Elizabeth Creak Chair in Rural Policy and Strategy at the RAU, who led the study, said: “The environmental cost of meat production globally means we need to throttle back, and widening the range of safe, tasty, and affordable alternatives to traditional meat can help.

"While the jury is out on whether cultured meat will fit the bill, we’ve found that it needn’t spell disaster for farmers. The farmers who spoke to us for this study had lots of concerns about the technology but, for the most part, had many bigger challenges on their plates. Some were also interested in its opportunities, from supplying raw materials to even producing it on their farms.

“Some places around the world have banned cultured meat in the name of protecting farming. But instead of seeing this as ‘all or nothing’, we explored where there could be win-wins. Building bridges with farmers is certainly in the cultured meat companies’ interests, as some are starting to see. More surprisingly, we found that keeping the door open may serve farmers better too.”

To read the full report, click here. 

The research revealed that possible by-products that could be used in cultured meat production, such as the leftovers from making rapeseed oil, some of which currently goes to animal feed, and blood from traditional meat production, which is sometimes used as fertiliser or wasted. Both are rich in amino acids which are the costliest and least sustainable ingredients used to grow cultured meat.

This report found that using these by-products, instead of synthetic amino acids, could reduce the environmental footprint of cultured meat by using less energy, water, and land, and make the end product more affordable.

The RAU team partnered with nine farms in the UK to find out their views on cultured meat. The report found that compared with challenges such as changing weather patterns and global commodity markets, the threat of competition from cultured meat felt like a ‘slow burn’ to them.

One of the farmers who contributed to the study said: “The cultured meat industry needs to talk more about what they’re up to, rather than keeping everything behind closed doors. But I also think that us farmers could listen a bit more too.”