May 10, 2022

Conglomerates have bought out several smaller companies as the meat substitute market is predicted to grow rapidly Meat alternatives at a supermarket in London. Big meat companies have been investing heavily in the alternative protein market. Photograph: Nathaniel Noir/Alamy Meat alternatives at a supermarket in London. Big meat companies have been investing heavily in the alternative protein market. Photograph: Nathaniel Noir/Alamy Supported by Last modified on Tue 10 May 2022 06.01 EDT Big meat and food conglomerates threaten to push out smaller producers of meat alternatives in the same way they have affected other food industries, according to two recent reports. Meat companies such as JBS and Cargill have invested heavily in plant-based proteins and laboratory-grown meats in recent years and bought out several smaller companies, according to a report published Tuesday by the non-profit Food & Water Watch and a March report from IPES-Food, a coalition of food systems experts. The animal meat conglomerates are joining other food giants that already control about 80% of the meat alternative market, including Kellogg’s, which owns the MorningStar Farms brand, and Conagra, which owns Gardein. “With most of these products you won’t see the parent company’s name on the label,” said Philip Howard, an associate professor at Michigan State University and lead author of the IPES-Food report. People buying meat alternative products “may not realize they’re supporting those big companies”, he added. The meat substitute market is predicted to grow rapidly , from $4.2bn in sales in 2020 to $28bn in 2025, according to IPES-Food. Much of that growth will come from the already robust plant-based meat industry, the report said, but several conglomerates have also invested hundreds of millions to develop lab-grown meat – meat produced in bioreactors without the need to slaughter animals. Both plant-based and lab-grown meat producers say their products are better for the environment than meat. Plant-based alternatives have a median carbon footprint 93% smaller than beef, according to a report from Johns Hopkins University. And German scientists have said replacing even 20% of the world’s beef consumption with microbial proteins such as Quorn could cut deforestation in half. Even as the meat industry downplays the value of fake meat , as pressure grows from climate scientists and other experts to dramatically reduce meat consumption, some big meat companies may be looking for other revenue streams. Cargill has been active in the sector, investing in lab-grown meat company Aleph Farms and creating its own plant proteins. Tyson Foods is selling plant-based meats under its Raised & Rooted brand and has invested in several plant-based and lab-grown meat companies. JBS, the world’s biggest meat company, last year bought lab-grown meat firm BioTech Foods and also Dutch plant-based meat company Vivera , which has the corporate tagline: “Life is better when you eat less meat.” “They’re covering their bases because this is an area that’s growing very quickly,” Howard said. “These companies have gotten big and powerful by using every strategy they can.” US federal regulators are doing little to stop consolidation in the alternative meat sector, said Amanda Starbuck, research director for Food & Water Watch, who added that it could end up looking similar to the beef industry , where four companies – JBS, Cargill, Tyson Foods and National Beef Packing – control 85% of the industry. “Plant-based meat brands are hardly an alternative to the current system if they continue to entrench corporate power,” concludes the Food & Water Watch report. “It shows the futility of voting with your dollar,” Starbuck said. It’s a concern echoed in the IPES-Food report, which says corporate control threatens to undermine gains from reducing reliance on animals by replicating some of the problems of the traditional meat industry, including mass-produced, monocultured ingredients and energy-consuming methods. Increases in meat alternatives could “reinforce the power relations that keep current systems in place, and fail to address the question of how systemic changes will be achieved,” notes the report.