Socio-ecological research to understand the potential impacts of alternative protein sources in the UK and Europe

The food system feeds societies, employs billions of people, and underpins international aspirations such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. However, it is responsible for one-third of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, threatens more species than any other activity, uses over half of all nitrogen and phosphorus, and over 70% of all freshwater. Balancing

these benefits and pressures is essential for human wellbeing and the liveability of both specific places and the planet. These environmental pressures come disproportionately from the production of animal products (e.g. 57% of food system emissions come from livestock production, Xu et al 2021), largely due to

their low environmental efficiency compared with plant-based foods (Poore & Nemecek 2018). Reducing consumption of animal products in wealthy countries and avoiding shifts to high-meat diets as economies develop is therefore essential to maintain a liveable environment. However, attempts to reduce consumption may be resisted due to the social and cultural importance of

animal products and production systems, strong relationships between wealth and consumption, suggesting aspirational consumption (Tilman et al 2011), and political aversion to any perceived limiting of consumer choice. In this context, alternative proteins (APs) offer a potential solution. APs include plant-based,

cultivated and fermentation-made meat, eggs, dairy, and seafood, which have significantly lower environmental impacts than animal-based counterparts. They may also offer health benefits at the individual level (e.g. higher fibre, lower calorie density) and societal level (e.g. reducing risks from zoonotic diseases and antimicrobial resistance). Importantly, they may enable consumers to

substitute lower-impact products into diets while continuing to access familiar tastes and dishes. However, the growth of APs has not been universally welcomed, being described as a technological solution that fails to address the complex social, economic and cultural factors associated with food production and consumption. In addition, the social, cultural, economic, and

ecological transformations that could result from a widescale shift to APs are understudied. Instead, most research has focused on technical product development or life cycle assessments of specific products. Given the speed and scale of AP development there is an urgent need to address this knowledge

gap. This interdisciplinary project has been co-designed with the European team of the Good Food Institute-the world's leading AP-focused international third-sector organisation-to answer the overarching question: "How will alternative proteins affect people and the environment in the UK and Europe over coming decades?".

To do so, the student will tackle three linked questions: (1) How are different APs likely to be accepted in different European contexts? (2) How could European demand for different proteins change up to 2050? (3) What would the social, economic, and environmental impacts of meeting this demand be? This interdisciplinary project will make empirical and theoretical contributions to a range of

disciplines, including economics, land economy, and environmental social sciences. For example, providing insight into the substitutability of different protein sources across cultures; the liveability implications of different ways of meeting future food demand; and how shifts to APs could affect people's relationships with their environments.