The Protein Horizon

the landscape of alternative protein technologies

enabling future food experiences

Disclaimer: There is currently no harmonised legal definition for naturalness of food ingredients.
Any communication to end consumers must be done according to the appropriate local regulations.
 A Givaudan white paper,
in collaboration with the
University of California,
Berkeley.
This paper summarises the key findings of
a research report prepared by students of
the University of California (UC), Berkeley
Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering
Product Development Program (PDP) on
behalf of Givaudan.
It explores current and in-development
technologies used in the alternative protein
industry to provide insights into adoption,
market potential, ongoing challenges and
opportunities for future market development.
With special thanks to UC Berkeley’s PDP
Director, Keith Alexander, PDP Coach,
Sudhir Joshi, and the field project team that
conducted the research: Catalina Villouta,
Kristina Luong and Sichen Liang.

2
Table of contents

01 Innovation in alternative proteins p. 5

02
State of the market: today’s
technological landscape p. 7

03
Getting technical with plant-based meat
alternatives: process v product p. 9

04 New innovations in alt meat p. 18

05
Future gazing: recommendations for
industry p. 22

06 Become part of the future p. 24

3
01
Innovation in
alternative proteins
Products derived from alternative proteins have landed in grocery
stores and restaurants worldwide with a bang. Where there once
was very little choice, now there is a dazzling array of options on
supermarket shelves, in high-street eateries and even on the menus
of fast-food chains.

No longer considered a niche dietary preference, the for this vibrant sector and what will it mean for producers
growth of plant-based alternatives has been fueled by and their consumers?
rising consumer desire for food products that do good
Our recent research project set out to answer this question
and feel good for body, mind and the planet. But, unlike
by exploring the most important technologies for alternative
the vegetarians, vegans and health-conscious eaters of the
proteins, including dry and wet extrusion, 3D printing,
past, today’s consumers are not willing to compromise on
moulding, cultured meat and biomass fermentation. This
flavour, texture or price.
white paper provides an overview of our findings, setting
Technical advancement and innovative new technologies out the pros and cons of the available technologies, the
have allowed the development of better tasting and better opportunities they offer to producers and the potential
looking products, but there is more still to come. With such hurdles they pose, as well as providing a glimpse into
an exciting range of innovation in the pipeline, what is next what is on the horizon in this dynamic space.

5
What’s fueling the appetite
for alternative proteins?
Today’s consumers are hungry for protein alternatives that possess
the organoleptic properties of meat and seafood, but without the
health, environmental and welfare concerns of traditional meat
products. What’s driving this growth?

Environmental and animal The rise of the health- Market necessity

welfare concerns conscious consumer The world’s population is growing
and becoming more affluent, leading
Concerns over animal welfare, human The movement towards plant-based diets
to increased demand for animal-based
health and global warming have further is driven by conscious consumer desire to
products:
focused interest on the development of choose foods that are good or feel good
meat alternatives: for body, mind and planet: • An estimated 70% more food will
need to be produced over the
• Food of animal origin is a high • 65% of Gen Z say they want a more
coming decades to meet rising
source of environmental destruction, 'plant-forward' diet.
worldwide demand.1
both because of the production
• 42% of consumers globally are
of greenhouse effect gases and • In China, for example, consumers
restricting animal-based products.
because of the huge demand on increased their meat consumption
soil and water needed for meat by 49% from 2000 to 20202, while
production. the population only grew by 11.5%
during this period.
• Animal welfare is a growing
concern with the farming and
slaughter of animals less palatable
for today’s consumers.

• As part of the solution, protein

alternatives have been shown
to have a better energy and
environmental impact than their
animal-based counterparts.

1 Kyriakopoulou, Konstantina, et al. “Alternatives to Meat and Dairy.” Annual Review of Food Science and Technology, vol. 12, no. 1, 2021, pp. 29–50. View online
2 OECD (Organ. Econ. Co-op. Dev.). 2020. Agricultural output—meat consumption. Data Set, OECD, Paris. View online

6
02
State of the market:
today’s technological
landscape
While each of the existing technologies has its own advantages
and disadvantages, as a whole, they are all important technologies
for developing new products to meet market demand. Here, we
compare some of the most important and promising innovations in
this space: dry and wet extrusion, 3D printing, moulding, cellular
meat and Mycelium Biomass fermentation.

Overview of technologies3

RAW PROTEIN LEVEL OF

TECHNOLOGY PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE ADVANTAGES CHALLENGES APPLICATION
MATERIALS SOURCES TECHNOLOGY

- Shelf stable
High temperature /
- High output
DRY high shear transform Defatted plant - Lack of fibrous Textured vegetable
Sponge-like - Low cost Industrial practice
EXTRUSION globular protein to protein
- Longstanding
meat-like structure proteins (TVP)
linear protein - Soy protein
industrial application
- Wheat protein
High temperature/ - Potato protein
- Unknown exact
shear transform globular - Rice protein - Meat-like fibres Small fillets of
WET Defatted plant mechanism
protein to linear protein Layered fibres - Highly scalable chicken, pork & Industrial practice
EXTRUSION + long cooling die form
protein (below 5%)
Pulse proteins: - High output
- Not scalable in
chunks meat, seafood
the final fibrous structure.
diameter
- Pea
- Lentil
- Faba bean
Food ink printed All the ingredients - Mimics meat - Slow
3D Layered fibrous - Mung bean Whole cuts of meat,
in layers to mimic required for the final appearance perfectly - Appearance Bench scale
PRINTING fibrous texture
structure
product - Fatty mouthfeel - Texture
scaffolding
Algae based:
- Microalgae
- Seaweed
Moulds mimic the All the ingredients (macroalgae) - Generally used as
Patties, seafood
MOULDING shape of the desired – required for the final a final step in all – Industrial practice
products
product product technologies

Single fibres - Poultry cells

Mimics biological - Almost exact - Extremely complex
CULTURED (potencial co- Initial animal - Livestock cells From ground meat
growth of complete meat replication - Scalability/cost are a Pilot phase
MEAT (muscle) tissue
cultivation of myocytes donor required - Fish cells
possible big challenge
to whole cuts
and adipocytes) - Crustaceans cells

Mycelium based
Uses intrinsically Single fibres (needs - Fungus filaments with - Process is not very
- Fusarium venenatum Various products
BIOMASS fibrous material to to be cross-linked high amino acid value - Good texture resource efficient
(Quorn™) ranging from minced Industrial practice
FERMENTATION mimic the fibrousness to higher order - Removal of RNA is
- Aspergillus oryzae (Koji)
- Highly scalable - Texture cannot be
meat to burger patties
of meat structures) necessary - Flavolapis (Fy) Rhiza
easily improved

3 This table was inspired by the information presented in the article “Alternatives to Meat and Dairy” by Kyriakopoulou et al.

7
03
Getting technical
with plant-based meat
alternatives: process
v. product
For the purposes of our research, we have categorised existing meat
alternative innovation into two groups: process-based and product-
based technologies. The first group includes dry and wet extrusion,
3D printing and moulding, while the second covers cultured (also
known as lab-grown) meat and Mycelium Biomass fermentation.

9
Process-based:
Technologies designed to
mimic animal proteins

DRY EXTRUSION

Dry (low moisture) extrusion is a well-established technique Dry extrusion produces textured vegetable proteins (TVP)
for producing foods such as snacks that has been widely that can be further processed to adjust flavours and
adopted by the alternative meat industry. It provides nutritional balance. However, the technology has not been
manufactures both production accessibility and capacity, able to provide the fibrous meat-like structure or texture that
not to mention decades of industry experience, making it a today’s consumers have come to expect.
cost-effective and, therefore, popular choice.

Notable innovations:
PowerHeater™ is a new and promising indirect thermal Advantages/disadvantages
cooking processing technology that can be used as of dry extrusion:
a post-processing step after dry extrusion to achieve a
similar muscle-like fibre structure to that produced by wet
+ Well-established and easily available technology
extrusion (see below).
+ Versatile, low cost and energy efficient

+ Light weight due to its low moisture content, making

it cheaper to transport

+ Lower water content also ensures stable

and long shelf life

+ Continuous process makes it a scalable technique

− Products with too much expansion can have a hard

time retaining their structure after rehydration, turning
to mush during processing/eating

From left: PowerHeater working mechanism, PowerHeater™ Screw Configuration, vegan beef processed by − Products with too little expansion can be slow to
PowerHeater rehydrate, lack texture, and can be difficult to flavour
pre-extrusion.

10
WET EXTRUSION

While dry extrusion has been around for quite some

time, wet (high moisture) extrusion technology is a rapidly
evolving field. Prized for its ability to mimic the texture Advantages/disadvantages
of meat, wet extrusion is already one of the most popular of wet extrusion:
process-based solutions used by companies worldwide.

Despite its high throughput, wet extrusion does have certain

+ Ability to mimic meat-like fibres
limitations; in particular, when it comes to manufacturing
+ Clean label products possible only using proteins
products past a certain size. The production process is also
and water
energy intensive, although the environmental impact of
+ Well-established technology and experience enables
extrusion is still low compared to that of animal meat. speed to market

Wet extrusion systems differ from dry systems due to + Cost of production is relatively low

differences in the concentration of water. They transform + Process is scalable in size with a high throughput of up
raw materials into a high-moisture semi-solid output to 1,000kg/hr5

by passing them through a screw system within a barrel

conveys mass (a combination of dry ingredients, water
− Product is not scalable in diameter: thickness is limited
and/or oil) and a cooling die, using heat, shear, pressure
to around 1 to 1.5 cm by the cooling die
and moisture.4 This cooling die provides the fibrous
− Produces only horizontal and v-shape fibres
structure that is missing from dry extrusion by minimising
− Products are hard to differentiate because of the
water evaporation to generate smaller pockets of air. Fibre
similar structure of the final product
formation can be further enhanced by the addition of
− The production process and nutritional profile of the
certain polysaccharides into the food mix before extrusion. end product is hard to optimise 6
Further, clean label products are possible as ingredients
such as Methyl-Cellulose are not needed.

Cooling Die

Wet Extrusion

We add more water and the cooling die piece is

needed to texturise the plant proteins in this moist
environent

4 “Asian Perspective on High-Moisture Extrusion.” Cereal Foods World, vol. 65, no. 4, 2020. View online
5 Bühler’s PolyCool 1000 model (Bühler Group, 2022).
6 Morrison, Oliver. “Why High Moisture Extrusion Could Solve Alt Meat's Nutritional as Well as Structural Challenges.” Foodnavigator.com, William Reed Ltd, 24 Mar. 2022. View online

11
3D PRINTING

Foods printed with 3D technology may intrigue consumers, 3D printing technology has been used by companies such
but they are still very much a novelty in the current market. as Redefine Meat, NovaMeat, and Juicy Marbles to imitate
While the technology in itself isn’t new, its use at present the fibrous textures of meat with plant-based ingredients.
is concentrated mainly on gourmet dining, whether in Each of these companies overcome one of these challenges
molecular kitchens or fancy bakeries. The printers use plant- detailed above. For example, Redefine Meat has been
based viscous inks and computer-aided design (CAD) files able to perfect the speed challenge to produce more than
to build products layer by layer. Not only can this mimic 20kg per hour; however, the fibres of the meat are quite
the muscle, fat, and blood found in animal meat, but it can large compared to animal meat. NovaMeat has been able
also be customised by colour, shape, flavour, texture and to overcome the challenge of texture to create very fibrous
nutritional content, making this technology an attractive looking meat; however, printing is extremely slow. Finally,
proposition. Although the application of the technology Juicy Marbles has been able to overcome the appearance
requires more time and development to mature, headway challenge, but is also struggling with the speed component.8
is being made to scale up the use of 3D printing and to
expand it into new product lines.

At present, most food-based 3D printers use hot melt/room

temperature extrusion technology to extrude food materials
Advantages/disadvantages
through nozzles according to a preset path, stacking layers
of 3D Printing:
to obtain the final 3D-printed products. A key requirement
of any raw material to be used as an ink in this process is
+ Low environmental impact (only requiring electricity)
that it must flow smoothly from the print cartridge to the
printing platform. Various combinations of protein source + Lower material cost as ink is placed exactly (no scraps
or trimmings left over)
and ingredients have been tested to provide food with the
+ Potential to mimic the fibrous texture of meat
required structure as it’s printed. For example, soy protein
isolate mixed with sodium alginate and gelatin was found + Ability to customise the final product relatively easily

to create excellent geometries and improve the hardness

and chewiness of the formed products.7 − Slow to produce the final product (one product
produced line by line at a time)
Studies on how animal muscle tissue behave when 3D
− Food ink must be formulated to produce the required
printed would help in understanding how textured plant texture, even after cooking
based food inks would also extrude. To date, however, there
− Appearance and cooking ability of meat is less easy to
has been little published work describing the printability of replicate, as it include fat, not only muscle tissue
fibrous meat materials (e.g., pork, turkey, chicken, fish), with
none for beef. There is also concern in the market about
the long-term effects of eating products that are artificially
manufactured in this way.

NovaMeat steak printed and cooked at the Culinary School of Barcelona, Spain (Reuters, 2020)

7 Watkins, Peter, et al. “Three-Dimensional (3D) Food Printing—an Overview.” Food Engineering Innovations Across the Food Supply Chain, 2022, pp. 261–276. View online
8 Rubinsky, Dan. Interview. Conducted by Catalina Villouta, Kristina Luong, and Sichen Liang. 11 February 2022.

12
MOULDING

Moulding is one of the simplest process-based technologies

and is often used as the final step when producing animal
alternative products in minced and whole/cut forms. The
technology can easily replicate the texture properties
of certain seafood proteins, is scalable and does not
require a high level of expertise to employ. It has minimal
environmental impact compared to other technologies,
although its use can be limited by production speed.
However, it is not capable, by itself, of mimicking the
fibrous texture of real meat.

Product-based:
Innovations designed to
bring products to life

CULTURED MEATS

Cellular-cultured (or cultivated) meats produce meat to sterilise bioprocessing equipment. Not only will further
alternatives by growing real animal cells in a lab, as innovation be required to increase batch volumes and
opposed to seeking to replace them with plant-based decrease the cost of the final product, but producers will
alternatives. By growing these animal cells in specialist also need to work with national governments to develop the
bioreactors, cultured meat technology is not only regulatory guidelines needed to open the door to the sale
able to replicate the sensory and nutritional profile of of cultivated meat products.
conventionally produced meat more effectively, but it does
Cultured meat is one of the most exciting innovations in
so more sustainably and without the need to slaughter the
product-based technology. By harvesting real animal cells
source animal.
and then mimicking the process by which those cells grow
At present, capital and operating costs remain high due to and divide in vivo, it is possible to produce products with
the cost of the specialist equipment required, the challenges the same nutritional and organoleptic properties as their
associated with scaling the resulting products, and the need conventional counterparts.

13
Phase I: Cell isolation and initial expansion Phase III: Tissue Maturation
The first step is to isolate and characterise appropriate Cells are grown under conditions that promote
cells from the species of interest and bank these cells for differentiation and maturation of the cells, typically but not
future use. Cell lines must be capable of differentiating into always on scaffolds. The choice of media and bioreactor
muscle fibres, adipocytes and a handful of other important are crucial in both phases II and III and will likely differ
cell types that make up meat (such as fibroblasts). In many between the two phases.
cases, this step will encompass the development of a
stable, immortalised cell line. Companies may undertake
the cell isolation and cell line development steps themselves Phase IV: Processing into a food product
or licence an existing line.
For some product types, a final processing step will be
necessary to transform the engineered tissues into a
final product. For example, scaffolds laden with mature
Phase II: Large-scale cell expansion
myofibers might be combined with edible microcarriers on
In this phase, cells are expanded to increase the total which adipocytes have been differentiated in a separate
biomass. The goal is to produce a large number of cell phase III process to form a burger patty.
doublings while keeping the cells in an undifferentiated,
and therefore proliferative, state. In this example, cells are
grown in a stirred-tank bioreactor and may be grown on
microcarriers, as aggregates, or as single cells.

Cell line Media Scaffold Bioreactors

Live animals

Embryo, Biopsy,
or iPSC Serum-free
media Seed train proliferation
bioreactors

Starting cell line

Maturation Bioreactors
bioreactors

• T issue is taken from the animal • The cell culture media is a liquid • Scaffolds permit cells to attach • Bioreactors must be explicity
to extract stem cells and create that contains the nutrients and differentiate in a 3D designed for cellular meat
cell lines. needed to support growth, architecture of the meat product capable of supporting high-
differentiation and proliferation density and a large volume of
• Edible, removable with textural
cell cultures
•V
 ery complex and expensive properties
composition

14
 One possible solution to the scale and cost barriers would
be to use genetically engineered cells; however, it remains
Advantages/disadvantages questionable whether consumers will accept GM foods.
of cultured meat: Despite the hurdles to be overcome in this sector, the
number of startups focused on developing cultivated
+ Overall more animal friendly and sustainable while meat inputs or end products continues to rise. Some of the
providing the same proteins
main players in this industry are Upside Foods (previously
+ No animal farming is necessary, decreasing expensive Memphis Meat), Good Meat, SuperMeat, Mosa Meat,
labour and risk of zoonotic diseases
and Finless and BlueNalu (both seafood producers).
+ Could reduce land use by up to 95% 9 and require
Notable innovations include the world’s first beef meatball
77% less water than conventional meat 10
(developed by Memphis Meat in 2016), 100% chicken
+ Cells from a single animal could cultivate the same
amount of product as hundreds (or thousands) of
products (i.e. cultured chicken without any use of plant-
animals based carrier or scaffolding, developed by SuperMeat in
2022), and Mosa Meat’s non-GMO and full tissue burgers

− Upscaling this technique requires large bioreactors

(producing up to 80,000 patties from a sesame-seed size
sample of cells in 2022).
− High control over the growing conditions necessary to
avoid contamination

− Nutrients (amino acids and protein growth factors)

must be determined uniquely for each cell line

− Regulatory barriers: to date, only Singapore has

approved the use of a cultivated meat product (Good
Meat chicken nuggets)

− Cost remains a challenge

Snapshot of the regulatory status for cultured meats11

COUNTRY REGULATOR STATUS INITATIVES

Throughout 2021, GFI Brazil promoted discussions on

General Food Office at the National Health Agency GFI expects Brazil to undertake a regulatory impact
regulatory best practices with international regulators and
BRAZIL (ANVISA) and the Animal Products Inspection Department, analysis in 2022. According to ANVISA, Brazil plans to
proposed a unique protocol for cultivated meat within
under the Ministry of Agriculture adopt a model similar to that of the US and EU.
Brazil’s existing novel foods framework.

China included cultivated meats and other “future foods”

China has not yet announced how it will regulate or
CHINA Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs in its official five-year agricultural plan (released in
oversee the manufacturing and sale of cultivated meat.
January 2022).

When cultivated meat is produced without genetic REACT-EU, a government funding programme launched in
Companies must apply to the European Commission for modification, it is regulated under the novel foods response to the Covid-19 pandemic, awarded cultivated
EUROPEAN
premarket authorisation of products. This includes a safety regulation of the EU. Premarket authorisation is handled meat company Mosa Meat and partner Nutreco a €2
UNION evaluation by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). centrally, so once a product is approved that approval million grant for research into lowering the cost of cell
applies across all EU member states. culture media.

SFA has not indicated whether it will issue a

comprehensive regulatory framework or approve cultivated
meat products on a case-by-case basis. Companies must SFA became the first national regulator to green-light the
SINGAPORE Singapore Food Agency (SFA)
still submit regulatory filings for their specific formulations. sale of a cultivated meat product in 2020.
SFA updated a guidance document on novel food safety
assessments in December 2021.

USDA granted US$10 million (m) in 2021 to create a

USDA has issued an advance notice of proposed
Cell collection/banking and all cultivation inputs and centre for excellence in cellular agriculture at
rulemaking on the labelling of cultivated meat products.
UNITED processes overseen by the Food and Drug Administration Tufts University.
STATES (FDA). Processing and labelling for terrestrial meats
Companies seeking to retail their products before USDA
regulated by the Department of Agriculture (USDA). National Institutes of Health granted US$1.5m to Defined
completes this process can submit labels to USDA’s Food
Bioscience to develop a cell culture medium supplement.
Safety and Inspection Service for review.

9 CE Delft. 2021. LCA of Cultivated Meat—Future Projections for Different Scenarios. Delft, NL: CE Delft.
10 UPSIDE Foods, 23 Feb. 2022. View online
11 Good Food Institute (GFI) 2020/2021 State of the Industry for Cultivated Meat reports. See the Appendix for a regulatory overview of other territories of interest, incl. Africa, Australia, Canada, India and Japan.

15
MYCELIUM BIOMASS FERMENTATION

Whereas cultured meats employ real animal cells to

grow meat in the lab, biomass fermentation does so
using mycelium, a filamentous fungi with a protein that Advantages/disadvantages
has a similar fibrous texture to animal meat as well as a of biomass fermentation:
desirable nutritional profile. While mycelium is easily grown
via submerged fermentation in airlift fermenters or via solid- This last category of food seems to address well the
state fermentation in trays, biomass fermentation does have challenges faced by the other technologies, although
biomass fermentation does have its own unique set of
its limitations. Only specific strains of filamentous fungi are
challenges.
both safe to eat and capable of successfully mimicking the
desired texture. Discovering new strains and/or effective
− Only specific species of fungi have the required
feedstocks (sugars, starches and nutrients) would require texture, resulting in a high R&D cost associated with
considerable research and development (R&D) time discovering and developing these species

and budget. − Consumers are generally wary of eating a product

that says it is made of fungi and/or is associated with
Of the companies growing different strains of fungi, the mould
oldest and most recognised brand is that of Quorn™ − Perceived risk of developing allergies to this category
(Marlow Foods). It produces mycoprotein, a low energy of food

and protein-rich whole food source derived from the

fermentation of filamentous fungus such as Fusarium
venenatum, on a large industrial scale, adding egg
albumen, colour and flavour compounds to create a The future applications of mycelium seem promising,
texture similar to meat. however, with the potential to further develop mycelium
to mimic muscle tissue and use it as a scaffolding to build
Overall, the process is highly efficient with 14,000 tonnes
both plant-based and cell-based meats as well as fungi-
produced every year. Mycoprotein is also an excellent
based products.14
source of high-quality protein12, with a higher weight
percentage of protein content (45–54%) than common
plant or other fungal protein, although lower than meat.13

Other producers grow filamentous fungi to produce a

fibrous texture that is analogous to meat. Because of the
naturally occurring structure, minimal processing is needed
to mimic the texture of meat. For example, The Better Meat
Co. uses a 9,000 litre bioreactor with a one day turnover to
produce its products.

12 Finnigan, T., et al. “Mycoprotein.” Sustainable Protein Sources, 2017, pp. 305–325. View online
13 Ahmad, Muhammad Ijaz, et al. “A Review on Mycoprotein: History, Nutritional Composition, Production Methods, and Health Benefits.” Trends in Food Science & Technology, vol. 121, 2022, pp. 14–29. View online
14 McEvoy, Enda. 2021.“Mycelium, a Promising Future.” View online

16
04
New innovations
in alt meat
Four new technologies are opening the door to a range of
new solutions, including shear cell technology, wet spinning,
electrospinning and the mixing of proteins and hydrocolloids.

18
1. Shear Cell Technology
Originally used as an offline method to study the effect of extrusion-like
conditions on biopolymers such as starch or proteins, shear cells were
identified as a novel structuring technology when the processing of calcium
caseinate led to the formation of fibrils.

As opposed to wet extrusion, the process utilises a well-defined shear

flow during heating and cooling to produce fibrous products with calcium
caseinate and several plant protein blends (e.g. wheat gluten). So far, the
technology has been successful up to the pilot-scale.15

Rival Foods was one of the first companies to use shear cell technology
to create whole-muscle products, including mimicking the heterogeneous
fibrous texture of red meat products and the finer, more homogenous
texture of white meat products.

2. Wet Spinning
Wet spinning is one of the standard techniques for the production of
membranes for industrial separation purposes.16 Mostly used for the
creation of individual fibres, it spins plant protein into long and thin strands,
which are then formed together to mimic the structural and biochemical
features of natural muscle tissues during processing and cooking. To date,
this process has been successful at converting soy, pea and faba bean
proteins from their native globular state to a fibrous structure.

A protein solution with higher concentrations of protein and higher

temperature facilitates the spinnability and results in stronger fibres.17
However, these fibres must then be solidified in a salt, acid or alkali
coagulation bath, making the washing step essential and leaving
behind large waste streams.18

Illustration: Wet spinning process for producing fibres (Kyriakopoulou et al., 2019)

Take up roll
Syringe with
polymer solution

Collector

Spinneret

15 Dekkers, Birgit L., et al. “Structuring Processes for Meat Analogues.” Trends in Food Science & Technology, vol. 81, 2018, pp. 25–36. View online
16 Ho, Stephanie. “The Diet Revolution.” StemSide, StemSide, 10 Mar. 2021. View online
17 Kazir, Meital, and Yoav D. Livney. “Plant-Based Seafood Analogs.” Molecules, vol. 26, no. 6, 2021, p. 1559. View online
18 Kyriakopoulou, Konstantina, et al. “Plant-Based Meat Analogues.” Sustainable Meat Production and Processing, 2019, pp. 103–126. View online

19
3. Electrospinning
Electrospinning produces individual fibres of the smallest scale by applying
a high voltage to a polymer solution. This solution needs to satisfy several
requirements, not least high solubility, viscosity, conductivity, surface
tension and the ability of the components to entangle. Electrospinning of
proteins has been reported for several animal-based proteins such as whey,
collagen, egg and gelatin, but only sparingly for plant proteins.19

Illustration: Electrospinning process for producing fibres (Kyriakopoulou et al, 2019)

Taylor cone

Syringe with
polymer solution

Grounded
collector
High voltage

4. Mixing of proteins
and hydrocolloids
Finally, it is possible to obtain fibrous products by mixing proteins with
hydrocolloids that precipitate with multivalent cations. Various combinations
of proteins, hydrocolloids and multivalent cations can be used in this
process. For example, Valess was a product introduced in 2005 based on
caseinate and alginate. Plant proteins such as soy, rice, maize, and lupine
can be employed in a similar way. This process is well scalable, yields
products with some degree of structure, but still is relatively intensive in
its use of resources.20 New and innovative products like the vegan shrimp
developed by New Waves seem to rely on this kind of technology.

19 Girija, J, et al. “Production Methodologies of Meat Analogues: A Review.” Journal of Agricultural Engineering, vol. 58, no. 02, 2021, pp. 137–148. View online
20 Dekkers, Birgit L., et al. “Structuring Processes for Meat Analogues.” Trends in Food Science & Technology, vol. 81, 2018, pp. 25–36. View online

20
05
Future gazing:
recommendations
for industry
The rise of meat alternatives is both significant and poised strongly
for future growth. But, while existing technologies offer a major
opportunity for process and product-based alternatives, the main
challenges in this sector remain cost and scale.

The economic opportunity for meat alternatives is sizeable across

all of the technologies featured in our research. Not only is each
technology and product type viable for a specific consumer market
segment, but will continue to be so in the future as ongoing research
and development identifies new opportunities and finds new
solutions to the challenges highlighted in this report.

In general, the process-based technologies featured in this report

are more robust, scalable and have better resource efficiency,
whereas the product-based technologies have the potential to
mimic meat most closely.

22
What’s next?
While all the technologies we have featured have meat, if/when regulations are approved in major markets,
the potential to be the next up-and-coming dominant due to the volume of interest and investment in this space.21
technology in the alternative meat market, plant-based
products produced by extrusion are expected to remain New innovations also have the potential to shake up the
as the alternative protein market leader. This trend is market. For example, innovative and well-performing lab
expected to last at least the next decade, due to the scale technologies, such as shear cell, are already emerging
affordable price and production efficiency. It may even as the next major research trend and investment hotspot.
accelerate once PowerHeater technology is integrated
into the dry extrusion process to create a more fibrous While the industry’s precise growth path will remain

and meat-like product type. uncertain for some time, industry stakeholders – startups
and established food companies, consumers, investors and
We also expect to see an increase in the number of global governments – are already making great strides
products produced by biomass fermentation thanks to down that path in the direction of a more sustainable and
its relatively low production cost and ability to produce secure food future.
desirable textures. A similar picture applies for cultured

Alternative protein consumption will

grow in three waves:

97 97

14% 14%
CAGR CAGR
CAGR CAGR
CAGR CAGR
CAGR CAGR
65 65 2025-302025-30
2020-252020-25 2030-352030-35
69 69
13% 22%
13% 22%8% 8%

12% 12%16% 16%7% 7% Plant-based

Plant-based

45% 111%
45% 111%8% 8% Microorganism-based
Microorganism-based

52% 66%
52% 120%
66% 120% Animal-cell-based
Animal-cell-based
24 24

13 13 22 22

Sources: US Department of Agriculture; Euromonitor; UBS; ING; Good Food Institute;

6 6 expert interview; Blue Horizon; BCG Analysis. CAGR from 2022-2025, starting from
market entry.
2020 2020 2025 2025 2030 2030 2035 2035

21 For cultivated meat specifically, McKinsey & Company estimates that the market may reach $2 billion in annual sales in just a few years and up to $20 billion or even $25 billion in sales by 2030 if cultivated meat
companies are able to “replicate a wide variety of both processed meats and whole cuts” and distribute them globally (Brennan et al., 2021).

23
06
Become part
of the future
Creating delicious meat alternatives not only requires specialised
knowledge, resources and technical capabilities. To succeed in this
fast-changing and dynamic environment, companies also need to be
agile, efficient and innovative.

Collaboration will be the key to solving the many technical

challenges that exist in this space by providing access to the latest
technologies, production capabilities and industry knowledge.

24
How to find the right technology to
meet your technical challenges
Partnering in research and technology can open up Partner with Givaudan today
possibilities and help identify and solve your innovation
challenges whether you choose to work with established From fundamental scientific understanding to holistic
industry players, academics, start-ups or any other type of product design, Givaudan delivers customised solutions
innovator in the alternative protein space. at every step of our customers’ protein journeys based
on a collaborative approach to successful innovation.
Connecting with the right partner or collaborative Our ecosystem unites a strong and vibrant community of
ecosystem requires active and consistent scouting, innovators in the protein space, from industry players to
however. Choose wisely based on your needs and desire academia and start-ups, to find and accelerate disruptive
to collaborate, leverage your existing network and keep an foodtech.
open mind when selecting potential collaborators.

Start by identifying and focusing on your main innovation

challenges, whether that be to:

• Achieve authentic taste and texture: Mask off-notes,

increase meatiness and achieve market differentiation.

• Improve visual appearance: Mimic the visual

transformation of meat alternatives, from raw to
cooked, without sacrificing the cachet of a “clean”
label.

• Create healthier products: Control calories by reducing

salt and fat content, switch to natural colours and
natural preservatives to meet market demand.

Find business partners with the right mindset that will

collaborate with you to resolve those technical challenges,
including by defining clear objectives and deadlines,
focusing on the technology/solution and ensuring value
creation within the partnership.

25
Plant Attitude: supporting each
other and the broader ecosystem
Givaudan manages a global network of protein hubs to co-creation to help customers open a world of opportunities
provide companies with access to an entire ecosystem of in the fast-changing alternative protein arena.
specialists, resources and cutting-edge technologies.
Our expertise encompasses every aspect of alternative
Spread across four continents, our Plant Attitude network meat and seafood and we’re ready to help you as needed
includes innovation centres with pilot extrusion capabilities to create an outstanding product. Our flavour and taste
in Zurich, Switzerland and Singapore, a new centre being experts are unparalleled and have extensive knowledge
built in Brazil, and extensive capabilities throughout North in bringing the absolute best taste attributes to alternative
America. From these protein innovation spaces, we help our products. Texture, preservation and colour experts are
customers to accelerate the development of winning plant- available to support your needs across a range of product
based food experiences at every stage of the product life types. And at their fingertips, each expert has an unrivalled
cycle. From scientific research to holistic product design and portfolio they can put to use on your behalf.
prototyping, our centres foster collaboration and

San Francisco

Let’s imagine together the future of meat alternatives:

Find out more at www.givaudan.com.

26
Appendix

The regulatory status for cultured meats (additional countries)

COUNTRY REGULATOR STATUS INITATIVES

In December 2020, Benjamin Netanyahu became the first

National Food Control Service (FCS) FCS in process of evaluating the required safety
head of government to sample a cultivated meat product.
ISRAEL assessments for a cultivated meat regulatory framework.

To comply with existing food regulations, cultivated meat

products and production processes must not externally
JAPAN source growth factors or use immortalised cells.

Clear regulatory framework still required.

Canada does not currently have any of the other stringent

Canada’s Food and Drug Regulations have a Similar to the EU, Canada requires a pre-market requirements in relation to nutrition or additional checks
CANADA broad definition of novel foods, that would include notification from the government before any novel food is and inspections that the US has.
cultivated meat. advertised or sold.

The Novel Food Regulations require the approval of the

FSSAI for such foods to be manufactured or sold in India.
INDIA Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI)
The procedure for application and details of the safety
assessment are encapsulated in the Food Safety and
Standards Regulations, 2017.

The Food Standards Code has a provision on novel foods,

AUSTRALIA which also requires compliance with certain conditions.
and NEW Food Standards Australia and New Zealand
There are currently no permissions or requirements in the
ZEALAND Food Standards Code specifically for cultivated meat,
however, they are regulated as novel food products.

Mzansi Meat is the first company producing cultivated

Three government bodies in Africa oversee food meat products in South Africa.
AFRICA production: the departments of trade, health and
agriculture. Government bodies have been working on regulation since
its inception in March 2020.

Source: Good Food Institute (GFI) 2020 and 2021 State of the Industry for Cultivated Meat reports.

28
 Join the next global trend
As tried-and-tested specialists in protein function challenges,
Givaudan holds in-depth knowledge and wide-ranging experience
of many meat alternative technologies. As innovators, we are
continually working to build a global community of industry
partners, academics and start-ups, as we strive to consolidate our
own world-class capabilities for the next generation.

Contact us at [email protected]