The future of meat: why alternative proteins matter

The global food system is responsible for roughly a third of all greenhouse gas emissions, consumes 80% of the world's agricultural land, and uses more fresh water than any other industry. At the center of that footprint sits one thing: animal agriculture. Bruce Friedrich, founder and CEO of the Good Food Institute, argues that reforming the food system without addressing how we produce protein is not a serious plan — and that two technologies are positioned to change that at scale.

The problem with conventional meat

The scale of conventional animal agriculture is difficult to grasp. To produce one kilogram of beef requires approximately 15,000 liters of water and emits around 60 kilograms of CO2 equivalent. Chicken and pork are more efficient, but still resource-intensive at the volumes required to feed 8 billion people. The land cleared for livestock grazing and feed crop production is the single largest driver of global deforestation.

Beyond the environmental cost, conventional meat production raises persistent public health concerns. Factory farming conditions create the environment for zoonotic disease outbreaks and antibiotic resistance. Roughly 70% of all medically important antibiotics sold in the US are used in animal agriculture.

The global appetite for meat is not going down. Middle-class populations in Asia, Africa, and Latin America are expected to dramatically increase their consumption over the coming decades. Meeting that demand through conventional means is not physically or ecologically possible.

Plant-based meat: what changed

Early plant-based products competed on ideology. They appealed to vegetarians and environmentally conscious consumers, but did nothing to displace conventional meat in the mainstream. That changed when companies like Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods shifted their target market to meat eaters — people who were not looking for a compromise, but for something that tasted and felt like the real thing.

The formulation advances behind these products are significant:

• Protein isolation: Pea, soy, and faba bean protein can now be isolated at high purity and textured using extrusion and shear cell technology to replicate muscle fiber structure.
• Heme-based flavor: Impossible Foods' use of soy leghemoglobin (heme) addressed the most distinctive flavor compound in beef. This single ingredient changed how the product was received by meat eaters.
• Fat marbling: Coconut oil and cocoa butter replicate the fat distribution that gives meat its mouthfeel and richness.

Current plant-based products still lack the full experience of whole-cut beef — a steak, a pork chop — but they have fundamentally closed the gap at the ground meat category level, which represents the largest share of meat consumption globally.

Cultivated meat: the longer runway

Cultivated meat (also called cell-based or lab-grown meat) takes a different approach. Rather than approximating meat from plants, it starts from animal cells and grows actual meat tissue in a bioreactor. The process requires no slaughter and uses a fraction of the land and water of conventional production.

The concept has cleared its biggest regulatory hurdle: USDA approval. Several companies — including Upside Foods and GOOD Meat — have received clearance to sell cultivated chicken in the US. The challenge now is cost and scale.

The economics of cultivated meat are still not competitive. Cell culture media (the nutrient broth in which cells grow) is expensive. Bioreactor capacity is limited. The gap between laboratory production and commodity-scale manufacturing has not been fully closed. Friedrich is optimistic that those economics will improve with investment and infrastructure — and points to the history of precision fermentation (used to produce insulin, rennet, and saffron extract) as a precedent for how quickly bio-manufacturing costs can fall.

Why this matters now

The window to decarbonize the food system aligns tightly with global climate commitments for 2030 and 2050. The food system transition has received far less investment and policy attention than the energy transition, despite contributing a comparable share of global emissions.

Friedrich's core argument is that asking consumers to eat less meat has never worked at scale. Cultural, economic, and sensory preferences are too strong. The only viable path is to make the alternative so good — so close to identical — that switching is not a sacrifice. That is the standard both plant-based and cultivated meat technologies are being built to meet.

The investment opportunity is significant, and GFI has published open-access research to help accelerate the field as a whole rather than any single company.

What you can do

For individuals who want to engage with this transition:

• Trying the current generation of plant-based products gives market signal that the category is worth continued investment.
• Evaluating where your protein comes from — even partial substitution — reduces your individual food system footprint meaningfully.
• Supporting policy and funding for food technology research accelerates the timeline for cultivated meat to reach price parity.

The shift Friedrich describes is not about asking people to give something up. It is about building something better enough that the choice makes itself.