Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The potential of future foods for sustainable and healthy diets

Nature Sustainability volume 1, pages 782–789 (2018)Cite this article

Subjects

An Author Correction to this article was published on 25 March 2019

Abstract

Altering diets is increasingly acknowledged as an important solution to feed the world’s growing population within the planetary boundaries. In our search for a planet-friendly diet, the main focus has been on eating more plant-source foods, and eating no or less animal-source foods, while the potential of future foods, such as insects, seaweed or cultured meat has been underexplored. Here we show that compared to current animal-source foods, future foods have major environmental benefits while safeguarding the intake of essential micronutrients. The complete array of essential nutrients in the mixture of future foods makes them good-quality alternatives for current animal-source foods compared to plant-source foods. Moreover, future foods are land-efficient alternatives for animal-source foods, and if produced with renewable energy, they also offer greenhouse gas benefits. Further research on nutrient bioavailability and digestibility, food safety, production costs and consumer acceptance will determine their role as main food sources in future diets.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: The future foods, PSF, seafood and conventional ASF that were included in this study.
Fig. 2: Nutritional profiles of future foods.
Fig. 3: Land use of various produce expressed per daily recommended intake of each essential nutrient.
Fig. 4: GHG emissions resulting from producing the daily recommended amount of each nutrient with each protein source.

Data availability

The data supporting the findings of this study are available in this paper and its Supplementary Information.

References

  1. Van Huis, A. et al. Edible Insects. Future Prospects for Food and Feed Security (FAO, 2013).

  2. Post, M. J. Cultured beef: medical technology to produce food. J. Sci. Food Agric. 94, 1039–1041 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Wells, M. L. et al. Algae as nutritional and functional food sources: revisiting our understanding. J. Appl. Phycol. 29, 949–982 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. FAOSTAT (FAO, 2017); http://www.fao.org/faostat/.

  5. Van Zanten, H. H. E. et al. Defining a land boundary for sustainable livestock consumption. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 4185–4194 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Herrero, M. et al. Farming and the geography of nutrient production for human use: a transdisciplinary analysis. Lancet Planet. Health 1, e33–e42 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wang, X. et al. Red and processed meat consumption and mortality: dose–response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Public Health Nutr. 19, 893–905 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pan, A. et al. Red meat consumption and mortality: results from 2 prospective cohort studies. Arch. Intern. Med. 172, 555–563 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gerber, P. et al. Tackling Climate Change through Livestock. A Global Assessment of Emissions and Mitigation Opportunities (FAO, 2013).

  10. Leip, A. et al. Impacts of European livestock production: nitrogen, sulphur, phosphorus and greenhouse gas emissions, land-use, water eutrophication and biodiversity. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 115004 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mottet, A. et al. Livestock: on our plates or eating at our table? A new analysis of the feed/food debate. Glob. Food Sec. 14, 1–8 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Alexandratos, N. & Bruinsma, J. World Agriculture towards 2030/2050: The 2012 Revision (FAO, 2012).

  13. Alexander, P. et al. Could consumption of insects, cultured meat or imitation meat reduce global agricultural land use? Glob. Food Sec. 15, 22–32 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Low, J. W. et al. A food-based approach introducing orange-fleshed sweet potatoes increased vitamin A intake and serum retinol concentrations in young children in rural Mozambique. J. Nutr. 137, 1320–1327 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Pawlak, R., Lester, S. E. & Babatunde, T. The prevalence of cobalamin deficiency among vegetarians assessed by serum vitamin B12: a review of literature. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 68, 541–548 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gladyshev, M. I., Sushchik, N. N. & Makhutova, O. N. Production of EPA and DHA in aquatic ecosystems and their transfer to the land. Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat. 107, 117–126 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kainz, M., Arts, M. T. & Mazumder, A. Essential fatty acids in the planktonic food web and their ecological role for higher trophic levels. Limnol. Oceanogr. 49, 1784–1793 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Hixson, S. M. et al. Long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids have developmental effects on the crop pest, the cabbage white butterfly Pieris rapae. PLoS ONE 11, e0152264 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Liland, N. S. et al. Modulation of nutrient composition of black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae by feeding seaweed-enriched media. PLoS ONE 12, e0183188 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hussein, M. et al. Sustainable production of housefly (Musca domestica) larvae as a protein-rich feed ingredient by utilizing cattle manure. PLoS ONE 12, e0171708 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Heck, V., Hoff, H., Wirsenius, S., Meyer, C. & Kreft, H. Land use options for staying within the Planetary Boundaries — synergies and trade-offs between global and local sustainability goals. Glob. Environ. Change 49, 73–84 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Tuomisto, H. L. & Teixeira de MattosM. J. Environmental impacts of cultured meat production. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 6117–6123 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Tuomisto, H. L., Ellis, M. J. & Haastrup, P. Environmental impacts of cultured meat: alternative production scenarios. In Proc. 9th International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri-Food Sector 1360–1366 (LCA Food, 2014).

  24. van Zanten, H. H. E. et al. From environmental nuisance to environmental opportunity: housefly larvae convert waste to livestock feed. J. Clean. Prod. 102, 362–369 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Salomone, R. et al. Environmental impact of food waste bioconversion by insects: application of life cycle assessment to process using Hermetia illucens. J. Clean. Prod. 140, 890–905 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Aubin, J., Fontaine, C., Callier, M. & Roque d’orbcastel, E. Blue mussel (Mytilus edulis) bouchot culture in Mont-St Michel Bay: potential mitigation effects on climate change and eutrophication. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 23, 1030–1041 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hasselström, L., Visch, W., Gröndahl, F., Nylund, G. M. & Pavia, H. The impact of seaweed cultivation on ecosystem services — a case study from the west coast of Sweden. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 133, 53–64 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lhafi, S. K. & Kühne, M. Occurrence of Vibrio spp. in blue mussels (Mytilus edulis) from the German Wadden Sea. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 116, 297–300 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Ziegler, F. et al. Expanding the concept of sustainable seafood using life cycle assessment. Fish Fish. 17, 1073–1093 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Henriksson, P. J. G., Belton, B., Jahan, K. M. & Rico, A. Measuring the potential for sustainable intensification of aquaculture in Bangladesh using life cycle assessment. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 2958–2963 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Wiebe, M. G. QuornTM myco-protein - overview of a successful fungal product. Mycologist 18, 17–20 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Smetana, S., Palanisamy, M., Mathys, A. & Heinz, V. Sustainability of insect use for feed and food: life cycle assessment perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 137, 741–751 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Oonincx, D. G. A. B. et al. An exploration on greenhouse gas and ammonia production by insect species suitable for animal or human consumption. PLoS ONE 5, e14445 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Ray, N. E., O’Meara, T., Wiliamson, T., Izursa, J.-L. & Kangas, P. C. Consideration of carbon dioxide release during shell production in LCA of bivalves. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 23, 1042–1048 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Ramos-Elorduy, J. Insects: a sustainable source of food? Ecol. Food Nutr. 36, 247–276 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Yang, Q. et al. Nutritional composition and protein quality of the edible beetle Holotrichia parallela. J. Insect Sci. 14, 139 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Marono, S. et al. Crude protein digestibility of Tenebrio molitor and Hermetia illucens insect meals and its correlation with chemical composition traits. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 14, 3889 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Latunde-Dada, G. O., Yang, W. & Aviles, M. V. In vitro iron availability from insects and sirloin beef. Agric. Food Chem. 66, 8420–8424 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Fleurence, J. L., Morançais, M. & Dumay, M. in Proteins in Food Processing 2nd edn (ed. Yada, R. Y.) 245–262 (Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, 2018).

  40. Edwards, D. G. & Cummings, J. H. The protein quality of mycoprotein. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 69, E331 (2010).

  41. Mišurcová, L., Kráčmar, S., Klekdus, B. & Vacek, J. Nitrogen content, dietary fiber, and digestibility in algal food products. Czech J. Food Sci. 28, 27–35 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Maehre, H. K., Edvinsen, G. K., Eilertsen, K. E. & Elvevoll, E. O. Heat treatment increases the protein bioaccessibility in the red seaweed dulse (Palmaria palmata), but not in the brown seaweed winged kelp (Alaria esculenta). J. Appl. Phycol. 28, 581–590 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Kose, A., Ozen, M. O., Elibol, M. & Oncel, S. S. Investigation of in vitro digestibility of dietary microalga Chlorella vulgaris and cyanobacterium Spirulina platensis as a nutritional supplement. 3 Biotech 7, 170 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Selmi, C. et al. The effects of Spirulina on anemia and immune function in senior citizens. Cell. Mol. Immunol. 8, 248–254 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Nakano, S., Takekoshi, H. & Nakano, M. Chlorella pyrenoidosa supplementation reduces the risk of anemia, proteinuria and edema in pregnant women. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 65, 25–30 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Li, L. et al. Spirulina can increase total-body vitamin A stores of Chinese school-age children as determined by a paired isotope dilution technique. J. Nutr. Sci. 1, e19 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Watanabe, F. & Bito, T. Vitamin B12 sources and microbial interaction. Exp. Biol. Med. 243, 148–158 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Watanabe, F. et al. Pseudovitamin B12 is the predominant cobamide of an algal health food, Spirulina tablets. J. Agric. Food Chem. 47, 4736–4741 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Broekman, H. C. H. P. et al. Is mealworm or shrimp allergy indicative for food allergy to insects?. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 61, 1601061 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Lüning, K. & Mortensen, L. European aquaculture of sugar kelp (Saccharina latissima) for food industries: iodine content and epiphytic animals as major problems. Bot. Mar. 58, 449–455 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Ursu, A.-V. et al. Extraction, fractionation and functional properties of proteins from the microalgae Chlorella vulgaris. Bioresour. Technol. 157, 134–139 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Bußler, S., Rumpold, B. A., Jander, E., Rawel, H. M. & Schlüter, O. K. Recovery and techno-functionality of flours and proteins from two edible insect species: meal worm (Tenebrio molitor) and black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae. Heliyon 2, e00218 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Oonincx, D. G. A. B. & de Boer, I. J. M. Environmental impact of the production of mealworms as a protein source for humans — a life cycle assessment. PLoS ONE 7, e51145 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Oonincx, D. G. A. B., van Broekhoven, S., van Huis, A. & van Loon, J. J. A. Feed conversion, survival and development, and composition of four insect species on diets composed of food by-products. PLoS ONE 10, e0144601 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. van Zanten, H. H. E., Mollenhorst, H., Bikker, P., Herrero, M. & de Boer, I. J. M. Opinion paper: the role of livestock in a sustainable diet: a land-use perspective. Animal 10, 547–549 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Post, M. J. Cultured meat from stem cells: challenges and prospects. Meat Sci. 92, 297–301 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2016. Contributing to Food Security and Nutrition for All (FAO, 2016).

  58. USDA Food Composition Databases (USDA, 2017); https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/.

  59. Post, M. J. in Proteins Food Processing 2nd edn (ed. Yada, R. Y.) 289–298 (Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, 2018).

  60. Moll, R. & Davis, B. Iron, vitamin B12 and folate. Medicine 45, 198–203 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Jenkins, T. C., Wallace, R. J., Moate, P. J. & Mosley, E. E. Board-invited review: recent advances in biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty acids within the rumen microbial ecosystem. J. Anim. Sci. 86, 397–412 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Leip, A., Weiss, F., Lesschen, J. P. & Westhoek, H. The nitrogen footprint of food products in the European Union. J. Agric. Sci. 152, 20–33 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Weiss, F. & Leip, A. Greenhouse gas emissions from the EU livestock sector: a life cycle assessment carried out with the CAPRI model. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 149, 124–134 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Leip, A. et al. Evaluation of the Livestock Sector’s Contribution to the EU Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GGELS) - Final Report (JRC, 2010).

  65. Codex Alimentarius. Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling (FAO & WHO, 1985).

  66. EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition, and Allergies (NDA) Scientific opinion on dietary reference values for fats, including saturated fatty acids, polyunsaturated fatty acids, monounsaturated fatty acids, trans fatty acids, and cholesterol. European Food Safety Authority. EFSA J. 8, 1461 (2010).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper constitutes an output of the Expert Panel of Nitrogen and Food of the Task Force on Reactive Nitrogen under the Working Group on Strategies and Review of the UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Programme under Grant Agreement number 633692 (SUSFANS).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Animal Production Systems Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    A. Parodi, I. J. M. De Boer, C. E. Van Middelaar & H. H. E. Van Zanten

  2. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy

    A. Leip

  3. Operations Research and Logistics, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    P. M. Slegers

  4. Agrifood and Bioscience, RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Gothenburg, Sweden

    F. Ziegler

  5. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands

    E. H. M. Temme

  6. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), St Lucia, Queensland, Australia

    M. Herrero

  7. Department of Agricultural Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    H. Tuomisto

  8. Helsinki Institute of Sustainability Science (HELSUS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    H. Tuomisto

  9. Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Helsinki, Finland

    H. Tuomisto

  10. Ecosystems Services and Management Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria

    H. Valin

  11. Laboratory of Entomology, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    J. J. A. Van Loon

Authors
  1. A. Parodi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Leip
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. I. J. M. De Boer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. M. Slegers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. F. Ziegler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. E. H. M. Temme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. M. Herrero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. H. Tuomisto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. H. Valin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. C. E. Van Middelaar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. J. J. A. Van Loon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. H. H. E. Van Zanten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A.L. and H.H.E.V.Z. designed the research. A.P. and H.H.E.V.Z. conceived and led the project, reviewed the literature, analysed the data and wrote the paper. The following authors analysed the data and edited the paper: A.L., I.J.M.D.B., C.E.V.M., M.H. and H.V. analysed data on environmental impacts, P.M.S. analysed data on microalgae, F.Z. analysed data on seafood and mussels, E.H.M.T. analysed data on nutrition, H.T. analysed data on cultured meat and J.J.A.V.L. analysed data on insects.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. H. E. Van Zanten.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figures 1–7, Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Discussion, Supplementary References

Supplementary Dataset 1

8 Supplementary Tables

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Parodi, A., Leip, A., De Boer, I.J.M. et al. The potential of future foods for sustainable and healthy diets. Nat Sustain 1, 782–789 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0189-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0189-7

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing