Insects are often seen as a sustainable source of protein for the future. A new report now calls this assessment into question: How climate-friendly insect farms really are depends largely on how and where the animals are bred, what they are fed and whether they actually replace meat.
Proteins from insects instead of meat: This idea of insects as a superfood of the future has been considered a possible solution for a more climate-friendly diet for years. Unlike cattle, pigs, poultry or other suppliers of animal protein, insects need little space, grow quickly and can be fed with organic waste. But a new report now shows that the matter is not that clear.
Mixed environmental balance
For their report, Cleo Verkuijl from the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and her colleagues examined how environmentally friendly industrial insect farms in rich countries with temperate climates, such as Europe and North America, really are. Their result: The environmental balance fluctuates greatly. “According to current data, the ecological benefits are much less clear than is often assumed,” says co-author Camilo Garzón from SEI. The most important thing is how much energy the systems need, what feed is used and what product the insects actually replace in the end.
Specifically, the analyzes showed that although the land consumption of insect farming is generally low, in some cases it is at a similar level to soybean meal or even exceeds it. This is the case when insects are not fed with organic waste, but with fresh plants. However, feeding with waste is often difficult in practice and often fails on a large scale due to legal requirements. Water consumption also varies depending on the insect species, but according to the report there is little reliable data on this.
When it comes to greenhouse gas emissions, insects in temperate regions perform better with an average of 13.5 kilograms of CO2 equivalents per kilogram of protein than beef with 75 to 170 kilograms of CO2 equivalents per kilogram of protein. “The highest emission levels for insects are close to the upper values for poultry,” report Verkuijl and her colleagues.
Insects often don’t land directly on the plate
What is also important is what the insect protein is compared with: In practice, insect meal often does not replace the meat we humans eat, but usually replaces soy meal or fish meal in animal feed. However, these products often have a lower carbon footprint than many insect products. In addition, many farmed insects require warm conditions. In cooler regions, the systems therefore often have to be heated. If renewable electricity is not used for this, the climate footprint can worsen significantly, as the researchers report.
Many of the insects that are farmed don’t even end up on our plates. Where insect components are found in food, such as in pasta or bread, they often complement meat rather than actually replacing it, as Verkuijl and her colleagues explain. In addition, a significant part of production goes into feed for farmed land animals and aquaculture. “Instead of providing an alternative source of protein, insect farming often reflects and reinforces many of the problems in conventional animal husbandry,” the researchers write. They also point out possible ecological risks, for example if farmed insects accidentally escape. Ethical questions arise because there is increasing evidence that insects could be sentient.
Insect farming is under pressure
However, these results do not mean that insects are not a good alternative to other animal protein sources: According to the report, tropical countries and lower-income countries could generally offer more favorable conditions for insect breeding. Because less energy is needed to heat the systems there and organic residues are more available. However, reliable data on this is still missing, as the team explains. In our latitudes, however, insect breeding is increasingly being questioned due to the mixed environmental performance and is also coming under increasing economic pressure.
“If insect production mainly feeds other animals without reducing meat consumption, policymakers should ask themselves whether these investments are changing our food system or simply stabilizing it,” says Verkuijl. The researchers recommend that politicians and investors should support alternative proteins if data shows that they are actually more environmentally friendly and meat consumption can be reduced.
Source: Stockholm Environment Institute; Specialist article: SEI report, doi: 10.51414/sei2026.010