Alternative Foods and Food Circular Economy Prof. William Chen's Presentation at University of Mauritius

This presentation was delivered on September 25, 2025, at the launching of the Food Literacy & Sustainable Nutrition (FOLSUN) Initiative at the University of Mauritius. Prof. William Chen from Nanyang Technological University (NTU) addressed critical challenges and opportunities in transforming our food systems through alternative proteins and circular economy approaches.

 The Current Food System Crisis

The Fundamental Challenge

The global food system faces mounting pressure from multiple directions. With the world population projected to reach 10 billion by 2050, conventional meat production systems are increasingly unsustainable. The environmental and health issues associated with traditional animal agriculture—including greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water consumption, and public health concerns—necessitate a fundamental rethinking of how we produce protein.

Constraints and Needs

The presentation establishes that our current food system operates under significant constraints: limited agricultural land, water scarcity, climate change impacts, and the inefficiency of converting plant calories into animal protein. These constraints create an urgent need for innovative solutions that can deliver adequate nutrition while reducing environmental impact.

Alternative Protein Sources: A Detailed Analysis

1. Plant-Based Foods and Meat Alternatives

Plant-Based Foods: The Advantages

Prof. Chen distinguishes between whole plant-based foods and processed plant-based meat products. Traditional plant-based foods offer several compelling advantages:

• Nutrient density: Rich in vitamins, minerals, fiber, and phytonutrients
• Consumer familiarity: People already understand and consume vegetables, legumes, grains, and nuts
• Minimal processing: Can be consumed with fewer industrial processing steps
• Cost-effectiveness: Generally more affordable than both animal meat and processed alternatives
• True alternatives: Represent genuine dietary diversity rather than meat imitations

Plant-Based Meats: The Reality Check

However, highly processed plant-based meat alternatives face significant challenges:

• Hyper-processed nature: Require extensive industrial processing, multiple ingredients, and additives to achieve meat-like texture and flavor
• Identity crisis: Despite marketing, they are fundamentally not meat, which creates cognitive dissonance for consumers
• Premium pricing: Often more expensive than conventional animal meat, creating a barrier to widespread adoption
• Low consumer buy-in: Many consumers remain skeptical or uninterested, limiting market growth beyond early adopters

This dichotomy highlights a critical tension in the alternative protein space: the trade-off between creating familiar meat-like experiences and maintaining the inherent benefits of plant-based eating.

 

2. Cultivated Meat (Cell-Based/Lab-Grown Meat)

Regulatory Landscape

The cultivated meat sector presents a fascinating study in global regulatory divergence:

• Singapore and USA: Have granted regulatory approval, positioning themselves as innovation leaders
• Italy: Has banned cultivated meat by law, citing cultural and agricultural preservation concerns
• This regulatory patchwork creates uncertainty for investors and companies attempting to scale

The Urban Solution Proposition

Cultivated meat is often positioned as an urban solution because it could theoretically:

• Reduce the land footprint of protein production
• Be produced closer to consumption centers
• Minimize transportation and associated emissions
• Address sustainability concerns in land-scarce environments

Critical Barriers

Despite its promise, cultivated meat faces formidable obstacles:

• Scale-up bottleneck: Moving from laboratory production to industrial-scale manufacturing remains technically challenging and economically unproven
• Cost structure: Production costs remain prohibitively high, with questions about whether costs can ever reach parity with conventional meat
• Consumer acceptance: Many consumers express discomfort with "lab-grown" food, raising questions about willingness to pay premium prices

3. Biomass Fermentation and Precision Fermentation

Prof. Chen identifies fermentation technologies as emerging alternatives, though he poses the critical question: "High Cost?" This suggests that while these technologies show promise, their economic viability remains uncertain.

Biomass Fermentation: Uses microorganisms (like fungi or bacteria) grown on various feedstocks to produce protein-rich biomass.

Precision Fermentation: Engineers microorganisms to produce specific proteins, such as dairy proteins without cows, offering highly targeted nutrition solutions.

4. Alternative Food Sources from Nature

The "Real Solutions" Question

Prof. Chen provocatively asks whether these natural alternatives represent "Real Solutions?!" suggesting cautious optimism:

Microalgae

• High protein content and rapid growth rates
• Can be cultivated in non-arable land
• Rich in omega-3 fatty acids and other nutrients
• Challenges include taste, digestibility, and processing costs

Edible Insects

• Extremely efficient feed conversion ratios
• High protein and micronutrient content
• Low environmental footprint
• Major barrier: cultural acceptance in Western markets

Mushrooms

• Increasing consumption as meat alternatives
• Low in calories and cholesterol-free
• Provide umami flavor and meaty texture
• Offer documented health benefits
• Already culturally accepted in most markets

The mushroom sector appears particularly promising because it overcomes the acceptance barrier while delivering nutritional and sustainability benefits.

 

Food Circular Economy: Closing the Loop

The Waste Crisis in Food Manufacturing

The presentation reveals that significant food loss occurs at every stage of the food value chain:

1. Pre-harvest/slaughter: Agricultural waste, damaged crops
2. On-farm post-harvest/slaughter operations: Processing waste, unusable parts
3. Transport, storage, and distribution: Spoilage, damage
4. Processing and packaging: Manufacturing side-streams, off-cuts, by-products

The Circular Economy Vision

Prof. Chen presents a comprehensive framework for closed-loop upcycling, which he intriguingly labels as "too easy and too good?" This rhetorical question suggests that while the concept is compelling, implementation faces hidden complexities.

The Circular System Components:

Inputs: Agricultural and food manufacturing operations generate side-streams (a more positive term than "waste")

Food Manufacturing Side-Streams (FMSS): Materials that are currently discarded but contain valuable ingredients:

• Okara: The fibrous residue from soy milk and tofu production, rich in protein and fiber
• Brewer's spent grains: Barley remnants from beer brewing, high in protein and fiber

Transformation Process: These materials are processed to extract or utilize valuable components

Reintegration: Valuable ingredients are returned to the food chain for human consumption

Alternative Applications: Materials unsuitable for food can be used in other sectors (animal feed, biofuels, materials)

Residual Waste: Only true waste that cannot be utilized remains in the system

Food Manufacturing Side-Streams: A Balanced Perspective

The presentation acknowledges both advantages and challenges of utilizing FMSS through a "quad-modal hazard dynamics" approach, which considers:

1. Biological hazards: Microbial contamination risks
2. Chemical hazards: Pesticide residues, heavy metals, processing chemicals
3. Physical hazards: Foreign materials, contaminants
4. Nutritional/allergen concerns: Anti-nutritional factors, allergenic proteins

This nuanced approach recognizes that food waste valorization isn't automatically safe—it requires rigorous assessment and appropriate processing.

Food Safety Risk Assessment Framework

The Critical Importance of Safety

As alternative foods and circular economy approaches proliferate, Prof. Chen emphasizes that safety cannot be an afterthought. Novel foods require novel safety assessment approaches.

General Framework vs. Novel Foods Framework

The presentation contrasts:

Traditional Food Safety Risk Assessment:

• Hazard identification
• Hazard characterization
• Exposure assessment
• Risk characterization
• Well-established for conventional foods

Novel Foods Risk Assessment Framework:

• Must address unique challenges of foods with no history of safe use
• Requires evaluation of production processes (e.g., genetic modifications, cell culture conditions)
• Must consider novel compounds and interactions
• Needs to assess allergenicity and toxicology of unfamiliar proteins

New Approach Methodologies (NAMs)

Traditional food safety testing relies heavily on animal testing, which is:

• Time-consuming and expensive
• Raises ethical concerns
• May not accurately predict human responses

NAMs offer alternatives:

• In vitro (test tube) testing systems
• Computational modeling and simulation
• Human cell-based assays
• Organ-on-a-chip technologies
• Artificial intelligence for predictive toxicology

These approaches can accelerate safety assessment while reducing animal testing and potentially improving human relevance.

 The FRESH-WHO Initiative

A Global Collaboration for Food Safety

Prof. Chen concludes by presenting the FRESH (Food safety Risk assessment for Eating and living Safely and Healthily) initiative's collaboration with the World Health Organization.

Core Components

Global Perspectives: Bringing together international expertise and multilevel support to address food safety as a universal concern

Local Priorities: Ensuring that global frameworks can be adapted to regional needs and constraints

Working Areas

1. Novel Foods and Production Systems: Developing assessment frameworks for cultivated meat, precision fermentation products, insect proteins, and other emerging foods
2. Nutrition-Food Safety Integration: Recognizing that safety and nutrition cannot be separated—a food that is safe but nutritionally poor, or nutritious but unsafe, both fail to serve public health
3. New Approach Methodologies (NAMs): Implementing cutting-edge testing methods to accelerate and improve safety assessment
4. Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovations: Leveraging AI for predictive modeling, big data analysis, and rapid risk assessment

The Ultimate Goal

The initiative aims to create "a dynamic and comprehensive next-generation food risk assessment framework and related food control components that are effective and responsive to the evolving landscape of food systems, thereby ensuring continuous protection of global public health."

This vision recognizes that food systems are rapidly evolving, and safety frameworks must be equally dynamic—not static regulations that quickly become outdated.

Conclusion: Navigating Complexity

Prof. Chen's presentation reveals that the transition to sustainable food systems involves navigating complex trade-offs:

• Innovation vs. Acceptance: Cutting-edge technologies may struggle with consumer adoption
• Cost vs. Sustainability: More sustainable options often carry premium prices
• Processing vs. Naturalness: Creating meat alternatives requires processing that some consumers reject
• Speed vs. Safety: Rapid innovation must be balanced with thorough safety assessment

The path forward requires not just technological innovation, but also:

• Robust regulatory frameworks that enable innovation while ensuring safety
• Economic models that make sustainable options accessible
• Consumer education to build acceptance
• International cooperation to share knowledge and harmonize standards
• Integration of nutrition and safety considerations from the earliest stages of development

The presentation ultimately argues that alternative foods and circular economy approaches are essential tools for feeding 10 billion people sustainably, but their success depends on addressing economic, regulatory, safety, and consumer acceptance challenges with the same rigor applied to technological innovation.