3.1 Insects As Feed, Making Their Way
With a dramatically growing world population, the need to meet increasing nutritional needs is a topic of interest to policymakers and academics alike. In order to accommodate the expanding needs of animal-sourced food, the EU relies on imports of protein-rich animal feeds, especially soybean. Soybeans account for two-thirds of the world’s total protein feed production.
40 Their dietary value is unsurpassed by any other plant protein source and is the standard to which other protein sources are compared.
41 Although soybean cultivation has an exceptional protein yield per hectare, its production is often associated with environmentally harmful practices;
42 its predominant use as feed is economically inefficient compared to direct human consumption. Considering the EU’s Farm to Fork strategy (F2F) where domestic protein feed production is encouraged, import dependence is overcome, and demand for land in deforestation-prone regions is reduced, various alternative protein feeds have been investigated, including insects. Insect species currently farmed and involved in commercial development share short life cycles, have high feed conversion rates, and can grow at high densities on low-value wastes.
43 In addition, insect amino acid profiles are suitable for monogastric animals and fish, different from soybean meals, which often require supplementation when used in feed for monogastric animals.
44 Lastly, insects can be reared easily at an economically and environmentally sustainable cost.
45
In contrast to the many studies that make up the literature on the acceptability of insects as food, the number of studies related to consumer preference for insects as feed is distinctly limited. This is probably because the feed used for breeding is not clearly shown on the label, and therefore consumers cannot identify the type of feed when purchasing products. Yet, many companies could use new label information as a tool to differentiate from competitors, making the product stand out. The European Union approved the use of insects in aquaculture with Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/893,
46 consequently most studies on consumer preferences have focused on insect-fed fish. Nevertheless, some pioneering studies have investigated consumer preferences regarding other types of meat raised with insects, specifically pork and chicken, in the light of possible changes in European Union legislation which has recently allowed their use through Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/1372. One of the key topics related to introducing a process innovation, such as the use of alternative feeds for insect-based animal husbandry, is consumer acceptance, and what communication and positioning drivers might be used to facilitate success. Considering that both (direct entomophagy) and the use of insects as feed (indirect entomophagy) are traditions and uses far removed from the European citizen, the number of studies assessing consumer acceptability of entomophagy practices is flourishing in this geographic area. Section
3.2 illustrates this with respect to indirect entomophagy while Sect.
4.1 does so with respect to direct entomophagy.
3.2 Emerging Consumer Studies on Insects As Feed
In order to investigate consumer and market reactions and acceptance, which are crucial in determining the success of the use of insect-based feeds for different species, the EU-funded research project PROteINSECT questioned over 2400 respondents worldwide about their preferences towards the use of insects as feed. More than 70% of participants found insects as feed for farmed animals to be acceptable and stated that they would eat pork, poultry, and fish reared in this way. Respondents also manifested their willingness to receive more information on the topic, while perceiving insects as feed as no to low risk for human health.
47 A substantial lack of knowledge on feed and its environmental impact in general, and insect feed in particular, has been also outlined by Weinrich and Busch
48 and Popoff et al
.49 In the former study, a survey of 618 German consumers revealed that, despite little general knowledge of the subject, a better perceived environmental impact of feeding insects might lead to an improved attitude towards market introduction of poultry products fed with insects.
50 In addition to lack of awareness, Popoff et al. evidenced other factors involved in the decision-making process, independently of the type of feed used. Most respondents (75%) stated that the use of insect feed would not influence their willingness to purchase, and only 10% expressed opposition to eating Scottish salmon reared with insects.
Through the use of informed and uninformed choice experiments, Bazoche and Poret
51 examined consumer preferences toward fillets of smoked trout raised with or without insects. Although a small proportion of participants (15.3%) showed distaste for this type of insect-reared fish, 60% of the sample agreed it “followed the natural order of things.” This study, conducted in France, also shows that providing information to consumers about the environmental impact differences between the conventional use of fishmeal and insects significantly influences consumer choice. Furthermore, it has been highlighted how important it is to position the product adequately within the market. Regardless of the experimental condition, when the price of conventional trout was higher than trout reared with insects, the former was preferred. Conversely, 73% of consumers in the informed condition chose insect-reared trout if the price was lower than conventionally reared trout. Similarly, Ankamah-Yeboah et al
.52 showed that German consumers were likely to purchase insect-farmed fish if the price was affordable. Using an online questionnaire, it was found that although most of the sample was indifferent towards the type of feed used, 23% showed an unfavourable attitude towards the use of insects in aquaculture.
At the same time, some results indicate that consumption would rise if price were reduced, or convenience aspects were improved. In accordance with previous results, Altmann et al
.53 found that a sub-set of their sample will not accept chicken-breast produced with insect-meals unless at largely discounted prices. Ferrer Llagostera et al
.54 found that in Spain there is a higher willingness to pay (WTP) for fish fed with insect protein or vegetable matter over those fed with conventional fish meal (11.89 and 17.20 euros/kg respectively), nevertheless, the taste expectation for fish reared with insects is still low. In a similar fashion, Giotis and Drichoutis
55 estimated Greek consumers’ willingness to pay for a gilt head bream fed with insects. Their results show that 84% of the respondents were willing to accept insects as animal feed and 55.5% of the sample would pay a premium. Differently from the previous studies, in a study involving 565 Italian consumers investigating the role of information on consumers’ attitudes and intention to eat insect-fed ducks, Menozzi et al
.56 found that most of the respondents would pay the same average price for both a duck fed with insect meal and a conventionally fed duck. Thus, it can be concluded that results are quite mixed. Alternative feeds such as insect meals can be used as long as prices remain lower than or similar to conventional products. However, Ankamah-Yeboah et al
.57 also found a negative interaction effect between a certified production method and using insect protein as feed, which suggests that the type of feed does not affect the WTP if the product lacks a trusted certification. Interestingly, in a study by Spartano and Grasso
58 it was found that in a sample of United Kingdom (UK) consumers, those who had a previous tasting experience of edible insects as food have higher WTP for eggs from insect-fed hen than those who did not. Similarly, Sogari et al.
59 also found that other variables such as interest in environmental issues and positive attitude towards animal welfare influence WTP for meat products from animals fed with insects.
The studies reported so far seem to agree that the attitudes of European consumers towards the use of insects as feed are generally positive and acceptance is high, as has also been pointed out by Mancuso et al
.,60 who evidenced that 90% of all consumers interviewed had a positive attitude towards insects as feed. However, Mancuso et al. work also highlighted the existence of a behavioural gap, i.e., despite the generally positive attitude reported by most respondents, not all (25%) are actually ready to buy farmed fish fed on insect meal, and an even steeper share (53%) of hesitant Italian consumers can emerge in the research, as seen in Laureati et al
.61 Among the socio-demographic factors that impact the willingness to consume insect-fed animals, Szendrő et al
.62 determined that age, gender, and income have a significant effect, in accordance with Baldi et al
.63 where it was found that men and younger consumers tend to be more prone to accept the product. Similar results have been previously highlighted by Laureati et al
.64 where it was observed that age, gender, food neophobia, and cultural background affected Italian consumers’ willingness to accept insect-fed animal products.
Following the results of the studies focusing on consumer preferences towards insect-fed fish or livestock, it could be argued that consumer acceptance will not hinder this newly developed business,
65 but there are multiple factors that should be considered. These include pricing, previous knowledge and information provided, socio-demographic characteristics, and the taste of the meat or fish derived from insect-fed animals.