Database Analysis; The Chosen Species

I published my Entomology Company Database in this website about one week ago. I already got a lot of positive feedback and also people informed me of missing companies and mistakes, thank you for that! I will keep on updating the database from now on, if you spot a line that needs updating, let me know!

There are many ways to look at the data and I believe it can be used to serve multiple purposes, but what I will do here is to paint a picture of the insect species that are reared by the industry and what can we conclude from the findings.

Database analysis; The Chosen Species

To get started I first filtered out all companies that are not active. Then I selected companies that are involved in farming.  Also, I filtered out companies whose species are unknown.  This leaves us 69 companies (Note! I am using the database file version 08, uploaded on 14th of January).

Point 1. Most companies focus only on one species

First thing we can learn from this is that vast majority of companies, 43 out of 69, are focused only on one species. Putting the company’s focus to only one species brings many positives effects: R&D resources are better used, hardware investments and inventory carrying costs are lower. Also, benefits of economies of scale can be reached easier. There are negative sides as well; Focusing only on one species means higher environmental and supply risks. What if the chosen species are not among the most popular species when the industry grows? Or even worse, what if the species are not in the list of approved species when the legislation is going through big changes?

More on this you can read from my blog 5 Questions an Investor Should Ask Before Investing into a Insect Farm. https://ilkkataponen.com/2015/06/20/5-questions-an-investor-should-ask-before-investing-to-a-insect-farm/

Four companies have chosen the path of two species that might be a way to control the risks, but in the same time keep the costs low. The companies are Ynsect, Ofbug, Big Cricket Farms and Micronutris.

When looking at the “Multiple species” companies 12 of out 23 are companies that mainly focus on biocontrol or pet food manufacturing. When working on these segments of insect farming the higher production costs and loss of the benefits of economies of scale is justifiable as the companies get better price for their product. This is because their selling unit is rather pieces than kilos.  They operate in the a high-end segment, while when producing for food or feed the companies are competing e.g with soy bean that is extremely cheap.

Point 2. The most popular species

Looking at the most popular species is not easy as many companies talk only about “crickets” instead of the actual species of crickets. All the cricket companies make total number of 19. The black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) farming companies are 21. Maybe surprisingly only seven companies are involved mainly with mealworm or lesser mealworm. Of course some of the “Multiple species” companies are rearing these as well.

Point 3. The lone wolves

Two companies stand out with the selected species: Steak Traz Traz are the only one to choose Grasshoppers so far and Fly Farm Systems only one with Musca Domestica. Being the only raises few issues and increases supply risks. How come these companies have chosen a different answer than others? Do they know something that majority does not, and are they really the one with the better option?  Surely every company is their own individual case and they could justify their chosen species from production and business perspective today, but the in the future the case will be different. One reason is because of the environmental risk explained in Point 1. The biggest risk is not the environmental, but the supply risk that is very significant in the case of the lone wolves. Companies rearing e.g the most popular species black soldier fly will benefit from the wide vertical integration that they build together with other similar companies. This will not only bring security against the supply risk of the company but benefits in increased sales as the demand risk is reduced for the downstream of the logistic chain.

More on the supply risk briefly from my presentation here: https://ilkkataponen.com/2015/10/29/presentation-in-insect-business-and-research-meeting-in-seinajoki-finland/

Or with detail from my thesis here: https://ilkkataponen.com/2015/05/20/thesis-supply-chain-risk-management-in-entomology-farms/

 

Advertisements

Insect Farming Is Best Suited for the Production of Animal Feed

The companies of the growing industry of high-scale insect farming are approaching their businesses from many different angles, but where the use of insects can be justified the best is when the insects are used to create animal based feed for other animals. The “animal based feed” means feed that include proteins and other nutrients that are coming from an animal instead of plants. Certain farmed animals like salmon and pets like some reptiles require animal based feeds for their health and efficient farming.

When evaluating where the insect based products should be used, the animal based feed is the only group of products where the insects stand out in a positive way against the substitute products. Other products that can be made out of insect are human food, chitin and fertilizer. Chitin and fertilizer are side products of the main purpose of the insect farming that is aiming to produce food either for human or animal consumption.

Let’s go through some of the approaches the insect farming industry has made so far, and how they match up with the substitute products.

Human food

When talking about human food, insects are associated to it as a protein source and replacement for other animal products and beans like soy. There is no doubt that insect farming have significant benefits over these two product groups, but when looking at other new protein products, insects are not anymore the number one choice. Single-cell proteins (Algae, fungus and bacteria), cultured meat and bio engineering (e.g plant based products mimicking animal based products) can all offer the same value proposition as insects, but they do not carry similar risk exposure for the producers making them. For this reason the substitute products are more likely to be produced with more efficiency.

The main difference and in the same time the source of higher risks compared to these other modern food sources is that the insects are the only animal based, or putting it more precisely, the only one coming from live animals.  When farming animals in high-scale the pathogens are a risk for the health of the animals themselves. This risk is underlined in the coming years as the pathogens’ are building bit by bit more resistance against antibiotics. Secondly, when dealing with live animals the end products are also exposed to pathogens like salmonella more than plant based products.

The factor that insect industry has over the substitutes is the possibility of nutrient recycling. Nutrient recycling in this case means that nutrients can be saved from bio waste or even manure by feeding them to insects. Using bio waste brings multiple benefits for an insect farm, but it also highlights the risks. When the raw material of the production is bio waste the cost is very low. This lower cost can make up some of costs of higher risks when comparing the substitutes and underline positive environmental impact of the insect farming.

There are a few negative sides of using bio waste. Depending on the source of the waste the quality and quantity of it changes and this makes the forecasting of the production more difficult also in both quality and quantity. Additionally, when the waste is so unstable it bring additional pathogen risks. There are ways to mitigate these issues: If using waste from bio waste created by facilities such as breweries the quality and quantity are consistent, but the price is not as good as the same waste can be used for example in bio gas production. Other way to make the raw material consistent is for example fermentation and mixing of different high standard deviation batches to make them consistent by quality, but these solutions increase the production and inventory carrying costs. Lastly, the issue of regulations might be a problem from companies using bio waste. At the moment it is unknown how for example heavy metals and medication residues build-up in the food chain of insects. This is one of the main reasons why EU has not yet opened the markets for insect based food and feed. It has been speculated that the first steps of the opening of the markets will include only certain insect species fed only with certain feeds, and those fees would not include bio waste.

All these downsides may compromise one of the main arguments of insect farming, the possibility of nutrient recycling. If you are interested to read more about this aspect, see my blog post “Using bio waste as feed” here: https://ilkkataponen.com/2015/08/20/using-bio-waste-as-feed-for-farmed-insects/

Animal feed

When looking at the substitutes in the animal feed sector “insect feed” is competing with wild fish, side streams of traditional farming and plant based proteins like soy. The prices of these products are low and the quantity demand is extremely high. It will be difficult from the insect businesses to answer these numbers especially when the industry is still building up, but insect feed have other significant benefits over the competition.  Both wild fish and insects are part of the natural diet of predatory fishes like salmon, but unlike the wild fish, insects can be produced locally and insect products are a lot more sustainable. Soy is one of the key elements in the modern fish farming even though it is not a part of for example salmon’s diet. This area is not my expertise, but it is my understanding that soy is being used as fish feed only because it is the cheapest possible protein source, and if the price of an animal based protein source would be close soy, soy would be ditched right away. Additionally, the rise of the wild fish based fish feed prices is expected to continue. This will be closing the price cap year after year in benefit of the insect feed.

Conclusion

Keeping in mind the explained issues and when thinking about the industrial scale food production it can be concluded that insect are most suitable for animal feed for situations when the animal based nutrients are a must. When thinking of human food the new and modern substitute products offer more efficient and, depending on the type of the feed used for insects, more environmentally friendly solutions. When looking at the topic from non-industrial point of view insects are a great solution for human food. For developing countries and areas where arable land is scarce insects can offer great benefits over mammal farming that need huge areas of land and water. Topic that was not discussed in the blog was taste; will it work in benefit of insect or other protein sources? This question I leave for other bloggers and experts.

Collective Consciousness in High Scale Insect Farming

In the Finnish national broadcast company’s radio channel Yle Puhe there was a great program by a man called Jari Sarasvuo.  His latest talk show encouraged me to right this post. What he was talking about among many other things was Collective and Social Consciousness. These are not theories of his own, but his way of telling really struck me and made me notice many aspects of these theories exactly in this industry of high scale insect farming. For all the Finnish speakers here is the link for the show: http://areena.yle.fi/1-3092290

Earlier in this blog I have discussed the issues related to the conservative approach to co-operation by many in the entomology business. Companies are not willing to discuss even the very general approaches for example to the business strategy. I claim that this is a wrong approach that is wrongly justified. It is a way to kill your own business but its also hurting all the other operators in the field. Now in the current situation the restricted communication is forcing all the companies to do the same failures in e.g their trials related to scale up and the start of production. The situation in this specific industry is underlined by the lack of public studies.

I have understood that the companies do not want to share their knowledge because they feel they have used resources to collect it and they justify their approach not to co-operate by saying “because we have suffered for this, you should suffer too”. Behind this thinking is a wrong assumption that other insect farms or for example other insect product processors would be competitors for each other, but it is not true. While there is still so few operators in the field and the market demand of insect products is not even closely satisfied, the competitors are found from the replacing products that are the traditional protein sources.

It is a fact that the lack of operators in the industry is hurting all the companies, but still we do not want to help each other, we rather build barriers around ourselves. I think is fair to say a company’s competitive advantage is not in knowledge that can be achieved by six months of learn and fail experiences, but the same missing knowledge from the starting companies creates a barrier of entry and increases the risks of failure. Every failed company in the field is a loss from the whole industry as it narrows the horizontal integration. More on this in my seminar presentation that you can find here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=In_ONp_PoY0

The Collective Consciousness is a way of thinking where individuals are thinking “us and them” over the Social Consciousness way of “us”. The Collective is a part of conservative management were people were reflecting their lives and getting their motivations mostly through their own eyes. The Social way sees that the individual benefits the most when we think of the benefit of everyone over the battle between the two groups “us” and “them”.

Now you have struggled through the set-up and we get to the cricket-steak:

For many insect industry entrepreneurs the desire to find the company is coming from Social Consciousness- motivation. We want to build something sustainable and ethical for the good of the planet, right? For the good of not only us, but of you as well. By doing this we believe that us and you will all enjoy a healthier future.  So how is it so that the similar thinking is not transferring to the actual work the companies are doing? Is it the wrongly identified competitors, lack of business understanding or can it be that motivations of the entrepreneurs are after all more Collective or the Social?

The future belongs to Social Consciousness and the co-operation will always be more beneficial than isolation. There is always more to win from co-operation than there is to lose. It is choice of all companies to make the decision whether they will anchor themselves to core of development by co-operating or are they hurting themselves by building walls around themselves.

Insect Farmers Are Ignoring Health Hazards

Insect are closely related to crustaceans. Multiple entomology companies are acknowledging this by warning their customers about the possibility of allergic reaction when consuming insect products especially on people who are allergic to crustaceans e.g shrimps. The companies apply the warnings to their customers, but it seems they do not act on the same basis when it comes to the protection of their employees.

There no public releases or instructions on how the employees should be protected in the entomology industry. While such white papers are still missing, guidelines can be looked for from the seafood industry. The Canadian government gives instructions for fish handling:

“Employees shall wear protective clothing such as coveralls, aprons, sleeves, smocks, hand coverings, hair nets or beard nets that are in a clean and sound condition and suitable for the tasks employees are charged to perform.”

The complete instruction can be found here: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/fish-and-seafood/quality-management-program/compliance-and-assessment-guide/eng/1373905757114/1373905892989?chap=5#s29c5

Behind the following link you find an article about a Shrimp factory. The article includes pictures of the factory and its employees in full protective gear. http://pulitzercenter.org/reporting/thailand-thai-shrimp-industry-labor-abuse-child-migrant-burma-burmese-workers

It is surprising how lightly the entomology companies seem to the health hazards and the low level of protection offered to insect farm employees against the allergens. When you are unsure about the possible risks, you should be rather safe than sorry, right? Ignoring the risks can lead break out of allergies making the employees in the worst case unable to work at the facility. Additionally, the protective gear is not only for the safety of the employees, but also for the protection of the insects from pathogen sources and unwanted insect species.

At first I was thinking of showing here examples of companies, but I think it would be unfair just to name a few companies as “bad examples”. These examples are easy to find, just go ahead and search for pictures and videos posted by the companies themselves and you can see inside the facilities and how the employees and visitors are equipped.

What the Latest Avian Flu Epidemic Teaches to Insect Farmers?

In the first half of 2015 the egg production industry in USA has been hit hard with avian flu epidemic causing the staggering loss of 11 percent of the hen population all across the country. In actual number of egg-laying hens reduced just between April and June by 33 million individuals. Read these articles for more details:

(http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/7/the-end-of-chicken.html?utm_content=buffer14455&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer)

http://thefern.org/blog_posts/11-percent-of-egg-laying-hens-dead-in-two-months-from-bird-flu/

kirva
So what can the insect farming industry conclude from this example of significant pathogen issues this established and large industry is struggling with? When such a large industry with long history of scientific research and large funding (compared to insect farming) behind it cannot control its pathogen risks, it is clear that insect farming is exposed to even higher probability of risk pathogen risk realization.

Starting from the first posts I have been writing about the seriousness of the pathogen breakout risk. It is also my main conclusion of my thesis that this risk is the most serious one for all insect farming companies. Here are a few selected sections from my thesis about the topic. If you read the thesis already, you can jump ahead until the cricket drawing! If you are reading this for the first time and you are interested to learn more, find the link to my complete thesis in the end of this post .

pirkko
“The lack of knowledge increases all risks in every department and function of an IFF- farm, not only in the supply chain. As mentioned in chapter two by the time of writing this study there are no functional large-scale facilities operating yet, only plans exists. Even though the companies will do their best to predict upcoming challenges, it is likely that there will be surprises that the companies are not able to predict. There is not much scientific research on the industry so a lot of the data and knowledge companies have is gathered through their own research and development projects and based on the experiences of the individuals. As the data is private and essential for the company`s success the knowledge is carefully protected and out of reach of the public. As mentioned already in the opening chapter other than IFF- insect farming has related history, however the knowledge from the field of for example farming of entomophagous insects cannot be directly used to help the risk control in IFF- farming .This is be-cause the insect species feed on different nutrition and the scale is significantly bigger.”

aurinko
“Pathogens and parasites are the biggest concern for all entomology farms; they can wipe out entire facilities endangering the production output for a very long time. What makes the risk even more serious and the mitigation more difficult is that there is a very limited amount of knowledge available on the subject on commercial level farming. The insect pathogens include viruses, bacteria, fungi, protists and nematodes (Eilenberg et al.). An example of a problematic pathogen is densovirus that can cause serious dam-age to cricket farms that can wipe out entire colonies (Szelei et al., 2011). For control-ling the risk of contaminations by pathogens and parasites high hygienic conditions are required, similar to other food production (Klunder et al., 2012).”
“Pathogens and parasites cannot be controlled completely as they are in some cases originated from the insects themselves (Eilenberg, 2015). At times the pathogens will outbreak and cause problems for the production. An example of a minor case could be a loss of a few percentages of insects, or maybe only a slowed down growth rate. In the worst case scenario the whole colony dies. Losing a colony can be a catastrophe for an insect farm because risk residence resilience level is low due to the lack of egg supply in the market (chapter 4.3). “

“Pathogen and parasite outbreak can be considered as a hazard risk because of the lack of knowledge and low control level caused by it. The lack of knowledge leads to a situation where the companies do not have complete understanding of the dangers. What are the pathogens and parasites, where they can come into the process and what are the circumstances that favor the unwanted visitors? When the risks or their cause are not known, they cannot be mitigated. Other hazard risks are for example natural disasters as discussed in chapter 3.2.2. These risks cannot be controlled completely, but a company can be prepared for them.”

So what can the insect farms do that they could be better prepared and handle their risk than the struggling traditional farming? What is positive for insect farming is that unlike the traditional animal farming, the insect- industry is not tied to old fashioned infrastructure that does not support the modern risk management thinking and the growing insect industry can be build according to the latest knowledge.

ilkka-heinäsirkka
For long time the traditional farming has ignored the unethical and hazardous (and money making) living environments of the animals as they have been able to counter the downsides by heavy use of medication on the animals. As it has now been seen again with the latest case of the avian flu, it just might be so that this is not the right way to go. Fortunately, the insect farming industry does not even have this option simply because such thing as insect medication does not exists. For this reason the best option for insect farmers is to first of all provide the insect the best possible environment to lower the risk exposure of pathogen breakout. Secondly, use Risk Pooling meaning that the insect colonies are divided in the multiple separate locations so that in case the risk does occur, it does not affect the whole colony right away.

Further reading:
About risk management click here: https://ilkkataponen.com/2015/05/20/thesis-supply-chain-risk-management-in-entomology-farms/
About ethical insect farming click here: https://ilkkataponen.com/2015/01/04/the-animal-welfare-in-insect-farming/

5 Questions an Investor Should Ask Before Investing into an Insect Farm

Investing into the growing industry of high-scale insect farming that has undoubtedly high potential is a case of high risk / high reward. The high reward comes from the growing and unexploited markets and the high risk from the limited knowledge and the undeveloped market environment. Here in this blog I list some of the most important questions that investor should ask and that the farmer must have clear answers that are supported with solid arguments.

aurinko

In my perspective the one of the most important qualities for a high-scale insect farm is its flexibility. Because of all the uncertainty surrounding the industry the most important question is how the farm can adopt to changing legislation, trends and new scientific knowledge. All these factors increase the risk exposure of the insect farming companies. This main question is cut in to more detailed questions here below. The questions and the reasoning behind them are explained with higher detail in my thesis that can be found here: https://ilkkataponen.com/2015/05/20/thesis-supply-chain-risk-management-in-entomology-farms/

ilkka-heinäsirkka

1. What species are you farming?
2. How many species are you farming?
3. What type of feed are you using?

The question number one is very fundamental question and sets direction for the farming company. As concluded in my thesis the biggest risk threatening the companies is a pathogen break out. The risks are especially associated with insect farming because the pathogens are still very poorly known. For this reason insect farms should choose their species to be one of the ones that are best known, or they should have extraordinary knowledge or resources related to the scientific research with the selected species. In my thesis I name the three most common species farmed today. The species are Tenebrio molitor, Hermetia illucens and Acheta domesticus. If a farm has selected species that are not one of this three the species should at least be present in the “Belgium ten”, a list of ten approved species by the Belgium authorities  ( You can find the list here: http://www.afsca.be/foodstuffs/insects/).

Changing the insect species is not easy after building the infrastructure around the certain needs and choosing only one species is a risk for multiple reasons. The farm should be prepared for changing the primary species in order to avoid the following risks:

-It is possible that the selected species might not be in list of insects that are first allowed for use for human food and animal feed.

-If the species will not be one of most common ones to be used in the future the company will be left out from the growing knowledge of the most common species and from the growing logistics downstream.

-There is no knowledge of how any insect species will perform in very high volumes. It is possible that even the most promising species will turn up to be unsuitable for high-scale farming.

Same goes with the selected feed. Even if the selected species would be approved by legislation and the species would perform well in high-scale environment, it might be that the selected type of feed makes the end product remain banned. This type of situation might be ahead for example for the companies using biological waste.

4. Do you consider biological research important?
Companies are going to two different ways when it comes to biology research about the farmed species. Few bigger companies have multiple scientists with their teams working on building a better understanding on pathogens and what are the best and most efficient ways of farming. In the other end there are companies with no biological knowledge. It is essential to know the reasons behind the company’s selection between these two approaches. Is it so that the research is just waste of money, or so that the research will bring better quality, risk management and higher efficiency?

5. How have you prepared against pathogen breakouts?
There are multiple risks in insect farming, but the most dangerous one is a pathogen breakout. As mentioned before the knowledge about the insect pathogens is really basic and they pose risks that can in the worst case kill off entire colonies. According to Doctor Jorgen Eilenberg of University of Copenhagen, leading insect pathogens expect in the world, companies cannot with current knowledge prevent pathogens breakouts completely. It is undeniable scientific fact that the sufficient risk control against pathogen can only be reached by risk pooling and segregation of different functions.

If the farm uses same batch of feed for all of its insects, they are all located in a same space or if they use same AC- machinery the investor should be alarmed and ask how the farm can justify the ignorance towards the risk?
pirkko

Animal Welfare in Insect Farming

Large-scale industrial insect farming is a relatively new industry and is expected to grow significantly in the coming years. There are a few industrial size insect farms starting around the world that are rearing insects, mainly for fish feed, but some products are also popping up little by little for human consumption as well. The human consumption of insects is called entomophagy, not to be confused with entomology, the branch of zoology concerned with the study of insects. There are over 1000 different insects species used today as food, but the most common insects being farmed on an industrial scale are the mealworm (Tenebrio molitor), black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) and house cricket (Acheta domesticus). Insects are seen as a sustainable substitute, especially for the consumption of livestock. The traditional protein source livestock is not only expensive, but also environmentally unsustainable – compared to an insect or vegetarian diet, meat production is ineffective and uses staggering amounts of water, land and feed. For example, a cow consumes 12 times more resources than crickets that give the comparable nutrition as meat.

To read more about the topic, have a look at FAO’s Edible Insect document available here: http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3253e/i3253e00.htm

Along with the environmental issues, another ethical concern associated with meat consumption is the main topic of this blog: animal welfare. The basis of animal welfare legislation is the so-called Brambell’s five freedoms model.

The five freedoms are:

  1. Freedom from hunger and thirst
  2. Freedom from discomfort
  3. Freedom from pain, injury and disease.
  4. Freedom to express normal behavior.
  5. Freedom from fear and distress.

The basic cause for ethical problems in traditional animal farming is that it is economically beneficial to keep the animals in environments that are not natural for them. For example the unnatural, stressful environment and unnatural density of animals can lead to health issues, but economically it’s cheaper to deal with it by extensive medication than by providing more space.

As it stands today, when high-scale insect farms are emerging, it is economically beneficial for insect farms to respect the five freedoms. According to multiple industrial scale farmers interviewed in the research document “A Bug’s Life. Large-scale insect rearing in relation to animal welfare”, the more the industrial environment resembles the natural environment of the insect, the more productive and healthy the insect will be. There are a few exceptions, however. Some farmers use juvenile hormone to prevent the larvae of Tenebrio molitor from moulting into pupae and later into beetles. Another example is gender ratio manipulation. In order to maximize the breeding activities of the adult insect, the natural ratio of male and female insects is modified. These are two instances where the animals’ right to express their normal behaviour is interfered with. To read more about this topic, you can find the full “A Bug’s Life”-document is available here: http://venik.nl/site/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Rapport-Large-scale-insect-rearing-in-relation-to-animal-welfare.pdf

Hypocritical approach on animal rights.

People tend to be hypocritical about animal rights. For example, domestic animals are loved by their owners and a lot of time and effort is put into their wellbeing, because they are considered ‘cute’ and can show affection. Animals like rats do not receive the same degree of compassion, let alone cockroaches or spiders. This fact will affect the public’s view on the growing industry significantly. Even if in the future insect farms would not be able to provide an ethical environment for the insects, the public would not be as concerned with defending, for example, fly larvae in the same way that it is increasingly doing with livestock. Insect farming hasn’t yet reached a scale comparable to livestock farming at this point. It remains to be seen if farms will be able to provide the animals with the five freedoms and how the public will perceive the industry when it grows bigger.

For the last point some food for thought.

The big moral question that the consumer is facing when it comes to entomophagy is: is it morally correct to eat insects and other animals? And if not, can the immorality of eating insects be overlooked for the sake of the greater good?

If carefully controlled, insects can be fed with biological waste streams. This would make insect products clearly the most environmentally sustainable protein source, not only over livestock and fish but also over soya beans. If the carbon footprint of the end product does not count in the production of the insects’ feed (as it is otherwise considered waste), the only environmental impact comes from electricity usage on the farm, packing and transportation. When looking at the issues associated with soya bean farming, not even a full vegan diet gets away with a clear environmental conscience. For this reason, even a consumer who is conscious of the animal rights of insects must consider entomophagy over vegetable based proteins for an even lower environmental impact.

My blog is clearly pro-entomophagy, but an opposite view exists as well. Here is a link to a blog where the author speaks against insect farming for ethical reasons: http://reducing-suffering.org/why-i-dont-support-eating-insects/. The author makes some relevant and respectable points from his ethical point of view, but is guilty of fallacy when referring to “A Bug’s Life” and high mortality rates. Specifically, when the author writes “…in practice, farms don’t want to spend too much effort on maintenance or optimal welfare”, this conclusion has already been overruled by researchers of the “A Bug’s Life” document. According to their knowledge and the multiple farmers they interviewed, it is essential for the success of the farm to put a lot of effort into the maintenance and optimization of the insects’ welfare.

I hope you found my first ever blog interesting to read! As you may have noticed I’ve left out multiple references to make the text easier to read, also for people who are not interested in the topic for purely professional or research reasons. In case you would like to know more, leave a comment. I’ll do my best to answer all the questions!

In Paris 4th January 2015. Ilkka Taponen

Updated 2017- version can be found from my Medium-site: https://medium.com/@itaponen/animal-welfare-in-insect-farming-213a7224ef3d#.n6v9yewbt

Further reading:

For general information on insect farming: FAO’s Edible insects: http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3253e/i3253e00.htm

Study on animal welfare in industrial farming: “A Bug’s Life. Large-scale insect rearing in relation to animal welfare”

http://venik.nl/site/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Rapport-Large-scale-insect-rearing-in-relation-to-animal-welfare.pdf

About the environmental impacts when using insects of a part of fish feed: Life Cycle Assessment on Icelandic Arctic char fed with three different feed types:

http://skemman.is/stream/get/1946/15119/36564/1/Birgir_%C3%96rn_Sm%C3%A1rason.pdf