Comparing Environmental Impacts from Insects for Feed and Food as an Alternative to Animal Production

  • Afton Halloran
  • Hanne Helene Hansen
  • Lars Stoumann Jensen
  • Sander Bruun


This chapter systematically compares and contrasts the known environmental impacts of traditional vertebrate animal production with insect production intended for both food and animal feed. There are major physiological and biological differences between traditional livestock species and insects, which often translate into lower environmental impacts from insect production. However, insect production systems are still in their infancy and there are still major improvements to be made. Based on our analysis, the greatest potential of insects is the prospect of feeding them various kinds of waste products from agriculture, industry and households. This chapter can serve as a reference guide for future research into the environmental impacts of insects for food and feed.


  1. Alexander P, Rounsevell MDA, Dislich C et al (2015) Drivers for global agricultural land use change: the nexus of diet, population, yield and bioenergy. Glob Environ Chang 35:138–147. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alkemade R, Reid RS, van den Berg M et al (2013) Assessing the impacts of livestock production on biodiversity in rangeland ecosystems. PNAS 110:20900–20905. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Asner GP, Archer SR (2010) Livestock in the global carbon cycle. In: Steinfield H, Mooney H, Schneider L, Neville L (eds) Livestock in a changing landscape: drivers consequences and responses. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 69–82Google Scholar
  4. de Vries M, de Boer IJM (2010) Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: a review of life cycle assessments. Livest Sci 128:1–11. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eckard RJ, Grainger C, de Klein CAM (2010) Options for the abatement of methane and nitrous oxide from ruminant production: a review. Livest Sci 130:47–56. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Galloway J, Dentener F, Burke M et al (2010) The impact of animal production systems on the nitrogen cycle. In: Steinfield H, Mooney H, Schneider F, Neville L (eds) Livestock in a changing landscape: drivers consequences and responses. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 83–95Google Scholar
  7. Gerber PJ, Steinfeld H, Henderson B et al (2013) Tackling climate change through livestock: a global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), RomeGoogle Scholar
  8. Hackstein JH, Stumm CK (1994) Methane production in terrestrial arthropods. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 91:5441–5445CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Halloran A, Roos N, Eilenberg J et al (2016) Life cycle assessment of edible insects for food protein: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 36(4):1–13. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Halloran A, Hanboonsong Y, Roos N, Bruun S (2017) Life cycle assessment of cricket farming in north-eastern Thailand. J Clean Prod 156:83–94. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Herrero M, Gerber P, Vellinga T et al (2011) Livestock and greenhouse gas emissions: the importance of getting the numbers right. Anim Feed Sci Technol 166–167:779–782. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Herrero M, Henderson B, Havlík P et al (2016) Greenhouse gas mitigation potentials in the livestock sector. Nat Clim Chang 6:452–461. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hutchings NJ, Nielsen O-K, Dalgaard T et al (2014) A nitrogen budget for Denmark; developments between 1990 and 2010, and prospects for the future. Environ Res Lett 9:115012. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. IPCC, Smith P, Martino D, Cai Z, Gwary D, Janzen H, Kumar P, McCarl B, Ogle S, O’Mara F, Rice C, Scholes B, Sirotenko O (2007) Agriculture. In: Metz B, Davidson OR, Bosch PR, Dave R, Meyer LA (eds) Climate change 2007: mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacobsen R, Vandermeulen V, Vanhuylenbroek G, Gellynck X (2014) A life cycle assessment application: the carbon footprint of beef in Flanders (Belgium). In: Muthu S (ed) Assessment of carbon footprint in different industrial sectors. Springer Science & Business Media, Singapore, pp 31–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jamali H, Livesley SJ, Dawes TZ et al (2011) Diurnal and seasonal variations in CH4 flux from termite mounds in tropical savannas of the Northern Territory, Australia. Agric Forest Meteorol 151:1471–1479. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jarvis S, Hutchings N, Brentrup F et al (2011) Nitrogen flows in farming systems across Europe. In: Sutton MA, Howard CM, Erisman JW et al (eds) European nitrogen assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Jensen LS (2013) Animal manure fertiliser value, crop utilisation and soil quality impacts. Animal manure recycling: treatment and management, 295–328. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jongema Y (2017) World list of edible insects. In: .World list of edible insects. Accessed 28 Apr 2016
  20. Kool A, Blonk H, Ponsioen T et al (2010) Carbon footprints of conventional and organic pork: assessments of typical production systems in the Netherlands, Denmark, England and GermanyCarbon footprints of conventional and organic pork. Blonk Milieu Advies, GoudaGoogle Scholar
  21. Leinonen I, Williams AG, Wiseman J et al (2012) Predicting the environmental impacts of chicken systems in the United Kingdom through a life cycle assessment: broiler production systems. Poult Sci 91:8–25. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Leip A, Billen G, Garnier J et al (2015) Impacts of European livestock production: nitrogen, sulphur, phosphorus and greenhouse gas emissions, land-use, water eutrophication and biodiversity. Environ Res Lett 10:115004. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Machovina B, Feeley KJ, Ripple WJ (2015) Biodiversity conservation: the key is reducing meat consumption. Sci Total Environ 536:419–431. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Mekonnen MM, Hoekstra AY (2012) A global assessment of the water footprint of farm animal products. Ecosystems 15:401–415. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Menzi H, Oenema O, Burton C et al (2010) Impacts of intensive livestock production and manure management on the environment. In: Steinfeld H, Mooney H, Schneider F, Neville L (eds) Livestock in a changing landscape: drivers, consequences and responses. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 139–163Google Scholar
  26. Miglietta P, De Leo F, Ruberti M, Massari S (2015) Mealworms for food: a water footprint perspective. Water 7:6190–6203. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Murray DRP (1968) The importance of water in the normal growth of larvae of Tenebrio molitor. Entomol Exp Appl 11:149–168. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Naylor R, Steinfeld H, Falcon W et al (2005) Losing the links between livestock and land. Science 310:1621–1622. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Nielsen N, Jørgensen M, Bahrndorff S (2012) Greenhouse gas emission from the Danish broiler production estimated via LCA methodology. Agrotech, ArhusGoogle Scholar
  30. Oonincx DGAB, de Boer IJM (2012) Environmental impact of the production of mealworms as a protein source for humans – a life cycle assessment. PLoS One 7:e51145. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Oonincx DGAB, van Itterbeeck J, Heetkamp MJW et al (2010) An exploration on greenhouse gas and ammonia production by insect species suitable for animal or human consumption. PLoS One 5:e14445. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Reay DS, Davidson EA, Smith KA et al (2012) Global agriculture and nitrous oxide emissions. Nat Clim Chang 2:410–416. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ripoll-Bosch R, de Boer IJM, Bernués A, Vellinga TV (2013) Accounting for multi-functionality of sheep farming in the carbon footprint of lamb: a comparison of three contrasting Mediterranean systems. Agric Syst 116:60–68. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rivera A, de la Salud Rubio M, Zanasi C, et al (2014) Environmental impact evaluation of beef production in Veracruz using life cycle assessment. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on life cycle assessment in the agri-food sector (LCA Food 2014), San Francisco, 8–10 Oct 2014Google Scholar
  35. Robinson TP, Pozzi F (2011) Mapping supply and demand for animal-source foods to 2030. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  36. Schlink AC, Nguyen ML, Viljoen GJ (2010) Water requirements for livestock production: a global perspective. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz 29:603–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smetana S, Mathys A, Knoch A, Heinz V (2015) Meat alternatives: life cycle assessment of most known meat substitutes. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1254–1267. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sommer SG, Hutchings NJ (2001) Ammonia emission from field applied manure and its reduction—invited paper. Eur J Agron 15:1–15. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sørensen P, Jensen LS (2013) Nutrient leaching and runoff from land application of animal manure and measures for reduction. In: Sommer SG, Christensen ML, Schmidt T, Jensen LS (eds) Nutrient leaching and runoff from land application of animal manure and measures for reduction. Wiley, West Sussex, pp 195–210Google Scholar
  40. Steinfeld H, Gerber P, Wassenaar T et al (2006) Livestock’s long shadow: environmental issues and options. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  41. Sutton M, Howard CM, Erisman JW et al (eds) (2011) European nitrogen assessment: sources effects and policy perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  42. Tilman D, Clark M (2014) Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature 515:518–522. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Winther U, Ziegler F, Skontorp Hognes E et al (2009) Carbon footprint and energy use of Norwegian seafood products. SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture, TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  44. Zachariassen K (1996) The water conserving physiological compromise of desert insects. Eur J Entomol 93:359–367Google Scholar
  45. Ziegler F, Winther U, Hognes ES et al (2013) The carbon footprint of Norwegian seafood products on the global seafood market. J Ind Ecol 17:103–116. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Afton Halloran
    • 1
  • Hanne Helene Hansen
    • 2
  • Lars Stoumann Jensen
    • 3
  • Sander Bruun
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Nutrition, Exercise and SportsUniversity of CopenhagenFrederiksberg CDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Plant and Environmental SciencesUniversity of CopenhagenFrederiksberg CDenmark
  3. 3.Department Veterinary and Animal SciencesUniversity of CopenhagenFrederiksberg CDenmark

Personalised recommendations