A new report from Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) finds that industrial insect farming in temperate, high-income countries may not be the climate solution it is often portrayed to be. Its environmental performance varies widely depending on production systems, energy use, feed inputs and whether insect products actually replace conventional meat.
After years of strong investor and government backing, the sector is now facing financial headwinds, and the new research suggests that its environmental credentials are also far from guaranteed.
The report, " Rethinking insects as alternative protein: emerging environmental and animal welfare considerations ", was produced by researchers from SEI, Leiden University and the European Institute for Animal Law & Policy. Drawing on a review of life cycle analyses with an emphasis on Europe and North America, it finds that insect farming may not live up to claims as a sustainable alternative to conventional animal protein. The report also documents a wave of recent restructurings and shutdowns across the sector.
"Insect farming is often framed as a sustainability solution," said Camilo Garzón , Research Associate at SEI. "But the benefits depend on how insects are produced and what they replace in our diets. On current evidence, the environmental case is far less clear-cut than often assumed."
Mixed environmental performance
The environmental footprint of insect farming is uneven. Land use is generally low, though comparable to, or in some cases exceeding, soymeal when insects are not raised on organic waste. Evidence on water use remains limited, with available studies suggesting variability between insect species.
Greenhouse gas emissions can vary substantially. In temperate regions, emissions from insect production range from around 3 to 35.5 kgCO₂eq per kilogram of protein, with a median of around 13.5. For comparison, chicken is estimated at 18–36 and pork at 21–53 kgCO₂eq/kg protein. While worst-case insect figures remain well below beef (75–170), they approach the upper range reported for chicken and the middle of the range for pork. Moreover, the proteins most likely to be displaced by insect meal in practice — soymeal (0.9–2.2 kgCO₂eq/kg protein) and fishmeal (0.2–9.3) — tend to have lower emissions. These findings challenge the common assumption that insects are categorically lower-impact than the products they seek to replace.
Insect farming does have the potential for very low environmental impacts, but this typically depends on specific conditions that are often not met in practice. For example, facilities in cooler regions such as Europe and North America may require substantial heating, increasing energy demand and associated emissions. The use of renewable energy in the sector remains limited. Insect farming can upcycle organic waste as feed, but regulatory and practical barriers limit this practice at scale.
Limited impact on meat consumption and wider concerns
Most farmed insects never reach human plates. Consumer uptake has been limited, and where insect ingredients do appear — in products such as pasta, cookies and bread — they often supplement rather than replace meat. A substantial share of production goes to farmed land animal and aquaculture feed, potentially reinforcing the very industries it is meant to displace.
"If insect production mainly feeds other animals without reducing meat consumption, policymakers should ask whether these investments are transforming our food system or simply reinforcing it," said Cleo Verkuijl , Senior Scientist at SEI.
The report also flags ecological risks from accidental insect releases, and it warns that investment in the sector may come at the expense of more promising alternatives such as plant-based and cultivated proteins. It notes that growing evidence of insect sentience raises ethical questions about farming them at industrial scale.
The researchers argue that policy and investment decisions on alternative proteins should be guided by robust evidence of environmental performance and clear potential to reduce reliance on conventional meat. While insect farming may face fewer barriers in tropical and lower-income countries, where energy demand could be lower and the availability of organic residues higher, the evidence base there remains limited. In high-income countries, the promise of insect farming now faces two critical tests — environmental performance and economic viability — both of which are increasingly in question.
