The UNs Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) is examining the terminology surrounding cultivated food as the industry edges closer to commercialization. The organization poses a question: “What would you call a food that’s made by cultivating animal cells in a tank?” As the cultivated meat space matures, stakeholders are seeking the answer to this question in response to a growing need to define the terms of the emerging industry.

The FAO’s examination comes as its expert consultation report on the cultivated meat space, years in the making, is imminently due. The report will discuss food safety around cultivated meat, analyzing and recommending how the language and nomenclature around the space can and should function.

“As of March 2023, cell-based food products are not yet available in most parts of the world. For this reason, most consumers are unlikely to be familiar with them,” Masami Takeuchi, FAO Food Safety Officer, tells FoodIngredientsFirst. 

“Therefore, this is a critical and opportune time for regulatory authorities to be prepared with an effective food safety assurance system with good communication strategies that use the appropriate nomenclature.” 

“FAO is here to support evidence-based international discussions so that regulators can make informed decisions considering their specific country contexts and language.”

Key players in the cultivated meat space are celebrating this discussion and effort by the FAO.

“We welcome the efforts of FAO and others to define terminology,” says Dr. Benjamin Smith, director of the Future Ready Food Safety Hub (FRESH). 

“Consistent and clean terminology is important to build our knowledge around cultivated meats and align understanding between regulators, industry, and consumers. Transparency in communication ensures trust in the process, which is critical for consumer acceptance and adoption of cultivated meat products.”

Defining terms
FRESH formed part of a consortium of key players in the Asia-Pacific cultivated meat space, which last year agreed to use “cultivated” as the standard descriptor for cell-based products.

“We appreciate the FAO’s approach to examining terminology in the nascent but fast-growing area of real meat made from animal cells instead of conventionally raised and slaughtered livestock,” says Andrew Noyes, VP, head of Global Communications & Public Affairs at Eat Just, which owns GOOD Meat, its cultivated meat subsidiary.

GOOD Meat was also one of the signatories of the Asia-Pacific nomenclature agreement and gained fame for netting “first-in-the-world” regulatory approval from the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) to use serum-free media to produce cultivated meat. This followed its construction of one of the world’s largest bioreactors for cultivated meat.

The Good Food Institute (GFI) was also one of the signatories.

“There has been a growing consensus on this as the sector’s preferred term for several years now, and our colleagues at GFI Asia Pacific recently joined industry leaders to present the first-ever memorandum of understanding aligning on ‘cultivated’ as the chosen terminology.” says Seth Roberts, policy manager at the Good Food Institute Europe.

The weight of a word
Implications and implied meanings are key to consider in the defining of nomenclature, with the FAO noting the “importance of names and labels that directly or indirectly impact consumers’ perceptions and appeal of the product.” For example “there is a problem with calling the product “clean” meat, as it implies that conventional meat is unclean in some way, which indirectly raises often unsubstantiated negative connotations for conventional meat.” 

Noyes agrees that this is a pivotal point to consider.

“It is imperative that cultivated meat be referred to in a way that is neutral, understandable and appealing to consumers. The nomenclature should be accurate and descriptive of the production process,” he says.

Smith agrees, noting that clarity is critical to the success of this endeavor.

“Establishing a standardized nomenclature will have significant impacts on how these foods are understood, communicated, and marketed, leaving no room for ambiguity.” 

“For example, vegans will want to know and understand exactly what this product is to decide if they want to try a slaughter-free meat alternative.”

“Appropriate nomenclature that is truthful and not misleading facilitates informed discussions and ultimately informed decision-making by all stakeholders,” notes Takeuchi. “Agreeing on common naming structure will help provide a common language for all stakeholders, from manufacturers and policymakers to consumers.” 

Language and labeling

One of the most significant impacts of standardized language will be on the labeling of products.

“It’s difficult to predict at this time what the impact of nomenclature will be on food labeling, as the cell-based meat industry is still in its early stages,” notes Smith. 

“At the moment, the FAO recommendations are also at an early stage and there needs to be more discussion on specific aspects of labeling such as allergens.”

The language on-label must coordinate with local authorities and contexts for food safety.

“This change also needs to be done in conjunction with the relevant national food safety authorities who have the responsibility over novel food risk assessment, approval, and subsequent marketing requirements,” says Smith.

“The development of standardized nomenclature is a significant step in the right direction, but we’ll have to wait and see how it all plays out when it comes to specific labeling requirements and regulations.”

Labeling also offers the opportunity to effuse the sustainable benefits of cultivated meat.

“We have found that the currently low levels of awareness and the neutral understanding around cultivated meat mean that there is plenty of room for informing the public, normalizing the concept, and making it more well-known and attractive,” says Gemma Tadman of ProVeg Corporate Engagement Team. 

“Labeling will play an important role here as, potentially, the environmental and animal welfare gains of cultivated meat could feature on these labels.” 

However, cultivated meat labeling is already experiencing pushback.

“In terms of challenges, we have already seen in Texas how the conventional meat industry is seeking to restrict the term “meat” for cultivated meat before it even appears on the market,” flags Tadman. 

“No doubt other US states and countries will feel the pressure from parts of the conventional meat industry to restrict labeling accordingly.” 

Preferences of terminology
Noyes has a firm choice of terminology in this space.

“Cultivated meat” is our strong preference, followed by “cultured meat,” he says. 

“Lab-grown meat” is factually inaccurate because, at scale, the manufacturing process occurs in a large food production facility similar to a beer brewery rather than a lab.”

“Cell-based” is scientifically accurate but it is overly broad and could be confusing to consumers since conventional and plant-based meat also contain cells.”

Smith aligns with the results of the earlier memorandum. 

“In 2022, FRESH aligned with other industry stakeholders to sign the memorandum of understanding (MOU) aligning on the term “cultivated meat” as the industry’s preferred nomenclature,”

Tadman has made the same choice, saying, “We believe it is also important to use wording that is more appealing to consumers and ProVeg has moved away from “cultured” to “cultivated” for that very reason.”

“While many terms have been used to describe meat grown from cells, GFI uses the term ‘cultivated meat’ because it is grown in cultivators, similar to the fermenters used to brew beer, which provide the warmth and nutrients cells need to become meat,” says Roberts.

Next steps
Standardization will bring clarity but also potentially increase costs, as greater frameworks will be needed to be put in place to monitor and regulate use of the language.

“A global regulatory framework for cell-based, cultivated meat could provide many benefits, such as creating a level playing field for companies operating in the industry, promoting safety and quality standards, and facilitating international trade,” says Smith. 

“However, there may also be drawbacks, such as increased regulatory costs for smaller producers and potential challenges in aligning regulations across different regions and countries.”

Takeuchi highlights the upcoming results of the FAO report on cultivated meat. 

“A joint FAO/WHO milestone publication on the results of the Expert Consultation will be published and launched on 5 April 2023 at the joint FAO/WHO webinar,” as well as “various follow-ups are being planned to collaborate with stakeholders including regulatory authorities, industries, start-ups, academia and NGOs.”