Search

Current evaluation systems for protein quality focus only on indispensable amino acids (IAAs) and do not consider the dispensable amino acids (DAAs). However, at excess levels of IAAs, DAAs may become limiting. Here, we used published ileal amino acid digestibility data determined in growing pigs and currently assumed protein and IAA recommendations to estimate utilizable, oxidized, and non-absorbed amino acids in different dietary protein and to compare these utilizable amino acid values to digestible indispensable amino acid score (DIAAS) values. For dietary protein sources with a DIAAS value <90, the amount of calculated utilizable amino acids increased proportionally with the DIAAS value according to “utilizable amino acids (mg/g protein) = DIAAS × 10”; for dietary protein sources with a DIAAS value >90, the amount of utilizable amino acid stays within the range 800–1000 mg/g protein. Cereals contained the lowest levels of utilizable amino acids and the highest amount of oxidized amino acids. Dairy and meat have the highest amount of utilizable amino acids followed by nuts and pulses. For many mixtures of protein sources, the highest value for utilizable amino acids, which considers both IAAs and DAAs, occurred at a different ratio of protein sources than the maximum DIAAS value, which only considers IAAs. From this theoretical study and based on the assumptions made, we conclude that estimation of utilizable amino acids from data typically reported in DIAAS studies further enables complementary insights next to DIAAS values. Careful consideration of protein and IAA requirements is critical in further work.

This report explores the options to steer, valuate and remunerate sustainability services of farmers, with a view to develop a critical performance indicators (CPI) system for facilitating the transition to circular agriculture. To this end, the relevant governance and legislative boundaries (Common Agricultural Policy [CAP], state aid and competition legislation) were investigated. Since December 2021, EU legislation offers enhanced flexibility in this respect. National financial support for sustainability services may now be channeled through the CAP National Strategic Plan, in principle without any ceiling or state aid notification, if agreed by the European Commission. In addition, sustainability agreements in the agricultural production chain are no longer prohibited (cartel formation) but, within certain conditions, have become a right. As regards the CAP and state aid, a 20% margin on top of the costs incurred and income foregone may in certain situations be applied as an incentive for participation. The CPI system may be employed in several ways for influencing behaviour of farmers and may be applied in all four previously identified domains (area- specific initiatives, market-oriented initiatives, application in the framework of the CAP, application in the form of derogations to legal requirements). For legal reasons, private and public funding may however not be combined in a joint expenditure system. Every private and public instrument is bound to its own specific legal, governance and accountability constraints in EU legislation. Nevertheless, CPI development is highly valuable as a common language for defining targets and measuring performance. In addition, societal transaction costs may be reduced through simpler and faster agreement on systems and definitions., Ten behoeve van de ontwikkeling van een systematiek van kritische prestatie-indicatoren (KPI’s) voor de transitie naar kringlooplandbouw verkent dit rapport de mogelijkheden om de prestaties van boeren ten aanzien van duurzaamheid te sturen, waarderen en belonen. Daarvoor werden de bestuurlijke en juridische kaders (gemeenschappelijk landbouwbeleid [GLB], staatssteunregels, mededingingsrecht) in kaart gebracht. Het EU-recht biedt op deze drie gebieden sinds eind 2021 nieuwe ruimte. Nationale financiële middelen voor duurzaamheidsprestaties mogen nu in principe onbeperkt worden toegevoegd aan het GLB zonder staatssteuntoets via het Nationaal Strategisch Plan, mits goedgekeurd door de Europese Commissie. Daarnaast is het maken van duurzaamheidsafspraken in de keten niet langer verboden (kartelverbod), maar binnen zekere kaders een recht geworden. Bij GLB en staatssteun mag voor duurzaamheid in bepaalde situaties een marge van 20% boven op de gemaakte kosten en gederfde inkomsten worden gehanteerd om deelname aantrekkelijk te maken. De KPI-systematiek kan op diverse manieren worden ingezet om duurzaamheidsprestaties te sturen en is bruikbaar voor alle vier KPI-toepassingsvormen die in eerder onderzoek werden geïdentificeerd (gebiedsgericht, marktgericht, GLB, vrijstellingen). Combinatie van private en publieke middelen en gezamenlijke uitkering daarvan stuit echter op juridische bezwaren. Elk instrument kent noodzakelijkerwijs zijn eigen juridische inregel- en verantwoordingsvoorwaarden. Het ontwikkelen van een gelijke onderliggende inhoudelijke basis voor KPI’s is desondanks waardevol. Door gebruik te maken van dezelfde KPI’s kunnen bedrijven en overheden beloningen beter op elkaar afstemmen. Ook kunnen de maatschappelijke transactiekosten worden beperkt, omdat er minder tijd verloren gaat in het afstemmen van systemen en definities.

Repository contains input data for and model code to run the resource allocation model. The model is a linear optimisation model with an objective function to maximise human edible protein from livestock (dairy, beef, pigs, laying hens, broiler chickens, salmon and tilapia) while satisfying their nutritional requirements from a given availability of feed. The availability of feed is based on the low opportunity cost biomass (co-products, food waste, and grassland resources) produced from the EAT-LANCET diet and grasslands in the European Union 27 + United Kingdom. Two different availabilities of co-products and food waste are provided, one from the original EAT-LANCET diet and a second from a refined grain version of the EAT-LANCET diet. In addition the model can calculate the associated GHG emissions from livestock and steer livestock production to meet the animal-sourced food requirements of the EAT-LANCET diet.

The need for more sustainable production and consumption of animal source food (ASF) is central to the achievement of the sustainable development goals: within this context, wise use of land is a core challenge and concern. A key question in feeding the future world is: how much ASF should we eat? We demonstrate that livestock raised under the circular economy concept could provide a significant, nonnegligible part (9–23 g/per capita) of our daily protein needs (~50–60 g/per capita). This livestock then would not consume human‐edible biomass, such as grains, but mainly convert leftovers from arable land and grass resources into valuable food, implying that production of livestock feed is largely decoupled from arable land. The availability of these biomass streams for livestock then determines the boundaries for livestock production and consumption. Under this concept, the competition for land for feed or food would be minimized and compared to no ASF, including some ASF in the human diet could free up about one quarter of global arable land. Our results also demonstrate that restricted growth in consumption of ASF in Africa and Asia would be feasible under these boundary conditions, while reductions in the rest of the world would be necessary to meet land use sustainability criteria. Managing this expansion and contraction of future consumption of ASF is essential for achieving sustainable nutrition security.