Exploring the future of in vitro meat: scenarios for a new meat future

(1)

1

Exploring the future of in vitro meat

Scenarios for a new meat future

A research proposal

_______________________________________________________________________________ Amsterdam, February 2020 Kelly Streekstra | 10617701

Master’s thesis proposal

Master: Earth Sciences, Major: Science Communication Examiner: Coyan Tromp, J.C.Tromp@uva.nl

Co-assessor: Marc Davidson, M.D.Davidson@uva.nl

Daily Supervisor: Maja Bosch (Senior advisor at Futureconsult), bosch@futureconsult.nl Contact at RIVM: Adriënne Sips, Adrienne.sips@rivm.nl

(2)

2

Summary

In vitro meat (IVM) is developed by start-ups around the world to feed the globally rising meat demand with a more animal friendly and sustainable alternative. The potential implications would be significant; for instance, IVM could change the agricultural system, give rise to new moral and ethical questions surrounding the animal-human relationship, and it could strengthen public debate about livestock-meat. However, the future of IVM is uncertain: many technological developments still need to be designed, and contextual trends in the food market, regulations, socio-cultural- and environmental trends can influence its future significantly. To date, there is no academic research found that describes a set of alternative future scenarios on IVM that explore alternative

technological developments as well as key contextual trends. This would be a valuable research, for scenarios can give insight into the future outlooks, give a common framework for cross-discipline communication and cooperation and could spark commitment to a favourable future. Therefore, I want to propose to explore the future of in vitro meat for my masters’ thesis. The internal objective of this research is to contribute to this research gap by developing a set of contrasting and

explorative scenarios that describe plausible, radical and relevant futures, and to indicate the corresponding systemic, regulatory and true cost implications. I propose to explore the key trends and developments that impact the future of IVM through interviews and a literature review. Scenarios will be derived from these trends, and discussed in interviews and a stakeholder-session. Followingly I will assess regulatory, systemic and true cost implications of the scenarios. Besides the research gap there is a practice gap: regulatory bodies are only minimally prepared for the possibility of IVM. Therefore, the external objective of this research is to contribute an early step in the

regulatory preparedness of the RIVM (Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu), and to serve as a learning instrument for their understanding of IVM. In this collaboration, I will organize 2-3

cocreation sessions at the RIVM.

Illustrations on the front page are developed by the Next Nature Network, and can be found in the In Vitro Meat Cookbook: 45 recipes from the future. (van Mensvoort & Grievink, 2014)

(3)

3

Preface

What could have been a heated debate whether or not we would want to introduce clean meat at all, instead immediately turned into a friendly agreement.

In this conversation at the Tegenlicht meetup at Pakhuis de Zwijger in 2018, we got to meet Jaap Korteweg, a vegetarian butcher, who is dedicating his organisation towards recreating the sensation and experience of meat-dishes through vegetarian ingredients. Going sustainable to him means going fully vegetarian; in style. And I, as a vegetarian myself, would find it hard to disagree with that view.

On the chair next to him sat Koert van Mensvoort, founder of Next Nature Network and lead of the in vitro meat cookbook: 45 recipes of the future. Koert describes himself unambiguously in favour of eating meat, a guilty pleasure hopefully soon to be replaced by culinary specialties based on

artificially grown in vitro meat.

You may see how these visions of the future, both aimed to be more animal friendly, both aimed to be better for the world than the impactful fauna-food industry we have today, could find themselves in a competition for the holy grail of the ideal solution.

Instead, Koert van Mensvoort launched the ‘debate’ like a true Polder-model Dutchmen, as he stated “If we’re building the ideal train for the world, why not also invest in electrical cars?” A funny silence filled the room, ingesting that metaphor. Jaap was the first to nod in agreement. They smiled, and spontaneously decided to shake hands in these first minutes of the event before returning their view to the moderator.

From that moment on, my pen started scratching the lines of my notebook. I was drawn to this harmonious movement of commercially ánd ideologically oriented developers, researchers, innovators, designers, visionaries towards a more sustainable ‘meat’ system.

As of now, the train is our greenest option. Going vegetarian is like skipping the climb up the inefficient trophic levels of the food pyramid. A fast-track to sustainability, build for the many who are happy with the known. But, we tend to favour the freedom of our own wheels. Building electric cars is not yet meant for everyone. They’re expensive, not every part about them is actually

sustainable yet, but it’s a trial and error and a shining status object. Perhaps, in the view of this metaphor, in vitro meat would follow the tracks of our electric cars.

Besides the train (the vegetarian meal), and the electrical car (in vitro meat), we shouldn’t lose grip on the third party involved in this transitory exploration. Namely, our old barrel, our trusted, loved, rough, edgy, true piece of real bloody meat. Our carnivorous culture with gourmettes for Christmas and hotdogs on the street, would need a lot of awe to be lured to other alternatives, if we were to change, all together. And whenever I return from the Amsterdam veggie-keen bubble to my hometown in Flevoland, I doubt whether a transition from the ‘carniculture’ is likely to happen anytime soon.

(5)

5

But, whether or not people could be lured for cultured meat, that I don’t know. And, perhaps there is a market for change. The very first question to the audience at the Tegenlicht meetup was; “Who would eat a clean meat burger if it was in your supermarket?” Within this audience, nearly everyone raised their hands, rather immediately. However, I wouldn’t describe this event and its audience as “a warm welcome” to in vitro meat. Instead, all together, a rich critical and envisioning debate arose, full of laughter, crazy ideas and metaphors. What kind of future do we see for in vitro meat, how does it fit in the food sector, how could it suit the world? The opinions diverged and conditions for its growth contrasted, all within this initially seemingly unanimous audience.

Therefore, I dare to conclude that the future of sustainable and new meat is still up for us to envision, design, build or await. If we abandon the “or-or” discussion and move to an “and-and” of these alternative ‘meats’, we are left with the question: what role do we want in vitro meat to fulfil? What niche in the ecosystem of meat will be most fitting for this technology, if at all?

That is the kind of questions I’m eager to explore within this group of people within my final thesis. I hope you’ll enjoy reading my proposal!

(6)

6

1. Introduction

1.1 From in vivo to in vitro?

In a televised event in 2013, three people were sharing a single burger on international

broadcasting. With the utmost care, they focussed on the taste, texture and bite of this peculiarly interesting piece of meat. However unusual, this was not an unfit spotlight, as never before did mankind find a way to make meat for human consumption, without the slaughter of an animal. Going from in vivo, to in vitro.

This first lab-grown burger was served by the Dutch researcher Mark Post, and funded by the Sergey Brin, CEO of Google. Rather than produced within the complex body of an animal, in vitro meat(IVM) involves taking specific cells of an animal and lets the cells multiply in a few weeks to grow into a piece of meat, a method known as ‘tissue engineering’. Ground breaking as this prototype of animal free meat is, it is still part of a complex and developing process that needs time before it reaches the dinnerplates.

In the years following this televised event, start-ups around the world have set up to develop, improve and scale up this emerging technology. By the end of 2018, 27 start-ups world-wide have set up (Cameron & Neill, 2019). Moreover, designers have imagined speculative futures with IVM (van Mensvoort & Grievink, 2014), and Paul Shapiro, author and vegan activist wrote an advocative book on the promise of this emerging technology: Clean Meat: How growing meat without animals

will revolutionize dinner and the world (Shapiro, 2018). And, most companies state they’re nearly

ready for first consumer-tastings of the products. For instance, in 2018, a petition in the Netherlands stated “In vitro meat is here! We want to taste it.” (van Mensvoort, 2018), when a piece of IVM from American start-up JUST was confiscated by the Dutch food authority as it fell under European Novel Foods regulations. Moreover, on January 30th_{2020 the Dutch parliament debated on the}

opportunities of in vitro meat, and later voted positive on notions to increase ambition-levels (Tweede kamer, 2020).

This emerging technology could have many implications. Innovators state it will become a more animal friendly alternative, allowing the chicken whose meat you’re eating to walk by your feet. For public health it is also is raising hopes: IVM would be less likely to cause antibiotic resistance and decrease the livestock-born pathogens. It would also be a more sustainable alternative to real meat: less water use, significantly less land needed for its production, and a decrease in CO2-eq emissions if

it were to replace real meat products (Mattick, Landis, Allenby, & Genovese, 2015; Smetana, Mathys, Knoch, & Heinz, 2015; Tuomisto & Teixeira de Mattos, 2014).

And, it seems as though we need alternatives for the livestock industry. The current livestock industry is already one of the most resource intensive industries in terms of land use and greenhouse gas emissions (Alexander et al., 2017; Post, 2012; L. Specht, 2018). What’s more; according to UN predictions we will reach about 9.7 billion people on earth in 2050 (United Nations Departement of Economic and Social Affairs - Population division, 2019). If the UN predictions are right, we will have experienced a 10-fold growth of the human population over the course of 250 years (Our World in Data, population growth). Globally, this increase in population causes a

(7)

7

Post, 2012; E. A. Specht, Welch, Rees Clayton, & Lagally, 2018), namely, from 258 million tonnes in 2006, to 455 million tonnes of meat in 2050 (Alexandratos & Bruinsma, 2012). It is argued that the conventional livestock industry may not be able to feed this growing meat demand, for the great environmental impacts (Alexander et al., 2017) and because we likely have reached a biological limit for animals to become more ‘efficient’ at growing meat (Tallentire, Leinonen, & Kyriazakis, 2018). But before IVM could play a role in our food system, many elements of these products need to be designed, technological hurdles need to find solutions, it needs production methods at proper scales, and it needs to be welcomed by the policymakers and consumers (Hocquette, 2016; Stephens et al., 2018). Furthermore, public debate about IVM, but also about the meat industry of today, may will impact the future of IVM (Stephens, Sexton, & Driessen, 2019; van der Weele & Driessen, 2019). Thus, the future of IVM is highly uncertain, but of great societal and environmental impact.

1.2 The known unknowns: peeking into the future

From many perspectives, people have started thinking about the future that IVM could bring, seeing it could impact our climate goals, animal rights, our dinner plates, and the food system. But there is a lot left that we do not know about the future of IVM, the so-called ‘known unknowns’. In

preliminary research which is attached to this proposal, it is found that there are many trends that influence the global food system, and there are many directions that tissue engineering for consumption may still develop into. These factors could strongly effect the future of IVM. It is important to understand the uncertainties surrounding what the future may bring in order to prepare for this, or potentially to adapt courses of action. Making a set of scenarios on the future of IVM can help exploring the plausible futures and the uncertainties therein.

To the knowledge of this research proposal, a set of scenarios for the (Dutch-)future of IVM hasn’t been researched before. What’s more, the future studies for the food industry (most of them looking at the year 2050, which corresponds with the climate goals) don’t yet include IVM.

Therefore, the internal objective of the research is to contribute to this research gap by developing a set of scenarios that explore the future of IVM in the Netherlands in 2050, and to research the implications thereof.

One organisation that is curious about the plausible futures of IVM is the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and Environment (RIVM). The RIVM is committed to public health and a safe, and healthy environment by doing research and applying knowledge as trusted advisor to the

government (source). In Vitro Meat appeals to each of these this goals, and it’s new nature of meat would require changes to policies and regulations of the RIVM. Therefore, it is important for the researchers of the RIVM to get a feel for- and a deeper understanding of the production methods and the product it may become. Besides this, the RIVM is exploring how to change from a reactive to a proactive organisation. To become proactive, they’re developing methods for regulatory

preparedness, which falls under the Safe innovation Approach. A research into the future of IVM could help them to gain insight into their potential (proactive-) role within emerging technologies. Therefore, the RIVM indicated interest in a set of ‘appealing narratives’ to help colleagues imagine the futures of IVM, as this future is yet hard to grasp.

(8)

8

This constitutes a practice gap in regulatory preparedness of a.o. the RIVM, which this research proposes to contribute to. The external objective of this research therefore is to contribute to the RIVM’s ‘Safe Innovation Approach’ by serving as a learning instrument for their understanding of IVM, it’s plausible future and its implications.

1.3 Contribution by this research

Following from the research objectives described above, this thesis will be guided by the following research question:

What could be the role of in vitro meat for the Dutch food system in 2050, and what could be the potential impact of IVM on the food system and on environmental, socio-cultural and regulatory factors?

Therefore I have two sub-questions referring to the internal objective:

- The scenario research:

What is the future of in vitro meat in the Netherlands in 2050?

- Analysing the implications of the scenarios:

What are the systemic and true-cost implications of the IVM-scenarios for the food system and for environmental, socio-cultural and regulatory factors?

This objective and these research questions will be approached by exploring the future of IVM through the development of a set of scenarios for the future. The scenario methodology aims to describe multiple plausible, relevant, imaginative and legitimate scenarios that differ strongly to one another. Firstly, an in-depth trend analysis on the future of IVM will inform the uncertainties, impact-estimates and bandwidth of each trend’s plausible outcomes through literature research, participatory sessions and interviews with stakeholders and experts. Followingly, a set of scenarios based on varying combinations of trend-outcomes will offer an outlook for the plausible futures of IVM. Of these scenarios, systemic and true-cost implications will be derived. To conduct this research, I will be interning at- and collaborating with Futureconsult, a company specialized in the scenario methodology.

Lastly, the final sub-question refers to the external objective:

- In what way could the RIVM engage in regulatory preparedness for IVM?

As this is the external objective, and therefore is not captured within the research question of this thesis. To contribute an early step in the regulatory preparedness of the RIVM for IVM, I will conduct interviews and participatory sessions with employees of RIVM. Adriënne Sips, research coordinator nanotechnology and advanced materials, will be my primary contact at the RIVM to maximally integrate my findings with the RIVM.

In the following chapters of this research proposal, I will propose the theoretical framework and methods of my masters’ thesis. Furthermore, in the attached file a working document is provided with a preliminary Contextual background, where I explore what is happening in the meat industry, which is already an early step in the analysis of trends that influence the future of IVM. In this

(9)

9

attached file is also the conceptual framework, where I describe what in vitro meat is, and what developments may still take place in the future of IVM, which is a preliminary research into the developments of IVM.

(10)

10

2. Theoretical framework

The proposed research comprises three parts. Firstly, this research will adopt the theoretical framework of explorative scenarios to study the future of IVM. To explore the implications of these scenarios for environmental, socio-cultural, regulatory and food-system factors, the theory of true cost calculations and systemic implication trees are adopted. And lastly, to aid the external objective of the research, the Safe Innovation Approach is introduced as a theoretical framework for it is the model adopted by the RIVM to approach emerging technologies. In the following sections, the theoretical framework is described, and the research gaps this research contributes to are identified. In the section 2.4, the sub-research questions for the proposed chapters of the thesis are outlined. In the next chapter, the methods adopted for the steps within this theoretical framework will be elaborated upon.

2.1 A scenario planning research strategy on studying the future

2.1.1 Why scenarios?

To study the future of IVM, the scenario methodology is chosen for the following reasons. The future of IVM is not explored yet in the form of a contrasting set of scenarios like Dammers et al. (2017) define them: scenarios that aim to make a relevant, plausible, legitimate and imaginative mapping of the future. This poses a research gap that this study proposes to contribute to. The current future conceptualisations of IVM are mainly envisioned by innovators and designers based on the potential outcomes of technical developments of IVM (Böhm, Ferrari, & Woll, 2018; Ferrari & Lösch, 2017; van Mensvoort & Grievink, 2014). Thus, in the design of these future-visions they did not actively take into account all contextual trends that may be of crucial influence to these futures.

Therefore a more integral study exploring both the negative and positive influences of contextual trends and technological developments is valuable to research IVM’s future. Scenarios are a fitting instrument to do this integral and system-level study of the future, because scenarios aim to make the uncertain complex future comprehensive to regulators, policymakers, innovators and general stakeholders of IVM; “scenarios effectively organize a variety of seemingly unrelated economic,

technological, political and social information and translate it into a framework for judgement”

(Wack, 1985: p 146).

2.1.2 Type of scenarios

Scenarios exist in a variety of types, tailored to their purpose. Dammers, van ‘t Klooster and de Wit (2017) describe 8 different purposes for scenarios, ranging from vision-formulation to risk

governance scenarios. Of these type scenarios, this research will adopt the framework of transformative scenarios. Transformation scenarios are chosen for the transformative nature of changes that the introduction of IVM may bring to the existing regime. The study of sustainable change via transformation is best described by (Grin, Rotmans, & Schot, 2010). Transitions are defined as intervening and irreversible changes of systems in society (Grin et al., 2010). This perspective on large-scale change is depicted in the following Figure 1Figure 1. It envisions that

(11)

11

innovations like IVM, indicated by the green arrows on the bottom, may or may not be taken up into the leading structure or ‘regime’.

Figure 1 The multi-level perspective on transition governance. Image by (Dammers et al., 2017), derived from (Grin et al., 2010).

Dammers, van ‘t Klooster and de Wit (2017) describe the qualities of the transformative scenarios to be strongly explorative, descriptive, qualitative, and participative.

Scenarios are strongly explorative when the trends and developments of today are projected by the method of foresight. Foresight is understood best when compared to forecasting: where forecasting extrapolates current trends, foresight explores the plausible extremes these current trends may extend into, and brings them into context (Nekkers, 2006).

The scenarios are ‘descriptive’ or otherwise termed ‘contextual’, when they explore the autonomic developments and uncontrollable events that can influence the future (Dammers et al., 2017; Nekkers, 2006). For this research, there are two main categories that will refer to these key and uncontrollable changes in the future: trends and developments. Trends are conceptualized by this research to refer to changes in the context of IVM, and comprise demographic and socio-cultural, environmental and ecological, and policy and regulatory and food industry changes on large scale. When using the term developments, this research refers to the specific technological and product

(12)

12

development and branding methods that IVM may still develop into. To see an overview of these trends and developments, see Figure 2on the next page.

It should be noted that in this research I will interview experts on their future visions, which will result in coloured images and normative views. However, I aim to descriptive scenarios, and will therefore combine expert opinions and use conflicting future visions to formulate separate scenarios.

The scenarios will exhibit a qualitative nature, meaning they will be based on narratives that help the reader imagine these futures and the pathways that lead up to them. These storylines and their implications are however complemented by more quantitative data derived in the implications-step of this research.

Lastly the process by which the scenarios are developed is integral to the legitimacy of the scenarios and their prevalence in practice. Therefore, the method to develop the scenarios will be

participative: stakeholders will be actively involved in the process. The method to do so is outlined in

chapter 5.

Figure 2 Preliminary conceptual model of the research identifying the classifications of IVM-developments, and contextual

trends.

2.2 Implications of the scenarios

Stephens et al. (2018) underline the need to start analysing how IVM may change our current system: “Yet despite projections of market and cultural shifts appearing to favour protein innovation,

there is a critical need to examine cultured meat within the contexts of existing food policy and the existing material landscape of food production.” (Stephens et al. 2018, p 156). This underlines and

(13)

13

concerns a research-gap: the examination of cultured meat within our current system. What would change and what can stay the same? These implications of cultured meat for the present system can be valuable insights that inform potential interventions at present.

Some implications have been studied of the future of IVM, such as the environmental impacts of IVM through anticipatory life cycle assessments (Mattick et al., 2015; Smetana et al., 2015; Tuomisto & Teixeira de Mattos, 2014), and the potential land use change under IVM versus other food systems (Alexander et al., 2017). Without dismissing the great value of these studies, it is important to note that these studies do not analyse implications on other relevant indicators like animal welfare, public health, work-type and employment, etc. Therefore, the second internal objective of this research is to analyse a broad set of systemic implications and externalities. I propose to work towards this objective by analysing the implications of the scenarios in two general ways: a more quantitative and a more qualitative method. Lastly, the found implications will be compared to one another in two ways: “how do the scenarios and their implications compare to one another?” as well as; “how do the scenarios compare to the present?”.

Firstly, an estimation of systemic impacts of these scenarios will be estimated in a participative process with stakeholders and experts. The framework of an implication tree will be adopted; a framework described by Nekkers (2006) to explore the primary and secondary degree implications of scenarios. I will seek to define implications of the scenarios in the categories defined in the research question and integrated in the conceptual model of Figure 2: environmental implications, socio-cultural implications, regulatory implications, and food-system implications. Another set of

implications can be found by researching what these scenario’s mean for the present. This will be a qualitative analysis the implications of the scenarios.

Secondly, a model will be developed to quantitatively estimate the externalities of each scenario on these same categories as in the qualitative approach. Per indicator of an externality, such as CO2 emissions, labour conditions or animal ethics, a rating or state per scenario will be found through literature research or expert judgement. These ratings will be combined per scenario, to form a quantitative judgement of the scenario. Whereas this research can be done in various ways, the proposed framework for this analysis is to summarize the value of meat(-alternatives) in terms of a ‘true price’-calculation. True pricing is “the monetary valuation of social and environmental

externalities” (True Price, PwC, & Deloitte, 2014). By the principle of true price, one captures an

overview of both positive and negative externalities that are not covered in the commercial interest. This could help approach a complete overview of implications of these scenarios. Furthermore, a true price analysis would result in a quantitative price-judgement of the scenarios that seems intuitive to people, which may aid external communications.

(14)

14

Figure 3 An example of a true cost calculation, resulting in a net higher price when externalities are included than without externalities. (True Price et al., 2014)

2.3 External goal of the scenario study: the Safe Innovation Approach

The scenarios that will be developed by this research are not the end product or the purpose of this study: rather they are a means to an end. Ramirez and Wilkinson (2016) explain “scenarios are best

thought of as services, not products”, as they are part of a wider intervention. For this study, the

wider interventions that the scenarios serve are to contribute to the ‘Safe Innovation Approach” (SIA). This model is chosen for this research because it is a recently developed model that

comprehensively covers a multitude of processes surrounding emerging technologies within this

research focus-area of Europe. Lastly, it is a relevant model, because SIA is intended for the early R&D phase of emerging technologies that IVM is in. Its relevance for this study is significant as SIA is known to the RIVM, which may enhance the ability to integrate this research into RIVMs future work. SIA is developed by the RIVM and consortium-experts of two European nanotechnology projects: NanoReg2 and NANoREG, and is described by Soeteman-Hernándes et al (2019). The theoretical framework of this research can be illustrated by the following Figure 4.

(15)

15

Figure 4 Theoretical framework of the external objective of this research, positioning the theory of scenario-planning

(orange) in the Safe Innovation Framework (blue, yellow and green). Figure is an adapted conceptualisation of the frameworks described by various publications: (Dammers et al., 2017; Owen, Macnaghten, & Stilgoe, 2012;

Soeteman-Hernández, Apostolova, et al., 2019; Soeteman-Soeteman-Hernández, Bekker, et al., 2019)

Soeteman-Hernandés et al. (Soeteman-Hernández, Apostolova, et al., 2019) describe the purpose of SIA as follows: “Safe Innovation can be seen as a process to ensure that potential risks of innovations

can be timely addressed throughout the R&D process and not only in the later stages before going to market.” Moreover, this model focuses to describe how to achieve “a resilient system able to anticipate and adapt to technological innovations”. This is a valuable goal to strive for, especially as

my contacts at the RIVM underline that regulators are usually behind on track with innovation, which can delay the process, which is found to be costly for the innovators. Regulatory preparedness intends to approach this differently, by moving from a reactive to a proactive organisation.

SIA is achieved by two general approaches: the responsibility of the industry to ensure Safety by Design (indicated in yellow in the framework, adopted from (Owen et al., 2012)), and the

responsibility of regulators to ensure regulatory preparedness (indicated in green in the framework, an interpretation from Soeteman-Hernández, Bekker, et al., (2019)). Scenarios serve two parts of this model best: the anticipation step of the regulatory preparedness, and an indication whether or not the design and research conducted currently is ‘responsible’ and safe.

Regulatory preparedness

Scenarios can contribute to RP. There are several actions defined by Soeteman-Hernándes et al. (2019) that are integral to the process of RP: 1) ‘anticipate’, 2) ‘engage and interact’, 3) ‘share knowledge’, 4) ‘create incentives’, and 5) ‘implement’. In the anticipation step, regulators and

(16)

16

policymakers anticipate on regulatory challenges posed by innovations such as IVM. Alternative future-scenarios are specifically indicated to contribute to the integral processes of horizon-scans and foresight within anticipation-actions (Soeteman-Hernández, Bekker, et al., 2019). In addition, scenarios may also offer a common framework of understanding amongst innovators and regulators that can support the other actions of RP.

The process of regulatory preparedness(RP) for IVM has only minimally taken off. IVM has been discussed by Dutch politics in favour of increasing ambition and action-plans (Tweedekamer Plenaire verslagen, 2020), and research organisations like CE-Delft are looking into it. However, the first reactive step in Europe for regulations would be to go through the Novel Foods regulations of the ESFA (reference). As of now, this process has not commenced.

This research proposes a few proactive steps in RP, by presenting the knowledge and insights of the scenarios to the policy-advisors of RIVM. For the close connection of this research with the RIVM and thus the higher chances for relevance of the research, contributing to the RP of the RIVM is the major external objective of the research.

Safe by Design

The SIA framework however also highlights another potential external objective of this research: to contribute to Safe by Design (SbD).

Safe by Design (SbD) is a broad approach that is researched increasingly in recent years for synthetic biology and nanotechnology in R&D. It aims for the industry to reduce the uncertainties and risks to people and the environment starting from the upstream, early phases of the innovation process (Soeteman-Hernández, Bekker, et al., 2019), and to include safety and the responsibility for safety early in the design process. SbD is often linked explicitly to Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), which can be regarded as a framework that aims to make science more responsive to society and to make sure research and innovation have the “right impacts” on society (Owen et al., 2012). Scenarios can serve the interventions of IVM-innovations at this time, when the scenarios inform on the responsibility and safety of the innovations. However, to design the research for this external objective, this research would need to reach many international start-ups with the findings. This goes beyond the proposed scale of the research thesis. Therefore this research proposes to focus its contribution to RP. Contributing to SbD may be reconsidered as an objective if innovators show significant interest.

(17)

17

3. Methods

In this chapter I will elaborate upon the research planning, the budget, and I’d like to propose the methods adopted for each of the research activities.

3.1 Data collection & analysis methods

My research will be informed by 4 types of data: a literature review, grey literature, interviews, and participation sessions. I need all three types of data for their unique qualities and characteristics. I will building forward from the existing knowledge. Therefore, the knowledge of the current and the past can be derived from scientific literature and publications from knowledge institutes via a literature review. To derive information on the opinions and ideas that are debated today, I will conduct research in the grey literature. This category of data is a valuable addition, as it shows the most recent idea’s and is not restricted by the delay in academic publications. Moreover, it is the grey literature that has most influence on the public. The last type of information I need is the most uncertain knowledge: that of what futures may be expected. This data will be found via participatory research with experts, through interviews and sessions. The characteristics and qualities of each of the 4 types of data is further illustrated in Figure 5.

Figure 5 Types of data with corresponding characteristics. In academic literature and interviews I explore the knowledge of

single experts or research, whereas in grey literature and in participatory sessions there is usually a dialogue between multiple experts of different backgrounds. Academic Literature and grey literature are published or presented, and usually give data that explores more certain or agreed upon knowledge and perspectives, whereas in interviews and participatory sessions it is possible to derive data that explores the uncertainty of the future in conversations and can explore beyond ideas that are ready for sharing widely. For academic literature and grey literature I will be observing the data, whereas in interviews and participatory sessions I am partaking in the debate, which may enhance the possibility of bias.

(18)

18

3.1.1 Literature review

Preliminary research will be done via a literature review. To select the set of literature, I will rely on an iterative process described by (Gray, 2004); where I will continuously be locating literature with searching tools like the UvA academic library, reviewing the found literature and refining the searching terms to specify the search further. I will select the literature for the amount of citations, the researchers that are connected to the research, and the publication date (emphasizing the more recent studies of the past 5 years). Selected literature is tagged, and organized in the reference manager Mendeley.

The so called ‘grey literature’, such as websites, news articles, videos and popular science books are included in this research. Live events with presentations and panel conversations, or plenary debates of the Dutch parliament also belong to this category. Live events I attend will be recorded and summarized in a similar fashion as the interviews.

3.1.2 Interviews

I propose to conduct semi-structured interviews (Gray, 2004) of maximally 1 hour per interview for 3 reasons. This will help me gain a more in-depth understanding of the trends and developments, to ensure a level of participation in the creation of the scenarios, and to ask experts and stakeholders about their ideas for the future.

I will create an interview guide comprising two parts: questions unspecific with respect to the interviewee, and specific questions per interviewee delving more into their expertise. The literature review will inform the formulation of specific questions. For the unspecific questions, the researcher will derive introductory and open-ended questions that invite arguments for-, criticism on-, visions for- and trends and developments influencing the future of in vitro meat. Moreover, the interview guide will be iterated after each interview or with new insights from the literature review. As such, I can test my findings from the one interview with other interviewees for consistencies or differences. Selecting the interviewees will be done by a few criteria. For developments of IVM, I intend to conduct interviews with innovators working on IVM of the start-ups, and of research bodies that follow these innovations closely. For trends influencing the future IVM, I select two types of interviewees: researchers that have focused on the effects of contextual trends on IVM, and researchers of adjacent disciplines but with a general understanding of IVM to decrease bias. These potential interviewees for instance work for animal rights, on biotechnology, or on agricultural land use change. Because of time-constraints, this research aims for a total of 5-10 interviews on the trends and developments: at least 1 and maximally 2 interviews per category of the conceptual framework indicated in Figure 2 (1. Developments in IVM, trends in the 2. food industry, 3. environmental, 4. Socio-cultural, 5. Regulatory).

3.1.3 Participatory sessions

It is also valuable to organize sessions with multiple stakeholders at the RIVM, to reach an expert judgement together about the trends and developments, the bandwidth of these trends, and the

(19)

19

implications of the scenarios. Depending on the expertise of the attendees, these sessions may partly replace interviews.

In these participatory sessions, I will seek to design for a trusted environment where people can speak and explore freely within the uncertainties of the future. Methods of a world-café will be adopted (Brown & Isaacs, 2001). For the RIVM, the following sessions are proposed:

- 1 session that explains IVM and explores together what contextual trends may be of influence on the future of IVM.

- 1 session that discusses the found scenarios, and seeks to define (systemic and) regulatory implications of these scenarios

- 1 final session to present the findings, and have a conversation about what this means for the regulatory preparedness of RIVM.

3.1.4 Analysis of data from interviews, participatory sessions and live events

Each interview, participatory session and live event will be recorded, and I will write summaries of 1-3 pages depending on the length of the event. In the participatory sessions this research will have an additional data from provided schemes that the participants will fill write their findings on. The found data will be labelled and coded using Excel. The coding and analysis will go by the two general approaches of content analysis (the more deductive method, with codes and labels found in the preliminary conceptual models) and grounded theory method (the more inductive method, with categories, codes and labels that arise while analysing the data) (Gray, 2004).

3.2 The scenario-methodology to explore the future

The flow of the proposed research design can be illustrated by Figure 6:

Figure 6 The three steps of this scenario-research framework. Research will inform the directions of contextual trends and

optional developments in IVM-engineering, the plausible outcomes of the key trends will be captured in the morphological field, and lastly, these outcomes are combined in a set of scenarios for the future of IVM. This approach is combined and interpreted from various sources: (Dammers et al., 2017; Nekkers, 2006; Ramírez & Wilkinson, 2016).

3.2.1 Step one: researching trends and developments.

All 4 types of data collection will be used to get an overview of the trends and developments. Many of the contextual trends and technological developments have been studied already; this literature will serve a valuable input. Think of consumer acceptance (Stephens et al., 2018) or stakeholder

(20)

20

perspectives under various IVM-scenarios (Stephens et al., 2019; van der Weele & Driessen, 2019). Other studies explore the potential environmental implications of IVM production at scale

(Alexander et al., 2017; Mattick et al., 2015; Smetana et al., 2015; Tuomisto & Teixeira De Mattos, 2011).

An early conceptual model that organises these trends is given in Figure 2, which will guide as a labelling tool for the found data. Preliminary findings of the contextual trends, and preliminary variables of the developments of IVM can be found in the Preliminary research in the Annex. Of all the trends and developments that will be identified and studied for chapter 4 of this research, a selection needs to be made. This selection will be done according to the trends that are most determining for the future of IVM; these are the key uncertainties or the key trends and

developments (Nekkers, 2006). These key uncertainties can be found when plotting the trends and developments (see Figure 7) based on their uncertainty and impact. When a trend or development is very uncertain and very impactful, the trends of developments are key uncertainties. When the impact is high but the uncertainty low, the trend or development will be a theme throughout all scenarios. When the uncertainty is high, but the impact low, we are dealing with ‘blind spots’ that may or may not appear in the scenarios but could have an influence on the future. The plotting to determine the key indicators will be done with the help of futurists from Futureconsult. The interview-data on the trends and developments may offer additional valuable input, and so will the findings collected from the participatory sessions.

Figure 7 The impact-uncertainty matrix to determine the key trends and developments, with exemplary plotting of trends

(21)

21

3.2.1 Step two, morphological field

In the next step, the most important trends and developments are outlined in a morphological field in chapter 5 of this research. This method is informed by a scenario-research by the Dutch research institute Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving (PBL, 2019a, 2019b). This research expects that more than two key uncertainties will arise from the previous step. Therefore, the potential outcomes of each key trend and some themes are outlined in a comprehensive morphological field with all future options of these trends and developments organised adjacently, as illustrated in Figure 8. It may be possible to indicate the likeliness of the outcomes as well. This may be done on a scale of “less likely, plausible, more likely”. This can help the selection of the outcomes and estimating the plausibility of the scenario.

Figure 8 A morphological field The impact-uncertainty matrix to determine the key trends and developments, with

exemplary plotting of trends and developments. Matrix is derived from (Nekkers, 2006).

3.2.3 Step three, Scenario development

As indicated in Figure 8, the outcomes of the morphological field are ingredients for the scenarios. To explore the plausible combinations of outcomes in the morphological field, and to identify whether or not these outcomes could logically co-occur, I will use two approaches to derive scenarios from the morphological field. Firstly, together with a team of futurists, I will select scenarios in an intuitive selection, and I will also do a round of random selections to see if new scenarios show up.

To select the final scenarioset of minimally 3 and maximally 5 scenarios from all found combinations of the morphological field, I will focus to select a set that has contrasting scenarios, and that

explores most of the plausible outcomes of the morphological field. The scope of 3-5 scenarios is chosen as 5 scenarios would still be a manageable amount of scenarios within the scope of the research, and because less than 3 scenarios would offer too little bandwidth to explore the outcomes of found trends and developments. When I have a preliminary set scenarios, I will send

(22)

22

summaries of the prototype scenarios to experts per e-mail to ask for reactions and to iterate on my work.

Subsequently a set of scenario narratives for the future will be finalized. These scenarios will be complemented with a narrative written to help the reader imagine partaking and living in these futures. To write such ‘scenario-fiction’, I intend to take a storytelling course at CREA to focus on developing such writing skills.

3.3 Implications and scenario comparison: true price

In order to estimate the implications on systemic outcomes, and a true cost analysis, two methods will be adopted.

For the systemic implications, there are two intended outcomes. Firstly, an overview of systemic implications will be found and described. In the second session at the RIVM, these systemic implications will be derived by the brainstorm-method of an implication tree as described by (Nekkers, 2006). For each of the scenarios, implications of 1th, 2nd_{and 3}rd_{orders (if 1th happens,}

then 2nd_{, then 3}rd_{) will be formulated for the 4 categories: food system, environmental factors,}

regulatory factors and socio-cultural factors. After forming trees themselves, participants are asked to respond to a proposed implication tree drawn up based on the research and provided in advance. Furthermore, when I send the prototype scenarios to interviewees as described in 3.2.3 I will request if respondents see specific implications from these scenarios that I should take into account. The third and last data inquiry to derive implications is to explore the implications in a sessions with futurists from Futureconsult.

For the true cost analysis of each scenario, I will develop a model that concludes on a true cost per scenario made up divided over a defined set of externalities of positive and negative values. The exact workings of this model are to be explored further on in the research, and I will seek contact with the organisation True Price of the Impact Institute to aid my understanding of best practices. A preliminary design of the model would be to assign derive a value per scenario for each

externality. I may choose to add a reference scenario that corresponds to the present (2020), for comparison. It may be considered to assign weights to some externalities, in case the research shows that certain implications are deemed more important for the costs than others. To derive the values of each externality, expert advice and literature will be consulted. Whether or not the end unit will be in the form of a “price” is still up to debate, an alternative could be scoring each scenario on a scale (of for instance 0 to 5).

3.4 Contributing to the safe innovation approach

The external objective of this research, to contribute an early step to the regulatory preparedness of the RIVM, is not the central focus of this research proposal. However, in order to attune the

academic study most to the practice-gap it also aims to serve, I choose to integrate the external objective in the research design already.

To make a preliminary step towards the external objective of this scenario study, the 3 sessions that I organize at the RIVM are contributing in making the experts at the RIVM part of the anticipation.

(23)

23

What’s more: the final session at the RIVM focusses entirely on discussing what this thesis means for the regulatory preparedness of the RIVM. In this session, I will present my findings through my thesis, and moderate a discussion of the world-café type in which participants will explore what to do with the scenarios and implications, and perhaps identify potential strategic options.

3.5 Planning

In the following table, the planning of this thesis is outlined.

Table 1 Gantt table illustrating the planning of this research thesis.

In light blue, it is indicated that preparations are made, or that the planning is less rigid. Dark blue blocks indicate a focus on the indicated tasks on the left. Some notes:

Two dates are important to consider: the 27th_{of May is agreed to be the draft-deadline of the thesis.}

Afterwards, in June I will have time to work with the review from my daily supervisor and examiner. The exact ending of the thesis is yet to be determined: if possible, I will present the findings already on the 3rd_{of June, however if this proves to be too tight I will delay the presentation by maximally a}

(24)

24

month, to the beginning of July. This extension is possible, because the thesis would then still be finalized within 5 months (which corresponds to 30EC).

The daily supervisor Maja Bosch will be present on a daily basis for questions. The agreement is to plan a session together every two weeks on Kelly’s initiative to have more active help in the thesis process. Examiner Coyan Tromp will meet with Kelly at least one time in the process of the thesis (estimated here in week 17), and will review the draft proposal and draft thesis before grading the final deliverables. Co-assessor Marc Davidson will grade the final proposal and final thesis. My contact at the RIVM Adriënne Sips can write the hours she spends on my thesis on one of her projects that explore the potential of processes within the Safe Innovation Approach.

3.6 Budget

For this research, a budget is not necessary. Working materials and/or location and catering costs will be covered by Futureconsult and/or the RIVM. Furthermore, I will cover my living and travel expenses with the Dutch student-financing.

(25)

25

References

Alexander, P., Brown, C., Arneth, A., Dias, C., Finnigan, J., Moran, D., & Rounsevell, M. D. A. (2017). Could consumption of insects, cultured meat or imitation meat reduce global agricultural land use? Global Food Security, 15(April), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.04.001

Alexandratos, N., & Bruinsma, J. (2012). World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision. In ESA Working paper No. 12-03. Rome.

Böhm, I., Ferrari, A., & Woll, S. (2018). Visions of In Vitro Meat among Experts and Stakeholders. NanoEthics, 12(3), 211–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-018-0330-0

Brown, J., & Isaacs, D. (2001). The World Café : Living Knowledge Through Conversations That Matter. The Systems Thinker, 12(5), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Cameron, B., & Neill, S. O. (2019). State of the Industry Report: Cell-based Meat.

Dammers, E., van ’t Klooster, S., & de Wit, B. (2017). Scenario’s voor milieu, natuur en ruimte gebruiken: een handreiking. Den Haag: Uitgeverij PBL.

Ferrari, A., & Lösch, A. (2017). How Smart Grid Meets In Vitro Meat: on Visions as Socio-Epistemic Practices. NanoEthics, 11(1), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-017-0282-9

Gray, D. E. (2004). Doing research in the real world. Sage. London. Thousands Oaks. New Delhi, 1–570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2

Grin, J., Rotmans, J., & Schot, J. (2010). Transitions to Sustainable Development. New York: Routledge. Hocquette, J. F. (2016). Is in vitro meat the solution for the future? Meat Science, 120(April 2016), 167–176.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.036

Mattick, C. S., Landis, A. E., Allenby, B. R., & Genovese, N. J. (2015). Anticipatory Life Cycle Analysis of In Vitro Biomass Cultivation for Cultured Meat Production in the United States. Environmental Science and Technology, 49(19), 11941–11949. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b01614

Nekkers, J. (2006). Wijzer in de toekomst (16th ed.). Business Contact.

Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy, 39(6), 751–760.

https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs093

PBL. (2019a). Oefenen met de toekomst, Scenario’s voor stedelijke ontwikkeling, infrastructuur en mobiliteit in Nederland voor 2049. Retrieved from https://daf9627eib4jq.cloudfront.net/app/uploads/2019/04/pbl-2019-ruimtelijke-verkenning-2019-oefenen-met-de-toekomst-2631.pdf

PBL. (2019b). Scenario’s voor stedelijke ontwikkeling, infrastructuur en mobiliteit, verdieping bij Oefenen met de toekomst. Den Haag.

Post, M. J. (2012). Cultured meat from stem cells: Challenges and prospects. Meat Science, 92(3), 297–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.008

Ramírez, R., & Wilkinson, A. (2016). Strategic reframing, The Oxford scenario planning approach.

Shapiro, P. (2018). Clean Meat: How Growing Meat Without Animals Will Revolutionize Dinner and the World. Gallery Books.

(26)

26

Smetana, S., Mathys, A., Knoch, A., & Heinz, V. (2015). Meat alternatives: life cycle assessment of most known meat substitutes. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 20(9), 1254–1267.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0931-6

Soeteman-Hernández, L. G., Apostolova, M. D., Bekker, C., Dekkers, S., Grafström, R. C., Groenewold, M., … Noorlander, C. W. (2019). Safe innovation approach: Towards an agile system for dealing with innovations. Materials Today Communications, 20(June), 100548.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2019.100548

Soeteman-Hernández, L. G., Bekker, C., Groenewold, M., Jantunen, P. A., Mech, A., Rasmussen, K., …

Noorlander, C. W. (2019). Perspective on how regulators can keep pace with innovation: Outcomes of a European Regulatory Preparedness Workshop on nanomaterials and nano-enabled products.

NanoImpact, 14(April), 100166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.impact.2019.100166

Specht, E. A., Welch, D. R., Rees Clayton, E. M., & Lagally, C. D. (2018). Opportunities for applying biomedical production and manufacturing methods to the development of the clean meat industry. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 132, 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2018.01.015

Specht, L. (2018). Meat by the molecule: Making meat with plants and cells. Biochemist, 40(4), 18–21. Stephens, N., Di Silvio, L., Dunsford, I., Ellis, M., Glencross, A., & Sexton, A. (2018). Bringing cultured meat to

market: Technical, socio-political, and regulatory challenges in cellular agriculture. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 78(April), 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.04.010

Stephens, N., Sexton, A. E., & Driessen, C. (2019). Making Sense of Making Meat: Key Moments in the First 20 Years of Tissue Engineering Muscle to Make Food. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 3(July). https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00045

Tallentire, C. W., Leinonen, I., & Kyriazakis, I. (2018). Artificial selection for improved energy efficiency is reaching its limits in broiler chickens. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-19231-2

True Price, PwC, & Deloitte. (2014). The business case for true pricing: why you will benefit from measuring, monetozing and improving your impact.

Tuomisto, H. L., & Teixeira de Mattos, M. J. (2014). Environmental impacts of cultured meat production (supporting information). Environmental Science & Technology, 45(14), S1–S8.

https://doi.org/10.1021/es202956u

Tuomisto, H. L., & Teixeira De Mattos, M. J. (2011). Environmental impacts of cultured meat production. Environmental Science and Technology, 45(14), 6117–6123. https://doi.org/10.1021/es200130u Tweedekamer. (2020). Debat over de kansen van Kweekvlees. Retrieved February 6, 2020, from Plenair

verslag, 48e vergadering Donderdag 30 januari 2020 website:

https://www.tweedekamer.nl/kamerstukken/plenaire_verslagen/detail/db86b8c7-3893-4a65-92ff-bf627c922fda#id45eca40f

United Nations Departement of Economic and Social Affairs - Population division. (2019). World Population Prospects 2019. In Futuribles (Paris, France : 1981). Retrieved from

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12283219

van der Weele, C., & Driessen, C. (2019). How Normal Meat Becomes Stranger as Cultured Meat Becomes More Normal; Ambivalence and Ambiguity Below the Surface of Behavior. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 3(August), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00069

van Mensvoort, K. (2018). Petitie: Kweekvlees is er, laat ons het proeven. Retrieved January 6, 2020, from https://petities.nl/petitions/kweekvlees-is-er-laat-ons-het-proeven?locale=nl

(27)

27

van Mensvoort, K., & Grievink, H.-J. (2014). The in vitro meat cookbook. BIS publishers. Wack, P. (1985). Scenarios : shooting the rapids. Harvard Business Review, (85617), 139–151.

(28)

28

Annex

1 Research questions

In the chapters of the final research, the research I conduct will be guided by the following research questions regarding the future of IVM.

- Chapter 4

Exploring the uncertainty of the future: trends and developments

- Which key trends may be of influence on the developments of In Vitro Meat until 2050, and what effect may they have?

- What trends in the contextual environment are potentially of impact to the developments of IVM?

- What are the plausible outcomes of the trends?

- What key choices may be made in the development of In Vitro Meat, that significantly affect the characteristics of IVM in 2050?

- What options in the design of the products, production process, and branding of IVM are considered?

- What are the plausible outcomes of these developments in 2050? - Chapter 5

Capturing the elements of a plausible future: Morphological field

- What are the trends and prospective outcomes with the highest impact and uncertainty, to explore the plausible bandwidth of the future?

- What scenarios form a plausible, relevant and radical scenarioset? - Chapter 6

Telling stories of the future: Scenarios

- How may a person in 2050 perceive the food system and the presence of IVM? - What qualitative and quantitative outcomes, depending on de morphological field

correspond to the various scenarios? - Chapter 7

Using scenarios to understand future implications

- How do the scenarios compare to each other?

- What are the systemic implications of the scenarios, and how do they compare?

- What are the true price implications of these alternative futures, and how do they compare?

- What are the implications of these scenarios for today for innovators, regulators and other stakeholders?

- Chapter 8

Discussion & reflection

- How do these scenarios compare to existing visions for the future of IVM? - How do participating experts reflect on the scenario set?

- What do these scenarios not explore?

- Reflection: How do I think the scenario method is of value to the future of emerging technologies like IVM, and where is it lacking?

- What insights relevant for the RIVM and other policy makers does this study conclude on?

(29)

29

- How can the scenarios be used within the field of the emerging IVM-technology?

2 Preliminary research

See the attached file in the email I sent my supervisors.

3 Additional deliverables for Futureconsult & RIVM

My thesis is intended to be relevant outside of the purpose of the master’s thesis. Therefore, additional deliverables to suit this practice-oriented purpose are proposed here I hope that the scenarios may inspire a wide range of people working on IVM, or people who are curious to get informed or inspired about what this emerging technology could become. As I’m interning at Futureconsult, and contributing to the regulatory preparedness of the RIVM, some additional deliverables tailored to these organisations are outlined here as well.

Final scenarios

Minimum viable product: a publication

I will summarize the research in a publication. This can be in the form of a nicely designed book or ‘publication’. Other option would be to publish these stories on a website (for which I can ask my brother for help). A website would make the findings more accessible and could serve as a platform to share my findings more widely.

The contents of this publication will include: an introduction, a summary of the trends, the scenario storylines, an overview of each scenario in bullet points, a summary of the implications, and a call to action & reflection for the reader. Furthermore, a hyperlink will be given to background documentation, which is either my final thesis, or an appendix of document.

The scenario storylines will be in the form of a short story told by someone from the future who is looking back, an excerpt of a conversation between people discussing the effects of the food during dinner, a speech at an SDG conference, or an interview with an IVM innovator of today, or another creative form of storytelling.

Note that this publication may be written in Dutch, for the focus area of the study is in the Netherlands, and to make the scenarios more authentic and appealing to a Dutch audience.

To accompany this website or physical publication, I intend to re-write my findings to suit an opinion piece for general media.

Going beyond the minimal viable, product (what I’d love to do) Sharing the scenarios through another medium than text:

- For instance, via a recording of each of the storylines.

- These storylines could be summarized in a podcast-like series. With an introductory

episode, the 3-4 scenarios, and a concluding one that compares the scenarios and discusses the implications.

(30)

30

- Another more artsy form could also be optional. It would be special if each of the voices

of the recording has a distinguishable sound (male, female, high pitched, etc), and can be played at the same time to see immediately the differences between each of the scenarios on different aspects.

- On an online platform you’d be able to listen to the storylines. Via a ‘mengpaneel’ you’d

initially hear all scenarios simultaneously but you can tune down the tracks of scenarios you don’t like. Perhaps people could ‘mix’ their own favourite scenario by being a future-DJ, and switching from scenario to scenario per topic (having the product of scenario A, the environmental impacts of scenario D)

- Or, you can move in a room to hear the different storylines in different corners, which

corners are also decorated in another manner. This can be linked to sessions where people discuss implications of scenarios in the corresponding corner.

- Another way, without recordings is to design an physical exhibit.

- For instance, a table with 4 different kind of plates and recipes. On the table infographics

of the context of these dishes are shown. One can sit on the chair and is faced with other futures at the table.

- You could add a serious-game component. For instance, there is a deck of cards at each

scenario. For every aspect of the morphological field, there is a card describing the outcomes for each scenario. You can together decide which card is best, and put this favourite card in the middle (your desired recipe for the future). Afterwards I would stimulate a discussion about whether or not this combination would be possible. - I could see if these exhibits would suit for instance the traveling exhibit of the Next

Nature Network exhibit on in vitro meat.

- An additional text-like publication would be to publishing the stories on a journalistic platform,

like a series on the Next Nature Network (I’m quite sure I could ask them about this).

RIVM deliverables

The external research objective is to contribute to the Regulatory Preparedness of the RIVM. Therefore, the following deliverables are specific to the RIVM.

- 1 session that explains IVM and explores together what contextual trends may be of influence on the future of IVM.

- 1 session that discusses the found scenario’s, and seeks to define (systemic and) regulatory implications of these scenarios

- 1 final session to present the findings, and have a conversation about what this means for the regulatory preparedness of RIVM.

- A publication (digitally, or perhaps physically) of the research is given to the interested people at RIVM. Ideally identical to the publication indicated in the previous section, but perhaps with a tailored background document with a selection of relevant appendices for the RIVM.

- Potentially a set of regulatory recommendations for the RIVM, reflections and lessons I want to share after the sessions.

Futureconsult deliverables

For Futureconsult, I expect to contribute the following specific deliverables:

- A few lunchlectures (30 minutes per time), to update about my research

- A description of trends that I think are interesting for other projects as well. Formatted into a

(31)

31

- A lunchlecture with ‘lessons learned’ about my scenario research that may inspire their projects.

- A set of slides about the IVM-scenarios that they can show in other projects as an example of a

Exploring the future of in vitro meat: scenarios for a new meat future