Hide table of contents

We are excited to announce the launch of the ONEI, an organisation dedicated to informing decision-making about insect farming in France (Observatoire National de l'Elevage d'Insectes). 

ONEI

The context

France is a leader in insect farming, with two of the largest companies in the sector working there. The industry has grown immensely in recent years, gathering more than a billion dollars in investment worldwide, with the number of insects farmed yearly rising from 1 trillion to 10 to 30 trillion in 5 years. The sector is expected to grow even further in the future.

While discussions on the topic often revolve around insects as food, farmed insects are primarily intended to be used as feed for other farmed animals like fish or chickens or as pet food. 

Insect farming has been presented as a potential solution to environmental challenges linked to conventional livestock farming. France is currently supporting the industry with funding and research. 

However, several recent studies call into question these promises of sustainability. For instance, rebound effects could lead to increased meat consumption and the associated impacts if insects provide a new source of animal feed. Moreover, while insects were promised to contribute to a circular economy by using food waste, persistent economic and regulatory challenges prevent this, with most farms feeding insects with high-quality feeds already in use elsewhere. 

Our role

I am the first author of several new papers produced in collaboration with the Insect Institute on the environmental impacts of insect farming. This work, covering environmental sustainabilityeconomic competitiveness, barriers to the use of food waste, limits to the research and consumer acceptability, is currently available in the form of academic preprints and highlights several challenges. 

ONEI intends to share evidence-based information on the impact of insect farming on the environment and society, a role no actor is currently filling in France. Our first task, currently underway, is translating our findings into French. We plan to work with policymakers, journalists, and investors. Much of our work will revolve around policy to ensure that future decisions are based on solid evidence. 

How you can contribute

French speakers can subscribe to our newsletter and share our articles when they are published.

If you have contacts who might be interested in data on the sustainability of the sector (in French or English), please share them with us. This includes policymakers, institutions, journalists, investors or researchers.

If you're interested in this topic, we are looking for volunteers! We have some skilled tasks available for non-French speakers (graphic design, communication) and others that require speaking French (proofreading, identifying relevant contacts to share our reports with). I can also redirect you to relevant English-speaking charities that might have other roles in this sector.

You can DM me, and I will also be at the EAG London and EAGx Utrecht - feel free to reach out! 

You can contact us here or via email (contact@onei-insectes.org) for any questions or remarks.

Comments8


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

This new organization seems to be mostly focused on economic and sustainability issues. Are you also interested in the animal welfare side of it? What is your point of view on that?

What we gathered so far is that several scientific papers mention this topic, as well as several large members of the industry itself, which consider it to be important, although there is limited data to inform with a high degree of certainty how to properly inform adequate decision-making on this topic. 

For this reason, and since we have limited expertise on this topic, this is currently beyond what we will write about.

Congratulations! ONEI looks well placed to bridge the gap between the scientific literature on insect farming and the French public's (lack of) knowledge of the subject. Can't wait to see the first results.

Congratulations, Corentin! It is great to see this starting officially after so much preparatory work!

Congratulations Corentin on the launch of the association. I'm delighted to have been able to work with you on these papers.

Thank you again for everything!

Isn't supporting insect farming one of the most anti-EA things you can do?

https://www.sci.news/biology/insect-pain-10993.html

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 52m read
 · 
In recent months, the CEOs of leading AI companies have grown increasingly confident about rapid progress: * OpenAI's Sam Altman: Shifted from saying in November "the rate of progress continues" to declaring in January "we are now confident we know how to build AGI" * Anthropic's Dario Amodei: Stated in January "I'm more confident than I've ever been that we're close to powerful capabilities... in the next 2-3 years" * Google DeepMind's Demis Hassabis: Changed from "as soon as 10 years" in autumn to "probably three to five years away" by January. What explains the shift? Is it just hype? Or could we really have Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) by 2028?[1] In this article, I look at what's driven recent progress, estimate how far those drivers can continue, and explain why they're likely to continue for at least four more years. In particular, while in 2024 progress in LLM chatbots seemed to slow, a new approach started to work: teaching the models to reason using reinforcement learning. In just a year, this let them surpass human PhDs at answering difficult scientific reasoning questions, and achieve expert-level performance on one-hour coding tasks. We don't know how capable AGI will become, but extrapolating the recent rate of progress suggests that, by 2028, we could reach AI models with beyond-human reasoning abilities, expert-level knowledge in every domain, and that can autonomously complete multi-week projects, and progress would likely continue from there.  On this set of software engineering & computer use tasks, in 2020 AI was only able to do tasks that would typically take a human expert a couple of seconds. By 2024, that had risen to almost an hour. If the trend continues, by 2028 it'll reach several weeks.  No longer mere chatbots, these 'agent' models might soon satisfy many people's definitions of AGI — roughly, AI systems that match human performance at most knowledge work (see definition in footnote).[1] This means that, while the co
saulius
 ·  · 22m read
 · 
Summary In this article, I estimate the cost-effectiveness of five Anima International programs in Poland: improving cage-free and broiler welfare, blocking new factory farms, banning fur farming, and encouraging retailers to sell more plant-based protein. I estimate that together, these programs help roughly 136 animals—or 32 years of farmed animal life—per dollar spent. Animal years affected per dollar spent was within an order of magnitude for all five evaluated interventions. I also tried to estimate how much suffering each program alleviates. Using SADs (Suffering-Adjusted Days)—a metric developed by Ambitious Impact (AIM) that accounts for species differences and pain intensity—Anima’s programs appear highly cost-effective, even compared to charities recommended by Animal Charity Evaluators. However, I also ran a small informal survey to understand how people intuitively weigh different categories of pain defined by the Welfare Footprint Institute. The results suggested that SADs may heavily underweight brief but intense suffering. Based on those findings, I created my own metric DCDE (Disabling Chicken Day Equivalent) with different weightings. Under this approach, interventions focused on humane slaughter look more promising, while cage-free campaigns appear less impactful. These results are highly uncertain but show how sensitive conclusions are to how we value different kinds of suffering. My estimates are highly speculative, often relying on subjective judgments from Anima International staff regarding factors such as the likelihood of success for various interventions. This introduces potential bias. Another major source of uncertainty is how long the effects of reforms will last if achieved. To address this, I developed a methodology to estimate impact duration for chicken welfare campaigns. However, I’m essentially guessing when it comes to how long the impact of farm-blocking or fur bans might last—there’s just too much uncertainty. Background In
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
SUMMARY:  ALLFED is launching an emergency appeal on the EA Forum due to a serious funding shortfall. Without new support, ALLFED will be forced to cut half our budget in the coming months, drastically reducing our capacity to help build global food system resilience for catastrophic scenarios like nuclear winter, a severe pandemic, or infrastructure breakdown. ALLFED is seeking $800,000 over the course of 2025 to sustain its team, continue policy-relevant research, and move forward with pilot projects that could save lives in a catastrophe. As funding priorities shift toward AI safety, we believe resilient food solutions remain a highly cost-effective way to protect the future. If you’re able to support or share this appeal, please visit allfed.info/donate. Donate to ALLFED FULL ARTICLE: I (David Denkenberger) am writing alongside two of my team-mates, as ALLFED’s co-founder, to ask for your support. This is the first time in Alliance to Feed the Earth in Disaster’s (ALLFED’s) 8 year existence that we have reached out on the EA Forum with a direct funding appeal outside of Marginal Funding Week/our annual updates. I am doing so because ALLFED’s funding situation is serious, and because so much of ALLFED’s progress to date has been made possible through the support, feedback, and collaboration of the EA community.  Read our funding appeal At ALLFED, we are deeply grateful to all our supporters, including the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which has provided the majority of our funding for years. At the end of 2024, we learned we would be receiving far less support than expected due to a shift in SFF’s strategic priorities toward AI safety. Without additional funding, ALLFED will need to shrink. I believe the marginal cost effectiveness for improving the future and saving lives of resilience is competitive with AI Safety, even if timelines are short, because of potential AI-induced catastrophes. That is why we are asking people to donate to this emergency appeal