EA Forum Bot Site
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
Corentin D. Biteau 🔸3
0
0

Thank you again for everything!

Reply
See in context
by Corentin D. Biteau 🔸
2 min read 8

92

Building effective altruismPolicyAnnouncements and updatesClimate changeEnvironmental scienceResearch
Frontpage
Show all topics

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 sustainability, economic 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.

92

6
0
3

Reactions

6
0
3
Mentioned in
Comments8


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Gabin5
0
0

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?

Reply
Corentin D. Biteau 🔸2
0
0

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.

Reply
Jacob 🔸3
0
0

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

Reply
Tom Bry-Chevalier🔸3
0
0

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

Reply
Corentin D. Biteau 🔸3
0
0

Thank you again for everything!

Reply
AxellePB 🔹3
1
0

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.

Reply
waitwhat1
3
0

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

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

Reply
More from Corentin D. Biteau 🔸
69
Insect farming: New media coverage on the hidden challenges of the sector
Corentin D. Biteau 🔸, Tom Bry-Chevalier🔸
· · 6m read
0
0
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
Today, Forethought and I are releasing an essay series called Better Futures, here.[1] It’s been something like eight years in the making, so I’m pretty happy it’s finally out! It asks: when looking to the future, should we focus on surviving, or on flourishing? In practice at least, future-oriented altruists tend to focus on ensuring we survive (or are not permanently disempowered by some valueless AIs). But maybe we should focus on future flourishing, instead.  Why?  Well, even if we survive, we probably just get a future that’s a small fraction as good as it could have been. We could, instead, try to help guide society to be on track to a truly wonderful future.    That is, I think there’s more at stake when it comes to flourishing than when it comes to survival. So maybe that should be our main focus. The whole essay series is out today. But I’ll post summaries of each essay over the course of the next couple of weeks. And the first episode of Forethought’s video podcast is on the topic, and out now, too. The first essay is Introducing Better Futures: along with the supplement, it gives the basic case for focusing on trying to make the future wonderful, rather than just ensuring we get any ok future at all. It’s based on a simple two-factor model: that the value of the future is the product of our chance of “Surviving” and of the value of the future, if we do Survive, i.e. our “Flourishing”.  (“not-Surviving”, here, means anything that locks us into a near-0 value future in the near-term: extinction from a bio-catastrophe counts but if valueless superintelligence disempowers us without causing human extinction, that counts, too. I think this is how “existential catastrophe” is often used in practice.) The key thought is: maybe we’re closer to the “ceiling” on Survival than we are to the “ceiling” of Flourishing.  Most people (though not everyone) thinks we’re much more likely than not to Survive this century.  Metaculus puts *extinction* risk at about 4
 ·  · 6m read
 · 
This is a crosspost from my new Substack Power and Priorities where I’ll be posting about power grabs, AI governance strategy, and prioritization, as well as some more general thoughts on doing useful things.  Tl;dr I argue that maintaining nonpartisan norms on the EA Forum, in public communications by influential community members, and in funding decisions may be more costly than people realize. Lack of discussion in public means that people don’t take political issues as seriously as they should, research which depends on understanding the political situation doesn’t get done, and the community moves forward with a poor model of probably the most consequential actor in the world for any given cause area - the US government. Importantly, I don’t mean to say most community members shouldn’t maintain studious nonpartisanship! I merely want to argue that we should be aware of the downsides and do what we can to mitigate them.    Why nonpartisan norms in EA are a big deal Individual politicians (not naming names) are likely the most important single actors affecting the governance of AI. The same goes for most of the cause areas EAs care about. While many prominent EAs think political issues may be a top priority, and politics is discussed somewhat behind closed doors, there is almost no public discussion of politics. I argue the community’s lack of a public conversation about the likely impacts of these political actors and what to do in response to them creates large costs for how the community thinks about and addresses important issues (i.e. self-censorship matters actually). Some of these costs include:  * Perceived unimportance: I suspect a common, often subconscious, thought is, 'no prominent EAs are talking about politics publicly so it's probably not as big of a deal as it seems'. Lack of public conversation means social permission is never granted to discuss the issue as a top priority, it means the topic comes up less & so is thought about less, and i
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
Context: I’m a senior fellow at Conservation X Labs (CXL), and I’m seeking support as I attempt to establish a program on humane rodent fertility control in partnership with the Wild Animal Initiative (WAI) and the Botstiber Institute for Wildlife Fertility Control (BIWFC). CXL is a biodiversity conservation organization working in sustainable technologies, not an animal welfare organization. However, CXL leadership is interested in simultaneously promoting biodiversity conservation and animal welfare, and they are excited about the possibility of advancing applied research that make it possible to ethically limit rodent populations to protect biodiversity.  I think this represents the wild animal welfare community’s first realistic opportunity to bring conservation organizations into wild animal welfare work while securing substantial non-EA funding for welfare-improving interventions.  Background Rodenticides cause immense suffering to (likely) hundreds of millions of rats and mice annually through anticoagulation-induced death over several days, while causing significant non-target harm to other animals. In the conservation context, rodenticides are currently used in large-scale island rat and mouse eradications as a way of protecting endemic species. But these rodenticides kill lots of native species in addition to the mice and rats. So advancements in fertility control would be a benefit to both conservation- and welfare-focused stakeholders. CXL is a respected conservation organization with a track record of securing follow-on investments for technologies we support (see some numbers below). We are interested in co-organizing a "Big Think" workshop with WAI and BIWFC. The event will launch an open innovation program (e.g., a prize or a challenge process) to accelerate fertility control development. The program would specifically target island conservation applications where conservation groups are already motivated to replace rodenticides, but would likely
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
22
European Progress Conference
Ben Anderson, Berke
· · 2m read
0
0
35
CEA is hiring for a Chief of Staff (Events Team)
OllieBase
· · 4m read
2
2
41
Applications Open for Impact Accelerator Program for EA Professionals
High Impact Professionals
· · 4m read
1
1
View more