Maybe not popular opinion but I am indifferent to these “ecosystem” enablers. I must add that I’m in now way an expert on the MII, the people or their direct output. Im talking in more general terms.

If I might venture, we need less “brand collabs” and connectors and more doers in the lab. Progress in this area has been slow and there is no compelling argument that contemporary animal-free materials are less harmful overall.

Ultimately, the proof is in the pudding and if we as consumers can actually buy these on our local high street.

I always like to point people towards the story of PET or Dyneema for a bit of colour on how concentrated we have to be on an idea.

Interesting insight on how you reached your decisions. 

I think there could be a debate on pre-filtering from Manifund for these kind of initiatives. I think sometimes less is more - it might even make sense to roll some projects together as they were very similar at first look.

One thing that I think is missing from the AP discussion is the potential application for the waste/seconds of EA food in making materials. 

The milk and nut fibres of the 1940s and 1950s struggled with feedstock consistency. This was one of the main things the makers of Ardil struggled with. With synthetic methods of protein production this issue would largely solved. No more bad harvests stopping production. 

I see altenative proteins as a feedstock for food and our materials industry. Two birds, one stone.