Meta-Analysis on the Study of Entomophagy

Isabella Pannu

Introduction

Entomophagy, the consumption of insects, is a very common and longstanding practice in Southeast Asia. One hundred ninety-four edible insect species have been identified and 164 of them are commonly collected en masse and sold in markets across the region.1 As population rates steadily increase across the continent, with a growth rate of 1.2% in the last decade according to the Asian Development Bank, environmental pressures also increase in the effort to sustain population growth and maintain food security.2 Economic and socio-cultural limitations hamper the consumption of more common livestock protein sources, while edible insects are an accessible alternative.3 Moreover, “rapid changes in dietary, food-acquisition, and food-expenditure patterns have created concern” for food security, and the United Nations now recommend entomophagy as a plausible solution to the food shortage, malnutrition and pressure on the environment.4

Insects are naturally high in protein and micronutrients, providing energy, amino acids, and mono- and polyunsaturated fatty acids.5

This means that insects are a viable nutritional alternative to livestock in terms of nutrition, but may only be widely adopted if they can be produced at a competitive quantity. They are much more efficient in terms of land and water use as seen in Figure 1, especially as they can be reared on unproductive land while producing fewer emissions than traditional livestock.6 The higher market value of insects compared to other sources of protein also provides an additional source of income, especially for women.7

As such, there has been a shift in production patterns “to include not only traditional harvesting of insects from wild habitats, but also semi-domestication and insect farming”, which also provides a source of income and additional livelihood opportunities for the rural poor.8 However, there is a significant lack of regulation and standard practice policy for insects compared to typical livestock with regards to production, distribution and consumption. It is necessary to improve this in order to ensure long term sustainability of the supply, prevent exploitation of the environment, and avoid dependence on a limited number of species.9 Additionally, the inclusion of insects in national dietary guidelines is currently not present, which poorly reflects their significance in the diets of many ethnic groups, and their inclusion would further improve the pursuit of sustainable diets and food security.10 Enthomophagy research should therefore identify areas in which regulation can be implemented sustainably and without disrupting local livelihoods or economies.

This study aims to investigate how communities in Laos can maintain the long-term sustainability of insect rearing and consumption despite its increasing commercialization and integration into formal markets. It evaluates how policy regulation and preservation of indigenous practices can coexist to provide the advantages of insect rearing while protecting local informal economies. It also explores how the practice can remain environmentally sustainable despite its increase in scale. Lastly, it investigates which aspects of insect farming should be regulated and to what degree, according to actors in the market.

Conceptual Framework

is environmentally sustainable when it maintains or enhances the local and global assets on which livelihoods depend, and has net beneficial effects on other livelihoods. A livelihood is socially sustainable which can cope with and recover from stress and shocks, and provide for future generations13

According to the sustainable livelihoods approach model from the United Kingdom Department of Foreign and International Development, there are five assets of capital to note: natural, physical, human, social, and financial. Natural capital involves the land, water, and biological resources in the environment. Financial capital consists of liquid, or disposable, monetary assets, access to credit, distribution within the community, and variability of income levels over time. Physical capital pertains to results of economic production, including infrastructure. Human capital refers to the quality and quantity of labor available, at either the household or community level, and determining factors such as education and skill level. Social capital is established by assets such as claims or rights provided by group membership at a community or political level.14

Dele Raheem et al., “Traditional Consumption of and Rearing Edible Insects in Africa, Asia and Europe,” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 59, no. 14 (March 15, 2018): 2169–88.

2 Asian Development Bank. (2017). Statistical database. Mandaluyong City, Philippines.

3 Raheem et al., 2019.

4 Yongyout Kachondham, “Food Security Issues Associated with Development in Thailand,” Food and Nutrition Bulletin 13, no. 1 (March 1991): 1–3.

5 A. Halloran et al., “Regulating Edible Insects: The Challenge of Addressing Food Security, Nature Conservation, and the Erosion of Traditional Food Culture,” Food Security 7, no. 3 (April 28, 2015): 739–46.

6 D. Dobermann, J. A. Swift, and L. M. Field, “Opportunities and Hurdles of Edible Insects for Food and Feed,” Nutrition Bulletin 42, no. 4 (December 2017): 293–308.

7 Doberman et al., 2017.

8 D. Dobermann, J. A. Swift, and L. M. Field, “Opportunities and Hurdles of Edible Insects for Food and Feed,” Nutrition Bulletin 42, no. 4 (December 2017): 293–308.

9 Raheem et al., 2019.

Figure 1. Land, feed and water use of each protein type and percentage of edible parts (Dobermann, 2017)

This study is situated within and guided by the sustainable livelihoods approach framework. The sustainable livelihoods approach provides a holistic, people-centered, and multilevel understanding of the dynamic strategies in which traditional landholders can adapt their livelihoods in response to the changes induced by modernization.11 It is a way of “linking socioeconomic and ecological considerations in a cohesive, policy-relevant structure”.12 It emphasizes the concept of sustainable rural livelihood, which was introduced in 1992 by Chambers and Conway in response to the notion of sustainable development. Their definition of livelihood is widely accepted among scholars of the subject:

A livelihood comprises people, their capabilities and their means of living, including food, income and assets. Tangible assets are resources and stores, and intangible assets are claims and access. A livelihood

10 Halloran et al., 2015.

11 Scoones, I. (1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis.

12 Krantz, L. (2001). The sustainable livelihood approach to poverty reduction: An introduction. Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, 2001.

13 Chambers, R., & Conway, G. (1992). Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century. Institute of Development Studies (UK).

14 Carney, D. 1998: Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: What Contribution Can We Make. UK Department for International Development

When engaging in a project within a rural community, a sustainable livelihood assessment is executed, with the intent of generating an understanding of the impact and role of a project on securing and enhancing local people’s livelihoods.15 Assessing livelihoods involves an analysis of the “coping and adaptive strategies pursued by individuals and communities as a response to external shocks and stresses” and arise from “the dynamic interaction and mutual interdependence between human agency and the ecosystem”. 16 Adaptive strategies aim to attain successful and sustainable livelihoods.17

This conceptual framework is relevant to this study as Laos is currently on a “path that will make it more monetized, more commodified, more liberalized, and more integrated”, but the top-down policy decisions will affect local communities significantly (Bouahom et al., 2004: 607). 18 As such, this approach examines how rural communities can protect, develop, and sustain their livelihoods during a period of modernization and transition. The insect farming sector in Laos is still developing, especially compared to the already booming industry in neighboring Thailand, so there is room for policy design and research for long term sustainability implications.19 It will allow my investigation of Laos to examine environmental, economic, and environmental sustainability, as the approach “focuses on the poor without using a specific sector as an entry point and involves the people to identify and implement necessary programs”.20 This means that improvement of health and nutrition and relief of environmental pressure can be explored simultaneously.

The sustainable livelihoods approach has been critiqued due to its “inability to address wider-scale global processes and their impingement on livelihood concerns at the local level”.21 Additionally, the relationship between the traditional economies of rural communities and the cash economy is often too complex and locally specific to be adequately addressed by the framework. Moreover, the local distribution of livelihood opportunities and resources within the community is often affected by informal relationships and structures of power or dominance within the communities themselves.22

Context

The research will be conducted in various communities across Laos. According to a survey conducted by L’Institut de la Francophonie pour la Médecine Tropicale, of 1,303 households in 96 villages in 16 Lao provinces, 96.6% of Laotian people considered insects an important part of their diet, with consumption starting in childhood.23 Entomophagy is a widespread family practice in all of the Lao ethnic groups, in both rural and urban areas, with the most commonly eaten insect groups being “beetles, caterpillars, bees, wasps, ants, grasshoppers, locusts, crickets, cicadas, leaf and plant hoppers, scale insects and true bugs, termites, dragonflies and flies”.24 Lao people have long collected insects as a non-wood forest product, but commercial insect farming is at an early stage: only 7 insect farms were reported in the survey, with most people harvesting for themselves or to sell to non-locals rather than being purchasing consumers. Interviewees reported a decrease in consumption over the past decade, primarily due to issues of seasonal and geographic availability, but expressed that they would readily consume more insects if accessibility was improved. However, it is important to note that vending of insects remains a productive and active market: vendors reported consistent market exchange, differing from consumers’ responses.

As such, farming could ensure that “adequate quantities are readily available for consumption” amidst increasing development, growing population and climate change concerns.25 Edible insects have always been a part of the informal economy, with small-scale collection, farming and processing being primarily informal activities.26 Laos currently has little engagement in semi-domestication and farming, but there is an upward trend according to the Raheem et al. Insect farming also provides an opportunity to generate income, particularly for women, who make up the majority of vendors, as well as diversify existing livelihoods. The government of Laos has already begun the process of integration into the formal economy, with the proposal of a regional food standard for edible crickets which was supported by neighboring countries of Thailand, Malaysia, and Cambodia, as well as encouraged by other national governments such as the Netherlands who actively fund research on the area.27 However, this is the only form of policy remotely close to regulation, meaning there is much room and necessity for improvement. Nevertheless, the formalization of this sector threatens local and informal economies. As such, indigenous traditional knowledge of local insect species and their harvesting can greatly complement developing scientific knowledge that is imperative to the process of large-scale farming.28

15 Elasha, B. O., Elhassan, N. G., Ahmed, H., & Zakieldin, S. (2005). Sustainable livelihood approach for assessing community resilience to climate change: case studies from Sudan. Assessments of impacts and adaptations to climate change (AIACC) working paper, 17.

16 Elasha et al., 2005.

17 Addinsall, C., Glencross, K., Scherrer, P., Weiler, B., & Nichols, D. (2015). Agroecology and sustainable rural livelihoods: A conceptual framework to guide development projects in the Pacific Islands. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 39(6), 691-723.

18 Bouahom, B., Douangsavanh, L., & Rigg, J. (2004). Building sustainable livelihoods in Laos: untangling farm from non-farm, progress from distress. Geoforum, 35(5), 607-619.

19 Chambers and Conway, 1992.

20 Krantz, 2001.

21 Addinsall, 2015.

22 Krantz, 2001.

23 Barennes et al., 2015.

24 Raheem et al., 2019.

25 Raheem et al., 2019.

26 Halloran, A., Vantomme, P., Hanboonsong, Y., & Ekesi, S. (2015). Regulating edible insects: the challenge of addressing food security, nature conservation, and the erosion of traditional food culture. Food Security, 7(3), 739-746.

27 Halloran et al., 2015.

28 Raheem et al., 2019.

Concluding remarks

Studies in entomophagy are significant for multiple actors including the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), local communities, and other food-related organizations. In a conference in 2014, the FAO advocated for policy makers to approve insect inclusive food in legislation and encouraged further research efforts to expand on preexisting data regarding benefits of insects.29 This area of study is also of use to communities that participated in interviews, as grassroots organizations and maintenance of tradition is incredibly useful in the establishment of good entomophagic practices and that the bottom-up approach will be the most considerate of local economies and individuals. The ASEAN Food and Feed Insects Association (FFIA) would benefit from entomophagy studies as they could contribute to tangible implementation of regulations. Laos is not currently a member of this as their market is still small compared to other members, but as the industry grows, the FFIA may reconsider including them.30 As Laos is a socialist state, the political and governmental spheres may be challenging to integrate, and even the aforementioned organizations may not have the impact necessary, which is why the grassroots organizations are equally important.

References

Addinsall, C., Glencross, K., Scherrer, P., Weiler, B., & Nichols, D. (2015). Agroecology and sustainable rural livelihoods: A conceptual framework to guide development projects in the Pacific Islands. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 39(6), 691-723.

Asian Development Bank. (2017). Statistical database. Mandaluyong City, Philippines.

Barennes, H., Phimmasane, M., & Rajaonarivo, C. (2015). Insect consumption to address undernutrition, a national survey on the prevalence of insect consumption among adults and vendors in Laos. PloS one, 10(8), e0136458.

Bouahom, B., Douangsavanh, L., & Rigg, J. (2004). Building sustainable livelihoods in Laos: untangling farm from non-farm, progress from distress. Geoforum, 35(5), 607-619.

Carney, D. 1998: Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: What Contribution Can We Make. UK Department for International Development.

Chambers, R., & Conway, G. (1992). Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century. Institute of Development Studies (UK).

DFID (1999a, 2000d, 2001) Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets, Numbers 1–8, London: Department for International Development (also available on www.livelihoods.org).

Dobermann, D., Swift, J. A., & Field, L. M. (2017). Opportunities and hurdles of edible insects for food and feed. Nutrition Bulletin, 42(4), 293-308.

Durst, P. B., & Hanboonsong, Y. (2015). Small-scale production of edible insects for enhanced food security and rural livelihoods: experience from Thailand and Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Journal of Insects as Food and Feed, 1(1), 25-31.

Elasha, B. O., Elhassan, N. G., Ahmed, H., & Zakieldin, S. (2005). Sustainable livelihood approach for assessing community resilience to climate change: case studies from Sudan. Assessments of impacts and adaptations to climate change (AIACC) working paper, 17.

Halloran, A., Vantomme, P., Hanboonsong, Y., & Ekesi, S. (2015). Regulating edible insects: the challenge of addressing food security, nature conservation, and the erosion of traditional food culture. Food Security, 7(3), 739-746.

Kachondham, Y. (1991). Food security issues associated with development in Thailand. Food and Nutrition Bulletin, 13(1), 1-3.

Kitchin, R., & Tate, N. (2001). Conducting research in human geography. Prentice Hall, England.

Krantz, L. (2001). The sustainable livelihood approach to poverty reduction: An introduction. Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, 2001.

Raheem, D., Carrascosa, C., Oluwole, O. B., Nieuwland, M., Saraiva, A., Millán, R., & Raposo, A. (2019). Traditional consumption of and rearing edible insects in Africa, Asia and Europe. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 59(14), 2169-2188.

Scoones, I. (1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis.