Search

Introduction: Plant-based meats (PBM) are an emerging set of food technologies that could reduce the environmental impacts of food systems by mitigating consumer demand for animal products. However, scaling up the production and consumption of plant-based meats requires overcoming multiple technological, regulatory, political, and market barriers. An evidence-based prioritization of needs and actions may help actors (e.g., investors, funders, policymakers) who wish to help scale PBM achieve desired outcomes with limited resources. Research question: What actions could most effectively help to scale up the production and/or consumption of plant-based meat in Brazil? Methods: We selected Brazil as a case study of a country with a significant animal agriculture sector and a burgeoning PBM sector. We constructed a panel of nine experts and employed the Delphi technique during two rounds of an online survey to iteratively assess the degree of consensus and disagreement around the relative priority of 14 possible actions (identified from relevant literature) that could help to scale up the production and/or consumption of PBM in Brazil. We used the Importance, Neglect, and Tractability framework. Results: The panelists collectively concluded that the top priority action for scaling up both the production and the consumption of plant-based meat in Brazil was to reduce the price of products for consumers. For most priority actions, there was greater consensus among panelists in the second round of the survey. Discussion: Our findings contribute to an improved understanding of (a) which actions may be of highest priority for investors, funders, and policymakers, (b) synergies and differences between priority actions to scale up the production versus consumption of PBM in Brazil, (c) the relative merits of focusing on scaling up PBM production versus consumption, and (d) the strengths and limitations of assessing expert opinion on alternative protein futures using the Delphi technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The widespread demand for animal-sourced foods poses challenges in addressing climate change due to their significant greenhouse gas emissions. Alternative proteins like cultured meat show promise with lower greenhouse gas emissions, but have faced public resistance, posing substantial barriers to their broad development and adoption. This paper reports a survey that examined the perceived naturalness of protein sources as an important factor that predicts perceived risks, benefits, and support for consumption. A diverse sample from the United States considered six different protein technologies, including three newer alternative proteins such as cultured meat and three more conventional proteins. Newer alternative proteins were perceived as less natural and were less supported than conventional proteins. Additionally, the more participants perceived protein sources as natural, the less risky and more beneficial they perceived them to be, contributing to their support. These results suggest that perceived naturalness, and associated risks and benefits, could be an important factor in shaping public support for or opposition to new proteins. These findings have theoretical and broader implications for the development and adoption of sustainability technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]