Search

Meat alternatives' popularity is increasing worldwide. Nevertheless, the attitudes and motivations underpinning their adoption still evolve and may differ by region. In Argentina, where meat consumption per capita is among the highest globally, the market for plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs) is just beginning to develop. Few reports attempt to explain the behavior of the Argentinian population regarding these products. This study explored the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of meat analogues and hybrid products through a national online survey (N = 2339). Also, barriers and drivers to their consumption as well as the target segments were identified. Participants were classified as omnivores 73.8%, flexitarians 19.5%, vegetarians 6%, and vegans 0.7%. Despite the significant lack of awareness about PBMAs, there is a strong willingness to adopt them, with females, younger respondents, and those with lower incomes more open to these options. The main drivers for consumption were health concerns, animal welfare, and environmental awareness. Familiarity was a key factor influencing the adoption, as evidenced by the openness of well-informed omnivores. Lack of available options represented the main limitation for consumption and distrust regarding their origin and sensory appeal were the primary reasons for rejection. This study reveals a potential market for PBMAs in Argentina, highlighting that guaranteeing nutritional and sensory quality is crucial. Educating consumers is also essential for their widespread acceptance., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The promotion of meat substitutes to reduce meat intake is a promising way to reduce the environmental and public health externalities of meat consumption while preserving the important role of taste and texture in meat products. However, the market for meat substitutes is developing more slowly than expected. Therefore, we analyze the factors associated with the heterogeneity in meat substitute consumption in Germany, a country where meat traditionally plays an important role. We use revealed preference data on meat substitute sales from 1025 individual retailers, sociodemographic data, and election results from 92 regions in Germany over the period 2017-2021, to analyze whether differences in meat substitute consumption are associated with consumers' political orientation (liberal/left or conservative/right) and socio-demographic variables. We also investigate whether election results for parties with stronger climate protection goals are associated with meat substitute consumption. Our results show that meat substitute consumption varies significantly across Germany and that this is related to differences in socio-demographic characteristics and voting behavior across regions. Voting for the Green Party and parties with strong climate protection ambitions is positively related to the market share of meat substitutes. In contrast, voting for Germany's most conservative party, which has the lowest ambitions in terms of climate protection targets, is associated with lower meat substitute consumption. Therefore, manufacturers could develop tailored marketing strategies that specifically target these voter groups in order to increase the market share of meat substitutes as alternatives to meat products., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The purpose of this study is to examine the psychosocial determinants of baby boomers'-born between 1946 and 1964- intention to choose a menu item featuring plant-based meat alternatives (PBMA) when dining out. The specific objectives are as follows: 1) to identify the baby boomer generation's health-related perceptions about PBMA, and 2) to examine the factors that influence baby boomers' intention to choose a dish featuring PBMA at a restaurant. A total of 174 responses obtained using the Qualtrics panel were analyzed with content analysis and partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). The findings identified various underlying perceptions of baby boomers toward PBMA, such as perceived health outcomes, perceived availability, and willingness to purchase. Furthermore, subjective norm, cues to action, and self-identity were found to be significant predictors of the intention to choose a menu item featuring PBMA when dining out. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Plant-based meat analogues (PBMA) may help consumers in shifting towards more plant-based diets, but PBMA are not widely used yet, and little is known about their longer-term acceptance. This study investigated whether consumer acceptance of PBMA changed with repeated home-use, and whether providing recipe suggestions in the form of meal boxes could influence PBMA acceptance. To this end, Dutch regular meat eaters (n = 61) prepared, consumed and evaluated two meals (one from a meal box, one self-created) with PBMA (PB mince and PB chicken, counterbalanced across meal types) per week at home for four weeks. As a secondary objective, potential longer-term effects of repeated home-use of PBMA on meat (analogue) consumption habits and attitudes (e.g. motives for choosing PBMA, attitudes toward eating less meat) were assessed in a pre-vs post-intervention survey. Responses were compared with a control group of consumers not participating in the home-use study (n = 179). Results provided no evidence that PBMA liking changed with repeated home-use, nor that the provision of meal boxes increased liking of PBMA. Instead, PBMA liking was strongly influenced by the meal context, which may have overruled potential effects of repeated exposure. Findings from the pre- vs. post-intervention survey suggest that repeated exposure may stimulate longer-term consumption of PBMA, although more seems needed to bring about a structural shift toward a less animal-based consumption pattern. Future research should investigate whether more sophisticated recipes that provide a suitable meal context for PBMA and elevate consumers' meal experiences may improve PBMA acceptance and facilitate the transition toward more sustainable diets., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest NN and EHZ are employees of Unilever Foods Innovation Center Wageningen. Unilever markets food products, including plant-based meat analogues., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Animal agriculture has a large impact on the environment. Hence, there is an increasing demand for meat alternatives - more sustainably produced plant-based products that replace meat as meal component. Demands for meat alternatives also seem to be fuelled by consumers' belief that meat alternatives are healthier than meat products. In an online questionnaire study, we examined whether consumers indeed perceived meat alternatives to be healthier, to what degree consumers adequately estimated the nutritional value of meat (alternatives), and whether a nutrition claim could misguide consumers. In a panel of 120 Dutch consumers, it was found that meat alternatives were generally perceived as being healthier than meat products. According to supermarket data, meat alternatives contained less protein and saturated fat, higher levels of fibre and salt compared to meat. Consumers were found to overestimate the protein content of meat alternatives relative to meat products, especially when meat alternatives carry a 'high in protein' claim. The current beliefs about the healthiness and nutritional content of meat and meat alternatives are precarious and a fair, transparent, and understandable environment should be created for the conscious consumer., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The drive to encourage consumers to reduce animal meat protein has resulted in a substantial market for plant-based meat products. Despite willingness and acceptance among certain sectors of the population, there remains a large proportion of consumers unwilling to try plant-based meat. Through the lens of political ideology and applying message congruence theory, we demonstrate that current message framing is incongruent to conservative consumers in the USA. A pre-test (n = 262), using political ideology to predict willingness to try plant-based meat, revealed a significant effect such that conservatives were significantly less likely to want to learn about plant-based meat or to try it. A content analysis (n = 82) of press releases from a major plant-based meat company highlights that plant-based meat is promoted based on three key benefits: taste, health and the environment. Finally, in an experiment, conservative participants (n = 200) were randomly assigned to view an advertisement for a plant-based meat company that either cited environmental benefits or did not. Results demonstrate the presence of incongruence in messaging, where environmental benefits are shown to be less effective for conservative leaning consumers., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Meat substitutes using alternative proteins can facilitate sustainable diets without compromising animal welfare. The fungal protein, also called mycoprotein is the biomass that results from the fermentation of a filamentous fungus. This paper reports the results of a consumer acceptance study of fungal protein-based meat substitutes using a mixed-method design with a web-based survey and a series of semi-structured interviews amongst European participants. Based on the description provided in the survey, 56% of participants were not directly familiar with fungal proteins but they understood its potential societal benefits. The overall Food Technology Neophobia Score (FTNS) of the sample was moderate (M = 40.0, range = 19-62), with more neophilic participants (52.9%) than neophobic (47.1%). FTN was a significant but weak predictor of Perceived Benefits (PB) and Purchase Intentions (PI). Younger participants perceived fungal proteins more positively, and city-dwellers had higher PI than rural dwellers. Reducetarians were more likely to purchase fungal proteins, compared to unrestricted omnivores. Participants with lower acceptance of fungal proteins' association with mould had significantly lower PI than those who were comfortable with it. In turn, familiarity with fungal protein was positively associated with mould acceptance. The qualitative data suggested that the sensory attributes were the most important factor in the acceptance of meat substitutes. The participants also valued clean label products which were perceived as healthier. Familiarity with other products containing mould seemed to assuage concerns and drive acceptance of fungal protein. The findings suggest that the overall acceptance of fungal protein is still rather low. This may be attributed to the perceived low appeal and tastiness of available fungal protein products., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The overconsumption of meat has been related to negative health, environmental, and animal welfare effects. As such, many people are now reducing their meat consumption, and for some this includes increasing their consumption of meat substitutes. While research has discussed the barriers towards the adoption of meat substitutes, there is a lack of studies examining the differences between omnivores and veg*ns. The objective of this research is to explore the facilitators, barriers, and negotiations (i.e., tensions) that various dietary groups encounter with meat substitutes. Six focus groups were conducted and our analysis found clear tension between many influences in food choice. These tensions result in the influences (sensory preferences, meat substitutes' classification, health perceptions, and social/culture) being both facilitators and barriers dependent on the dietary group. Yet, there are also key facilitators across all dietary groups such as resources (packaging and labelling), and food context (restaurants, takeaways), as well as barriers such as the "vegan tax" (high price) and lack of trust. A main value negotiation was also exhibited by all dietary groups, balancing familiarity with food/meal freedom and versatility. We provide a reflection on the practical implications for meat substitute companies., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A key lifestyle change people could make to reduce their environmental impact is to reduce their meat consumption. However, meat is still a staple in many people's diet, and some consumers are reluctant to cut down. Meat substitutes, if accepted as adequate replacements for meat, may offer a suitable alternative without leaving consumers feeling dissatisfied. The aim of the present study was to identify psychological barriers to reducing meat consumption and increasing use of meat substitutes among Swedish consumers. Participants engaged in focus group discussions around purchasing, preparing, and consuming meat and meat substitutes. Four main themes were identified through thematic analysis: uncertainty, scepticism, health, and identity. These are discussed in relation to previous work on the barriers to reducing meat consumption. Strategies to communicate the environmental impact of meat to consumers and effect change through behavioural interventions are considered., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Understanding consumer perceptions of meat alternatives is key to facilitating a shift toward more sustainable food consumption. Importantly, these perceptions may vary according to the characteristics of the consumer (e.g., preferences, motivations), the product (e.g., sensory attributes) and the encounter (e.g., how the meat alternative is presented/framed). Qualitative and quantitative methods were applied to examine consumer perceptions of five proposed alternatives to meat: legumes, tofu, seitan, lab-grown meat, and insects. In Study 1, 138 participants provided free associations with regards to conventional animal proteins (e.g., red/white meat, fish) and the five alternatives. Three profiles of consumers were identified: (1) hedonically motivated meat eaters uninterested in meat substitutes; (2) health-oriented meat eaters open to some meat substitutes; and (3) ethically conscious meat avoiders positively oriented to most meat alternatives. In Study 2, the presentation of the product was experimentally manipulated: 285 participants evaluated the same five meat alternatives along several dimensions (e.g., edibility, healthiness), either when framed as an individual product or as part of a larger meal. Overall, most meat alternatives benefited from a meal framing, with the notable exception of legumes, which benefited from an individual framing, and insects which were evaluated quite negatively regardless of framing. The present findings suggest that there is not a single way to frame all meat alternatives that will improve their appeal to all consumers., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Current meat consumption and production patterns are far from sustainable and place a heavy burden on the environment. Excessive meat consumption is also considered detrimental to consumer health. Hence, more consumers are willing to opt for meat substitutes to counteract these downsides of excessive meat consumption. However, in many Western countries, market shares for meat substitutes still have to increase significantly if they are to support responsible consumption and production. Consequently, more research is needed to take a closer look at consumer preferences for meat substitutes. This study aims to fill this research gap by analyzing consumer preferences for meat substitutes based on micro-algae. First, a choice-based conjoint analysis was conducted in three Western European countries (Germany, Netherlands, France) to reveal consumer preferences and willingness to pay for meat substitutes based on micro-algae. Second, a multi-item scale was developed to measure consumer attitudes toward meat and meat substitutes. Third, these results were combined to obtain novel insights about attitudinal drivers of consumer preference and willingness to pay for meat substitutes based on micro-algae. In summary, findings from this study provide important insights for food engineers, food marketers, and policy makers when it comes to product development and increasing market shares for meat substitutes based on micro-algae., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

There is a growing trend of consumers in developed countries substituting alternative protein sources for meat and purchasing meat products with specific production-system related credence attributes. This study of Australian meat consumers identifies consumer segments with varying levels of willingness to make the following changes to their protein consumption: reduce meat consumption, follow a meat-free diet most of the time, avoid meat consumption altogether, and follow a strict plant-based diet (i.e., stop eating all animal-products). Segments are characterised, and predictors of segment membership are determined. Discrete Factor analysis, based on a nationally-representative sample of 287 Australian meat consumers surveyed in 2016, identified four unique segments. Findings show that 46% of consumers are not willing to make any changes to their meat/protein consumption ('Committed Meat Eaters'), 22% are willing to reduce meat consumption ('Willing Meat Reducers'), 15% are willing to stop meat consumption/consume plant-based protein foods only ('Prospective Veg*ns'), and 17% are undecided about future change ('Undecided Meat Eaters'). The key factor differentiating Committed Meat Eaters from other segments is the perception that food choices are inadequate in meat-free diets. Committed Meat Eaters are also less likely to believe livestock farming contributes to climate change, and to report a recent reduction in the consumption of at least one type of meat than are Willing Meat Reducers and Prospective Veg*ns. These findings are expected to be of interest to individuals and organisations who may play a role in meeting current and future consumer demand for meat and alternative protein products., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Consumers' food selections have a large impact on the environment. In this study, we examined how consumers evaluated the environmental impact of various foods. Furthermore, we investigated whether the perceived environmental effect of foods, health consciousness, and food disgust sensitivity would be related to the consumption of meat substitutes and organic meat. We used data from the Swiss Food Panel 2.0 for our analyses (N = 5586 participants from the German- and French-speaking part of Switzerland). The participants mistakenly perceived the environmental impact of soy-based meat substitutes as similar to that of conventionally produced meat. The results suggested that consumers with low meat consumption, perceptions about the high environmental impact of meat, high health consciousness, low disgust sensitivity, and who were female, younger, and better educated were more likely to consume meat substitutes compared with people who had the opposite attributes. Perceived environmental impact of conventionally produced meat, health consciousness, being female, age, income, and education had a positive impact on consumption of organic meat. Disgust sensitivity had a negative effect. The relatively low negative correlation between meat and meat substitute consumption implies that the substitution effect may not be as large as hoped for in the transition to more sustainable food behavior. However, our results also indicate that increasing consumer knowledge about the environmental impact of foods may lead to more sustainable food consumption., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A transition to a more sustainable diet likely requires substituting proteins of animal origin with alternatives like plant-based foods. Yet consumers are not regularly consuming alternative protein products, and one potential explanation is that the dominant food retail infrastructure is not oriented in favour of these foods. This study provides an in-depth exploration of the role of supermarkets in plant-based protein consumption in a Canadian food retail setting. A mixed-methods approach involving seven supermarket audits, 24 consumer interviews, and five key informant interviews was used to explore the in-store context for plant-based protein purchasing as well as the forms of "fits" and "misfits" between the supermarket's strategies for retailing plant-based protein and consumer strategies when shopping for these products. Our findings suggest that supermarkets are simultaneously enabling and limiting consumers when it comes to alternative protein consumption by increasing the availability of plant-based options, but assuming basic strategies when it comes to marketing these products in-store. We propose several tactics that could facilitate greater uptake of these products, including placing plant-based meat and dairy substitutes on the same shelves as other meat and dairy products and the devotion of more resources to product promotions and the innovation of new varieties. In concluding, we contend that efforts to increase society's consumption of alternative protein products would greatly benefit from better understanding the supermarket's role in mediating this transition., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

By means of a population-based survey experiment, we analysed the effectiveness of two message characteristics - message framing and the refutation of misinformation - in persuading respondents to reduce their consumption of red meat and increase that of plant-based alternatives. We also tested whether the effects of those two message characteristics were moderated by prior beliefs about the health and climate impacts of red meat consumption. The data were collected with an online survey of the adult population living in Finland (N = 1279). We found that messages had a small but desired effect on intentions when the effect of prior beliefs was taken into account, but that that effect was strongly moderated by prior beliefs. In particular, messages changed behavioural intentions among the "meat-sceptics" (i.e., those believing relatively strongly in the negative health and climate effects of meat consumption) but not among the "meat believers" (defined symmetrically). The combination of frames and refutation of misinformation were not found to be more effective strategies than the provision of information through single-framed, one-sided messages. We found limited evidence that the way a message was formulated determined its effectiveness in changing behaviours., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In a hypothetical choice experiment consumers were given the option of purchasing burgers that were made from beef, plant-based protein, or cultured meat. Willingness to purchase plant-based and cultured meat burgers is linked to age, sex, views of other food technologies, and attitudes towards the environment and agriculture. Although consumers were told that all burgers tasted the same, there was a marked preference for beef burgers. A mixed-logit model predicts that, if prices were equal, 65% of consumers would purchase the beef burger, 21% would purchase the plant-based burger, 11% would purchase the cultured meat burger, and 4% would make no purchase. Preferences for plant-based and cultured meat burgers are found to be highly, but not perfectly, correlated., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)