Should we stop meating like this? Reducing meat consumption through substitution

High levels of meat consumption are increasingly being criticised for ethical, environmental, and social reasons. Plant-based meat substitutes have been identified as healthy sources of protein that, in comparison to meat, offer a number of social, environmental and health benefits and may play a role in reducing meat consumption. However, there has been a lack of research on the role they can play in the policy agenda and how specific meat substitute attributes can influence consumers to replace partially replace meat in their diets. In this paper, we examine consumers’ preferences for attributes of meat and meat substitute products and develop consumer segments based on these preferences. The results of a choice experiment with 247 UK consumers, using food labels and mince (ground meat), illustrate that the type of mince, fat content, country of origin and price are major factors that influence choice. Carbon footprint, method of production and brand play a secondary role in determining consumers’ choices of meat/meat substitutes. Latent class analysis is used to identify six consumer segments: price conscious, healthy eaters, taste driven, green, organic and vegetarian consumers which have different socio-demographic characteristics and meat consumption patterns. Future interventions and policies aimed at reducing meat consumption including labelling, provision of more information, financial incentives, educational campaigns and new product development will be more effective if they are holistic and target specific consumer segments, instead of focus on the average consumer.

[1]  F. Carlsson,et al.  Consumer Benefits of Labels and Bans on GM Foods—Choice Experiments with Swedish Consumers , 2007 .

[2]  J. Boer,et al.  “Meatless days” or “less but better”? Exploring strategies to adapt Western meat consumption to health and sustainability challenges , 2014, Appetite.

[3]  Vincenzina Caputo,et al.  Consumers’ willingness to pay for organic chicken breast: Evidence from choice experiment , 2011 .

[4]  J. Hermansen,et al.  Environmental consequences of different beef production systems in the EU , 2010 .

[5]  Wim Verbeke,et al.  Consumers’ valuation of sustainability labels on meat , 2014 .

[6]  B. Olmedilla-Alonso,et al.  Development and assessment of healthy properties of meat and meat products designed as functional foods. , 2013, Meat science.

[7]  R. Horne Limits to labels: The role of eco-labels in the assessment of product sustainability and routes to sustainable consumption , 2009 .

[8]  Artur Wilczynski,et al.  Economic comparison of beef production systems in the EU , 2018 .

[9]  J. Gil,et al.  Impact of hedonic evaluation on consumers' preferences for beef attributes including its enrichment with n-3 and CLA fatty acids. , 2016, Meat science.

[10]  Larry Lockshin,et al.  Combining discrete choice and informed sensory testing in a two-stage process: can it predict wine market share? , 2010 .

[11]  D. Ludwig,et al.  Front-of-package food labels: public health or propaganda? , 2010, JAMA.

[12]  Wim Verbeke,et al.  Health advertising to promote fruit and vegetable intake: Application of health-related motive segmentation , 2008 .

[13]  Douglas E Levy,et al.  Traffic-light labels and choice architecture: promoting healthy food choices. , 2014, American journal of preventive medicine.

[14]  K. Grunert,et al.  European citizen and consumer attitudes and preferences regarding beef and pork. , 2010, Meat science.

[15]  Maryse Labriet,et al.  Agriculture, forestry, and other land-use emissions in Latin America , 2016 .

[16]  D. McFadden Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[17]  I. Gren,et al.  Effects of an environmental tax on meat and dairy consumption in Sweden , 2015 .

[18]  K. Grunert,et al.  Sustainability Labels on Food Products: Consumer Motivation, Understanding and Use , 2014 .

[19]  Maj Munch Andersen,et al.  Fostering change to sustainable consumption and production: an evidence based view , 2008 .

[20]  M. Sutton,et al.  Food choices, health and environment: Effects of cutting Europe's meat and dairy intake , 2014 .

[21]  M. B. Jensen,et al.  Consumer response to monochrome Guideline Daily Amount nutrition labels , 2015 .

[22]  Sonja Lüthi,et al.  Analyzing policy support instruments and regulatory risk factors for wind energy deployment-A developers' perspective , 2011 .

[23]  Remco C. Havermans,et al.  High tax on high energy dense foods and its effects on the purchase of calories in a supermarket. An experiment , 2011, Appetite.

[24]  F. Clavel-Chapelon,et al.  Meat consumption and prospective weight change in participants of the EPIC-PANACEA study. , 2010, The American journal of clinical nutrition.

[25]  Alessandro Flammini,et al.  Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use Emissions by Sources and Removals by Sinks , 2014 .

[26]  Erik de Bakker,et al.  Reducing Meat Consumption in Today’s Consumer Society: Questioning the Citizen-Consumer Gap , 2012 .

[27]  Riccardo Scarpa,et al.  Valuing animal genetic resources: a choice modeling application to indigenous cattle in Kenya , 2007, Agricultural Economics.

[28]  P. Luning,et al.  Are meat substitutes liked better over time? A repeated in-home use test with meat substitutes or meat in meals , 2013 .

[29]  Sara R. Jaeger,et al.  Methodological issues in conjoint analysis: a case study , 2001 .

[30]  S. Smed,et al.  The Danish tax on saturated fat – Short run effects on consumption, substitution patterns and consumer prices of fats , 2013 .

[31]  Anikó Bíró Did the junk food tax make the Hungarians eat healthier , 2015 .

[32]  Gert van Dijk,et al.  Understanding heterogeneous preferences of cooperative members , 2009 .

[33]  René Lion,et al.  Front-of-pack nutrition labelling: Testing effectiveness of different nutrition labelling formats front-of-pack in four European countries , 2008, Appetite.

[34]  David Oglethorpe,et al.  The use and usefulness of carbon labelling food: A policy perspective from a survey of UK supermarket shoppers , 2011 .

[35]  Pinya Silayoi,et al.  The Importance of Packaging Attributes: A Conjoint Analysis Approach , 2007 .

[36]  David Hoyos,et al.  The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments , 2010 .

[37]  R. Neff,et al.  “We don’t tell people what to do”: An examination of the factors influencing NGO decisions to campaign for reduced meat consumption in light of climate change , 2014 .

[38]  Riccardo Scarpa,et al.  Eliciting Consumer Preferences for Certified Animal-Friendly Foods: Can Elements of the Theory of Planned Behavior Improve Choice Experiment Analysis? , 2012 .

[39]  P. Luning,et al.  Exploring meat substitutes: consumer experiences and contextual factors , 2013 .

[40]  Heléne Tjärnemo,et al.  Challenges of carbon labelling of food products: a consumer research perspective , 2011 .

[41]  R. Tiffin,et al.  The public health impacts of a fat tax , 2011, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[42]  S. deFrance Zooarchaeology in Complex Societies: Political Economy, Status, and Ideology , 2009 .

[43]  E. Golan,et al.  Food product composition, consumer health, and public policy: Introduction and overview of special section , 2008 .

[44]  Karen Gerard,et al.  Exploring the social value of health-care interventions: a stated preference discrete choice experiment. , 2009, Health economics.

[45]  P. Boxall,et al.  Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach , 2002 .

[46]  Wim Verbeke,et al.  European consumer preferences for beef with nutrition and health claims: A multi-country investigation using discrete choice experiments , 2014 .

[47]  Linda Thunström,et al.  The Impact of Meal Attributes and Nudging on Healthy Meal Consumption , 2013 .

[48]  G. Berndes,et al.  How much land is needed for global food production under scenarios of dietary changes and livestock productivity increases in 2030 , 2010 .

[49]  C. Tucker,et al.  The significance of sensory appeal for reduced meat consumption , 2014, Appetite.

[50]  S. Smed,et al.  The effect of using consumption taxes on foods to promote climate friendly diets – The case of Denmark , 2013 .

[51]  H. Westhoek,et al.  The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes , 2012 .

[52]  C. Strugnell,et al.  Factors affecting consumer acceptance of chilled ready meals on the island of Ireland , 2003 .

[53]  M. Loureiro,et al.  A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability , 2007 .

[54]  Wuyang Hu,et al.  Trading off health, environmental and genetic modification attributes in food , 2004 .

[55]  Susan D. Abbott,et al.  Consumer Response , 1985 .

[56]  J. Boer,et al.  Sustainable Protein Production and Consumption: Pigs or Peas? , 2006 .

[57]  M. Drake,et al.  CONSUMER PERCEPTION OF WHEY AND SOY PROTEIN IN MEAL REPLACEMENT PRODUCTS , 2008 .

[58]  Sue Clegg,et al.  Front-of-pack nutrition labelling: are multiple formats a problem for consumers? , 2011, European journal of public health.

[59]  Eija Pouta,et al.  The impact of fat content, production methods and carbon footprint information on consumer preferences for minced meat , 2013 .

[60]  Joanna Coast,et al.  Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations. , 2012, Health economics.

[61]  S. McGuire,et al.  Scientific Report of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Washington, DC: US Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services, 2015. , 2016, Advances in nutrition.

[62]  Monika J.A. Schröder,et al.  The Role of Livestock Production Ethics in Consumer Values Towards Meat , 2002 .

[63]  Roger J. Calantone,et al.  Effectiveness of Marketing Cues on Consumer Perceptions of Quality: The Moderating Roles of Brand Reputation and Third-Party Information , 2013 .

[64]  M. A. Oliver,et al.  Spanish, French and British consumers' acceptability of Uruguayan beef, and consumers' beef choice associated with country of origin, finishing diet and meat price. , 2013, Meat science.

[65]  T. Finnigan,et al.  Mycoprotein, life cycle analysis and the food 2030 challenge. , 2010 .

[66]  T. Jørgensen,et al.  The rise and fall of the world's first fat tax. , 2015, Health policy.

[67]  Deborah Marshall,et al.  Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force. , 2013, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[68]  W. Verbeke,et al.  Health-related attitudes as a basis for segmenting European fish consumers , 2010 .

[69]  I. D. Boer,et al.  Accounting for multi-functionality of sheep farming in the carbon footprint of lamb: A comparison of three contrasting Mediterranean systems. , 2013 .

[70]  E. Röös,et al.  Communicating the environmental impact of meat production: challenges in the development of a Swedish meat guide , 2014 .

[71]  A. Nordgren A climate tax on meat , 2012 .

[72]  Joffre Swait,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Relaxing the IID assumption – introducing variants of the MNL model , 2000 .

[73]  Klaus G. Grunert,et al.  Use and understanding of nutrition information on food labels in six European countries , 2010, Journal of Public Health.

[74]  Anita Yadavalli,et al.  Does media influence consumer demand? The case of lean finely textured beef in the United States , 2014 .

[75]  C. Sundberg,et al.  Can carbon footprint serve as an indicator of the environmental impact of meat production , 2013 .

[76]  J. Boer,et al.  Fostering more sustainable food choices: Can Self-Determination Theory help? , 2014 .

[77]  M. Gispert,et al.  Do all the consumers accept marbling in the same way? The relationship between eating and visual acceptability of pork with different intramuscular fat content. , 2012, Meat science.

[78]  C. Radnitz,et al.  Investigation of lifestyle choices of individuals following a vegan diet for health and ethical reasons , 2015, Appetite.

[79]  Mark J. Koetse,et al.  A choice experiment on alternative fuel vehicle preferences of private car owners in the Netherlands , 2014 .

[80]  Wim Verbeke,et al.  Flemish consumer attitudes towards more sustainable food choices , 2013, Appetite.

[81]  A. Boaz,et al.  Consumer use of health-related endorsements on food labels in the United Kingdom and Australia. , 2001, Journal of nutrition education.

[82]  Joop de Boer,et al.  Can we cut out the meat of the dish? Constructing consumer-oriented pathways towards meat substitution , 2012, Appetite.

[83]  H. Jensen,et al.  US and German consumer preferences for ground beef packaged under a modified atmosphere – Different regulations, different behaviour? , 2013 .

[84]  H. Dagevos,et al.  The Growing Role of Front-of-Pack Nutrition Profile Labeling: A Consumer Perspective on Key Issues and Controversies , 2011, Critical reviews in food science and nutrition.

[85]  Eija Pouta,et al.  Diversifying meat consumption patterns: consumers' self-reported past behaviour and intentions for change. , 2012, Meat science.

[86]  Rolf Wüstenhagen,et al.  What makes people seal the green power deal? — Customer segmentation based on choice experiment in Germany , 2014 .

[87]  Andreas C. Drichoutis,et al.  Nutrition knowledge and consumer use of nutritional food labels , 2005 .

[88]  G. Antonides,et al.  Flexitarianism: a range of sustainable food styles , 2015 .

[89]  W. Engels,et al.  Replacement of meat by meat substitutes. A survey on person- and product-related factors in consumer acceptance , 2011, Appetite.

[90]  K. Grunert,et al.  Consumer attitudes towards sustainability aspects of food production: Insights from three continents , 2012 .

[91]  Julian M. Allwood,et al.  Importance of food-demand management for climate mitigation , 2014 .

[92]  Larry Lockshin,et al.  What you see may not be what you get: Asking consumers what matters may not reflect what they choose , 2010 .

[93]  K. Lancaster A New Approach to Consumer Theory , 1966, Journal of Political Economy.

[94]  S. Loughnan,et al.  Rationalizing meat consumption. The 4Ns , 2015, Appetite.

[95]  Yanfeng Zhou,et al.  Chinese consumers’ adoption of a ‘green’ innovation – The case of organic food , 2012 .

[96]  Kammi K. Schmeer Married Women's Resource Position and Household Food Expenditures in Cebu, Philippines. , 2005 .

[97]  Rosanna Abbate,et al.  Accruing evidence on benefits of adherence to the Mediterranean diet on health: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2010, The American journal of clinical nutrition.

[98]  J. D. Jonge,et al.  Different shades of grey: Compromise products to encourage animal friendly consumption , 2015 .

[99]  P. Vellinga,et al.  Exploring dietary guidelines based on ecological and nutritional values: A comparison of six dietary patterns , 2014 .

[100]  H. V. Trijp,et al.  Heterogeneity in consumer perceptions of the animal friendliness of broiler production systems , 2014 .

[101]  J. Kerry,et al.  Consumer perception and the role of science in the meat industry. , 2010, Meat science.

[102]  J. Voordouw,et al.  Sustainability and meat consumption: is reduction realistic? , 2013 .

[103]  P. Börjesson,et al.  Sustainable meat consumption: A quantitative analysis of nutritional intake, greenhouse gas emissions and land use from a Swedish perspective , 2014 .