Perception of meat alternatives compared to meat: Differences between meat eaters and reducetarians

Jak są postrzegane alternatywy mięsa? Porównanie opinii osób jedzących mięso i ograniczających jego spożycie

Growing ethical, environmental, and health concerns related to meat consumption have increased interest in alternative protein sources, such as plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs), insect-based foods, and lab-grown meat. This study examined how Polish consumers perceive these three categories of meat substitutes in comparison to conventional meat and how these perceptions differ between meat eaters and reducetarians (individuals who intentionally limit meat consumption). A representative sample of 1,016 Polish adults completed an online survey evaluating meat alternatives on several dimensions. Overall, PBMAs received the most favourable evaluations, lab-grown meat was viewed ambivalently, and insect-based foods faced the strongest perceptual barriers. Dietary habits significantly influenced perceptions: reducetarians assessed all substitutes more positively than meat eaters, indicating greater openness to alternative proteins. These findings highlight substantial variation in how different meat alternatives are received by consumers and underscore the importance of addressing both sensory expectations and emotional responses in promoting meat alternatives.

Rosnące obawy etyczne, środowiskowe i zdrowotne związane ze spożyciem mięsa przyczyniły się do wzrostu zainteresowania alternatywnymi źródłami białka, takimi jak roślinne zamienniki mięsa (PBMAs), produkty na bazie owadów oraz mięso hodowane komórkowo. Celem badania było sprawdzenie, jak polscy konsumenci postrzegają te trzy kategorie alternatyw mięsa w porównaniu z mięsem konwencjonalnym oraz jak różnią się te oceny między osobami jedzącymi mięso a reduktarianami (osobami celowo ograniczającymi spożycie mięsa). Badanie przeprowadzono na reprezentatywnej próbie 1016 dorosłych Polaków, którzy wypełnili internetową ankietę oceniającą różne alternatywy mięsa w wielu wymiarach. Roślinne zamienniki mięsa (PBMAs) uzyskały najbardziej pozytywne oceny, mięso hodowane komórkowo było postrzegane ambiwalentnie, natomiast żywność z owadów oceniano najgorzej. Dieta okazała się również ważnym czynnikiem różnicującym. Wyniki podkreślają znaczące zróżnicowanie w odbiorze różnych substytutów mięsa oraz konieczność uwzględniania zarówno oczekiwań sensorycznych, jak i reakcji emocjonalnych w działaniach promujących produkty zastępujące mięso.

References/Bibliografia

Adamczyk, D., & Maison, D. (2019). Ideologia czy zdrowie – dwa typy wegetarianizmu. Marketing i Rynek, (8), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.33226/1231-7853.2019.8.2

Aiking, H. (2011). Future protein supply. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 22(2-3), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2010.04.005

Bryant, C. J., & Barnett, J. C. (2019). What’s in a name? Consumer perceptions of in vitro meat under different names. Appetite, 137, 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.02.021

De Boer, J., & Aiking, H. (2011). On the merits of plant-based proteins for global food security: Marrying macro and micro perspectives. Ecological Economics, 70(7), 1259–1265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.03.001

Caputo, V., Sun, J., Staples, A. J., & Taylor, H. (2024). Market outlook for meat alternatives: Challenges, opportunities, and new developments. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 148, 104474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2024.104474

Chong, M., Leung, A. K. Y., & Lua, V. (2022). A cross-country investigation of social image motivation and acceptance of lab-grown meat in Singapore and the United States. Appetite, 173, 105990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2022.105990

Dagevos, H. (2021). Finding flexitarians: Current studies on meat eaters and meat reducers. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 114, 530–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.06.021

EURLex. (2024). Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 October 2024. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex-:62023CJ0438

Gastaldello, A., Giampieri, F., De Giuseppe, R., Grosso, G., Baroni, L., & Battino, M. (2022). The rise of processed meat alternatives: A narrative review of the manufacturing, composition, nutritional profile and health effects of newer sources of protein, and their place in healthier diets. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 127, 263–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2022.07.005

González, N., Marquès, M., Nadal, M., & Domingo, J. L. (2020). Meat consumption: Which are the current global risks? A review of recent (2010–2020) evidences. Food Research International, 137, 109341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109341

Grossi, G., Goglio, P., Vitali, A., & Williams, A. G. (2019). Livestock and climate change: impact of livestock on climate and mitigation strategies. Animal Frontiers, 9(1), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/af/vfy034

Guasch-Ferré, M., Satija, A., Blondin, S. A., Janiszewski, M., Emlen, E., O’Connor, L. E., ..., & Stampfer, M. J. (2019). Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of red meat consumption in comparison with various comparison diets on cardiovascular risk factors. Circulation, 139(15), 1828–1845. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.118.035225

Hampton, J. O., Hyndman, T. H., Allen, B. L., & Fischer, B. (2021). Animal harms and food production: Informing ethical choices. Animals, 11(5), 1225. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11051225

Hezaveh, S. A., Adamczyk, D., Stasiuk, K., & Maison, D. (2024). Modelling the future of meat consumption in Poland: An agent-based approach. British Food Journal, 127(2), 519– 38. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-01-2024-0055

Hirpessa, B. B., Ulusoy, B. H., & Hecer, C. (2020). Hormones and hormonal anabolics: residues in animal source food, potential public health impacts, and methods of analysis. Journal of Food Quality, 2020(1), 5065386. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/5065386

Loughnan, S., Bastian, B., & Haslam, N. (2014). The psychology of eating animals. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(2), 104–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414525781

Mlček, J., Rop, O., Borkovcova, M., & Bednářová, M. (2014). A comprehensive look at the possibilities of edible insects as food in Europe – A review. Polish Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences, 64(3), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10222-012-0099-8

Modlinska, K., Adamczyk, D., Goncikowska, K., Maison, D., & Pisula, W. (2020). The effect of labelling and visual properties on the acceptance of foods containing insects. Nutrients,12, 2498. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12092498

de Oliveira Padilha, L. G., Malek, L., & Umberger, W. J. (2022). Consumers’ attitudes towards lab-grown meat, conventionally raised meat and plant-based protein alternatives. Food Quality and Preference, 99, 104573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2022.104573

Sadler, M. J. (2004). Meat alternatives – market developments and health benefits. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 15(5), 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2003.09.003

Sikora, D., & Rzymski, P. (2023). The heat about cultured meat in Poland: Across-sectional acceptance study. Nutrients, 15(21), 4649. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15214649

Smart Protein. (2021). What consumers want: a survey on European consumer attitudes towards plant-based foods. https://smartproteinproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/FINAL_Pan-EU-consumer-survey_Overall-Report-.pdf

Szymkowiak, A., Antoniak, M. A., Bokwa, K., Vlčko, T., Jarosz, I., Kulawik, P., & Golian, J. (2023). Consumer expectations regarding the labelling of products containing cultured meat. Marketing i Rynek, (10), 30–40.

Szulc, K. (2023). Edible insects: A study of the availability of insect-based food in Poland. Sustainability, 15(20), 14964. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014964