Consumers' evaluation of the environmental friendliness, healthiness and naturalness of meat, meat substitutes, and other protein-rich foods

In an attempt to move consumers toward a more sustainable and healthy diet, meat substitute products have flooded the market. However, consumers tend to be conservative about new food products and technologies that are supposed to replace traditional ones. Thus, it is important to evaluate whether consumers see the benefits of consuming these new products compared to the traditional meat products they are intended to replace. This online study examined how study participants from the German-speaking region of Switzerland (N = 534) assessed the environmental friendliness, healthiness and naturalness of 20 protein-rich foods, including meat, fish, cheese and a diverse set of meat substitutes. The study also aimed to determine how well subjective consumer evaluations corresponded with objective evaluations based on life cycle assessments and nutrient profiling. Results show that most participants did not assume that meat substitutes are automatically healthier and more environmentally friendly just because they are meat-free. Participants did not evaluate meat substitute products as more environmentally friendly than meat or consider them a healthier option. Compared to traditional foods like meat, fish and cheese, meat substitutes were also evaluated as less natural. Furthermore, strong correlations were found between participants' perceptions of environmental friendliness, naturalness and healthiness, although objective evaluations of these attributes did not correlate. Consumers' generally negative impression of meat substitute products compared to meat remains a challenge for industry and public health as well as the establishment of more sustainable diets.

Automated summary

Consumers have a generally negative impression of meat substitute products, perceiving them to be less healthy, less environmentally friendly, and less natural compared to traditional meat products. There is a discrepancy between subjective and objective evaluations of these products. This poses a challenge for the industry, public health, and the establishment of sustainable diets.