Meatless Revolution: Exploring Consumers’ Perception of Meat Alternatives

ABSTRACT

This paper employs a 4 × 2 × 3 research design with four different antecedents of meat alternative consumption (red meat consumption, consumers’ health consciousness, environmental awareness, animal welfare), two types of meat alternatives (plant-based vs. vegetarian), and three consumer behavioral outcomes (purchase intention, willingness to substitute, and willingness to pay). Our study of 425 participants shows that all four antecedents affect consumers’ meat alternative perceptions. Red meat consumption has a negative effect, while health consciousness, environmental awareness, and animal welfare have a positive relationship, increasing meat alternative purchase intention, willingness to substitute, and willingness to pay. Interestingly, plant-based alternatives had higher purchase intention, willingness to substitute, and willingness to pay relative to vegetarian alternatives. Our results estimate that plant-based alternatives are substituted for up to 50% of red meat consumption, compared to 35% for vegetarian alternatives. Also noteworthy, plant-based meat alternatives have a 10% higher willingness to pay versus vegetarian alternatives.

KEYWORDS:

• Meat alternatives
• purchase intention
• willingness to pay
• disruptive product marketing
• Labeling

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

¹ Note that we have a few single-item measures (e.g., frequency of meat consumption and all our outcome variables). This is appropriate if the single item reflects a homogenous construct (Diamantopoulos et al., 2012).