Consumer perceptions and intentions towards sustainable meat consumption and lab-grown meat in Australia

Animal-sourced products are among the most nutritious food products available to humans. However, the sustainability of food derived from modern livestock production methods are under increased scrutiny. Growing consumer concerns over the impacts of global meat production and consumption have led to growing demand for alternative sources of protein, and the use of production-related credence attributes and related ‘sustainability’ labels on meat products. To address these issues, this thesis aims to increase understanding of Australian consumers’ views and intentions regarding sustainable meat and meat substitutes. Consumers’ perceptions of six key attributes (health, safety, affordability, eating enjoyment, animal welfare and environmental friendliness) were measured for conventionally produced meat, plant-based protein products, and novel lab-grown meat alternatives. Market opportunities for lab-grown meat were also explored. Australia provided a unique context to conduct this research because both per capita meat consumption and per capita greenhouse gas emissions have been high relative to other countries around the globe. The main empirical work for this thesis is presented in Chapters 2-4. The empirical study presented in Chapter 2 focuses on understanding what sustainability means to consumers in the context of meat and how consumers relate production-related credence attributes of chicken meat to sustainability. The exploratory research used a multi-method approach (an online survey (n=87), in-person interviews (n=30) and eye-tracking methods (n=28)). Environmental dimensions of sustainability were most important to consumers’ definition of a ‘sustainable food system’, and chicken meat sustainability was most commonly associated with the perceived environmental impact of chicken meat production. Consumers made incorrect inferences about some sustainability labels and frequently associated a higher price with higher sustainability, indicating a belief that ‘doing the right thing’ might cost more. Chapter 3 employed an online survey to investigate 1078 Australian consumers’ perceptions of meat products (chicken and beef) and meat substitutes (plant-based meat alternatives and lab-grown meat). Consumers’ behavioural intentions with respect to lab-grown chicken and beef were also explored using multinomial logistic regression analyses to understand what factors are likely to influence willingness to consume lab-grown meat products. On average, relative to other products, lab-grown meat was perceived negatively on all attributes considered, with the exception of animal welfare. Factors that helped predict willingness to consume lab-grown meat were positive perceptions of eating enjoyment and the healthiness of lab-grown meat; familiarity with lab-grown meat; higher consumption frequency of conventionally raised chicken meat; tertiary education; and younger age. Chapter 4 utilised the data set from Chapter 3 to provide further insight on the market potential for lab-grown meat in Australia. A latent class cluster analysis revealed six unique clusters, of which three (49% of consumers) showed some willingness to consume lab-grown meat when available on the market. One segment, ‘Prospective LGM eaters’ (12%), appeared ‘very willing’ to consume lab-grown meat. These consumers were more likely to be younger (<35 years); university-educated; live in metropolitan areas; have greater prior awareness of lab-grown meat; stronger beliefs regarding the potential self- and society-related benefits of growing demand for lab-grown meat; and they had higher trust in diverse information sources.

Author dc:creator

• Garcez de Oliveira Padilha, Lívia

Advisors dc:contributor.advisor

• Umberger, Wendy
• Malek, Lenka

• Meat
• Consumer behaviour
• Sustainability
• Food systems
• Eco-labelling
• Perceptions
• Animal Welfare
• Environment
• Health
• Eye-tracking
• Lab-grown meat
• Plant based protein
• Alternative protein sources
• Food choice values
• Dietary preferences
• Segmentation

Language dc:language.iso

en

Handle dc:identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/2440/134178

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:digital.library.adelaide.edu.au:2440/134178