Abstract
The development of meat substitutes could contribute to a more sustainable food production system. Although the consumption of meat substitutes in the Netherlands has grown over the last decades, meat consumption stayed roughly the same. This led to the question of whether meat substitutes fit in the same usage situations as meat products do. Perceived situational appropriateness of meat, meat substitutes and other meat alternatives in different usage situations was studied using an item-by-use appropriateness survey. Products were presented via photographs and for each combination of product and situation, the appropriateness was rated on a 7-point scale. Personal information included the consumption of meat and meat substitutes and Food Neophobia. An exploratory survey was conducted in 2004 and an online survey in 2019.Overall, meat products were perceived as more appropriate than their vegetarian equivalents (e.g. hamburger vs. vegetarian hamburger) in almost all situations. Meat alternatives (chickpeas, nuts) scored generally higher than meat substitutes on situational appropriateness. Age and gender affected appropriateness ratings: women and younger respondents gave higher ratings to meat substitutes and meat alternatives. Food Neophobia showed a small effect. Meat substitute consumption frequency was a predictor of overall appropriateness in 2019, where it was not in 2004. Results underpin that situational appropriateness and consumer characteristics should be taken into account in new product development of meat substitutes. Furthermore, meat alternatives like chickpeas and nuts could also contribute to the reduction of meat consumption.
Highlights
Over the last decades, it has become clear that worldwide food consumption and food production systems have a substantial impact on the environment
An exploratory survey was developed and conducted in 2004, ac cording to the item-by-use appropriateness method by Schutz (1994) and the situations that were used were based on the information that was generated during focus group discussions on meat substitutes
Spider plots 1A through 1E show how meat products were rated compared to their vegetarian equivalents, whereas 1F compared meat alternatives to the highest scoring meat substitute
Summary
It has become clear that worldwide food consumption and food production systems have a substantial impact on the environment. More over, due to the still-growing world population, it is expected that global meat production will keep on growing for the decades (Aiking, 2011; OECD-FAO, 2019). Due to this environmental pressure and with the still-growing meat production and consumption in mind, a shift in our dietary behavior from an animal-based diet towards a more plantbased diet is an urgent need to be environmentally more sustainable (Aiking, 2011; Smil, 2002; Tijhuis et al, 2011). The adoption of meat substitutes by consumers is slow and many products are not meeting consumer demands since the texture and taste of those products do not always resemble the texture and taste of meat, as shown by own results (Elzerman et al, 2011, 2013, 2015) and others (e.g. Hoek, van Boekel, Voordouw and Luning, 2011; Hartmann & Siegrist, 2017)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call