Consumers’ hesitancy over the idea of having meat cultivated in a lab
Global meat production has risen considerably in recent decades. However, the livestock sector has been under increasing attention in recent years due to its extensive climate, ethical, and human health issues. These concerns together with the projection of increased protein consumption in the coming decades necessitate the development of more sustainable alternative sources of protein. Recently, there has been a rise in the interest in the development of meat alternatives from different sources such as crops, insects, marine biomass, and by cultivating animal cells directly which is called cultured meat. Cultured meat (also known as "lab-grown" meat) has become popular in recent years, with the hype to solve environmental challenges related to conventional meat production.
Cultured meat is made from the in-vitro culture of animal cells rather than raising complete animals, which eliminates the need for large-scale agricultural operations. Proponents argue that this technology will have fewer environmental impacts like carbon footprint and water footprint in comparison with the livestock industry. In addition, it has been contended that cultured meat has the advantage of fewer animal welfare issues compared to conventional meat.
Still, consumers remain sceptical to consider it as a replacement for farmed meat. A recent review conducted by researchers from the Novia University of Applied Sciences and Bologna University identified three broad themes across distinct bodies of literature: a) a general reluctancy in acceptance of cultured meat, b) knowledge and heuristic cues (such as perceived healthiness, naturalness, and disgust evoked by the unfamiliar technology) are the main cues influencing consumers reactions, c) environmental and ethical concerns have a trivial impact on cultured meat acceptance. The majority of studies on consumer attitudes about cultured meat have reported a general lack of knowledge about the technology and its advantages, however, providing information on the technology's benefits does not essentially lead to a favourable attitude. Providing information does not change attitude instantly, rather how the information is perceived has a greater effect. Mental cues such as perceived naturalness, healthiness, and disgust sensitivity impact the processing of the provided information. The extent that the cultured meat is perceived as unhealthy, unnatural, not “real”, or disgusting, increases consumers’ negative attitude toward this technology. Moreover, the environmental advantages or ethical considerations alone do not seem to be a strong motivation to compensate for the negative attitude (or disgust impulse) of cultured meat.
This study is published in the Appetite journal with the title “Review of factors affecting consumer acceptance of cultured meat”.
This post has been published in Swedish in the paper Västra Nyland in May 2022.
