A better understanding of the motives underlying the adoption of sustainable and healthy diets is needed for designing more effective policies. The aim of the study was to examine how eating motives were associated with self-reported changes in the consumption of beef, beans, and soy products, i.e., changes related to reducing animal and increasing plant proteins. The study analysed a survey of an adult population living in Finland (N = 1048). The eating motives were measured with the Eating Motivation Survey (TEMS), which distinguishes between 15 eating motives. Six clusters of consumers based on self-reported changes in food choices were identified with latent class analysis (LCA). Four clusters had established food consumption patterns ("Beef only", "Beef and beans", "Beef, beans, and soy products", and "No beef"), one was undergoing a change, and one had attempted a change earlier. ANOVA with planned contrasts revealed that the motives relating to natural concerns, health, and weight control were higher, and convenience and price lower, among those who had an established diet including beans and soy products, as compared to those who consumed only beef. Those undergoing a dietary change expressed a higher endorsement of natural concerns as well as health, sociability, social image, and price motives than those with an established diet including beans and soy products. The results suggest that eating motives play an important role in changing towards more sustainable food consumption patterns in which meat/beef is replaced with plant proteins.

No abstract

No abstract

Environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) largely select flagship species for conservation marketing based on their aesthetic appeal. However, little is known about the fundraising effectiveness of this approach or how it compares to ecosystem conservation campaigns that use habitat types as flagships. By performing a willingness to donate (WTD) survey of potential online donors from Finland, we identified which motivations and donor characteristics influence their preferences for a range of different flagship species and ecosystems. Using the contingent valuation method and the payment card approach, we found the combined funding for eight mammal flagship species was 29% higher funding than for eight bird flagship species. Furthermore, the aesthetically more appealing species, as well as the species and ecosystems that are native to Finland, attracted the most funding. We then used ordinal logistic regression to identify the factors influencing a donor's WTD, finding that knowledge of biodiversity conservation and familiarity with the flagship was associated with an increased WTD to birds and ecosystems, and people with higher education levels had an increased WTD to ecosystems. Surprisingly, species aesthetic appeal was not related to an increased WTD, although "need of conservation" was, suggesting that highlighting the plight of these less appealing threatened species or ecosystems could raise money. Our results suggest that the factors driving donating to mammals, birds or ecosystems differ, and so underline the importance of considering the diverse motivations behind donation behaviour in fundraising campaigns. They also provide new evidence of the motivations of online donors, an under-studied group who are likely to become an increasingly important source of conservation funding.

We examined how individuals perceive nuclear energy in the context of climate change mitigation and how their perceptions are associated with trust in different risk information sources. We analyzed the interrelationships between trust, perceived risk of nuclear power, climate change concern, perception of nuclear energy as an acceptable way to mitigate climate change, and willingness to pay (WTP) for alternatives to nuclear power. A nationwide survey (N = 967) collected in Finland was analyzed with structural equation modeling. The associations between trust and perceived risk of nuclear power, climate change concern, and perception of nuclear power as a way to mitigate climate change varied by the type of information source. Political party support and other background variables were associated with trust in different information sources. The effect of trust in information sources on WTP was mediated by perceived risks and benefits. The results will increase our understanding of how individuals perceive nuclear energy as a way to cut CO emissions and the role of trust in different information sources in shaping nuclear risk perceptions and energy choices.