Health versus environmental benefits: Does additional information influence consumer acceptance of pulse‐based spreads?

Abstract

Despite the known health benefits and the potential for substituting less environmentally sustainable consumed foods such as meat, the current intake of pulses in developed countries remains less than recommended. Barriers are related to sensory characteristics and lack of knowledge about preparation, while drivers of environmental benefits are intangible. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of additional information about health or environmental benefits of pulses on the acceptance of novel pulse‐based products from chickpeas, black beans, and faba beans. Perceptions of these pulse‐based spreads in a blind and informed stage were assessed with 202 consumers in urban and suburban areas of Denmark. In general, the familiar chickpea spread followed by the relatively most unfamiliar black bean spread was liked the most. Only for these two products, additional information increased hedonic perception, regardless of the context (health or environmental benefits). If consumers did not like the spread, as found for the faba bean spread, providing additional information did not significantly alter this perception. Participants’ preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) in a discrete choice experiment corresponded to hedonic scores, whereas providing additional information increased the WTP. These findings suggest that extrinsic cues such as health or environmental benefits may only be useful in products with an acceptable baseline taste profile. Moreover, black beans might be investigated as a promising source for further product development due to their acceptance by consumers besides being the comparably most unfamiliar pulse type.

The contribution of pulses to net zero in the UK

“…Studies into how additional information influences consumer preferences for pulses and pulse-based products agree that when consumers are informed of positive health or environmental impact this increases their intention to consume the product (Röös et al 2020). Some studies find that positive health outcomes are a stronger motivation for eating less meat compared with environmental reasons (Tobler et al 2011) and others identified that when consumers were informed of both environmental and health benefits this further increased their intention to consume the product (Henn et al 2023). Positive messaging about the environmental (including net zero) and health benefits of pulse consumption should therefore be focused and strengthened by government messaging, food research and industry advertising and branding to align consumer intentions more closely with consumer decisions.…”