Replacement of meat by meat substitutes. A survey on person- and product-related factors in consumer acceptance

Hoek, Annet C.; Luning, Pieternel A.; Weijzen, P.L.G.; Engels, W.; Kok, F.J.; Graaf, C. de

doi:10.1016/j.appet.2011.02.001

Cited by 546 publications

(459 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

361

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Given these interactions and the possible synergies arising, responsibilities should be shared between producers, consumers, and intermediaries (Rodrigues and Domingos 2008). An obstacle shared by both the producer and consumer side is the resistance to behavior changes (Rodriguez et al 2009;Hoek et al 2011). Even in case of awareness of environmental problems and intention to change behavior, it still requires additional efforts to translate the intention into action and to maintain that behavior.…”

Section: Pathways For Implementing Climate-smart Agriculturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Obstacles that consumers face to change their diets or minimize food waste include unfamiliarity with alternatives (Hoek et al 2011;Schösler et al 2012), inappropriate packaging (Aschemann-Witzel et al 2015), convenience, such as buying ready meals (Schösler et al 2012) and buying fewer times but in excess (Graham-Rowe et al 2014), the belief that meat is important for a healthy diet (Verbeke et al 2010), expiration dates, and the lack of knowledge on how to store and handle food (Aschemann-Witzel et al 2015). The obstacles point again to the opportunities for motivating sustainable consumption.…”

Section: Pathways For Implementing Climate-smart Agriculturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Crop breeding and the use of different crops might both improve resilience to climate-induced natural hazards such heat and droughts. While the acceptance of genetically modified crops could be fostered by informing consumers about risks and benefits and by building trust (Ishii and Araki 2016), changing consumption patterns, especially traditional staple crops, requires to overcome food neophobia (our reluctance to try out novel food) and cultural attachment to specific crop types (Hoek et al 2011).…”

Section: Interlinked Supply and Demand Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mapping and linking supply- and demand-side measures in climate-smart agriculture. A review

Scherer

Verburg

2017

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change and food security are two of humanity's greatest challenges and are highly interlinked. On the one hand, climate change puts pressure on food security. On the other hand, farming significantly contributes to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. This calls for climate-smart agriculture-agriculture that helps to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Climate-smart agriculture measures are diverse and include emission reductions, sink enhancements, and fossil fuel offsets for mitigation. Adaptation measures include technological advancements, adaptive farming practices, and financial management. Here, we review the potentials and trade-offs of climate-smart agricultural measures by producers and consumers. Our two main findings are as follows: (1) The benefits of measures are often site-dependent and differ according to agricultural practices (e.g., fertilizer use), environmental conditions (e.g., carbon sequestration potential), or the production and consumption of specific products (e.g., rice and meat). (2) Climate-smart agricultural measures on the supply side are likely to be insufficient or ineffective if not accompanied by changes in consumer behavior, as climate-smart agriculture will affect the supply of agricultural commodities and require changes on the demand side in response. Such linkages between demand and supply require simultaneous policy and market incentives. It, therefore, requires interdisciplinary cooperation to meet the twin challenge of climate change and food security. The link to consumer behavior is often neglected in research but regarded as an essential component of climate-smart agriculture. We argue for not solely focusing research and implementation on one-sided measures but designing good, sitespecific combinations of both demand-and supply-side measures to use the potential of agriculture more effectively to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

show abstract

Section: Pathways For Implementing Climate-smart Agriculturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Pathways For Implementing Climate-smart Agriculturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Interlinked Supply and Demand Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mapping and linking supply- and demand-side measures in climate-smart agriculture. A review

Scherer

Verburg

2017

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, consumers are often hesitant about dietary changes and prefer to cook and eat what they are familiar with. Again, retailers can influence it and facilitate dietary changes by offering more meat substitutes and making them more attractive by improving the convenience and resemblance to meat (Hoek et al 2011;Schösler et al 2012).…”

Section: Barriers and Opportunities To Increase Animal Welfarementioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a consequence, consumers disconnect their attitude from their behaviour. In addition, food neophobia (the openness to trying novel food) prevents many consumers from trying meat substitutes as an alternative protein source (Hoek et al 2011).…”

Section: Barriers and Opportunities To Increase Animal Welfarementioning

confidence: 99%

Framework for integrating animal welfare into life cycle sustainability assessment

Scherer

Tomasik²,

Rueda³

et al. 2017

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study seeks to provide a framework for integrating animal welfare as a fourth pillar into a life cycle sustainability assessment and presents three alternative animal welfare indicators. Methods Animal welfare is assessed during farm life and during slaughter. The indicators differ in how they value premature death. All three consider (1) the life quality of an animal such as space allowance, (2) the slaughter age either as life duration or life fraction, and (3) the number of animals affected for providing a product unit, e.g. 1 Mcal. One of the indicators additionally takes into account a moral value denoting their intelligence and self-awareness. The framework allows for comparisons across studies and products and for applications at large spatial scales. To illustrate the framework, eight products were analysed and compared: beef, pork, poultry, milk, eggs, salmon, shrimps, and, as a novel protein source, insects.Results and discussion Insects are granted to live longer fractions of their normal life spans, and their life quality is less compromised due to a lower assumed sentience. Still, they perform worst according to all three indicators, as their small body sizes only yield low product quantities. Therefore, we discourage from eating insects. In contrast, milk is the product that reduces animal welfare the least according to two of the three indicators and it performs relatively better than other animal products in most categories. The difference in animal welfare is mostly larger for different animal products than for different production systems of the same product. This implies that, besides less consumption of animal-based products, a shift to other animal products can significantly improve animal welfare. Conclusions While the animal welfare assessment is simplified, it allows for a direct integration into life cycle sustainability assessment. There is a trade-off between applicability and indicator complexity, but even a simple estimate of animal welfare is much better than ignoring the issue, as is the common practice in life cycle sustainability assessments. Future research should be directed towards elaborating the life quality criterion and extending the product coverage.

show abstract

References

2013

Should We Eat Meat?

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Replacement of meat by meat substitutes. A survey on person- and product-related factors in consumer acceptance

Cited by 546 publications

References 62 publications

Mapping and linking supply- and demand-side measures in climate-smart agriculture. A review

Mapping and linking supply- and demand-side measures in climate-smart agriculture. A review

Framework for integrating animal welfare into life cycle sustainability assessment

References

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About