Abstract:SummaryBackgroundReducing meat consumption could help to protect the natural environment and promote population health. Interventions restructuring physical micro-environments might help to change habitual behaviour. We synthesised the scientific evidence pertaining to whether, and which, interventions restructuring physical micro-environments effectively reduce the demand for meat.MethodsWe did a systematic review of quantitative studies evaluating the effectiveness of interventions restructuring physical mic… Show more
“…Our results indicate that meal selection is neither fixed nor random, but rather is partially determined by availability. These results suggest that increasing the proportion of vegetarian options may have a larger effect than many other choice architecture interventions included in a recent systematic review on meat selection and consumption (13): In previous studies, neither restructuring food menus with different meal descriptions nor positioning meat in less prominent positions reduced meat uptake. Providing US and UK participants with meat substitutes, recipes, and educational materials led to large reductions in meat consumption (13): a 40% reduction in red and processed meat (31), a 54% reduction in spending on meat (32), and a 70% reduction in meat consumed (33).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…While many recent papers have stressed the importance of reducing meat consumption (1)(2)(3)36), very few studies have tested which interventions might work. For example, a recent systematic review found only 18 studies with 11,290 observations that tested how changing some aspect of choice architecture could reduce meat consumption (13). Our studies have 94,644 observations from months of robust, individual-level data.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Models suggest that taxes on the most polluting foods would result in savings of 1 gigatonne of GHGE worldwide (4), but these taxes can be regressive and are politically unpopular given their lack of public support (8). A third group of interventionschanging the physical, economic, and social context (the socalled choice architecture) in which decisions are made-could potentially deliver improved environmental outcomes at a low cost and with little controversy, but this group has received relatively little empirical attention to date (10)(11)(12)(13).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Turning to reducing meat consumption, a recent review found no studies on the effects of changing the availability of plant-based meals (13). The likely patterns are hard to anticipate: At 1 extreme increasing relative availability might have a directly proportional…”
Shifting people in higher income countries toward more plant-based diets would protect the natural environment and improve population health. Research in other domains suggests altering the physical environments in which people make decisions (“nudging”) holds promise for achieving socially desirable behavior change. Here, we examine the impact of attempting to nudge meal selection by increasing the proportion of vegetarian meals offered in a year-long large-scale series of observational and experimental field studies. Anonymized individual-level data from 94,644 meals purchased in 2017 were collected from 3 cafeterias at an English university. Doubling the proportion of vegetarian meals available from 25 to 50% (e.g., from 1 in 4 to 2 in 4 options) increased vegetarian meal sales (and decreased meat meal sales) by 14.9 and 14.5 percentage points in the observational study (2 cafeterias) and by 7.8 percentage points in the experimental study (1 cafeteria), equivalent to proportional increases in vegetarian meal sales of 61.8%, 78.8%, and 40.8%, respectively. Linking sales data to participants’ previous meal purchases revealed that the largest effects were found in the quartile of diners with the lowest prior levels of vegetarian meal selection. Moreover, serving more vegetarian options had little impact on overall sales and did not lead to detectable rebound effects: Vegetarian sales were not lower at other mealtimes. These results provide robust evidence to support the potential for simple changes to catering practices to make an important contribution to achieving more sustainable diets at the population level.
“…Our results indicate that meal selection is neither fixed nor random, but rather is partially determined by availability. These results suggest that increasing the proportion of vegetarian options may have a larger effect than many other choice architecture interventions included in a recent systematic review on meat selection and consumption (13): In previous studies, neither restructuring food menus with different meal descriptions nor positioning meat in less prominent positions reduced meat uptake. Providing US and UK participants with meat substitutes, recipes, and educational materials led to large reductions in meat consumption (13): a 40% reduction in red and processed meat (31), a 54% reduction in spending on meat (32), and a 70% reduction in meat consumed (33).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…While many recent papers have stressed the importance of reducing meat consumption (1)(2)(3)36), very few studies have tested which interventions might work. For example, a recent systematic review found only 18 studies with 11,290 observations that tested how changing some aspect of choice architecture could reduce meat consumption (13). Our studies have 94,644 observations from months of robust, individual-level data.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Models suggest that taxes on the most polluting foods would result in savings of 1 gigatonne of GHGE worldwide (4), but these taxes can be regressive and are politically unpopular given their lack of public support (8). A third group of interventionschanging the physical, economic, and social context (the socalled choice architecture) in which decisions are made-could potentially deliver improved environmental outcomes at a low cost and with little controversy, but this group has received relatively little empirical attention to date (10)(11)(12)(13).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Turning to reducing meat consumption, a recent review found no studies on the effects of changing the availability of plant-based meals (13). The likely patterns are hard to anticipate: At 1 extreme increasing relative availability might have a directly proportional…”
Shifting people in higher income countries toward more plant-based diets would protect the natural environment and improve population health. Research in other domains suggests altering the physical environments in which people make decisions (“nudging”) holds promise for achieving socially desirable behavior change. Here, we examine the impact of attempting to nudge meal selection by increasing the proportion of vegetarian meals offered in a year-long large-scale series of observational and experimental field studies. Anonymized individual-level data from 94,644 meals purchased in 2017 were collected from 3 cafeterias at an English university. Doubling the proportion of vegetarian meals available from 25 to 50% (e.g., from 1 in 4 to 2 in 4 options) increased vegetarian meal sales (and decreased meat meal sales) by 14.9 and 14.5 percentage points in the observational study (2 cafeterias) and by 7.8 percentage points in the experimental study (1 cafeteria), equivalent to proportional increases in vegetarian meal sales of 61.8%, 78.8%, and 40.8%, respectively. Linking sales data to participants’ previous meal purchases revealed that the largest effects were found in the quartile of diners with the lowest prior levels of vegetarian meal selection. Moreover, serving more vegetarian options had little impact on overall sales and did not lead to detectable rebound effects: Vegetarian sales were not lower at other mealtimes. These results provide robust evidence to support the potential for simple changes to catering practices to make an important contribution to achieving more sustainable diets at the population level.
“…A protocol for this systematic review was published on PROSPERO [ 21 ]. This review includes studies evaluating interventions targeting conscious determinants of human behaviour to reduce the consumption, purchase, or selection of meat, and that fulfilled the eligibility criteria outlined in Table 1 .…”
BackgroundReducing meat consumption can help prevent non-communicable diseases and protect the environment. Interventions targeting conscious determinants of human behaviour are generally acceptable approaches to promote dietary change, but little is known about their effectiveness to reduce the demand for meat.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of interventions targeting conscious determinants of human behaviour to reduce the demand for meat.MethodsWe searched six electronic databases on the 31st of August 2017 with a predefined algorithm, screened publicly accessible resources, contacted authors, and conducted forward and backward reference searches. Eligible studies employed experimental designs to evaluate interventions targeting conscious determinants of human behaviour to reduce the consumption, purchase, or selection of meat in comparison to a control condition, a baseline period, or relative to other eligible interventions. We synthesised results narratively and conducted an exploratory crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis to identify combinations of intervention characteristics associated with significant reductions in the demand for meat.ResultsWe included 24 papers reporting on 59 interventions and 25,477 observations. Self-monitoring interventions and individual lifestyle counselling led to, or were associated with reduced meat consumption. Providing information about the health or environmental consequences of eating meat was associated with reduced intentions to consume and select meat in virtual environments, but there was no evidence to suggest this approach influenced actual behaviour. Education about the animal welfare consequences of eating meat was associated with reduced intentions to consume meat, while interventions implicitly highlighting animal suffering were not. Education on multiple consequences of eating meat led to mixed results. Tailored education was not found to reduce actual or intended meat consumption, though few studies assessed this approach.ConclusionSome interventions targeting conscious determinants of human behaviour have the potential to reduce the demand for meat. In particular, self-monitoring interventions and individual lifestyle counselling can help to reduce meat consumption. There was evidence of effectiveness of some educational messages in reducing intended consumption and selection of meat in virtual environments.Protocol registrationCRD42017076720.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12966-018-0729-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
With increasing concerns about health, animal welfare, and the environment, changes in dietary patterns are emerging, as evidenced by the gradual shift toward plant‐rich diets. To appropriately plan vegetarian meals with high consumer satisfaction that would help promote this dietary pattern and ultimately improve the sustainability of food systems, meal acceptability testing would be crucial. The present work aims to investigate the influence of individual food components' acceptability on the overall meal acceptability in vegetarian diets. Over four taste‐testing periods, 94 panelists of US nationality recruited from Cornell University staff (47 males and 47 females; 30–50 years of age) were asked to rate the acceptability of 41 vegetarian meals containing various food category items, including a main dish, side dish, appetizer, salad, soup, bread, dessert, beverage, and a control food. Each meal included six menu items to ensure the tested foods resembled a typical meal. Consequently, some meals lacked one or more of the nine total food categories. Participants were asked to rate the acceptability of the six meal items and the overall meal acceptability on a 9‐point hedonic scale. Multiple imputation was used to fill in any missing data, and multiple linear regression analysis was then performed. Through this study, a model that predicts the overall meal acceptability of vegetarian diets based on individual meal category components was developed with an R‐squared value of .7033, suggesting that around 70.33% of the variation in overall meal acceptability could be explained by the nine food category predictors. The findings also suggested that the most influential food item on overall meal acceptability was the main dish followed by the side dish. For every unit increase in the acceptability score of the main dish on a 9‐point hedonic scale, the overall meal acceptability increased by 0.324 points. The positive findings would be beneficial to food service providers in designing a vegetarian meal with high meal acceptability. By focusing on optimizing the acceptability of these two key categories, menu planners can effectively elevate customers' satisfaction of their meals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.