|
|
|
|
|
| Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat |
| Wim Verbeke, Pierre Sans, Ellen J Van Loo |
1、Department of Agricultural Economics, Ghent University, Gent B-9000, Belgium
2、INP-ENV Toulouse, Toulouse 31076, France
3、UR1303 ALISS, INRA, Ivry-sur-Seine 94205, France |
|
|
|
摘要 Consumer acceptance of cultured meat is expected to depend on a wide diversity of determinants ranging from technologyrelated perceptions to product-specific expectations, and including wider contextual factors like media coverage, public involvement, and trust in science, policy and society. This paper discusses the case of cultured meat against this multitude of possible determinants shaping future consumer acceptance or rejection. The paper also presents insights from a primary exploratory study performed in April 2013 with consumers from Flanders (Belgium) (n=180). The concept of cultured meat was only known (unaided) by 13% of the study participants. After receiving basic information about what cultured meat is, participants expressed favorable expectations about the concept. Only 9% rejected the idea of trying cultured meat, while two thirds hesitated and about quarter indicated to be willing to try it. The provision of additional information about the environmental benefits of cultured meat compared to traditional meat resulted in 43% of the participants indicating to be willing to try this novel food, while another 51% indicated to be ‘maybe’ willing to do so. Price and sensory expectations emerged as major obstacles. Consumers eating mostly vegetarian meals were less convinced that cultured meat might be healthy, suggesting that vegetarians may not be the ideal primary target group for this novel meat substitute. Although exploratory rather than conclusive, the findings generally underscore doubts among consumers about trying this product when it would become available, and therefore also the challenge for cultured meat to mimic traditional meat in terms of sensory quality at an affordable price in order to become acceptable for future consumers.
Abstract Consumer acceptance of cultured meat is expected to depend on a wide diversity of determinants ranging from technologyrelated perceptions to product-specific expectations, and including wider contextual factors like media coverage, public involvement, and trust in science, policy and society. This paper discusses the case of cultured meat against this multitude of possible determinants shaping future consumer acceptance or rejection. The paper also presents insights from a primary exploratory study performed in April 2013 with consumers from Flanders (Belgium) (n=180). The concept of cultured meat was only known (unaided) by 13% of the study participants. After receiving basic information about what cultured meat is, participants expressed favorable expectations about the concept. Only 9% rejected the idea of trying cultured meat, while two thirds hesitated and about quarter indicated to be willing to try it. The provision of additional information about the environmental benefits of cultured meat compared to traditional meat resulted in 43% of the participants indicating to be willing to try this novel food, while another 51% indicated to be ‘maybe’ willing to do so. Price and sensory expectations emerged as major obstacles. Consumers eating mostly vegetarian meals were less convinced that cultured meat might be healthy, suggesting that vegetarians may not be the ideal primary target group for this novel meat substitute. Although exploratory rather than conclusive, the findings generally underscore doubts among consumers about trying this product when it would become available, and therefore also the challenge for cultured meat to mimic traditional meat in terms of sensory quality at an affordable price in order to become acceptable for future consumers.
|
|
Received: 21 February 2014
Accepted:
|
|
Corresponding Authors:
Wim Verbeke, Tel: +32-9-264-6181,E-mail: wim.verbeke@ugent.be
E-mail: wim.verbeke@ugent.be
|
Cite this article:
Wim Verbeke, Pierre Sans, Ellen J Van Loo.
2015.
Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(2): 285-294.
|
| de Barcellos M D, Kügler J O, Grunert K G, Van Wezemael L,Pérez-Cueto F J A, Ueland Ø, Verbeke W. 2010. Europeanconsumers’ acceptance of beef processing technologies: Afocus group study. Innovative Food Science and EmergingTechnologies, 11, 721-732Bhat Z F, Bhat H. 2011. Tissue engineered meat-Future meat.Journal of Stored Products and Postharvest Research, 2,1-10Chiles R M. 2013. If they come, we will build it: In vitro meat andthe discursive struggle over future agrofood expectations.Agriculture and Human Values, 30, 511-523Cox D N, Evans G. 2008. Construction and validation of apsychometric scale to measure consumers’ fears of novelfood technologies: The food technology neophobia scale.Food Quality and Preference, 19, 704-710Daily Mail. 2012. Artificial meat grown in a lab could become areality this year. [2012-01-17]. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2087837/Test-tube-meat-reality-yearscientists-work-make-profitable.htmlDatar I, Betti M. 2010. Possibilities for an in vitro meatproduction system. Innovative Food Science and EmergingTechnologies, 11, 13-22Driessen C, Korthals M. 2012. Pig towers and in vitro meat:Disclosing moral worlds by design. Social Studies ofScience, 42, 797-820Flycatcher. 2013. Kweekvlees [cultured meat]. [2013-12-18].http://www.flycatcherpanel.nl/news/ item/nwsA1697/media/images/Resultaten_onderzoek_kweekvlees.pdf (in Dutch)Frewer L J, Bergmann K, Brennan M, Lion R, Meertens R, RoweG, Siegrist M, Vereijken C. 2011. Consumer response tonovel agri-food technologies: Implications for predictingconsumer acceptance of emerging food technologies.Trends in Food Science and Technology, 22, 422-456Goodwin J N, Shoulders C W. 2013. The future of meat: Aqualitative analysis of cultured meat media coverage. MeatScience, 95, 445-450Grunert K G, Verbeke W, Kügler J O, Saeed F, ScholdererJ. 2011. Use of consumer insight in the new productdevelopment process in the meat sector. Meat Science,89, 251-258Hocquette J-F, Mainsant P, Daudin J D, Cassar-Malek I,Rémond D, Doreau M, Sans P, Bauchart D, Agabriel J,Verbeke W, Picard B. 2013. Will meat be produced in vitroin the future? INRA Productions Animales, 26, 363-374(in French)Hopkins P D, Dacey A. 2008. Vegetarian meat: couldtechnology save animals and satisfy meat eaters? Journalof Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 21, 579-596Hopkins P D. 2015. Cultured meat in western media: Thedisproportionate coverage of vegetarian reactions,demographic realities, and implications for cultured meatmarketing. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14, 264-272Marcu A, Gaspar R, Rutsaert P, Seibt B, Fletcher D,Verbeke W, Barnett J. 2015. Analogies, metaphors, andwondering about the future: Lay sense-making aroundsynthetic meat. Public Understanding of Science, doi:10.1177/0963662514521106Martins Y, Pliner P. 2005. Human food choices: An examinationof the factors underlying acceptance/rejection of novel andfamiliar animal and nonanimal foods. Appetite, 45, 214-224Mattick C S, Allenby B R. 2012. Cultured meat: The systemicimplications of an emerging technology. In: Proceedings ofthe IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systemsand Technology ISSST. May 16-18, 2012 IEEE, Boston. Pliner P, Hobden K. 1992. Development of a scale to measurethe trait of food neophobia in humans. Appetite, 19,105-120Pluhar E B. 2010. Meat and morality: Alternatives to factoryfarming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics,23, 455-468Post M J. 2012. Culture meat from stem cells: Challenges andprospects. Meat Science, 92, 297-301Post M J. 2014. Cultured beef: Medical technology to producefood. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, doi:10.1002/jsfa.6474Rollin F, Kennedy J, Wills J. 2011. Consumer response to newfood technologies. Trends in Food Science and Technology,22, 99-111Saeed F, Grunert K G, Therkildsen M. 2013. How product trialchanges quality perception of four new processed beefproducts. Meat Science, 93, 119-127Siegrist M. 2008. Factors influencing public acceptance ofinnovative food technologies and products. Trends in FoodScience and Technology, 19, 603-608The Guardian. 2012. Would you eat lab-grown meat? [2012-02-20]. http://www.guardian.co.uk/ commentisfree/poll/2012/feb/20/lab-grown-meat-test-tube-burger?INTCMP=SRCHVanhonacker F, Van Loo E J, Gellynck X, Verbeke W. 2013.Flemish consumer attitudes towards more sustainable foodchoices. Appetite, 62, 7-16Verbeke W. 2005. Agriculture and the food industry inthe information age. European Review of AgriculturalEconomics, 32, 347-368Verbeke W. 2011. Consumer attitudes and communicationchallenges for agro-food technologies. Agro-Food IndustryHi-Tech, 22, 34-36Verbeke W, Frewer L J, Scholderer J, De Brabander H F.2007. Why consumers behave as they do with respect tofood safety and risk information. Analytica Chimica Acta,586, 2-7Verbeke W, Marcu A, Rutsaert P, Gaspar R, Seibt B, FletcherD, Barnett J. 2015. ‘Would you eat cultured meat?’:Consumers’ reactions and attitude formation in Belgium,Portugal and the United Kingdom. Meat Science, 102,49-58.Verbeke W, Viaene J, Guiot O. 1999. Health communicationand consumer behaviour on meat in Belgium: From BSEuntil dioxin. Journal of Health Communication, 4, 345-357van der Weele C, Driessen C. 2013. Emerging profiles forcultured meat: Ethics through and as design. Animals, 3,647-662Welin S. 2013. Introducing the new meat. Problems andprospects. Etikk i praksis: Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics,7, 24-37Welin S, van der Weele C. 2012. Cultured meat: Will it separateus from nature? In: Potthast T, Meisch S, eds., ClimateChange and Sustainable Development: Ethical Perspectiveson Land Use and Food Production. Wageningen AcademicPublishers, Wageningen. pp. 348-351 |
| No Suggested Reading articles found! |
|
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
| |
Shared |
|
|
|
|
| |
Discussed |
|
|
|
|
