Exploring perceptions of sustainable proteins and meat attachment

Purpose: This study sought to explore consumer perceptions of more sustainable protein alternatives to conventional meat. Design/methodology/approach: A mixed methods design of interviews and an online survey identified key drivers and barriers to the consumption of (1) laboratory-grown meat, (2) edible insects, and (3) plant-based meat substitutes, with meat attachment accounted for in analyses. Differences between personal preference and perceptions of alternative proteins’ role in addressing global environmental concerns were also explored Findings Findings indicated that plant-based substitutes were favoured for personal consumption for moral and ethical reasons and edible insects were least favoured due to aversion. Meat attachment was significantly associated with personal willingness to consume alternative proteins in each of the three cases. Results challenged previous research that had proposed that when considering the effectiveness of certain alternatives in addressing global environmental issues, people may advocate them but not want to consume them personally. Results imply that the congruity of these perceptions is more complex. Research limitations/implications: Avenues for future research, including applications for exploring tailored marketing are suggested based on the preliminary findings of this study Originality/value: This study asked consumers to consider three alternative proteins alongside one another for the first time, exploring how meat attachment is associated with perceptions and quantifying the congruity of consumers’ personal perceptions and global perceptions of these alternative proteins