Search

[Display omitted] • Plant-based meat alternatives were preferred over cultured meat and insect-based products. • Perceived un-naturalness of meat alternatives was the main barrier to consumption intent. • Ethnicity and gender have a notable impact on consumer attitudes towards meat alternatives. • Those with concerns about drug residues in meat were more willing to pay more for meat alternatives. • Differential strategies may be needed to promote acceptance of different meat alternatives. Alternative protein foods can be manufactured from various sources, including plants, insects, and cultured meat. Asia is a unique consumer market, with diverse ethnicities and culinary traditions that may impact consumer acceptance of these emerging protein products. Yet, few studies have compared various alternative protein foods within a multi-ethnic Asian population. We examined how sociodemographic factors were associated with alternative protein food acceptance and investigated the attitudes of individuals towards consuming plant-based meat alternatives, cultured meat, and insect-based products. Adult Singaporeans (n = 1224) from the Multi-Ethnic Cohort 2 study (75 % Chinese, 15 % Indian, 10 % Malay) were surveyed. Hierarchical ordinal regression was used to identify the sociodemographic and attitudinal factors of consumption intent and price sensitivity. Consumption intent for plant-based meat alternatives was the highest, followed by cultured meat, and insect-based products. The perception of un-naturalness was the strongest barrier to consumption intent and this perception was strongest for cultured meat, followed by insect-based products, and plant-based meat alternatives. Males and those more familiar with the products were more willing to consume alternative protein foods, whereas ethnic Malays were less willing. Attitudinal factors that were unique to specific types of alternative protein foods were concerns over zoonotic diseases (plant-based meat alternatives), distrust in gene technology (cultured meat), food neophobia and animal welfare (insect-based products). Participants were willing to pay more for alternative protein foods if they had concerns over drug residues in meat. Our findings suggest that differential strategies may be needed to promote acceptance of different types of alternative protein foods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clean meat (grown from animal cells rather than rearing animals) has the potential to address many concerns associated with meat production. However, research suggests that the perceived unnaturalness of clean meat could be a barrier to consumer acceptance. This study investigated the efficacy of different messages designed to address consumers' concerns about clean meat naturalness. In an experimental design, participants read one of four messages: clean meat is natural, conventional meat is unnatural, naturalness is not important, or highlighting benefits of clean meat without addressing naturalness. The results indicated that arguing that conventional meat is unnatural resulted in a significant increase in some measures of acceptance compared to other messages. Arguing that clean meat is natural and challenging the appeal to nature were less persuasive, and challenging the appeal to nature resulted in some measures of acceptance being lower than not addressing naturalness. We discuss these results in the context of existing naturalness research and give recommendations for further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Cultured meat forms part of the emerging field of cellular agriculture. Still an early stage field it seeks to deliver products traditionally made through livestock rearing in novel forms that require no, or significantly reduced, animal involvement. Key examples include cultured meat, milk, egg white and leather. Here, we focus upon cultured meat and its technical, socio-political and regulatory challenges and opportunities. Scope and approach The paper reports the thinking of an interdisciplinary team, all of whom have been active in the field for a number of years. It draws heavily upon the published literature, as well as our own professional experience. This includes ongoing laboratory work to produce cultured meat and over seventy interviews with experts in the area conducted in the social science work. Key findings and conclusions Cultured meat is a promising, but early stage, technology with key technical challenges including cell source, culture media, mimicking the in-vivo myogenesis environment, animal-derived and synthetic materials, and bioprocessing for commercial-scale production. Analysis of the social context has too readily been reduced to ethics and consumer acceptance, and whilst these are key issues, the importance of the political and institutional forms a cultured meat industry might take must also be recognised, and how ambiguities shape any emergent regulatory system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clean meat (meat grown in cell culture rather than obtained from animal slaughter) is an emerging biotechnology industry that will ameliorate the serious environmental, sustainability, global public health, and animal welfare concerns of industrial animal agriculture. While many technologies and products developed for the cell therapy industry can already be applied to clean meat, significant opportunities exist to expand product lines to supply this emerging industry. Large-scale cell culture for clean meat production presents a number of unique requirements that are not currently met by existing products and processes from the biomedical industry − most notably related to cost constraints and scale requirements. Developing these tools for clean meat would simultaneously advance the technology and reduce costs for biomedical and therapeutic applications. We will discuss new applications of current biomedical products and manufacturing methods for clean meat, as well as opportunities for synergistic product development through partnerships between academic researchers, established industry players in cell-based therapeutics, and the emerging clean meat industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cultured meat is meat produced from stem cell biopsies of cattle. Stem cells were cultured in a bioreactor in the presence of serum to grow the flesh to maturity. Cultured meat technology originated from regenerative medical technology; however, it has been given a new lease of life to produce cultured meat as an innovative food source in the future without involving cattle breeding. This technology can reduce the negative environmental impacts of global warming, water use, soil, and unethical handling of animals. In the excitement of accepting this new technology, the halal status of cultured meat is in question, as it can be produced from embryonic stem cells and myosatellite cells, each of which can be disputed for their halal status. Additionally, the process of culturing and maturation of stem cells involves the use of an impure medium derived from animal blood. Thus, cultured meat is acceptable to Muslims only if the stem cells, medium and scaffold biomaterials used to manufacture it are from Halal sources and shall be in line with the six principles discussed in this study. The discussion is based on Halal and haram animals; Animal slaughtering; Not derived from a source of najs (impurity); Istihalah tammah (perfect substance change); Maslahah (public interest or benefit) and mafsadah (damage); and Darurat (exigency) of cultured meat)). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study focuses on the details of consumer response to lab grown 'cultured meat (CM)', compared to meat derived from insects, plants and animals. A sample of 254 New Zealanders were interviewed. A word association exercise revealed that consumer reaction to CM was dominated by affective, rather than cognitive factors. The linkages between a general food neophobia scale, a specific CM evaluation scale and purchase intent were studied. The general neophobia scale performed poorly as a predictor, while the 19-point CM evaluation scale performed well. Reducing this scale to its seven affective components, and then to just the two key affective components did not significantly reduce the scale's predictive performance. Overall, the results of this research reveal very significant differences in preference for meat products based upon their origins. Insect protein was strongly disfavoured over all alternatives, while cultured meat was significantly disfavoured compared to more established alternatives. The implications of this for the commercialisation of CM are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Higher food technology neophobia predicts more negative evaluations of clean (vs. traditional) meat. • Food naturalness less important in predicting attitudes toward clean (vs. traditional) meat. • Safety concerns, but not naturalness concerns, explained negative evaluations of clean meat. Laboratory-grown (or "clean") meat is structurally similar to traditional meat yet comes with several environmental, health, and ethical benefits compared to regular meat. However, while some people are favorable towards clean meat, others are reluctant to engage with it. We tested whether these marked differences in clean meat acceptance are rooted in pre-test differences in fears of novel food technologies (i.e., food technology neophobia) and valuing the naturalness of food products (i.e., food naturalness importance). In three experiments (total N = 1169), participants evaluated dishes labelled as either clean or regular meat (counter-balancing dish labels across participants). The findings (Experiments 1–3) consistently demonstrated that only omnivores higher (but not lower) in food technology neophobia evaluated clean meat dishes more negatively than regular meat dishes. We found no support for the moderating role of food naturalness importance in the evaluation of clean (vs. regular) meat dishes. Experiment 2 also included dishes labelled as plant-based meat, revealing that vegetarians and vegans evaluated clean meat dishes considerably more negatively than plant-based dishes, an effect exacerbated among those higher in food technology neophobia. Finally, Experiment 3 demonstrated that safety concerns, but not naturalness concerns, partly explained why those higher in food technology neophobia evaluated clean meat dishes as less favorable. Taken together, the findings highlight the role of general concerns about the use of new food technology as a psychological barrier to clean meat acceptance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] • The efficacy of different informative claims about cultured meat was assessed. • Claims referred to human safety, animal welfare, and environmental impact. • Claims significantly increased favour, and willingness to substitute cultured meat. • Human safety and animal welfare were the most divisive claims across sex and age. • Willingness to try cultured meat correlated modestly with willingness to substitute. Cultured meat (CM) is a potential sustainable novel food. Consumers' attitude towards this product is currently under investigation but a direct comparison of the effect of different types of information on consumers' response to CM is lacking. This study aimed: 1. to compare the efficacy of different informative claims in improving attitude towards CM; 2. to verify the effect of previously studied variables on attitude towards CM. Four information types were compared (human safety; animal welfare; environmental impact; no additional information: control), each envisaging two additional claims ('Antibiotic-free' and 'Pathogen- and zoonosis-free' for human safety; 'No animal breeding' and 'No animal slaughtering' for animal welfare; '82–96% reduction of water consumption' and '99% reduction of soil usage' for environmental impact). The response variables were favour towards CM, willingness to try, willingness to purchase, and willingness to substitute traditional meat with CM. Data from 603 participants (61% females, 15–80 years old) randomly assigned to four blocks, each corresponding to one type of information, were analysed. Participants were uniform among blocks in terms of socio-demographic data, frequency of consumption of traditional meat, previous knowledge of CM, food neophobia, and disgust sensitivity. The type of information given to respondents improved favour and willingness to substitute compared to the control, without differences across blocks. The effects of the additional claims were comparable. Environmental claims unified respondents, while human safety and animal welfare claims were divisive for sex and age groups. Favour, willingness to try, willingness to purchase, and willingness to substitute were positively correlated (r 0.38–0.72) but the weak correlation between willingness to try and willingness to substitute indicates that being curious may not imply the modification of actual behaviour (traditional meat substitution). Response variables seemed not to be interchangeable. Females showed higher willingness to substitute CM to conventional meat if informed with claims related to human safety. Youngsters (under '30 years old), who are plausibly the real future target, showed higher favour towards CM if provided with information related to animal welfare and human safety. Production companies should carefully choose what additional information to provide, depending on the consumer target. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Alternative protein sources such as cell-based meat are potentially associated with improvements in important issues related to intensive industrial livestock production: animal welfare, environmental impact, food safety and the low efficiency of conventional meat production. However, little is known about the potential implications of the new cultivated meat technology for emerging countries. Thus, drawing on the Global Value Chain literature and on the blossoming literature on cell-based meat, we have first discussed how this new chain may be structured. Then, based on the analysis of a set of companies that operate in the fast-developing cultivated meat industry, core enabling capabilities that are required in order to enter the new meat value chain were identified; they encompass technological, business structuring, market positioning and relationship with stakeholder capabilities. It is likely that all listed capabilities are relevant for any country to access the livestock chain in transition. We propose reflections that may contribute to decisions which, in turn, may define aspects of the cultivated meat chain, for the sake of relieving animal suffering and taking care of our home planet, while providing all humans with quality food that meet their nutritional requirements and consumption desires. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]