The Influence of Labelling and Dietary Preferences on Consumers’ Willingness to Buy Plant-Based Meat-Alternatives

Abstract

The plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs) market has grown tremendously, driven by increasing consumer demand. Eating plant-based has been associated with several benefits, including environmental benefits. Considering these benefits in light of the current climate crisis emphasizes the importance to shift away from meat consumption towards a more plant-based diet. Many PBMAs were developed to resemble meat products and have been marketed under similar denominations (Domke, 2018). However, this meat-based labelling of PBMAs has sparked a debate. For instance, meat producers argue against this labelling, stating that PBMAs cannot be confused with meat products (Demartini et al., 2022). This study aimed to contribute to this debate and build upon Demartini et al. (2022) by examining the impact of PBMAs’ labelling on consumers’ willingness to buy these products. Participants’ willingness to buy PBMAs was assessed using a 2 (Label: Meat-based, Plant-based) x 3 (Dietary preference: Meat-eaters, Flexitarians, Vegetarians/vegans) repeated measures ANOVA design. The findings indicated that PBMAs with a meat-based label, compared to a plant-based label, elicited a higher willingness to buy. Moreover, vegetarians/vegans exhibited the highest willingness to buy PBMAs, followed by flexitarians, while meat-eaters displayed the lowest willingness. An interaction effect revealed that the impact of labelling on willingness to buy PBMAs varied across these dietary preference groups. These results have implications for both the meat and PBMA industries, providing insights into food labelling and consumer preferences. Additionally, this study highlights the need for further research in this area, and alternative explanations and suggestions for future research are discussed.