Is “cultured meat” a viable alternative to slaughtering animals and a good comprise between animal welfare and human expectations?

Is Sustainable Consumption a Sufficient Motivator for Consumers to Adopt Meat Alternatives? A Consumer Perspective on Plant-Based, Cell-Culture-Derived, and Insect-Based Alternatives

This study investigates consumer preference and acceptance of three meat alternatives-plant-based, lab-grown, and insect-based-as sustainable choices to meet the demands of a growing population and evolving food systems. Insights were gathered from European consumers regarding their perceptions and consumption patterns using a mixed-methods approach. The approach employed a questionnaire followed by focus group discussions conducted in Slovenia and the UK to understand the motivations and barriers behind their responses. The UK and Slovenia were chosen as they provided the highest response rates to the questionnaire and they have differing legislation. The results show that plant-based alternatives are the most familiar and accepted option, while lab-grown meat and insect-based products are less familiar and have lower acceptance rates. Moreover, they show that although sustainability factors are important to consumers, they are not their only concern; health and nutrition are the primary motivators for choosing meat alternatives. These are followed closely by sensory appeal, pricing, and a preference for natural, minimally processed options. Based on insights from the focus groups, strategies to overcome the barriers to the acceptance of meat alternatives should include targeted product categorisation and placement, educational campaigns, effective use of media, and greater transparency in product information.

Understanding consumer attitude toward the name framings of cultured meat: Evidence from China

The naming and labeling of products can affect consumer attitudes and subsequent behavior, particularly in the case of new food products in the market. The present study explores the effects of name framing on consumer attitudes towards cultured meat (CM), which is currently in the early stages of development. With a sample of 1532 Chinese consumers, we integrated several pathways to explain the name-framing effect by examining three different terms ("cultured," "artificial," and "cell-based") for CM. Results indicate that "cultured meat" and "cell-based meat" are more appealing than "artificial meat." Name framings of CM affect consumers' perception of benefits more than that of risks. Our comprehensive model identified evoked affect (perceived disgust) and naturalness as two crucial predictors of attitudes. These two predictors also act as substantial mediators of perceived benefits, and they activate the mediation of perceived risks (an insignificant mediator in cognitive processing). In addition, perceived naturalness mediates the name-framing effect mainly through perceived disgust. Our findings have implications for future strategies for communicating about novel foods (like CM) to the public.

Review: Will "cultured meat" transform our food system towards more sustainability?

Our agri-food system today should provide enough healthy food of good quality for the growing human population. However, it should also preserve natural resources and better protect livestock. In this context, some FoodTech companies are developing a disruptive approach: cell culture for in vitro food production of "meat" but this technology is still at the research and development stage. This article will highlight its development, the technologies used and the stakeholders involved (Part 1), its potential environmental impacts (Part 2) but also regulatory, social and ethical issues (Part 3). This article aims to shed light throughout the manuscript on two major controversies related to "cultured meat". The first controversy is related to its ethical aspects, which includes different points: its potential to reduce animal suffering and therefore to improve animal welfare, the future values of our society, and a trend towards food artificialisation. The second controversy includes environmental, health and nutritional issues, in relation to the characteristics and quality of "cultured meat" with an important question: should we call it meat? These two controversies act in interaction in association with related societal, legal and consequently political issues. Answers to the various questions depend on the different visions of the World by stakeholders, consumers and citizens. Some of them argue for a moderate or a strong reduction in livestock farming, or even the abolition of livestock farming perceived as an exploitation of farm animals. Others just want a reduction of the current much criticised intensive/industrial model. Compared with other potential sustainable solutions to be implemented such as reduction of food losses and waste, new food consumption habits with less proteins of animal sources, sustainable intensification, development of agroecological livestock production, or the development of the market for other meat substitutes (proteins from plants, mycoproteins, algae, insects, etc.), "cultured meat" has an uncertain future.

Current technology and industrialization status of cell-cultivated meat

Interest and investment in cultivated meat are increasing because of the realization that it can effectively supply sufficient food resources and reduce the use of livestock. Nevertheless, accurate information on the specific technologies used for cultivated meat production and the characteristics of cultivated meat is lacking. Authorization for the use of cultivated meat is already underway in the United States, Singapore, and Israel, and other major countries are also expected to approve cultivated meat as food once the details of the intricate process of producing cultivated meat, which encompasses stages such as cell proliferation, differentiation, maturation, and assembly, is thoroughly established. The development and standardization of mass production processes and safety evaluations must precede the industrialization and use of cultivated meat as food. However, the technology for the industrialization of cultivated meat is still in its nascent stage, and the mass production process has not yet been established. The mass production process of cultivated meat may not be easy to disclose because it is related to the interests of several companies or research teams. However, the overall research flow shows that equipment development for mass production and cell acquisition, proliferation, and differentiation, as well as for three-dimensional production supports and bioreactors have not yet been completed. Therefore, additional research on the mass production process and safety of cultivated meat is essential. The consumer's trust in the cultivated meat products and production technologies recently disclosed by some companies should also be analyzed and considered for guiding future developments in this industry. Furthermore, close monitoring by academia and the government will be necessary to identify fraud in the cultivated meat industry.

Challenging cultured meat naturalness perceptions: The role of consumers' mindset

Cultured meat, produced through in vitro cultivation of animal cells, has emerged as a promising solution to environmental, health, and ethical issues resulting from conventional meat production. However, acceptance remains a crucial challenge, significantly influenced by perceptions of unnaturalness. Previous research has demonstrated the limited success of messaging strategies aimed at countering these perceptions. Across two experimental studies, this research breaks new ground by examining these strategies through the lens of mindset theory-i.e., beliefs about the fixedness or malleability of human attributes. In Study 1, we present findings illustrating that a strategy challenging the importance of naturalness is effective at increasing cultured meat acceptance among consumers with a growth mindset. In Study 2, we demonstrate how complementing such messaging strategy with a specific form of creative narrative can make it effective among consumers with a fixed mindset too. Our findings are informative theoretically, extending mindset and narrative theories to the context of cultured meat and, practically, examining the effectiveness of different communication strategies in driving consumer acceptance of the product.

New insights in improving sustainability in meat production: opportunities and challenges

Treating livestock as senseless production machines has led to rampant depletion of natural resources, enhanced greenhouse gas emissions, gross animal welfare violations, and other ethical issues. It has essentially instigated constant scrutiny of conventional meat production by various experts and scientists. Sustainably in the meat sector is a big challenge which requires a multifaced and holistic approach. Novel tools like digitalization of the farming system and livestock market, precision livestock farming, application of remote sensing and artificial intelligence to manage production and environmental impact/GHG emission, can help in attaining sustainability in this sector. Further, improving nutrient use efficiency and recycling in feed and animal production through integration with agroecology and industrial ecology, improving individual animal and herd health by ensuring proper biosecurity measures and selective breeding, and welfare by mitigating animal stress during production are also key elements in achieving sustainability in meat production. In addition, sustainability bears a direct relationship with various social dimensions of meat production efficiency such as non-market attributes, balance between demand and consumption, market and policy failures. The present review critically examines the various aspects that significantly impact the efficiency and sustainability of meat production.

Current and future technologies for monitoring cultured meat: A review

The high population growth rate, massive animal food consumption, fast economic progress, and limited food resources could lead to a food crisis in the future. There is a huge requirement for dietary proteins including cultured meat is being progressed to fulfill the need for meat-derived proteins in the diet. However, production of cultured meat requires monitoring numerous bioprocess parameters. This review presents a comprehensive overview of various widely adopted techniques (optical, spectroscopic, electrochemical, capacitive, FETs, resistive, microscopy, and ultrasound) for monitoring physical, chemical, and biological parameters that can improve the bioprocess control in cultured meat. The methods, operating principle, merits/demerits, and the main open challenges are reviewed with the aim to support the readers in advancing knowledge on novel sensing systems for cultured meat applications.

Evaluation of public submissions to the USDA for labeling of cell-cultured meat in the United States

With the rapid advancement of cell-cultured meat processing technologies and regulations, commercialization of cell-cultured meat to market shelves requires the implementation of labeling that informs and protects consumers while ensuring economic competitiveness. In November 2022, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) completed its first pre-market consultation of cell-cultured meat and did not question the safety of these products for human consumption. As of June 2023, commercialization of cell-cultured meat products has become a reality in the United States. To derive potential label terms and gain insight into how different stakeholders refer to these novel products, we analyzed 1,151 comments submitted to the 2021 U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Services (USDA-FSIS) call on the labeling of cell-cultured meat and poultry. Our first aim was to systematically assess the nature of comments with regards to their length, cited references, and supplemental materials. In addition, we aimed to identify the most used terms to refer to these products through text analysis. We also asked how these analyses would vary by affiliation category and economic interest. Using the listed organizations for each comment, we first determined financial ties: 77 (7%) comments came from those with an economic interest, 12 (1%) of the comments did not have an identifiable economic interest, while for the remaining 1,062 (92%) comments economic interest could not be determined. We then grouped comments into affiliation categories. Cell-cultured meat companies and animal welfare non-profits had the highest median word count, whereas comments from the unknown affiliation category had the lowest. We found across all comments the predominantly mentioned potential label terms, in descending order, to be cultured meat, lab-grown meat, cultivated meat, cell-cultured meat, clean meat, and cell-based meat. While all label terms were discussed throughout overall submissions, percentages of comments mentioning each term differed between affiliation categories. Our findings suggest differences in how affiliation categories are discussing cell-cultured meat products for the US market. As a next step, the perception and acceptance of these terms must be evaluated to identify the optimal label term regarding the information and protection provided to consumers while ensuring economic competitiveness.

Perception of cultured "meat" by Italian, Portuguese and Spanish consumers

The aim of this study was to investigate how consumers (n = 2,171) originated from South-Western Europe (Italy, Portugal, and Spain) perceive cultured "meat" (CM) and if their demographic characteristics (origin, gender, age, education, occupation, and meat consumption) are related to their willingness to try (WTT), to regularly eat (WTE) and to pay (WTP) for CM. We found the current respondents had an initially positive attitude towards CM: 49% of them perceived CM as "promising and/or acceptable" and 23% "fun and/or intriguing" whereas 29% considered it as "absurd and/or disgusting". In addition, 66 and 25% would be willing and not willing to try CM, respectively. However, 43% had no WTE for CM and, 94% would not pay more for CM compared to conventional meat. Age and especially occupation were good indicators of consumer acceptance of CM. Respondents of 18-30 years of age had the highest acceptance. Respondents outside the meat sector had the highest WTE and people working within the meat sector had the lowest WTE, scientists (within or outside the meat sector) had the highest WTT, people not scientists but within the meat sector had the lowest WTT. Additionally, we found that men are more likely to accept CM than women, Spanish-speaking consumers had the highest WTT and WTE, people with vegan and vegetarian diets may pay more for CM but generally no more than for conventional meat. The perceptions that CM may be more eco-friendly, ethical, safe and healthy than conventional meat, and to a lower extent, the perception that current meat production causes ethical and environmental problems are likely to be major motives for the current respondents to try, regularly eat and pay for CM. On the opposite, lower perceptions of CM benefits and of conventional meat weaknesses more generally, plus emotional resistance towards CM are main barriers to accept CM.

Why alternative proteins will not disrupt the meat industry

The production of food, especially meat, has a high environmental impact. Many believe that the introduction of alternative proteins could substantially reduce animal meat consumption, resulting in a more sustainable food system. In this review, we critically evaluate the challenges and barriers that need to be overcome to ensure that these alternative proteins have the desired effects. We focus on conventional plant-based proteins (e.g., pulses, soy, and legumes), highly processed meat analogs (e.g., Quorn and the Impossible Burger), cultured meat, and insects. For a majority of consumers, meat seems to be too attractive to be substituted by plant proteins, cultured meat, or insects. There are certainly niche markets for these products, but worldwide meat consumption is still likely to grow in the future. We argue that technological solutions alone are not sufficient to substantially reduce meat consumption and that additional measures are needed.

Nutrient recovery in cultured meat systems: Impacts on cost and sustainability metrics

A growing global meat demand requires a decrease in the environmental impacts of meat production. Cultured meat (CM) can potentially address multiple challenges facing animal agriculture, including those related to animal welfare and environmental impacts, but existing cost analyses suggest it is hard for CM to match the relatively low costs of conventionally produced meat. This study analyzes literature reports to contextualize CM’s protein and calorie use efficiencies, comparing CM to animal meat products’ feed conversion ratios, areal productivities, and nitrogen management. Our analyses show that CM has greater protein and energy areal productivities than conventional meat products, and that waste nitrogen from spent media is critical to CM surpassing the nitrogen use efficiency of meat produced in swine and broiler land-applied manure systems. The CM nutrient management costs, arising from wastewater treatment and land application, are estimated to be more expensive than in conventional meat production. Overall, this study demonstrates that nitrogen management will be a key aspect of sustainability in CM production, as it is in conventional meat systems.

Will cultured meat be served on Chinese tables? A study of consumer attitudes and intentions about cultured meat in China

This research investigates the attitudes and intentions of Chinese consumers about cultured "meat" (CM). We also investigate framing effects through the names used for these products ("cultured meat," "artificial meat," and "cell-based meat") and the effect of information provision. Of the 1532 consumers in our sample, most had not heard of "cultured meat" or "cell-based meat" before, although 70% had heard of "artificial meat". Around 44% of the participants indicated that they would be willing to try CM, and 32% would be likely to purchase it. Participants disliked the terms "cultured meat" and "cell-based meat" less than they disliked the term "artificial meat," although the latter was the most familiar to them. The provision of neutral information on the production process increased consumer support for CM, but the effect was limited. Prior knowledge and naming terms were strong predictors of attitudes and willingness to buy. A key implication is that stakeholders should cautiously apply framing strategies when introducing CM to the public.

Policy frameworks and regulations for the research and development of cell-based meats: Systematic literature review

Cell-based meats have been discussed in terms of improving sensory factors for consumer acceptance and remedying the environmental problems of conventional livestock production. The improvement accompanies the modification of the production process and the consumption habit regarding cell-based meats. This review analyzed the current status of policies that promote cell-based meats, the related literature, and policy frameworks for the regulation and promotion of cell-based meats in the European Union, Singapore, the United States, Israel, and Japan. Sample selection was based on language, that is, English and Japanese. Further selection was exploratory to analyze the diverse degree of the integration of cell-based meats in policies. The region and countries were selected as leading cases, thereby enabling a policy comparison because they host global corporations that produce cell-based meat. The literature review examined peer-reviewed social science articles from 2013 to early 2022 on policies that promote cell-based meats. The results of the policy surveys revealed that regulations focused on the safety of and measures to display these novel foods by conducting a premarket assessment. These regulations are the basis for developing cell-based meats. Furthermore, some countries and the region being studied justified their support for cell-based meats by implementing action plans for decarbonization and food security. However, unclear communication regarding the nomenclature of cell-based meats is likely to slow down the development of cell-based meats. Moreover, religious beliefs and other cultural perceptions, including animal welfare, leave much room to research such promotion. Similarly, environmental impact assessments of cell-based meats demand further considerations and discussions to accompany evidence-based policymaking for cell-based meats.

Consumer perception of "artificial meat" in the educated young and urban population of Africa

African's population is expected to grow especially in cities to reach about 2.5 billion in 2050. This will create an unprecedented boom in the demand for animal products over the coming years which will need to be managed properly. Industry stakeholders worldwide have been touting the potential benefits of "artificial meat" in recent years as a more sustainable way of producing animal protein. "Artificial meat" is therefore moving into the global spotlight and this study aimed to investigate how African meat consumers of the coming generations perceive it, i.e., the urban, more educated and younger consumers. Three surveys were conducted with more than 12,000 respondents in total. The respondents came from 12 different countries (Cameroon, Congo, -DRC Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal South Africa, Tanzania and Tunisia). Respondents in this survey prefered the term "artificial meat". This term was therefore used throughout the survey. "Artificial meat" proved to be fairly well known in the surveyed countries as about 64% the respondents had already heard of "artificial meat." Only 8.9% were definitely willing to try "artificial meat" (score of 5 on a scale of 1-5) mostly males between 31 and 50 years of age. Furthermore, 31.2% strongly agreed that "artificial meat" will have a negative impact on the rural life (score of 5 on a scale of 1-5) and 32.9% were not prepared to accept "artificial meat" as a viable alternative in the future but were still prepared to eat meat alternatives. Of all the results, we observed significant differences in responses between respondents' countries of origin, age and education level with interactions between these factors for willingness to try. For instance, the richest and most educated countries that were surveyed tended to be more willing to try "artificial meat." A similar pattern was observed for willingness to pay, except that gender had no significant effect and age had only a small effect. One major observation is that a large majority of respondents are not willing to pay more for "artificial meat" than for meat from livestock.

Should and will "cultured meat" become a reality in our plates?

Produced from proliferating cells in bioreactors with a controlled culture medium, "cultured meat" has been presented by its supporters, who are mainly private actors (start-ups), as a sustainable solution to meet the growing demand for animal proteins without weaknesses of animal husbandry in terms of environmental impact, animal welfare or even health. The aim of this chapter is to take stock of current knowledge on the potential benefits and pitfalls of this novel product. Since robust scientific arguments are lacking on these aspects, there is no consensus on the health and nutritional qualities of "cultured meat" for human consumption and on its potential low environmental impact. In addition, many issues related to the market, legislation, ethics and consumer perception remain to be addressed. The way in which this new product is regarded appears to be influenced by many factors related mainly to its price, as well as to the perception of safety, sensory traits but also environmental and nutritional issues. Therefore, research by universities and public research institutes indicates that "cultured meat" production does not present any major advantages in economic, nutritional, sensory, environmental, ethical or social terms compared to conventional meat. Thus, a more balanced diet by diversifying our sources of plant and animal proteins, consuming other meat substitutes, and reducing food losses and waste appear to be more effective short-term solutions to the urgent need of producing enough food for the growing human population (while reducing environmental degradation and animal suffering).