Meat eaters view plant-based meat as riskier and offering less value than conventional meat, regardless of how it is marketed, according to new Adelaide University research.
These perceptions reduce their willingness to buy plant-based meat and recommend it to others.
Published in Journal of Marketing Management, the study surveyed almost 1000 Australian adults in an online experiment designed to reflect the Australian population by age, gender and state.
The study examined different types of perceived risk, including financial, psychological and time-related concerns, alongside perceptions of product quality and value for money.
“We had expected the advertising appeal to have a stronger overall effect, but for most meat eaters it made little difference,” said lead researcher Dr Cassidy Shaw from Adelaide University's School of Marketing.
“Their existing perceptions of plant-based meat as riskier and offering less value remained the strongest influence on their decisions. This is consistent with what we know about established attitudes: once formed, they tend to be durable and difficult to change over time.”
Dr Shaw was joined in the research team by Professor Armando Corsi, Dr David Jaud, and Associate Professors Rebecca Dolan and Steve Goodman.
For most meat eaters, changing advertising from emotional messaging, such as highlighting enjoyment, to rational messaging focused on health, did not shift these perceptions. Responses differed across consumer groups.
“Advertising alone is unlikely to overcome concerns for most meat eaters because perceptions of risk and value are more influential than the style of the message itself,” said Dr Shaw.
“Among younger consumers, emotional advertising actually backfired, reducing acceptance of plant-based meat because it lowered perceptions of quality.
“Among vegetarian consumers, rational messages strengthened perceptions of quality and increased their willingness to purchase and recommend the product.”
Interest in plant-based meat is growing rapidly, with sales nearly doubling since 2019 as consumers increasingly seek alternatives for environmental, animal welfare and health reasons.
However, Australia remains one of the world’s largest consumers of meat, reflecting strong social and cultural preferences alongside uncertainty about the taste, quality and health benefits of plant-based alternatives.
The researchers wanted to understand why many consumers remain hesitant despite growing awareness of sustainability issues and the health benefits associated with reducing meat consumption.
The findings support earlier research showing consumers remain more hesitant about plant-based meat than conventional meat, while providing new insight into the perceptions driving that reluctance.
The researchers say marketers should tailor their messaging to different consumer groups. For younger consumers and vegetarians, factual, rational messaging that clearly communicates product quality appears more effective.
For meat eaters, communications should focus on reducing perceived financial, psychological and time-related risks by reassuring consumers that plant-based products taste good and offer value for money.
The researchers also say manufacturers should continue improving the taste, texture and overall quality of plant-based meat if it is to become more widely accepted.
Media contacts:
Dr Cassidy Shaw, School of Marketing, Adelaide University. Email: cassidy.shaw@adelaide.edu.au
Lara Pacillo, Media Officer, Adelaide University. Mobile: +61 403 659 154. Email: lara.pacillo@adelaide.edu.au