Recent years have seen increasing interest in research on consumer acceptance of clean meat. Whilst some consumers are enthusiastic about the prospect of reducing the health risks, environmental harms, and animal welfare implications associated with conventional meat production, others have concerns about the product's taste, price, safety, and naturalness. Some evidence suggests that acceptance of clean meat will vary substantially across cultures, though there is currently a lack of quantitative research in Asia and country comparisons on this topic. Both are likely to be important areas given the forecasted increase in meat consumption in developing countries. Participants (n = 3.030) were recruited through the research panel CINT to take an online questionnaire about clean meat and plant-based meat. The participants were representative of China, India, and the U.S. in terms of age and gender, though participants in India and China were disproportionately urban, high income, and well-educated. As well as clean meat, participants were asked about plant-based meat, a conceptually similar product with similar potential to displace demand for conventional meat. They also answered the Meat Attachment Questionnaire and the Food Neophobia Scale. We compared these variables between countries, and used regression models to identify which demographic and attitudinal factors predicted purchase intent toward both products. We found significantly higher acceptance of clean and plant-based meat in India and China compared to the USA. We also found significantly higher food neophobia and significantly lower meat attachment in India compared to China and the USA. We identified several demographic patterns of clean and plant-based meat acceptance as well as which beliefs were important predictors of acceptance within each country. In particular, higher familiarity predicted higher acceptance of plant-based and clean meat across all countries. We found high levels of acceptance of clean meat in the three most populous countries worldwide, and with even higher levels of acceptance in China and India compared to the USA. These results underline the importance of clean meat producers exploring new markets for their products, especially as meat consumption in developing countries continues to rise.

Despite growing evidence of the environmental and public health threats posed by today’s intensive animal production, consumers in the west remain largely attached to meat. Cultivated meat offers a way to grow meat directly from cells, circumventing these issues as well as the use of animals altogether. The aim of this study was to assess the overall consumer markets and a range of preferences around cultivated meat in the US and the UK relating to nomenclature, genetic modification, health enhancements, and other features. To this end, we recruited large representative samples to participate in an online survey about cultivated meat, and subsequently analyzed segments (a) in the early majority population (guided by the Diffusion of Innovations Model), (b) by generation, and (c) in the general population. Our findings showed a high level of openness (80%) in both the US and UK populations, with 40% somewhat or moderately likely to try and 40% highly likely to try. Younger generations had the greatest openness: 88% of Gen Z, 85% of Millennials, 77% of Gen X, and 72% of Baby Boomers were at least somewhat open to trying cultivated meat. All segments envisioned cultivated meat to be nearly half of their total meat intake. Findings show that consumers prefer the terms ‘cultured’ and ‘cultivated’ over ‘cell-based’ and ‘cell-cultured’ for use in a social context and on packages, even though they perceive these terms as less descriptive. The most important on-package label was one indicating government assurances, and participants preferred non-GM products over GM products. We also found that US consumers prefer nutritionally superior meat over nutritionally equivalent meat. We discuss implications for product development, messaging, and understanding the likely adoption path of this food innovation.

The purpose of this study was to assess the likelihood of consumer adoption of plant-based and cultivated meat in South Africa as a pathway to a healthy, sustainable, and equitable food supply. We recruited a large sample of South Africans representative across age (18–61), gender, race, and income to participate in an online survey. Participants responded to a range of measures including adoption indicators, estimated yearly intake, motivators for purchasing, desired product characteristics, preferred species, and sociodemographics. We found a high degree of openness to both products. For plant-based meat, 67% were highly likely to try and 59% were highly likely to purchase. For cultivated meat, 60% were highly likely to try and 53% were highly likely to purchase. The highest acceptance was amongst the younger generations: 60% of born-frees, 62% of millennials, and 53% of Gen X were highly likely to purchase plant-based meat and 55% of born-frees, 55% of millennials, and 46% of Gen X were highly likely to purchase cultivated meat. For the general population, we observed that future meat intake was estimated to be split equally among the three meat categories (conventional, cultivated, and plant-based). We found early adopters (those highly likely to purchase) to be quite similar in attitudinal and sociodemographic characteristics in comparison to the general population. The study findings suggest that both plant-based and cultivated meat could be viable market-based options for improving the food system in South Africa, as consumers across all segments of society, and especially amongst the younger population, indicated broad acceptance.

Purpose This study aims to investigate the relationship between perceptions of mediators acting symmetrically (treating parties equally) and transparently (providing an explanation of past or future behavior) with parties’ assessments of the neutrality of their mediator and satisfaction with the mediation process. Design/methodology/approach This mixed-method study surveyed parties and mediators from 35 naturally occurring mediation sessions at community mediation centers about their perceptions of neutrality, symmetry, transparency and satisfaction. Findings The results showed that parties overwhelmingly assessed their mediators as acting neutrally. Compared to parties’ assessments of mediator neutrality, mediators rated their own neutrality even higher. Symmetry and transparency were both positively correlated with parties’ assessment of mediator neutrality and also emerged as qualitative themes. Speaking order and talk time did not significantly correlate with perception of symmetry. Overall, symmetry appeared to be a more salient factor in parties’ assessment of mediator neutrality than transparency. Both neutrality and symmetry were positively correlated with party satisfaction with the mediation process, but transparency was not. Research limitations/implications The present study provides a foundation for future research in understanding neutrality from both parties and mediators’ perspectives. The primary limitation was a small sample size and possible selection bias in achieving the sample. Practical implications The study found that symmetry and transparency are useful strategies for managing party perceptions of mediator neutrality and party satisfaction with the mediation process. Originality/value This study is one of only a few empirical research studies that investigated the parties’ perspective of mediator neutrality. The study provides a foundation for future research in understanding neutrality from both parties and mediators’ perspectives.

No abstract