European consumers' acceptance of beef processing technologies: A focus group study

Barcellos, Márcia Dutra de; Kügler, Jens Oliver; Grunert, Klaus G.; Wezemael, Lynn Van; Pérez-Cueto, Federico J.A.; Ueland, Øydis; Verbeke, Wim

doi:10.1016/j.ifset.2010.05.003

Cited by 104 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Dur findings confirm, however, that consumers may perceive new food technologies as riskier than traditional food technologies (Siegrist, 2008). Barcellos et al (2010) concluded that invasive technologies tending to deviate from conventional processing practices are widely rejected. In addition, the rejection of GM and cloning can be explained by the food used in this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

Acceptance of a food of animal origin obtained through genetic modification and cloning in South America: a comparative study among university students and working adults

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the aim of comparing the acceptance of milk obtained from cloned, genetically modified (GM) and conventionally bred cows among working adults and university students, and identifying and characterizing typologies among both subsamples in terms of their preferences, a survey was applied to 400 people in southern Chile, distributed using a simple allocation among the subsamples. Using a conjoint analysis, it was found that consumers preferred milk from a conventional cow. Using a cluster analysis, in both subsamples two segments sensitive to production technology were identified. Rejection of cloning was greatest among university students, whereas a higher proportion of working adults rejected GM. The segments differed in terms of area of residence, knowledge about GM, and milk consumption habits. Contrary to what was expected, no differences were found according to education, gender or degree of satisfaction with food-related life.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

Acceptance of a food of animal origin obtained through genetic modification and cloning in South America: a comparative study among university students and working adults

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consumer reasoning around agri-food technologies, including genetically modified organisms (GMOs), cloning, and nanotechnology, has been generally shown to be underpinned by considerations of unnaturalness, trust in science, risk management provision, ethics, risk and benefit 3 perceptions, uncertainty and unknown long-term effects, and concerns about wider implications of science for society (Siegrist, 2008;Palma-Oliveira et al, 2009;de Barcellos et al, 2010;Frewer et al, 2011;Rollin, Kennedy and Wills, 2011). Concerns about what is 'natural' and arguments of 'interfering with nature' pervade public responses to biotechnology, such as GMOs (Tenbült et al, 2005) or cloning (Shepherd et al, 2007), and underpin the rejection of food technologies such as cloned beef (Aizaki, Sawada and Sato, 2011).…”

Section: Public Perceptions Of Science and Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: Lay sense-making around synthetic meat

Gaspar²,

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on social representations theory, we explore how the public make sense of the unfamiliar, taking as the example a novel technology: synthetic meat. Data from an online deliberation study and eighteen focus groups in Belgium, Portugal and the UK indicated that the various strategies of sense-making afforded different levels of critical thinking about synthetic meat. Anchoring to genetic modification, metaphors like 'Frankenfoods' and commonplaces like 'playing God' closed off debates around potential applications of synthetic meat, whereas asking factual and rhetorical questions about it, weighing up pragmatically its risks and benefits, and envisaging changing current mentalities or behaviours in order to adapt to scientific developments enabled a consideration of synthetic meat's possible implications for agriculture, environment, and society. We suggest that research

show abstract

“…Several recent examples, such as biotechnology and nanotechnology illustrate that consumers may not embrace novel agro-food technologies as enthusiastically as hoped for at the times when the technologies were developed and adopted (Verbeke 2011). de Barcellos et al (2010), for example, indicated that while consumers may support the development of non-invasive (processing) technologies that improve the healthiness and eating quality of meat, they are very reluctant to manipulations and interventions that are perceived as excessive, invasive and non-natural in meat production chains.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat

Verbeke

Sans

Loo

2015

Journal of Integrative Agriculture

Self Cite

260

176

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OATAO is an open access repository that collects the work of Toulouse researchers and makes it freely available over the web where possible. This is an author-deposited version published in : http://oatao.univ-toulouse.fr/ Eprints ID : 15560 AbstractConsumer acceptance of cultured meat is expected to depend on a wide diversity of determinants ranging from technologyrelated perceptions to product-specific expectations, and including wider contextual factors like media coverage, public involvement, and trust in science, policy and society. This paper discusses the case of cultured meat against this multitude of possible determinants shaping future consumer acceptance or rejection. The paper also presents insights from a primary exploratory study performed in April 2013 with consumers from Flanders (Belgium) (n=180). The concept of cultured meat was only known (unaided) by 13% of the study participants. After receiving basic information about what cultured meat is, participants expressed favorable expectations about the concept. Only 9% rejected the idea of trying cultured meat, while two thirds hesitated and about quarter indicated to be willing to try it. The provision of additional information about the environmental benefits of cultured meat compared to traditional meat resulted in 43% of the participants indicating to be willing to try this novel food, while another 51% indicated to be 'maybe' willing to do so. Price and sensory expectations emerged as major obstacles. Consumers eating mostly vegetarian meals were less convinced that cultured meat might be healthy, suggesting that vegetarians may not be the ideal primary target group for this novel meat substitute. Although exploratory rather than conclusive, the findings generally underscore doubts among consumers about trying this product when it would become available, and therefore also the challenge for cultured meat to mimic traditional meat in terms of sensory quality at an affordable price in order to become acceptable for future consumers.

show abstract

European consumers' acceptance of beef processing technologies: A focus group study

Cited by 104 publications

References 54 publications

Acceptance of a food of animal origin obtained through genetic modification and cloning in South America: a comparative study among university students and working adults

Acceptance of a food of animal origin obtained through genetic modification and cloning in South America: a comparative study among university students and working adults

Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: Lay sense-making around synthetic meat

Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About