Food Neophobia or Distrust of Novelties? Exploring Consumers’ Attitudes toward GMOs, Insects and Cultured Meat

Abstract

The food industry is constantly challenged to find new ideas to satisfy the increasingly specific consumer demand. However, innovative food products do not always become part of consumption habits or create a market. One of the major sources of resistance to novelty lies in the attitude of the consumer, who in many cases may be suspicious or hostile as a result of specific ideologies, overly attached to tradition, or affected by neophobia. This paper analyzes the construct of food neophobia (the “unwillingness to try new foods”) in its phenomenology and its actual power to explain hostility to innovation in the agri-food sector. The limits of the concept, which is not always sufficient to shed light on the many reasons that could underlie the rejection of certain foods, will also be discussed. In addition, we review the recent literature on Europeans’ attitude toward novel foods and innovation including Genetically modified organisms (GMOs), cultivated meat and insects as food. This literature reveals a number of paradoxes in consumers’ behavior, and in the many complex conditions underpinning the success of innovation in food production. These conditions can only be understood by reconstructing the meanings consumers assign to food, and are often embedded in larger social and political frameworks.

To What Extent Are Consumers’ Perception and Acceptance of Alternative Meat Production Systems Affected by Information? The Case of Cultured Meat

“…If this is the case, new approaches are required to address "the underlying worldviews, fears, and conspirational mindsets that are associated with people resistance (p.144)" [30]. In this regard, the authors of [28] believe that the analysis of the attitude towards novel foods should start from the "understanding of the food identity profile of the members of the population of interest . .…”

“…Information can change the explicit attitude, i.e., the evaluation constructed through the cognitive elaboration of available information [49] towards the unfamiliar object-cultured meat-in the direction of the valence of the information [38]. Nevertheless, solving the "information deficit" may result insufficient to overcome the aversion to novel technologies applied to food production [28,30]. Indeed, the current available literature fails to provide a comprehensive analysis about consumers' perception towards intrinsic attributes and positive externalities the cultured meat embeds.…”

“…Indeed, the current available literature fails to provide a comprehensive analysis about consumers' perception towards intrinsic attributes and positive externalities the cultured meat embeds. In particular, as suggested by [28,30], further research is needed to understand whether the consumers' perception and beliefs are effectively influenced by information related to both intrinsic attributes and positive externalities. This would unveil the attributes and externalities for which approaches other than positive information provision are needed to face psychological barriers, such as distrust and fear.…”

Drivers and Inhibitors in the Acceptance of Meat Alternatives: The Case of Plant and Insect-Based Proteins

“…The consumers’ reluctance to change could be attributed to an inbuilt evolutionary-derived encoded instinct to protect humans against potential poisonous foods over familiar ones that are more beneficial to health and growth [ 17 , 18 ]. Thus, a predisposition to avoid unusual foods is based on instinctual neophobia [ 19 ], which has been socially constructed and filtered through the consumers’ system of values [ 20 ]. This could play a major role with regards to protein consumption, where an aversion to alternative proteins could constitute a major impediment for replacing meat for another substitute because of the consumer’s values, dietary habits, and preferences [ 21 ].…”

“…Nine hypotheses were tested ( Figure 1 ). The consumers’ attitudes towards the importance of meat taste, texture, smell, and the nutritional importance of meat were expected to be negatively influenced by their perception of meat-alternative suitability and benefits [ 19 , 21 ]. Suitability and benefits were defined as a combination of sensory benefits, nutritional importance, environmental impact, and health influence that was unique to the meat substitute in question.…”