Their study, funded by the National Institutes of Health’s National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, found that only a small percentage of consumers have tried plant-based meat alternatives. While plant-based meat alternatives were intended to serve as a substitute for beef, the researchers found that consumers were often purchasing plant-based meat alternatives alongside beef and pork and instead used the plant-based meat alternatives as a substitute for chicken, turkey and fish.
“The demand is not currently there yet for plant-based meat alternatives to replace a portion of beef sales,” said Zhao, assistant professor in the UK College of Agriculture, Food and Environment.
“Even though the market has grown, plant-based meat alternatives only make up 0.5% of the fresh meat market share,” said Zheng, UK associate professor.
Due to their high processing, plant-based meat alternatives often cost more than many other meat options and are currently priced similar to Angus beef. The researchers also found that consumers were more likely to try plant-based meat alternatives if they were on sale.
“The plant-based meat alternative industry is a new industry that is still evolving and currently not at a consumer-friendly level due to the high prices,” Zhao said.
The entire paper is available online at https://bit.ly/3JoJ40i.
The researchers recently received a nearly $650,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and Agriculture to further investigate plant-based meat alternatives including the consumer base, market, supply chain and any potential challenges the plant-based meat alternative industry faces.
Research reported in this publication was supported by the?National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences?of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number?UL1TR001998. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.?
This material is based upon work that is supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under award number 2022-67024-36734. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Department of Agriculture.?
Source : uky.edu