Environmental sustainability is not a significant factor affecting the meat consumption choices of the majority of Americans, even as awareness of the climate effects of red meat production rises, according to researchers from Rutgers University.
Environmental sustainability is not a significant factor affecting the meat consumption choices of the majority of Americans, even as awareness of the climate effects of red meat production rises, according to researchers from Rutgers University.
A study published in Appetite analyzed the meat and seafood consumption habits of over 1,200 adults across the United States. The researchers discovered that although many Americans claim to have cut back on red meat, their main motivations are health-related concerns and cost rather than environmental issues.
“There is a gap between growing awareness of the environmental impact of meat and the actual consumer choices,” stated Shauna Downs, an associate professor in the Department of Health Behavior, Society, and Policy at Rutgers School of Public Health, who led the study. “Our results indicate that messages focused purely on sustainability may not connect with the majority of American consumers when it comes to their meat selections.”
Significant findings from the research include:
- 78% of those surveyed reported eating red meat 1 to 4 times a week, while 14% consume it 5 or more times weekly
- Nearly 70% indicated they had reduced their red meat consumption in the past year, mainly for health (64%) and cost (32%) reasons
- Only 6% of respondents who reduced red meat consumption cited environmental sustainability as a consideration
- Health (85%) and flavor (84%) were deemed the most important factors in meat purchases overall
- Environmental sustainability (29%) and animal welfare (28%) were regarded as the least important factors
The study revealed some differences in meat consumption patterns and motivations among different demographics. For instance, participants aged 65 and older were more inclined to report reducing their red meat intake compared to younger respondents. Additionally, Black participants placed greater importance on factors such as cost, health, and sustainability in their meat purchasing decisions than other racial and ethnic groups. Moreover, female respondents prioritized environmental sustainability and health when making decisions about meat purchases more than male respondents did.
“These insights can guide more effective interventions and communication efforts to encourage a shift towards sustainable diets,” remarked Downs. “Emphasizing health benefits and cost-effectiveness, rather than focusing solely on environmental impacts, could more effectively drive changes in meat consumption for most Americans.”
This study is timely, as climate scientists increasingly advocate for reducing meat consumption—especially beef and lamb—as a crucial method to combat climate change. However, initiatives aimed at lowering meat consumption in the U.S. encounter cultural and political challenges, such as the powerful lobbying of the meat industry, evidenced by past resistance to integrating sustainability into federal dietary guidelines.
“Undoubtedly, there are barriers to making sustainability a priority for consumers,” commented Emily V. Merchant, an assistant professor in the Department of Urban-Global Public Health at the Rutgers School of Public Health and a co-author of the study. “Innovative, multifaceted strategies that highlight health, taste, and affordability may be essential for genuinely altering eating habits.”
The researchers suggest that future investigations should focus on effectively melding various motivational strategies in public messaging and interventions regarding meat consumption. They also advocate for more research into how to enhance the appeal of minimally processed plant-based options for meat consumers.
“Minor dietary changes across a population can lead to substantial environmental benefits,” Downs concluded. “It’s crucial to devise methods that align with consumers’ existing food priorities. This should coincide with policies aimed at transforming the environments where food choices are made. For instance, incorporating sustainability into public procurement policies or ensuring the availability and affordability of delicious plant-based meals.”
This study, conducted in collaboration with researchers from Columbia University’s Climate School, Cornell University, and the International Food Policy Research Institute, received funding from the Stavros Niarchos Foundation.
