How do regional differences and economic disparities affect interest in cultivated meat in the world’s largest beef exporter?
Brazil is the world’s largest beef exporter, second-largest meat producer, and third-largest consumer of beef per capita. But with the food system making up nearly three-quarters of its GHG emissions, a protein transition is crucial in the country.
Home to meat giants like JBS, Minerva and Marfrig, several of these companies have joined startups like Fazenda Futuro (Future Farm), The New, and Vegabom in offering alternative proteins to Brazilians.
In fact, retail sales of meat and seafood analogues increased by 38% in 2023, reaching $226M. And a third of Brazilians are either flexitarian, pescetarian, or meat-free.
Does the growing interest in plant proteins extend to technologies like cultivated meat? It’s a question explored by researchers at the Federal University of Paraná, who examined how regional disparities impact attitudes towards such novel foods in a study published in the PLOS One journal this month.
“As agriculture and animal production constitute a major component of the country’s GDP, the introduction of meat alternatives nationally, e.g. cultivated meat, seems essential to maintain its market share in the future, requiring careful planning to maximise the benefits and mitigate the disadvantages,” wrote the authors.
Health awareness gap a major barrier for cultivated meat
The 800-person study focused on two vastly different Brazilian cities, São Paulo and Salvador. The former is the most populous and economically developed area in the country, while the latter is ranked with the weakest economic and employment indicators among Brazilian state capitals.
Nearly two in five (38%) of respondents had heard of cultivated meat, with familiarity higher in São Paulo (45%) than in Salvador (32%).
This trend extended to consumption too. A third of survey participants said they’d eat cultivated meat, while 41% were unsure. In São Paulo, 41% were interested in trying these proteins, versus 24% in Salvador.
Among those who showed a willingness to eat cultivated meat, nearly a third said they were simply curious about it, a quarter cited animal welfare, and one in 10 said they were motivated by health reasons.
On the other hand, 26% indicated they wouldn’t consume these foods, with neophobia – a fear of the new – the strongest detractor. These respondents also cited “artificiality”, a lack of knowledge about the product and the process, and health impacts as factors holding them back.
Aligning with this, the study found that interest in consumption increases with knowledge. Half of those who had heard of cultivated meat wanted to try it, and 29% were uncertain. But among those unfamiliar with it, only 22% said they’d eat it, and nearly half (49%) were unsure.
While a majority of those aware of cultivated meat believe it’s better for the animals and the planet, only a third say the same about human health, highlighting the knowledge gap about the health implications of these proteins. This worsens among people who haven’t heard of these products – only 15% of them see benefits for human health, while 23% believe they’re harmful, and a third say they don’t know.
Regional and cultural context key for marketing and policies
The study showed that men (37%) are more interested in eating cultivated meat than women (30%), and these foods are more popular among Gen Z (39%)and millennials (32%) than those aged 50 and above (22%). Meanwhile, interest in cultivated meat remains similar across education and income levels, though higher-earners are more likely to eat cultivated meat.
However, there’s a significant disparity between people who eat meat frequently and those who don’t, with folks who eat meat more often more likely to be interested in trying cultivated meat. Only 9% of non-meat-eaters want to try cultivated meat, but this rises to 29% for people who eat meat up to three times a week, and 38% for those who consume meat four to seven times a week.
Respondents associated cultivated meat more positively with the environment than they did conventional animal proteins, even those who hadn’t previously heard of cultivated proteins. This is an important finding, considering that meat makes up the majority of Brazil’s agrifood emissions. Beef alone is responsible for 78% of this footprint.
The researchers highlighted the importance of regional considerations for cultivated meat stakeholders. They noted that São Paulo has a more diversified economy and greater access to technologies and innovation. Combined with higher purchasing power and greater climate awareness, its residents are more likely to be informed and accepting of cultivated meat.
“In contrast, citizens of Salvador, facing economic challenges such as a higher unemployment rate and lower purchasing power, may encounter barriers to accessing information about these new products, which could result in a lower intention to consume,” the study stated.
The researchers argued that public policies can be made more efficient through targeted educational initiatives that address the specific concerns of different regions, and industry stakeholders should adapt their marketing to be more culturally sensitive. “In addition, collaborating with local institutions is likely to foster a more productive approach to introducing cultivated meat,” they added.
The study comes just as Brazilians cut back on beef. According to the Good Food Institute, 36% of consumer have reduced their red meat intake between 2023 and 2024, mainly due to health detriments and high costs. It also chimes with a 2021 study, which found that 66% of Brazilians are interested in trying cultivated meat.
The post Study From Beef-Loving Brazil Suggests Regional Disparities Shape Cultivated Meat Consumer Attitudes appeared first on Green Queen.
This post was originally published on Green Queen.