A systematic review of consumer responses to meat alternative labeling

Abstract

Meat alternatives have gained popularity. However, there is ongoing debate over labeling requirements for these products. This systematic review collected and summarized recent research on how meat alternative name labeling affects consumer responses. The results indicate that meat-related labels significantly impact consumer responses. Using “meat” on cell-cultured meat labels increases confusion, while replacing it with “protein” may reduce confusion. Plant-based meat labels using meat-related terms generally cause little confusion and have minimal effects on purchasing decisions but may slightly increase willingness to eat. Meat-related labels can also enhance taste expectations, while avoiding them tends to improve perceptions related to environmental impact and health benefits. The results also suggest that, from a policy perspective, avoiding meat-related terms and using more specific labels may reduce consumer confusion and enhance ingredient clarity. In the industry, labels that communicate naturalness may improve consumer acceptance. Future research should address consumer perceptions of safety, environmental impact, and animal welfare, as well as their understanding of nutritional information. Moreover, assessing the real-world impacts of labeling regulations is essential for gaining more insights into consumer behavior.