植物性肉类替代品的替代模式和价格反应

IF 9.1 1区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Steffen Jahn, Daniel Guhl, Ainslee Erhard
{"title":"植物性肉类替代品的替代模式和价格反应","authors":"Steffen Jahn, Daniel Guhl, Ainslee Erhard","doi":"10.1073/pnas.2319016121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Efforts to promote sustainable resource use through reduced meat consumption face challenges as global meat consumption persists. The resistance may be attributed to the lower sales price of meat compared to most plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs). Addressing this, our research delves into the pivotal question of which PBMAs resonate most with consumers and how pricing affects demand. In a hypothetical restaurant context, we conducted 2 representative studies among 2,126 individuals in the United States to scrutinize preferences for meat, analog, semi-analog, and non-analog burgers. First, in a survey, we assessed rankings of the four burgers, alongside evaluating participants’ genuine consideration of these choices to discern a diverse preference distribution. Subsequently, in an experiment, we examined the influence of prices on participants’ consideration and choice of PBMAs, thereby capturing both phases of the decision-making process. Our survey shows that meat has considerably higher utility and consumer preference than all PBMAs on average, but we also find substantial heterogeneity (i.e., some consumers prefer PBMAs over meat). In the experiment, we establish that there is a negative association between the consideration of meat and PBMA burgers, though consideration of any one PBMA is positively associated with considering other PBMAs. A noteworthy increase in consideration and choice is observed when prices of PBMAs are reduced, while changing the price of the meat burger only has minimal effect on demand. Such findings underscore the importance of affordability beyond price parity in catalyzing the shift toward plant-based diets.","PeriodicalId":20548,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Substitution patterns and price response for plant-based meat alternatives\",\"authors\":\"Steffen Jahn, Daniel Guhl, Ainslee Erhard\",\"doi\":\"10.1073/pnas.2319016121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Efforts to promote sustainable resource use through reduced meat consumption face challenges as global meat consumption persists. The resistance may be attributed to the lower sales price of meat compared to most plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs). Addressing this, our research delves into the pivotal question of which PBMAs resonate most with consumers and how pricing affects demand. In a hypothetical restaurant context, we conducted 2 representative studies among 2,126 individuals in the United States to scrutinize preferences for meat, analog, semi-analog, and non-analog burgers. First, in a survey, we assessed rankings of the four burgers, alongside evaluating participants’ genuine consideration of these choices to discern a diverse preference distribution. Subsequently, in an experiment, we examined the influence of prices on participants’ consideration and choice of PBMAs, thereby capturing both phases of the decision-making process. Our survey shows that meat has considerably higher utility and consumer preference than all PBMAs on average, but we also find substantial heterogeneity (i.e., some consumers prefer PBMAs over meat). In the experiment, we establish that there is a negative association between the consideration of meat and PBMA burgers, though consideration of any one PBMA is positively associated with considering other PBMAs. A noteworthy increase in consideration and choice is observed when prices of PBMAs are reduced, while changing the price of the meat burger only has minimal effect on demand. Such findings underscore the importance of affordability beyond price parity in catalyzing the shift toward plant-based diets.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20548,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2319016121\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2319016121","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着全球肉类消费的持续,通过减少肉类消费促进可持续资源利用的努力面临挑战。这种抵制可能归因于与大多数植物性肉类替代品(pbma)相比,肉类的销售价格较低。为了解决这个问题,我们的研究深入探讨了哪些pbma最能引起消费者共鸣以及定价如何影响需求的关键问题。在一个假设的餐厅环境中,我们对2126名美国人进行了2项具有代表性的研究,以仔细检查人们对肉类、模拟汉堡、半模拟汉堡和非模拟汉堡的偏好。首先,在一项调查中,我们评估了四种汉堡的排名,同时评估了参与者对这些选择的真实考虑,以辨别不同的偏好分布。随后,在一项实验中,我们考察了价格对参与者对pbma的考虑和选择的影响,从而捕捉了决策过程的两个阶段。我们的调查显示,平均而言,肉类比所有pbma具有更高的效用和消费者偏好,但我们也发现了实质性的异质性(即,一些消费者更喜欢pbma而不是肉类)。在实验中,我们确定在考虑肉类和PBMA汉堡之间存在负相关,尽管考虑任何一种PBMA与考虑其他PBMA呈正相关。当pbma的价格降低时,可以观察到考虑和选择的显著增加,而改变肉汉堡的价格对需求的影响很小。这些发现强调了价格平价之外的可负担性在促进向植物性饮食转变方面的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Substitution patterns and price response for plant-based meat alternatives
Efforts to promote sustainable resource use through reduced meat consumption face challenges as global meat consumption persists. The resistance may be attributed to the lower sales price of meat compared to most plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs). Addressing this, our research delves into the pivotal question of which PBMAs resonate most with consumers and how pricing affects demand. In a hypothetical restaurant context, we conducted 2 representative studies among 2,126 individuals in the United States to scrutinize preferences for meat, analog, semi-analog, and non-analog burgers. First, in a survey, we assessed rankings of the four burgers, alongside evaluating participants’ genuine consideration of these choices to discern a diverse preference distribution. Subsequently, in an experiment, we examined the influence of prices on participants’ consideration and choice of PBMAs, thereby capturing both phases of the decision-making process. Our survey shows that meat has considerably higher utility and consumer preference than all PBMAs on average, but we also find substantial heterogeneity (i.e., some consumers prefer PBMAs over meat). In the experiment, we establish that there is a negative association between the consideration of meat and PBMA burgers, though consideration of any one PBMA is positively associated with considering other PBMAs. A noteworthy increase in consideration and choice is observed when prices of PBMAs are reduced, while changing the price of the meat burger only has minimal effect on demand. Such findings underscore the importance of affordability beyond price parity in catalyzing the shift toward plant-based diets.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.00
自引率
0.90%
发文量
3575
审稿时长
2.5 months
期刊介绍: The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a peer-reviewed journal of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), serves as an authoritative source for high-impact, original research across the biological, physical, and social sciences. With a global scope, the journal welcomes submissions from researchers worldwide, making it an inclusive platform for advancing scientific knowledge.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信