{"title":"价格、口味和便利性具有竞争力的植物性肉类类似物目前不会取代大多数肉类消费:一篇叙述性评论。","authors":"Jacob R. Peacock","doi":"10.1016/j.appet.2025.108301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Plant-based meat analogues, like Beyond Sausage or Impossible Burger, have become a source of optimism for environmental, public health, and animal welfare advocates hoping to mitigate the impacts associated with overconsumption of animal-based foods by replacing them with perfect alternatives. Some have proposed that these substitutes might soon replace animal-based meats based on the supposition that price, taste and convenience (PTC) are the primary drivers of food choice. Thus, it is conjectured that if a plant-based meat analogue matches (or exceeds) its animal-based counterpart in terms of PTC, a majority of consumption would shift from animal-based to plant-based. However, this conjecture has received little critical attention. To fill this gap, we will review evidence testing the PTC conjecture, including cross-sectional surveys, hypothetical discrete choice experiments, a field experiment and commercial case studies. Ultimately, given current consumer preferences, we do not find support for the PTC conjecture. However, plant-based meat analogues may still have important potential as a tool for mitigating excessive meat consumption.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":242,"journal":{"name":"Appetite","volume":"216 ","pages":"Article 108301"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Price-, taste-, and convenience-competitive plant-based meat analogues would not currently replace the majority of meat consumption: A narrative review\",\"authors\":\"Jacob R. Peacock\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.appet.2025.108301\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Plant-based meat analogues, like Beyond Sausage or Impossible Burger, have become a source of optimism for environmental, public health, and animal welfare advocates hoping to mitigate the impacts associated with overconsumption of animal-based foods by replacing them with perfect alternatives. Some have proposed that these substitutes might soon replace animal-based meats based on the supposition that price, taste and convenience (PTC) are the primary drivers of food choice. Thus, it is conjectured that if a plant-based meat analogue matches (or exceeds) its animal-based counterpart in terms of PTC, a majority of consumption would shift from animal-based to plant-based. However, this conjecture has received little critical attention. To fill this gap, we will review evidence testing the PTC conjecture, including cross-sectional surveys, hypothetical discrete choice experiments, a field experiment and commercial case studies. Ultimately, given current consumer preferences, we do not find support for the PTC conjecture. However, plant-based meat analogues may still have important potential as a tool for mitigating excessive meat consumption.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":242,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Appetite\",\"volume\":\"216 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108301\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Appetite\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666325004544\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Appetite","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666325004544","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Price-, taste-, and convenience-competitive plant-based meat analogues would not currently replace the majority of meat consumption: A narrative review
Plant-based meat analogues, like Beyond Sausage or Impossible Burger, have become a source of optimism for environmental, public health, and animal welfare advocates hoping to mitigate the impacts associated with overconsumption of animal-based foods by replacing them with perfect alternatives. Some have proposed that these substitutes might soon replace animal-based meats based on the supposition that price, taste and convenience (PTC) are the primary drivers of food choice. Thus, it is conjectured that if a plant-based meat analogue matches (or exceeds) its animal-based counterpart in terms of PTC, a majority of consumption would shift from animal-based to plant-based. However, this conjecture has received little critical attention. To fill this gap, we will review evidence testing the PTC conjecture, including cross-sectional surveys, hypothetical discrete choice experiments, a field experiment and commercial case studies. Ultimately, given current consumer preferences, we do not find support for the PTC conjecture. However, plant-based meat analogues may still have important potential as a tool for mitigating excessive meat consumption.
期刊介绍:
Appetite is an international research journal specializing in cultural, social, psychological, sensory and physiological influences on the selection and intake of foods and drinks. It covers normal and disordered eating and drinking and welcomes studies of both human and non-human animal behaviour toward food. Appetite publishes research reports, reviews and commentaries. Thematic special issues appear regularly. From time to time the journal carries abstracts from professional meetings. Submissions to Appetite are expected to be based primarily on observations directly related to the selection and intake of foods and drinks; papers that are primarily focused on topics such as nutrition or obesity will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution to the understanding of appetite in line with the journal's aims and scope.