
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://beta.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
Do EU consumers think about meat reduction when considering to eat a healthy, sustainable diet and to have a role in food system change?

This paper aims to highlight the position of meat reduction in what EU consumers think "eating a healthy and sustainable diet" involves and who has a role to play in achieving food system change. The data are based on the Eurobarometer 93.2 survey (mid 2020). The participants were asked to make their own selections out of a variety of food-related items and actors, linked to meat ("Eating meat less often") and other aspects of diets ("Eating more fruit and vegetables"). Their responses were analyzed separately in two EU regions: Northwest Europe-consisting of the 10 richest EU countries with the highest scores on economic and social sustainable development indicators- and the East and the South. Three principal components of dietary thinking were distinguished, relating to 1) nutrition issues, 2) easy "light green" issues and 3) more demanding "deeper green" issues, respectively. The analysis also distinguished three types of actors in the value chain (food chain actors, supporting actors, and governmental actors). In Northwestern Europe, a majority of consumers saw a role for themselves in making the food system more sustainable and a large minority saw meat reduction as part of a healthy and sustainable diet. Both responses were much less common in the East and South. In the Northwest, meat reduction was relatively strongly related to "deeper green" thinking but also weakly to nutrition-focused thinking, whereas the opposite was found in the East and South. However, meat reduction had no prominent position in their considerations. For policy-makers, therefore, it is crucial that both nutrition and environment can be motivating factors for consumers to consider meat reduction, albeit to different degrees.
- Free University of Amsterdam Pure VU Amsterdam Netherlands
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Netherlands
- Bellevue University United States
- Bellevue College United States
Ernährung, Konsum, protein; Eurobarometer 91.3 (2019) (ZA7572 v1.0.0); Eurobarometer 93.2 (2020) (ZA7739 v1.0.0), eating behavior, Sociology & anthropology, Ökologie und Umwelt, Food Supply, health behavior, Medical Sociology, Psychology, Ökologie, SDG 15 - Life on Land, Ecology, Nachhaltigkeit, Eurobarometer, consumer, social change, Consumer, Sustainable Development, sustainability, Verbraucher, nutrition, Sustainability, Health, Gesundheitsverhalten, Diet, Healthy, Sozialpsychologie, Meat, Social Psychology, Responsibility, Verantwortung, Essverhalten, Ecology, Environment, sozialer Wandel, Humans, consumption, food, Protein, Diet, Psychologie, Soziologie, Anthropologie, responsibility, Science for Sustainability, EU, Medizinsoziologie, Lebensmittel, ddc: ddc:150, ddc: ddc:301, ddc: ddc:577
Ernährung, Konsum, protein; Eurobarometer 91.3 (2019) (ZA7572 v1.0.0); Eurobarometer 93.2 (2020) (ZA7739 v1.0.0), eating behavior, Sociology & anthropology, Ökologie und Umwelt, Food Supply, health behavior, Medical Sociology, Psychology, Ökologie, SDG 15 - Life on Land, Ecology, Nachhaltigkeit, Eurobarometer, consumer, social change, Consumer, Sustainable Development, sustainability, Verbraucher, nutrition, Sustainability, Health, Gesundheitsverhalten, Diet, Healthy, Sozialpsychologie, Meat, Social Psychology, Responsibility, Verantwortung, Essverhalten, Ecology, Environment, sozialer Wandel, Humans, consumption, food, Protein, Diet, Psychologie, Soziologie, Anthropologie, responsibility, Science for Sustainability, EU, Medizinsoziologie, Lebensmittel, ddc: ddc:150, ddc: ddc:301, ddc: ddc:577
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).37 popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10% influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).Top 10% impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.Top 1%
