Shades and shifts in flexitarian and meat-oriented consumer profiles in a German panel study

Consumers' growing awareness of the adverse effects of high meat consumption has led to increased attention to flexitarian or meat-reduced diets. However, most flexitarians do not significantly reduce their meat consumption and still eat many meat-based meals. This study aims to classify the large and heterogeneous consumer group of flexitarians into different profiles based on attitudinal, normative, and control beliefs about meat reduction. Being aware that consumer profiles can change over time, this study explores the dynamics of the identified profiles using a two-wave panel survey of 430 German consumers. Latent profile analysis revealed distinct flexitarian and meat-oriented consumer profiles, including three stable profiles and one non-stable profile across both waves. The findings indicate that flexitarian and meat-oriented consumer profiles differ significantly in their belief structure about meat reduction and that consumers can switch back and forth to other profiles over time. Practitioners should be aware of changes in the belief structure of flexitarian and meat-oriented consumer profiles when developing meat reduction interventions. Further research is needed to understand the reasons behind these profile shifts.

Flexitarians in Brazil: Who are they, what do they eat, and why?

In this study, we conducted the first scientific investigation focusing on Brazilian flexitarians, aiming to characterize their socio-economic and demographic profiles, motivations for adopting flexitarianism, the frequency of animal-based meat consumption, and the primary meat substitutes they consume. To accomplish this, we distributed an online questionnaire with the assistance of university students and researchers from various regions of the country. Data were collected from 1029 individuals in Brazil who self-identified as flexitarians. Our findings reveal that the flexitarian dietary model is primarily adopted by women, constituting 76% of the sample (n = 786). Their motivations include concerns about the environmental impact of meat consumption (n = 361, 35%), personal health (n = 344, 33%), and animal welfare (n = 219, 21%). Flexitarians exhibit varying consumption patterns, which can be categorized into three groups: light flexitarians (consuming meat 36 times a week), medium flexitarians (consuming meat 7 times a week), and heavy flexitarians (consuming meat 4 times a week). The flexitarian dietary pattern is characterized by reduced beef consumption (less than 2 times per week) and higher consumption of chicken (3 times per week). It is complemented by plant-based protein sources and eggs as the primary meat substitutes. The recognition of legumes as the principal meat substitutes opens avenues for an expanded discussion on sustainable food systems and alternative meat products in Brazil. This provides opportunities to enhance the availability and accessibility of these foods and to develop nutritional interventions that prioritize plant-based proteins.

Insights into parents' and teachers' support for policies promoting increased plant-based eating in schools

Global environmental and public health challenges related to current food systems call for large-scale shifts towards increasingly plant-based diets, especially in Western meat-centric societies. School meal systems can play a role in these changes due to their widespread prevalence and multi-sectoral impact. However, there is a lack of evidence about how adults involved in the school meals system perceive school-based pro-environmental food policies, which limits the ability to align those policies with the needs and expectations of the school community. This study aimed to address this knowledge gap by exploring parents' (n = 104) and teachers' (n = 252) support for policies to promote increased plant-based eating in public schools in a highly meat-centric EU country (Portugal). Overall, teachers seemed to be slightly more supportive of such policies and displayed more favorable (injunctive and dynamic) norms toward plant-based eating, more negative appraisals of meals with meat (i.e., perceived healthiness, naturalness, and sustainability), and lower attachment to meat consumption. Furthermore, injunctive norms in favor of plant-based meals were linked with higher support for measures promoting plant-based meals in schools, in both samples (parents, teachers). Lower meat attachment and favorable perceived meal attributes (e.g., perceptions about plant-based and fish meals) were associated with teachers' support for measures promoting plant-based meals in schools. These findings suggest that future efforts and research with parents and teachers to enable less meat-centric and more flexitarian food practices in schools should consider social and motivation variables relevant to plant-forward transitions.

Meat consumption and flexitarianism in the Low Countries

Against the backdrop of meat production and consumption being increasingly contested, this paper presents a narrative descriptive review of (reductions in) meat consumption in the Netherlands and Belgium with a focus on trends during the period 2010-2020. Based on household panel purchasing data and supply balance sheet data as proxies, our analysis shows that meat consumption in the Netherlands is relatively stable, based on supply balance sheet data, despite an estimated annual decrease of around 250 g per capita per year based on household panel purchasing data. Meanwhile, household purchasing panel data for Belgium show a more steady and stronger decline with an annual decrease of slightly >1 kg per capita per year over the past decade, as well as more fluctuations based on supply balance sheet data. The 'Covid-year' 2020 displays a distinct pattern in both countries which deserves further exploration. Both countries face growing shares of (self-declared) flexitarians (ranging from around or above 30% in Belgium to 40% or more in the Netherlands depending on the data source and its definition of flexitarians) and consumers who claim to intend reducing their meat consumption in the future. The analysis reveals important differences in research methodologies, sample compositions, and analytical techniques. Such differences raise caveats for direct comparison between countries and impose challenges for the (European) monitoring of the so-called 'protein transition'. Although some change is occurring, the data suggest that meat reduction calls resonate still more in terms of people's attitudes, awareness, and intentions than in overt dietary behavioral change. Overall, our findings provide reason to conclude that the established meat-centered food system and its dominant meat-eating culture are still prevailing in the Low Countries.

Prescribing vegetarian or flexitarian diets leads to sustained reduction in meat intake

Many people agree that reducing the consumption of meat has good ends (e.g., for animal welfare, the environment, and human health). However, the question of which advocacy strategies are most effective in enabling wide-spread meat reduction remains open. We explored this by prescribing four different meat reduction diets to omnivorous participants for a seven-day adherence period, and studied their meat consumption over time. The diets included a Vegetarian diet, and three flexitarian diets (Climatarian - limit beef and lamb consumption; One Step for Animals - eliminate chicken consumption; Reducetarian - reduce all meat consumption). Results showed pronounced differences between groups in meat consumption during the adherence period, where the Vegetarian group ate significantly less meat than the flexitarian groups. All groups decreased their meat intake in the weeks following the adherence period compared to baseline, however, there were no significant group differences in the level of decrease over time. Participants also changed their attitudes toward meat and animals from pre-to post-intervention, and decreases in commitment toward and rationalization of meat-eating partially mediated change in meat intake. These findings reveal that the diet assignments had some impact on participants' meat consumption and attitudes even after the prescribed adherence period had ended. However, the sustained decrease in consumption did not vary depending on what meat reduction strategy was originally used.