As the alternative protein market matures, the question of which ingredients consumers actually want in their meat alternatives is becoming more urgent. A new study from ETH Zürich, published in Appetite, sheds light on this, exploring how nearly 2,000 consumers across Germany, Italy, Finland, and Serbia perceive a wide range of plant-based, algae-derived, and cultivated proteins.
The results point to a key takeaway: consumer familiarity, culinary traditions, and sensory expectations matter just as much—if not more—than the protein source itself.
Potatoes, Eggs, and Peas Take the Lead
When asked which protein sources would make the tastiest meat alternatives, participants most often chose eggs(favoured in Serbia and Finland) and potato protein (in Italy and Germany).
Other popular proteins included rice and pea, though acceptance varied by country. For example:
- Germany & Serbia: Almonds scored highly.
- Italy: Lentils performed well.
- Finland: Oats were a consumer favourite.
Cultivated beef received particularly high taste expectations in Germany, while insect and algae proteins consistently scored lowest across all regions.
Interestingly, soy protein—one of the most widely used ingredients in meat alternatives—scored poorly in Germany, where it may carry negative associations with GMOs or poor taste. This underlines the complexity of consumer attitudes, even toward familiar ingredients.
Health and Sustainability Perceptions
When it came to health and environmental impact, results were less clear-cut—but certain patterns emerged:
- Perceived healthiest options: Potatoes, peas, lentils, oats.
- Lowest health ratings: Cultivated beef and, in some countries, rice and soy.
- Sustainability perceptions: Consumers were more sceptical about the environmental impact of cultivated meat, with Germans and Finns particularly critical.
Eggs—though popular for taste—scored lower on health. Meanwhile, oats and almonds were consistently ranked as healthier in Northern and Southern Europe respectively, reflecting regional food cultures.
Food Tech Neophobia: A Barrier for Traditional Plant Proteins
The researchers also investigated the role of food technology neophobia (resistance to novel food technologies). Interestingly, neophobia appeared to affect traditional proteins like tofu and tempeh more than modern plant-based meats, particularly in Germany.
The authors suggest that this may be because tofu and falafels are tied to non-European cuisines, while plant-based burgers, mince, and nuggets mimic familiar meat dishes—making them less “threatening” to hesitant consumers.
Implications for Meat Alternative Development
The findings are clear: the protein source exerts a significant influence on consumer acceptance. Taste, cultural familiarity, and sensory experience all shape whether people are willing to embrace meat alternatives.
The researchers conclude that product developers should:
- Strategically select protein sources already favoured by consumers (e.g., peas, potatoes, oats) when developing new products.
- Improve taste and texture to align with local expectations and culinary traditions.
- Use labelling and communication to emphasise health and sustainability where perceptions are already positive.
As the authors note: “Strategic selection and labelling of already accepted protein sources by product developers and marketers has the potential to enhance the appeal of meat alternatives and facilitate their wider acceptance.”
Nutricomms Opinion
For industry, this research offers a clear reminder: innovation in meat alternatives isn’t just about technology—it’s about communication.
- Familiar proteins with strong cultural resonance—like peas, oats, and potatoes—offer a lower barrier to entry.
- Negative perceptions of soy and cultivated meat highlight the need for smarter consumer education to address taste, health, and sustainability concerns.
- Food tech neophobia remains a challenge, but framing plant-based meats as familiar, everyday products can reduce resistance.
We see a powerful opportunity here. Companies that combine ingredient innovation with targeted, evidence-based communication—tailored to cultural contexts—will be best placed to win consumer trust. The future of meat alternatives will depend not only on what’s in the product, but also how it’s positioned, labelled, and explained to the public.
More information:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019566632500399X
