A significant portion of the UK population identifies as a committed consumer of meat; however, the longevity of this dietary practice is a subject of inquiry. My recent investigation into the perspectives of individuals who consume meat revealed that the majority of participants acknowledged the ethical underpinnings of veganism and its environmental benefits.
It appears that the primary impediments to broader adoption of veganism are not rooted in a disagreement with its core principles, but rather in practical considerations such as flavour profiles, fiscal considerations, and ease of integration into daily routines.
This observation carries substantial implications for the trajectory of the food sector, particularly as the quality, affordability, and accessibility of meat substitutes continue to advance.
My survey, which canvassed 1,000 adult men and women across the UK, indicated that 73 percent of respondents perceived veganism as ethically sound, while 70 percent endorsed its positive impact on the environment.
Conversely, a considerable number expressed reservations: 61 percent found adopting a vegan diet unenjoyable, 77 percent deemed it inconvenient, and a substantial 83 percent reported that it was not easy to implement.
Other potential deterrents, such as health anxieties and societal prejudice, appeared to hold less sway. Approximately 60 percent considered veganism to be socially acceptable, and more than half of the participants viewed it as a healthy dietary choice.
The notion that most meat consumers align with the fundamental tenets of veganism might strike some as unexpected. Nevertheless, corroborating evidence can be found in other scholarly works. For instance, one study discovered that nearly half of American adults expressed support for a prohibition on slaughterhouses.
The prominence of taste, price, and convenience as obstacles to dietary change also resonates with prior research findings. A British survey, for example, identified the overwhelming primary reason cited by individuals for not adhering to a vegetarian diet as: “I like the taste of meat too much.” The subsequent most frequent justifications pertained to the elevated cost of meat alternatives and difficulties in meal planning.
These insights present a compelling quandary for proponents of climate action and animal welfare. While individuals generally recognise the valid arguments for reducing animal product consumption, they are largely unwilling to incur the personal sacrifices involved.
Food motivation
Extensive Food Behaviour Research spanning several decades has consistently identified price, flavour, and convenience as the principal determinants of food selection. For the majority, ethical considerations and environmental consequences typically do not factor into these decisions.
Furthermore, experimental studies have demonstrated that the very act of consuming meat can subtly influence individuals’ perceptions of the morality of eating animals. In one such experiment, participants were asked to evaluate their level of moral concern for cows. Prior to providing their responses, they were offered either nuts or beef jerky as a snack.
The findings indicated that consuming beef jerky led participants to exhibit a diminished level of concern for cows. This suggests that people may not select meat based on a conviction that there are justifiable reasons for doing so; rather, they develop justifications to align with their pre-existing consumption habits.
Consequently, the ingrained and, it must be acknowledged, enjoyable practice of meat consumption can serve as a barrier to rational discourse regarding our food systems. How can one be expected to engage in an honest evaluation of this topic when there is a strong intrinsic motivation to conclude that meat consumption is acceptable?
Fortunately, the landscape is undergoing a transformation. The diversity, quality, and affordability of vegan product offerings have dramatically expanded. My survey was conducted in September 2018, a period shortly before the highly successful launch of Greggs’ vegan sausage roll.
Since that time, a veritable deluge of high-calibre, reasonably priced vegan options has become available in British supermarkets, eateries, and even fast-food establishments. These innovations empower meat eaters to seamlessly substitute animal-derived products in their meals.
When a purveyor like Subway offers a version of its meatball marinara that aligns with one’s ethical and environmental convictions, the rationale for selecting the animal-based option diminishes, especially if the alternative provides an equivalent taste experience.
The widespread availability of these contemporary choices means that the ever-increasing demographic of vegans, vegetarians, and flexitarians in the UK now has an unprecedented array of selections. Not only will this encourage more individuals to explore vegan alternatives, but it will also significantly simplify the journey for those aspiring to transition to vegetarian or vegan diets.
This expansion of consumer choice inevitably fosters producer competition, and it is here that market dynamics will truly manifest. While those seeking to reduce their meat intake may feel spoilt for choice in 2020, the forthcoming impact of major food corporations vying to enhance and reduce the cost of their vegan portfolios in pursuit of a rapidly expanding consumer segment will be profound.
We may be on the cusp of a significant surge in research dedicated to perfecting plant-based meat analogues. Concurrently, the development of genuine animal meat cultivated from stem cells, obviating the need for animal farming, is steadily gaining momentum.
Cheaper and tastier
As these innovative alternatives progressively improve in flavour, nutritional value, and affordability over the ensuing decade, the characteristics of conventional animal-derived meat are likely to remain largely static. It is unsurprising, therefore, that the conventional animal agriculture sector is experiencing apprehension. Demand for meat and dairy products is precipitously declining, whilst the market for their substitutes has experienced exponential growth.
In the United States, two prominent dairy producers have recently initiated bankruptcy proceedings. Furthermore, a recent analysis projected that the meat and dairy industries are poised for collapse within the next ten years.
This presents the typical meat consumer with a complex dilemma. The majority concur with the justifications for adopting veganism but express opposition to the cost, taste, and convenience associated with the available alternatives.
As these substitutes become more economical, superior in quality, and widely disseminated, meat consumers will be compelled to re-evaluate at what point the improvements in alternatives will align with their values. Opting to persist in funding unnecessary animal slaughter solely because the alternative was merely “reasonably good” will likely be viewed unfavourably in the not-too-distant future. 
Chris Bryant, PhD Candidate, University of Bath.
