We Can’t Keep Meating Like This: Attitudes Towards Vegetarian And Vegan Diets In The United Kingdom

Abstract

Animal agriculture is implicated as a major cause of greenhouse gas emissions, animal suffering and public health problems. This survey asked 1000 UK meat-eaters about their beliefs about vegetarian and vegan diets, and their intended consumption of meat and animal products one month in the future. One in six intended to reduce their meat consumption in the next month, and 14% intended to reduce their consumption of animal products. The majority agreed that vegetarian and vegan diets are ethical, good for the environment and healthy. The majority also agreed that both vegetarianism and veganism were socially acceptable. However, there were three consistent negative beliefs about vegetarian and vegan diets: that they are difficult, that they are not enjoyable and that they are expensive. Moreover, perceptions of vegan diets were significantly more negative than perceptions of vegetarian diets on most aspects. Significant differences in perceptions of each diet were observed between genders, by age, political inclination, level of education, and income. It is argued that most meat-eaters agree with the ethical and environmental arguments in favour of vegetarianism/veganism but do not follow these diets because of practical reasons relating to taste, price and convenience. New alternatives to animal products are discussed as a possible way to address these practical barriers. Finally, the case is made for more research on developing high-quality, low-cost and widely available animal product alternatives.

Generated Summary

This research investigates UK meat-eaters’ views on vegetarianism and veganism, exploring attitudes towards different aspects of these diets and comparing them across various demographics. The study employed a survey-based methodology, recruiting 1000 meat-eaters through the online platform Prolific. Participants were presented with definitions of vegetarianism and veganism and then asked to rate their opinions on 11 different aspects of each diet using 7-point bipolar scales. Additionally, participants indicated their intended consumption of meat and animal products in the following month. Statistical analyses included Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to compare ratings between vegetarianism and veganism, Mann-Whitney U tests to compare responses between genders, and Spearman’s rank-order correlation to investigate correlations with age, political views, education level, and income level. The study aims to provide a quantitative evaluation of the relevant aspects of vegetarian and vegan diets, compare common motivators and barriers, and assess how these evaluations vary across different demographic groups.

Key Findings & Statistics

• The majority agreed that vegetarian and vegan diets are ethical, good for the environment, and healthy.
• 1 in 6 meat-eaters intended to reduce their meat consumption in the next month.
• 14% intended to reduce their consumption of animal products.
• Estimates for those who are flexitarian and/or have some desire to reduce their meat consumption vary more because those are less well-defined categories, and different surveys use different questions.
• Veganism is perceived more negatively than vegetarianism.
• On average, meat-eaters think that vegetarianism and veganism are socially acceptable, but most stop short of calling them aspirational.
• The study found that a substantial number intend to, or are willing to, reduce their meat consumption.
• Existing research provides some insight on the reasons why people feel compelled to give up eating meat, and the barriers they face in doing so.
• The main motivations to move towards a vegetarian or vegan diet are animal welfare, the environment and personal health.
• The major barriers are sensory enjoyment of animal products, convenience and financial cost.
• Consumers often recognise health benefits such as decreased saturated fat intake, increased fruit and vegetable intake and disease prevention.
• The nutrition of vegan diets, which just 41.5% rated positively and 37.7% rated negatively.
• The majority of meat-eaters had negative views of these aspects of veganism, and most had negative or neutral views of these aspects of vegetarianism.
• 3.5% said they would greatly decrease their consumption of meat, whilst 2.4% said they would greatly decrease their consumption of animal products.
• Older people tended to view some aspects of vegetarianism and veganism more positively than younger people.
• Higher age correlated with increased ratings of ease for both diets, as well as increased ratings of convenience and enjoyableness for vegetarianism.
• Political views were the demographic factor most strongly correlated with opinions of vegetarianism and veganism.
• Every aspect of each diet was viewed more positively by more left-wing people with the exception of ease and affordability of veganism.
• Women tended to have more positive views of vegetarianism and veganism compared to men.

Other Important Findings

• The study found that meat-eaters often agree with ethical and environmental arguments in favour of vegetarianism/veganism but do not follow these diets because of practical reasons relating to taste, price, and convenience.
• The main motivations to move towards a vegetarian or vegan diet are animal welfare, the environment, and personal health.
• The major barriers are sensory enjoyment of animal products, convenience, and financial cost.
• The study also found that many meat-eaters recognize the benefits of avoiding animal products but find vegetarianism/veganism to be too inconvenient, expensive, or simply not enjoyable.
• The study also found that many meat-eaters recognize the benefits of avoiding animal products but find vegetarianism/veganism to be too inconvenient, expensive, or simply not enjoyable.
• Women tended to have more positive views of vegetarianism and veganism compared to men.
• Political views were the demographic factor most strongly correlated with opinions of vegetarianism and veganism.
• The study suggests that many who eventually become vegan have followed a meat reduction path through flexitarianism and vegetarianism first.
• Most respondents rated vegetarianism as healthy (72.1%) and nutritious (63.6%), indicating that the majority of UK meat-eaters do not have serious health concerns about giving up meat.

Limitations Noted in the Document

• The study relies on self-reported attitudes and intention measures, which are prone to social desirability bias.
• The sample was younger than the general UK population.
• The study’s recruitment was for meat-eaters only, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.
• The study design and analysis methods are subject to the limitations inherent in survey-based research, including potential biases in self-reported data.
• The study’s findings may not be generalizable to older populations, as the sample was younger than the general UK population.
• The specific questions and scales used in the survey may have limitations in capturing the full complexity of attitudes and behaviors related to vegetarianism and veganism.

Conclusion

The research emphasizes the importance of addressing practical barriers such as taste, price, and convenience to reduce animal product consumption. The study indicates a strong recognition of the ethical and environmental benefits of vegetarian and vegan diets among meat-eaters, but the adoption of these diets is hindered by practical considerations. This suggests that interventions focused on improving the quality, affordability, and accessibility of plant-based alternatives could be more effective than purely ideological arguments. The study underscores that veganism is viewed more negatively than vegetarianism. Therefore, promoting vegetarianism may be a more achievable step towards reducing meat consumption. Moreover, the study’s findings suggest that there is a high degree of agreement with the ethical and environmental arguments for vegetarianism and veganism. In the context of future research, the study points out the need for the development and marketing of products that can replace animal products, addressing deficiencies in taste, convenience, and price, as a promising strategy for reducing the consumption of animal products. This may entail innovations in plant-based meat analogs and cellular agriculture, which could overcome taste barriers and improve the availability of animal product alternatives.

DOI

10.3390/su11236844