IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlcjs/v70y2025i6id31-2025-cjas.html

Consumer perceptions of lab-grown cells: Awareness, barriers, and the power of information. A review

Author

Listed:
  • Katalin Szendrő

    (Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Kaposvár, Hungary)

Abstract

Lab-grown cells (also known as cell-based or cultured meat) are novel food innovations that face uncertain consumer acceptance. This review examines recent research (2020-2024) on consumer perceptions of lab-grown cells, focusing on three main areas: (1) public awareness and familiarity, (2) psychological and cultural aspects shaping perceptions, and (3) the impact of information on acceptance. Results show that the awareness of lab-grown cells varies widely across regions; in countries with high meat consumption, such as the USA and Australia, or where culinary delights are highly valued, such as France, respondents rated lab-grown cells lower than in those countries where meat consumption is now rising, for example, China or Mexico. The knowledge of lab-grown cells positively impacted attitude, while psychological barriers (e.g. food neophobia) and disgust emerged as key deterrents. The information provided to respondents significantly influenced their willingness to accept, buy, try, eat, and pay premium prices. Personal (mainly health-related) benefits significantly increased the acceptance of lab-grown cells, while societal benefits (e.g. benefits to the environment or animal welfare) had less prominent effects than expected. At the same time, information regarding production technology (high-tech, laboratory, artificial) resulted in lower ratings from respondents. The conclusion is that overlooking the positive attributes of meat and focusing on the unproven advantages of lab-grown cells may lead to misleading results. On the other hand, effective communication - especially messages highlighting personal benefits - can substantially improve the consumer openness.

Suggested Citation

  • Katalin Szendrő, 2025. "Consumer perceptions of lab-grown cells: Awareness, barriers, and the power of information. A review," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 70(6), pages 203-222.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlcjs:v:70:y:2025:i:6:id:31-2025-cjas
    DOI: 10.17221/31/2025-CJAS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cjas.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/31/2025-CJAS.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://cjas.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/31/2025-CJAS.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/31/2025-CJAS?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leonore Lewisch & Petra Riefler, 2023. "Cultured meat acceptance for global food security: a systematic literature review and future research directions," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Aisha Egolf & Christina Hartmann & Michael Siegrist, 2019. "When Evolution Works Against the Future: Disgust's Contributions to the Acceptance of New Food Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(7), pages 1546-1559, July.
    3. repec:plo:pone00:0171904 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ortega, David L. & Sun, Jiayu & Lin, Wen, 2022. "Identity labels as an instrument to reduce meat demand and encourage consumption of plant based and cultured meat alternatives in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    5. Nathalie C M Rolland & C Rob Markus & Mark J Post, 2020. "The effect of information content on acceptance of cultured meat in a tasting context," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Septianto, Felix & Sung, Billy & Duong, Chien & Conroy, Denise, 2023. "Are two reasons better than one? How natural and ethical appeals influence consumer preferences for clean meat," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    2. Shahida Anusha Siddiqui & Tayyaba Alvi & Aysha Sameen & Sipper Khan & Andrey Vladimirovich Blinov & Andrey Ashotovich Nagdalian & Mohammad Mehdizadeh & Danung Nur Adli & Marleen Onwezen, 2022. "Consumer Acceptance of Alternative Proteins: A Systematic Review of Current Alternative Protein Sources and Interventions Adapted to Increase Their Acceptability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Romain Espinosa & Nicolas Treich, 2023. "Eliciting Non-hypothetical Willingness-to-pay for Novel Products: An Application to Cultured Meat," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(3), pages 673-706, August.
    4. Vincent A. Rabl & Frédéric Basso, 2021. "When Bad Becomes Worse: Unethical Corporate Behavior May Hamper Consumer Acceptance of Cultured Meat," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Nouve, Yawotse & Zheng, Yuqing & Zhao, Shuoli & Kaiser, Harry M. & Dong, Diansheng, 2024. "A detailed demand analysis of plant-based meat alternatives vs. animal-based meat in the United States," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343798, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Sunil P. Dhoubhadel & William Ridley, 2025. "China's meat sector growth and U.S. grain and oilseed exports," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(1), pages 275-303, March.
    7. Rabl, Vincent A. & Basso, Frédéric, 2021. "When bad becomes worse: unethical corporate behavior may hamper consumer acceptance of cultured meat," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110789, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Angela Bearth & Gulbanu Kaptan & Sabrina Heike Kessler, 2022. "Genome-edited versus genetically-modified tomatoes: an experiment on people’s perceptions and acceptance of food biotechnology in the UK and Switzerland," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(3), pages 1117-1131, September.
    9. Michael Siegrist & Joseph Árvai, 2020. "Risk Perception: Reflections on 40 Years of Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2191-2206, November.
    10. Tobias-Mamina, Rejoice & Jordaan, Yolanda & Lin, Lin & Ortega, David L., 2025. "The Effects of Information and Naming Restriction on South African Consumer Preferences for Farm-raised Meat and Meat Alternatives," 2025 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2025, Denver, CO 360835, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Annika Lonkila & Minna Kaljonen, 2021. "Promises of meat and milk alternatives: an integrative literature review on emergent research themes," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 625-639, September.
    12. Yuan, Rao & Asioli, Daniele & Jin, Shaosheng & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2021. "Consumers’ Valuation for Cultured Chicken Meat: A Multi-city Choice Experiment in China," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313957, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Maria Giovina Pasca & Gabriella Arcese, 2025. "Sustainability and Quality of Cultured Meat: Consumer Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, February.
    14. Nor Farhana Humairah Nordin & Nur Aufa Amilee Addie Irman & Intisya’ Adnin Zulaikha Mohd Shuhaidi & Batrisya Nur Mohd Kafli & Mohd Harifadilah Rosidi, 2025. "From Lab to Table: Islamic Jurisprudential Analysis of Cultured Meat Production," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 9(7), pages 4857-4868, July.
    15. Meike Rombach & David Dean & Frank Vriesekoop & Bin Jiang & Zeyuan Zhou & Wendy Hao & Wim Koning, 2025. "Understanding factors determining Chinese consumer’s willingness to eat cultured meat, insect, and plant-based proteins," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 22(1), pages 77-109, March.
    16. Antonella Samoggia & Chiara Benussi & Giuseppe Macaione, 2025. "Factors Shaping the Business Development of the Alternative Protein Transition: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-17, September.
    17. Lenore Newman & Robert Newell & Colin Dring & Alesandros Glaros & Evan Fraser & Zsofia Mendly-Zambo & Arthur Gill Green & Krishna Bahadur KC, 2023. "Agriculture for the Anthropocene: novel applications of technology and the future of food," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 15(3), pages 613-627, June.
    18. Weijun Liu & Zhipeng Hao & Wojciech J. Florkowski & Linhai Wu & Zhengyong Yang, 2022. "Assuring Food Security: Consumers’ Ethical Risk Perception of Meat Substitutes," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-19, May.
    19. Rao Yuan & Shaosheng Jin & Lin Zhou & Hsiaoping Chien & Wenchao Wu, 2025. "Promoting eco‐labeled food consumption in China: The role of information," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(2), pages 401-423, April.
    20. Asioli, Daniele & Fuentes-Pila, Joaquìn & Alarcón, Silverio & Han, Jia & Liu, Jingjing & Hocquette, Jean-Francois & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2022. "Consumers’ valuation of cultured beef Burger: A Multi-Country investigation using choice experiments," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlcjs:v:70:y:2025:i:6:id:31-2025-cjas. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.