IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i16p7161-d1460345.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Acceptance of Grass-Derived Ingredients in the UK: A Cross-Sectional Study

Author

Listed:
  • Anne Wambui Mumbi

    (Harper Adams Business School, Harper Adams University, Newport TF10 8NB, Shropshire, UK
    Engineering Department, Harper Adams University, Newport TF10 8NB, Shropshire, UK)

  • Helen Pittson

    (Harper Food Innovation, Harper Adams University, Newport TF10 8NB, Shropshire, UK)

  • Frank Vriesekoop

    (Harper Food Innovation, Harper Adams University, Newport TF10 8NB, Shropshire, UK)

  • Sebnem Kurhan

    (Engineering Department, Harper Adams University, Newport TF10 8NB, Shropshire, UK)

Abstract

The development of sustainable food production requires reducing the strain from present production systems on the environment using novel/disruptive technologies, one of which is to use grass as an abundantly available raw material, either minimally processed grass or grass-derived ingredients. With grass supplies readily available and the potentially significant carbon footprint reduction that this technology offers, this is an opportunity for sustainable production of much-needed food ingredients for human consumption. This study investigates UK consumers’ acceptance of grass-derived ingredients and examines the factors influencing their willingness to adopt these innovations as part of their diets. This study was conducted through a cross-sectional study in the UK, in which the participants were divided into three groups based on meat avoidance, i.e., meat reducers, meat avoiders, and meat consumers. The key findings emphasise the importance of education on grass-derived products to enhance consumer awareness and confidence. Other factors—such as age, meat attachment, grass-derived ingredients’ characteristics, social norms, and attitudes—have influenced willingness to try (WTT)/accept grass-derived ingredients. The findings suggest that while grass-derived ingredients in human diets may struggle to gain positive perceptions, targeted product development and marketing strategies tailored to highlight grass-derived ingredients’ nutritional benefits and safety are key to reshaping perceptions and fostering consumer readiness for novel food technologies in the UK.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne Wambui Mumbi & Helen Pittson & Frank Vriesekoop & Sebnem Kurhan, 2024. "Consumer Acceptance of Grass-Derived Ingredients in the UK: A Cross-Sectional Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-20, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:16:p:7161-:d:1460345
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/16/7161/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/16/7161/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rajeev Ravindran & Sybrandus Koopmans & Johan P. M. Sanders & Helena McMahon & James Gaffey, 2021. "Production of Green Biorefinery Protein Concentrate Derived from Perennial Ryegrass as an Alternative Feed for Pigs," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-14, September.
    2. Ruben Sanchez-Sabate & Joan Sabaté, 2019. "Consumer Attitudes Towards Environmental Concerns of Meat Consumption: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-37, April.
    3. Roberts, James A., 1996. "Green Consumers in the 1990s: Profile and Implications for Advertising," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 217-231, July.
    4. Jayson L. Lusk & Keith H. Coble, 2005. "Risk Perceptions, Risk Preference, and Acceptance of Risky Food," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 393-405.
    5. David Kühn & Adriano Profeta & Thomas Krikser & Volker Heinz, 2023. "Adaption of the meat attachment scale (MEAS) to Germany: interplay with food neophobia, preference for organic foods, social trust and trust in food technology innovations," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, December.
    6. Kopalle, Praveen K. & Lehmann, Donald R., 1997. "Alpha Inflation? The Impact of Eliminating Scale Items on Cronbach's Alpha," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 189-197, June.
    7. Apostolidis, Chrysostomos & McLeay, Fraser, 2016. "Should we stop meating like this? Reducing meat consumption through substitution," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 74-89.
    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. Jan-Felix Palnau & Matthias Ziegler & Lena Lämmle, 2022. "You Are What You Eat and So Is Our Planet: Identifying Dietary Groups Based on Personality and Environmentalism," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-19, July.
    2. Bonnet, Céline & Coinon, Marine, 2024. "Environmental co-benefits of health policies to reduce meat consumption: A narrative review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    3. Oliver Meixner & Michael Malleier & Rainer Haas, 2024. "Towards Sustainable Eating Habits of Generation Z: Perception of and Willingness to Pay for Plant-Based Meat Alternatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, April.
    4. Coucke, Nicky & Vermeir, Iris & Slabbinck, Hendrik & Geuens, Maggie & Choueiki, Ziad, 2022. "How to reduce agri-environmental impacts on ecosystem services: the role of nudging techniques to increase purchase of plant-based meat substitutes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    5. Andreja Vezovnik & Tanja Kamin, 2024. "Young Flexitarians: An Insight into Barriers and Facilitators Related to Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation for Meat Reduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-20, October.
    6. Annika J. Thies & Matthias Staudigel & Daniela Weible, 2023. "A segmentation of fresh meat shoppers based on revealed preferences," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1075-1099, October.
    7. Michelle S. Segovia & No‐Ya Yu & Ellen J. Van Loo, 2023. "The effect of information nudges on online purchases of meat alternatives," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 106-127, March.
    8. Matteo Migheli, 2021. "Green purchasing: the effect of parenthood and gender," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 10576-10600, July.
    9. Hsu, Chia-Lin & Chang, Chi-Ya & Yansritakul, Chutinart, 2017. "Exploring purchase intention of green skincare products using the theory of planned behavior: Testing the moderating effects of country of origin and price sensitivity," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 145-152.
    10. Zou, Lili Wenli & Chan, Ricky Y.K., 2019. "Why and when do consumers perform green behaviors? An examination of regulatory focus and ethical ideology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 113-127.
    11. Gonçalves, Helena Martins & Lourenço, Tiago Ferreira & Silva, Graça Miranda, 2016. "Green buying behavior and the theory of consumption values: A fuzzy-set approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 1484-1491.
    12. Jaiswal, Deepak & Kant, Rishi, 2018. "Green purchasing behaviour: A conceptual framework and empirical investigation of Indian consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 60-69.
    13. Pakvalit Kurkoon & Daranee Pimchangthong & Veera Boonjing, 2015. "A Conceptual Framework for Individual Green Information Technology Consumption and its Impact," Journal of Business & Management (COES&RJ-JBM), , vol. 3(3), pages 388-396, July.
    14. Christine L. Crago & Rong Rong, 2025. "Behavioral preferences and contract choice in the residential solar PV market," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 107(1), pages 27-53, January.
    15. Yu Na Lee & Laura Stortz & Mike von Massow & Christopher Kimmerer, 2023. "Impact of ‘‘high in” front‐of‐package nutrition labeling on food choices: Evidence from a grocery shopping experiment," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 71(3-4), pages 277-301, September.
    16. Mathieu Lambotte & Stephane Cara & Valentin Bellassen, 2021. "Correction to: Once a quality-food consumer, always a quality-food consumer? Consumption patterns of organic, label rouge, and geographical indications in French scanner data," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(4), pages 479-480, December.
    17. Xu, Yalin & Zhang, Zhiwen & Ren, Yanjun & Yuan, Rong & Wang, Yanan & Li, Rui & Zhao, Shunan & Qiu, Lu, 2024. "Can carbon labels shift consumers towards sustainable food? Evidence from Chinese consumers," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 8, pages 1-13.
    18. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Angela Zinnai & Alberto Pardossi, 2018. "A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Maria Rodrigues & João F. Proença & Rita Macedo, 2023. "Determinants of the Purchase of Secondhand Products: An Approach by the Theory of Planned Behaviour," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-18, July.
    20. Nenita B. Nagarit, DBA & Susana C. Bautista, EdD & Ferdinand C. Somido, PhD & Pedrito Jose V. Bermudo, PhD & Antonio D.Yango, PhD & Leomar S. Galicia, PhD, 2018. "Transforming Online Negative Blogs in the Use of Credit Cards in Electronics Transactions into Constructive Action: Basis of Creating Business Spend Analyzer Model," Journal of Business & Management (COES&RJ-JBM), , vol. 6(1), pages 66-83, January.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:16:p:7161-:d:1460345. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.