IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i13p6116-d1694271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Young Consumers’ Intention to Consume Innovative Food Products: The Case of Alternative Proteins

Author

Listed:
  • Angela Mariani

    (Department of Economics, Law, Cybersecurity, and Sports Sciences (DiSEGIM), University of Naples Parthenope, 80133 Naples, Italy)

  • Azzurra Annunziata

    (Department of Economic and Legal Studies (DiSEG), University of Naples Parthenope, 80133 Naples, Italy)

Abstract

The contemporary food environment is experiencing substantial transformations, and sustainability and the pursuit of novel ingredients have become pivotal factors in consumer decision-making and business strategy formulation. The emergence of alternative proteins has significant implications for sustainability, climate change mitigation and animal welfare, and can potentially promote the achievement of different United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. The spread of these novel foods requires significant attention, particularly concerning younger demographics, which are often considered to be more environmentally and ethically aware when making dietary choices. This study investigates the psychological and attitudinal factors that shape young consumers’ intention to consume plant-based, insect-based, and cultured meat alternative proteins, and verifies the existence of heterogeneous segments of consumers. To this purpose principal component analysis and k-means cluster analysis are employed using data from an online survey conducted in Italy, with a sample of 350 young consumers. The findings reveal that the intention to consume alternative protein sources is not particularly pronounced among the young consumers and differs according to the type of alternative protein. Three different profiles of young consumers were found: traditionalist (39% of the sample); enthusiastic (17%) and open-minded (44%). These segments differ significantly with respect to consumption intention, socio-demographic, lifestyle and psychological variables. The results provide useful insights for policymakers to design targeted interventions to encourage young consumers’ sustainable food choices. The findings could also be useful for marketers interested in investing in such innovations as they can benefit from an in-depth knowledge of this market segment.

Suggested Citation

  • Angela Mariani & Azzurra Annunziata, 2025. "Young Consumers’ Intention to Consume Innovative Food Products: The Case of Alternative Proteins," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-20, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:6116-:d:1694271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/6116/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/6116/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Van Loo, Ellen J. & Caputo, Vincenzina & Lusk, Jayson L., 2020. "Consumer preferences for farm-raised meat, lab-grown meat, and plant-based meat alternatives: Does information or brand matter?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    2. Agnieszka Orkusz & Wioletta Wolańska & Joanna Harasym & Arkadiusz Piwowar & Magdalena Kapelko, 2020. "Consumers’ Attitudes Facing Entomophagy: Polish Case Perspectives," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Naomi di Santo & Giovanbattista Califano & Roberta Sisto & Francesco Caracciolo & Vittoria Pilone, 2024. "Are university students really hungry for sustainability? A choice experiment on new food products from circular economy," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, December.
    4. 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.
    5. Jihee Hwang & Jihye You & Junghoon Moon & Jaeseok Jeong, 2020. "Factors Affecting Consumers’ Alternative Meats Buying Intentions: Plant-Based Meat Alternative and Cultured Meat," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    6. 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.
    7. Clara Frezal & Claude Nenert & Hubertus Gay, 2022. "Meat protein alternatives: Opportunities and challenges for food systems’ transformation," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 182, OECD Publishing.
    8. Nadia Palmieri & Maria Angela Perito & Claudio Lupi, 2020. "Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: some hints from Italy," Post-Print hal-03385175, HAL.
    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. 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.
    2. repec:osf:osfxxx:ze5yt_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Mélody Leplat & Youenn Loheac & Eric Teillet, 2022. "Preferences & choices experiments with real products consumption: application with plant-based proteins," Post-Print hal-03932623, HAL.
    4. Paul Fesenfeld, Lukas & Maier, Maiken & Brazzola, Nicoletta & Stolz, Niklas & Sun, Yixian & Kachi, Aya, 2023. "How information, social norms, and experience with novel meat substitutes can create positive political feedback and demand-side policy change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    5. Bazoche, Pascale & Guinet, Nicolas & Poret, Sylvaine & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2023. "Does the provision of information increase the substitution of animal proteins with plant-based proteins? An experimental investigation into consumer choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Lampi, Elina, 2022. "How much does it take? Willingness to switch to meat substitutes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    8. Maria Giovina Pasca & Gabriella Arcese, 2025. "Sustainability and Quality of Cultured Meat: Consumer Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, February.
    9. Donato, Carmela & Monsurrò, Luigi & Di Cioccio, Martina, 2024. "A matter of identity: Promoting plant-based food among meat-eaters through a common identity priming," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    10. Lin, Wen & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2022. "Green identity labeling, environmental information, and pro-environmental food choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    11. Hongxu Shi & Peihua Ma & Yinchu Zeng & Jiping Sheng, 2022. "Understanding the Interaction between Regulatory Focus and Message Framing in Determining Chinese Consumers’ Attitudes toward Artificial Meat," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-17, April.
    12. Bry-Chevalier, Tom, 2024. "Comparing the potential of meat alternatives for a more sustainable food system," OSF Preprints ze5yt, Center for Open Science.
    13. 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.
    14. Dimitris Skalkos & Ioanna S. Kosma & Eleni Chasioti & Thomas Bintsis & Haralabos C. Karantonis, 2021. "Consumers’ Perception on Traceability of Greek Traditional Foods in the Post-COVID-19 Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.
    15. Altmann, Brianne A. & Anders, Sven & Risius, Antje & Mörlein, Daniel, 2022. "Information effects on consumer preferences for alternative animal feedstuffs," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    16. 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).
    17. Dimitris Skalkos & Katerina Bamicha & Ioanna S. Kosma & Elpida Samara, 2023. "Greek Semi-Hard and Hard Cheese Consumers’ Perception in the New Global Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, March.
    18. Kelly Cooper & Ozgur Dedehayir & Carla Riverola & Stephen Harrington & Elizabeth Alpert, 2022. "Exploring Consumer Perceptions of the Value Proposition Embedded in Vegan Food Products Using Text Analytics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-16, February.
    19. Ha-Won Jang & Meehee Cho, 2022. "What Attributes of Meat Substitutes Matter Most to Consumers? The Role of Sustainability Education and the Meat Substitutes Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-15, April.
    20. Valerie Kilders & Vincenzina Caputo, 2024. "A reference‐price‐informed experiment to assess consumer demand for beef with a reduced carbon footprint," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(1), pages 3-20, January.
    21. 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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:6116-:d:1694271. 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.