IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i11p4377-d363409.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is India Ready for Alt-Meat? Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Meat Alternatives

Author

Listed:
  • Rashmit S. Arora

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Rural Sociology, and Education, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA)

  • Daniel A. Brent

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Rural Sociology, and Education, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA)

  • Edward C. Jaenicke

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Rural Sociology, and Education, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA)

Abstract

Little is known about the consumer preferences of next-generation plant-based and cell-based meat alternatives, two food technologies that offer a demand-side solution to the environmental, nutritional, and other societal concerns associated with animal-intensive agriculture. To address this gap, this paper estimates consumers’ willingness to pay for four sources of protein (conventional meat, plant-based meat, cell-based meat, and chickpeas) in a developing country with rising demand for meat—India. A latent class model of a discrete choice experiment conducted in Mumbai identifies four heterogeneous segments in the Indian market. Aggregating across all four segments, respondents are willing to pay a premium for plant-based meat and a smaller premium for cell-based meat over the price of conventional meat. However, our main findings show that these premiums strongly differ across the four consumer-class segments. The results offer important insights into future price points and policy options that might make these meat alternatives commercially successful, and therefore, a viable option in addressing societal concerns.

Suggested Citation

  • Rashmit S. Arora & Daniel A. Brent & Edward C. Jaenicke, 2020. "Is India Ready for Alt-Meat? Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Meat Alternatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:11:p:4377-:d:363409
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/11/4377/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/11/4377/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brunner, Florentine & Kurz, Verena & Bryngelsson, David & Hedenus, Fredrik, 2018. "Carbon Label at a University Restaurant – Label Implementation and Evaluation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 658-667.
    2. Kyungsoo Nam & Heesun Lim & Byeong-il Ahn, 2020. "Analysis of Consumer Preference for Milk Produced through Sustainable Farming: The Case of Mountainous Dairy Farming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(8), pages 827-840, August.
    4. Daniel McFadden, 2001. "Economic Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 351-378, June.
    5. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    6. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    7. de Boer, Joop & Aiking, Harry, 2011. "On the merits of plant-based proteins for global food security: Marrying macro and micro perspectives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1259-1265, May.
    8. Nijdam, Durk & Rood, Trudy & Westhoek, Henk, 2012. "The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 760-770.
    9. Daesoo Kim & Ranjan Parajuli & Gregory J. Thoma, 2020. "Life Cycle Assessment of Dietary Patterns in the United States: A Full Food Supply Chain Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, February.
    10. Danny Campbell & Seda Erdem, 2019. "Including Opt-Out Options in Discrete Choice Experiments: Issues to Consider," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, February.
    11. Cynthia Yip & Glenis Crane & Jonathan Karnon, 2013. "Systematic review of reducing population meat consumption to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and obtain health benefits: effectiveness and models assessments," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 58(5), pages 683-693, October.
    12. 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.
    13. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    14. Rehkamp, Sarah & Canning, Patrick, 2018. "Measuring Embodied Blue Water in American Diets: An EIO Supply Chain Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 179-188.
    15. Grabs, Janina, 2015. "The rebound effects of switching to vegetarianism. A microeconomic analysis of Swedish consumption behavior," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 270-279.
    16. Neil Chalmers & Stacia Stetkiewicz & Padhmanand Sudhakar & Hibbah Osei-Kwasi & Christian J Reynolds, 2019. "Impacts of Reducing UK Beef Consumption Using a Revised Sustainable Diets Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-20, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Lampi, Elina, 2022. "Sustainable food: Can information from food labels make consumers switch to meat substitutes?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    4. 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.

    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. Khakdaman, Masoud & Rezaei, Jafar & Tavasszy, Lóránt, 2022. "Shippers’ willingness to use flexible transportation services," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1-20.
    2. Choi, Andy S., 2011. "Implicit prices for longer temporary exhibitions in a heritage site and a test of preference heterogeneity: A segmentation-based approach," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 511-519.
    3. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    4. Balogh, Péter & Török, Áron & Czine, Péter & Horváth, Péter, 2020. "A fogyasztói magatartás elemzése feltételes választási modellekkel - a mangalicakolbász példáján [Analysing consumer behaviour with conditional choice models, with Mangalica sausage as an example]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(5), pages 474-494.
    5. Yang Yang & Jill E. Hobbs & David C. Natcher, 2020. "The Arctic as a food producing region: Consumer perceptions and market segments," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(4), pages 387-410, December.
    6. Sardaro, Ruggiero & Faccilongo, Nicola & Roselli, Luigi, 2019. "Wind farms, farmland occupation and compensation: Evidences from landowners’ preferences through a stated choice survey in Italy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    7. Andy Choi, 2009. "Willingness to pay: how stable are the estimates?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 33(4), pages 301-310, November.
    8. Ruggiero Sardaro & Nicola Faccilongo & Francesco Contò & Piermichele La Sala, 2021. "Adaption Actions to Cope with Climate Change: Evidence from Farmers’ Preferences on an Agrobiodiversity Conservation Programme in the Mediterranean Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, May.
    9. D Rigby & M Burton, 2003. "Capturing Preference Heterogeneity in Stated Choice Models: A Random Parameter Logit Model of the Demand for GM Food," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0319, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    10. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    11. Dhakal, Bhubaneswor & Yao, Richard T. & Turner, James A. & Barnard, Tim, 2012. "Recreational users' willingness to pay and preferences for changes in planted forest features," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 34-44.
    12. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    13. Sardaro, Ruggiero & La Sala, Piermichele & De Pascale, Gianluigi & Faccilongo, Nicola, 2021. "The conservation of cultural heritage in rural areas: Stakeholder preferences regarding historical rural buildings in Apulia, southern Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    14. Chiadmi, Ines & Traoré, Sidnoma Abdoul Aziz & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2020. "Asian tiger mosquito far from home: Assessing the impact of invasive mosquitoes on the French Mediterranean littoral," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    15. Mathieu Lambotte & Stephane De Cara & Valentin Bellassen, 2020. "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, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 101(1), pages 147-172.
    16. Makiko Nakano, 2019. "Evaluation of Corporate Social Responsibility by Consumers: Use of Organic Material and Long Working Hours of Employees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-16, September.
    17. Carnegie, Rachel & Wang, Holly & Widmar, Nicole & Ortega, David, 2014. "Consumer Preferences for Quality and Safety Attributes of Duck in Restaurant Entrees: Is China A Viable Market for The U.S. Duck Industry?," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170717, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Richartz, P. Christoph & Abdulai, Awudu & Kornher, Lukas, 2020. "Attribute Non Attendance and Consumer Preferences for Online Food Products in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(1), March.
    19. Fewell, Jason E. & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2016. "Farmers' willingness to contract switchgrass as a cellulosic bioenergy crop in Kansas," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 292-302.
    20. Hackbarth, André & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Willingness-to-pay for alternative fuel vehicle characteristics: A stated choice study for Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 89-111.

    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:12:y:2020:i:11:p:4377-:d:363409. 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.