Meat vs. Vegan: a battle between tradition and change

A pilot by supermarket chain Lidl, placing meat substitutes alongside their meat variants on the shelf, has triggered a wave of reactions among consumers. While some customers welcome the opportunity to discover vegetarian alternatives, others are angry and see the trial as an attempt to influence them and limit choice. Researchers at WUR respond to the commotion.

Negative reactions arose after the announcement of the pilot. Critics claim that the supermarket is misleading consumers by selling "wrong" products and telling them what to eat. Monique van der Meer, a PhD student in Marketing and Consumer Behavior involved in the pilot, thinks these reactions are premature. She emphasizes that the pilot has just started and that the results can only be analyzed after three months. Then it can be determined whether consumers are more likely to choose vegetarian when it is offered directly alongside meat.

Yolie Michielsen, PhD candidate at Consumption and Healthy Lifestyles, points out that meat is an emotionally charged topic. She explains that other choices in supermarket design usually do not cause a fuss. Freedom of choice plays an important role in reactions, with people considering the right to choose as an essential good. Van der Meer emphasizes that the pilot is not intended to mislead customers. The packaging of the meat substitutes is clearly different from that of the meat, minimizing confusion.

The researchers stress that some consumers are concerned that meat substitutes will eventually take over the meat shelf. These reactions stem from a general sense of resistance to change and possible interference by elites in consumer choice. However, the researchers emphasize that extreme reactions on social media represent only a small portion of the population. They note that flexitarianism is becoming increasingly popular and that there is evidence that the majority of Dutch people support reducing meat consumption.

Resource-online.nl