Less Meat Initiatives at Ghent University: Assessing the Support among Students and How to Increase It
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Present Study
2.1. LMIs at Ghent University: Assessing the Support
2.2. The Influence of Explanatory Variables
2.3. The Influence of Information about the Climate Impact of Meat
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Preparation and Dissemination
3.2. Measures
4. Results
4.1. Assessing the Support for LMIs
4.2. The Influence of Explanatory Variables
4.3. The Influence of Information about the Climate Impact of Meat
5. Discussion
5.1. Assessing the Support for the LMIs
5.2. The Influence of Explanatory Variables
5.3. The Influence of Information about the Climate Impact of Meat
5.4. Limitations
6. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Aiking, H. Future protein supply. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2011, 22, 112–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Boer, J.; Aiking, H. On the merits of plant-based proteins for global food security: Marrying macro and micro perspectives. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70, 1259–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Bakker, E.; Dagevos, H. Reducing Meat Consumption in Today’s Consumer Society: Questioning the Citizen-Consumer Gap. J. Agric. Environ. Ethic 2012, 25, 877–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steinfeld, H.; Gerber, P.; Wassenaar, T.; Castel, V.; Rosales, M.; de Haan, C. Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options; United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Allodi, M.; Chikobava, D.; Lappalainen, J.; Tarhonen, N. Towards Sustainable Diets: Decreasing Meat Consumption. 2015. Available online: http://www.helsinki.fi/henvi/teaching/Reports_15/02_Sust_diets.pdf (accessed on 23 August 2016).
- Jurgilevich, A.; Birge, T.; Kentala-Lehtonen, J.; Korhonen-Kurki, K.; Pietikäinen, J.; Saikku, L.; Schösler, H. Transition towards Circular Economy in the Food System. Sustainability 2016, 8, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morris, C.; Kirwan, J.; Lally, R. Less Meat Initiatives: An Initial Exploration of a Diet-focused Social Innovation in Transitions to a More Sustainable Regime of Meat Provisioning. Int. J. Soc. Agric. Food 2014, 21, 189–208. [Google Scholar]
- Raphaely, T.; Marinova, D. Flexitarianism: A Moral Dietary Option. Int. J. Sustain. Soc. 2014, 6, 189–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sage, C. Making and un-making meat: Cultural boundaries, environmental thresholds and dietary transgressions. In Food Transgressions: Making Sense of Contemporary Food Politics; Goodman, M.K., Sage, C., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2014; pp. 181–203. [Google Scholar]
- Henchion, M.; De Backer, C.J.S.; Hudders, L. Ethical and sustainable aspects of meat production; consumer perceptions and system credibility. In New Aspects of Meat Quality: From Genes to Ethics; Purslow, P.P., Ed.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2017; pp. 649–666. [Google Scholar]
- Leroy, F.; Praet, I. Meat traditions. The co-evolution of humans and meat. Appetite 2015, 90, 200–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Austgulen, M.H.; Skuland, S.; Schjøll, A.; Alfnes, F. Consumer readiness to reduce meat consumptions and eat more climate friendly. In Proceedings of the 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, Naples, Italy, 25–27 March 2015; Available online: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/202757/2/Alfnes.pdf (accessed on 13 August 2016).
- De Boer, J.; Schösler, H.; Boersema, J.J. Climate change and meat eating: An inconvenient couple? J. Environ. Psychol. 2013, 33, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latvala, T.; Niva, M.; Mäkelä, J.; Pouta, E.; Heikkilä, J.; Kotro, J.; Forsman-Hugg, S. Diversifying meat consumption patterns: Consumers’ self-reported past behavior and intentions for change. Meat Sci. 2012, 92, 71–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Macdiarmid, J.I.; Douglas, F.; Campbell, J. Eating like there’s no tomorrow: Public awareness of the environmental impact of food and reluctance to eat less meat as part of a sustainable diet. Appetite 2016, 96, 487–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tobler, C.; Visschers, V.H.M.; Siegrist, M. Eating green: Consumers’ willingness to adopt ecological food consumption behaviors. Appetite 2011, 57, 674–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vanhonacker, F.; Van Loo, E.; Gellynck, X.; Verbeke, W. Flemish consumer attitudes towards more sustainable food choices. Appetite 2013, 62, 7–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lea, E.; Worsley, A. Benefits and barriers to the consumption of a vegetarian diet in Australia. Public Health Nutr. 2003, 6, 505–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ruby, M.B.; Heine, S.J. Meat, morals, and masculinity. Appetite 2011, 56, 447–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ghent University. Sustainability Report Ghent University. 2016. Available online: http://www.iau-hesd.net/sites/default/files/documents/ghent_university_2016.pdf (accessed on 20 August 2016).
- Ghent University. Transitie UGent, Samen voor een Duurzame Universiteit. 2014. Available online: https://issuu.com/universiteitgent/docs/memorandum_transitie_ugent_2014 (accessed on 13 December 2014).
- De Boer, J.; Schösler, H.; Aiking, H. “Meatless days” or ”less but better”? Exploring strategies to adapt Western meat consumption to health and sustainability challenges. Appetite 2014, 76, 120–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Verain, M.C.D.; Dagevos, H.; Antonides, G. Sustainable food consumption: Product choice of food curtailment? Appetite 2015, 91, 1–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Bakker, E.; Dagevos, H. Vleesminnaars, vleesminderaars en vleesmijders—Duurzame eiwitconsumptie in een carnivore eetcultuur. LEI Wageningen, 2012. Available online: http://edepot.wur.nl/141743 (accessed on 13 May 2015).
- Dagevos, H.; Voordouw, J.; van Hoeven, L.; van der Weele, C.; de Bakker, E. Vlees Vooral(Snog) Vanzelfsprekend—Consumenten over Vlees Eten en Vleesminderen; LEI-Rapport 2012-029; LEI Wageningen: The Hague, The Netherlands, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Verbeke, W. Profiling consumers who are ready to adopt insects as a meat substitute in a Western society. Food Qual. Preference 2015, 39, 147–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bamberg, S.; Möser, G. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 2007, 27, 14–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fransson, N.; Gärling, T. Environmental Concern: Conceptual Definitions, Measurement Methods, and Research Findings. J. Environ. Psychol. 1999, 19, 369–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ractliffe, T.P. Environmental Concern, Knowledge, and the Enactment of Environmental Citizenship in a Retail Food Environment: An Investigation into the Perceptions and Behaviours of Cape Town Consumers. Master’s Thesis, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa, 11 November 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Steg, L.; Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. J. Environ. Psychol. 2009, 29, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luchs, M.G.; Mooradian, T.A. Sex, personality and sustainable consumer behaviour: Elucidating the gender effect. J. Consum. Policy 2012, 35, 127–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cordts, A.; Nitzko, S.; Spiller, A. Consumer response to negative information on meat consumption in Germany. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 2014, 17, 83–106. [Google Scholar]
- Rothgerber, H. Real Men Don’t Eat (Vegetable) Quiche: Masculinity and the Justification of Meat Consumption. Psychol. Men Masc. 2012, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruby, M.B. Vegetarianism. A blossoming field of study. Appetite 2012, 58, 141–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kubberød, E.; Ueland, O.; Rodbotten, M.; Westad, F.; Risvik, E. Gender specific preferences and attitudes towards meat. Food Qual. Preference 2002, 13, 285–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Graça, J.; Oliveira, A.; Calheiros, M.M. Meat, beyond the plate. Data-driven hypotheses for understanding consumer willingness to adopt a more plant-based diet. Appetite 2015, 90, 80–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pohjolainen, P.; Vinnari, M.; Jokinen, P. Consumers’ perceived barriers to following a plant-based diet. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 1150–1167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holm, L.; Møhl, M. Dietary restraint and self-reported meal sizes: Diary studies with differentially informed consent. Appetite 2000, 34, 235–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pohjolainen, P.; Tapio, P.; Vinnari, M.; Jokinen, P.; Räsänen, P. Consumer consciousness on meat and the environment—Exploring differences. Appetite 2016, 101, 37–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Povey, R.; Wellens, B.; Conner, M. Attitudes towards following meat, vegetarian and vegan diets: An examination of the role of ambivalence. Appetite 2001, 37, 15–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Boer, J.; de Witt, A.; Aiking, H. Help the climate, change your diet: A cross-sectional study on how to involve consumers in a transition to a low-carbon society. Appetite 2016, 98, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Diekmann, A.; Preisendörfer, P. Green and greenback the behavioral effects of environmental attitudes in low-cost and high-cost situations. Ration. Soc. 2003, 15, 441–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berndsen, M.; van der Pligt, J. Risks of meat: The relative impact of cognitive, affective and moral concerns. Appetite 2005, 44, 195–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dagevos, H.; Voordouw, J. Sustainability and meat consumption: Is reduction realistic? Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy 2013, 9, 60–69. [Google Scholar]
- Mäkiniemi, J.P.; Vainio, A. Barriers to climate-friendly food choices among young adults in Finland. Appetite 2014, 74, 12–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fiala, N. Meeting the demand: An estimation of potential future greenhouse gas emissions from meat production. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 67, 412–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stehfest, E.; Bouwman, L.; Van Vuuren, D.P.; Den Elzen, M.G.J.; Eickhout, B.; Kabat, P. Climate benefits of changing diet. Clim. Chang. 2009, 95, 83–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whitmarsh, L.; O’Neill, S. Green identity, green living? The role of pro-environmental self-identity in determining consistency across diverse pro-environmental behaviours. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 20, 305–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaspar, R.; Luís, S.; Seibt, B.; Lima, M.L.; Marcu, A.; Rutsaert, P.; Fletcher, D.; Verbeke, W.; Barnett, J. Consumers’ avoidance of information on red meat risks: Information exposure effects on attitudes and perceived knowledge. J. Risk Res. 2015, 19, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Onwezen, M.C.; van der Weele, C.N. When indifference is ambivalence: Strategic ignorance about meat consumption. Food Qual. Preference 2016, 52, 96–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schösler, H.; de Boer, J.; Boersema, J.J. Can we cut out the meat of the dish? Constructing consumer-oriented pathways towards meat substitution. Appetite 2012, 58, 39–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Takács-Sánta, A. Barriers to environmental concern. Res. Hum. Ecol. 2007, 14, 26–38. [Google Scholar]
- Sheppard, B.; Frazer, P. Comparing Social and Intellectual Appeals to Reduce Disgust of Eating Crickets. Stud. Arts Humanit. 2015, 1, 4–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haidt, J.; McCauley, C.; Rozin, P. Individual differences in sensitivity to disgust: A scale sampling seven domains of disgust elicitors. Personal. Individ. Differ. 1994, 16, 701–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rothgerber, H. Efforts to overcome vegetarian-induced dissonance among meat eaters. Appetite 2014, 79, 32–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Verain, M.C.D.; Sijtesma, S.J.; Dagevos, H.; Antonides, G. Attribute Segmentation and Communication Effects on Healthy and Sustainable Consumer Diet Intentions. Sustainability 2017, 9, 743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mikkola, M. Shaping professional identity for sustainability. Evidence in Finnish public catering. Appetite 2009, 53, 56–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wahlen, S.; Heiskanen, E.; Aalto, K. Endorsing sustainable food consumption: Prospects from public catering. J. Consum. Policy 2012, 35, 7–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
LMI (Ghent University) | Term | LMI (Formulation in the Survey) | Acronym |
---|---|---|---|
Sustainability barometer | 2013 | “Presenting the ecological footprint for every main meal (in the same way as the amounts of calories for every meal is presented now).” | E |
Eating beef once a week at maximum | 2014 | “Eating beef or mutton once a week at maximum.” | M |
Introducing alternative foods, such as insects | 2015 | “Introducing insect-based foods (lower environmental impact than meat).” | I |
Portions of 100 g instead of 120 g meat per meal | 2015 | “Reduce your portions of meat per meal (for example, 100 g instead of 120 g).” | P |
50% vegetarian meals and 50% meals with meat or fish (including snacks) | 2020 | “Increase the supply of vegetarian main meals up to 50% of the meals.” | V |
The contrarian week (four out of five days a week only vegetarian meals) | 2030 | “Switching to a ‘contrarian week’ in student restaurants whereby meals with meat are served one day a week, and vegetarian meals four days a week.” | C |
KNIM (Theme) | Mean ± SD (−2, …, +2) | Very Little | Little | Not Little/Not Much | Rather Much | Very Much |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Environment | −0.10 ± 1.03 | 9.79 | 24.48 | 36.83 | 24.24 | 4.66 |
Animal welfare | −0.16 ± 0.95 | 8.39 | 25.64 | 43.12 | 19.11 | 3.73 |
Health | −0.18 ± 0.93 | 8.16 | 26.81 | 41.96 | 20.75 | 2.33 |
Global food distribution | −0.49 ± 0.90 | 12.35 | 38.46 | 36.36 | 11.66 | 1.17 |
E | P | V | M | I | C | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
E | - | |||||
P | 0.39 | - | ||||
V | 0.34 | 0.52 | - | |||
M | 0.27 | 0.52 | 0.38 | - | ||
I | 0.19 | 0.17 | 0.18 | 0.13 | - | |
C | 0.24 | 0.38 | 0.58 | 0.40 | 0.24 | - |
Explanatory Variables | E | P | V | M | I | C |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sex (male = 0, female = 1) | −0.01 | 0.32 *** | 0.21 *** | 0.23 *** | −0.19 *** | 0.16 *** |
Meat consumption (sample 1, N = 191) | −0.09 | −0.26 *** | −0.30 *** | −0.25 *** | 0.02 | −0.33 *** |
Meat consumption (sample 2, N = 238) | −0.06 | −0.24 *** | −0.25 *** | −0.18 ** | 0.11 | −0.23 *** |
General environmental concern | 0.37 *** | 0.38 *** | 0.29 *** | 0.20 *** | 0.20 *** | 0.22 *** |
KNIM (general) | 0.13 ** | 0.16 *** | 0.20 *** | 0.04 | 0.22 *** | 0.18 *** |
- environment | 0.19 *** | 0.19 *** | 0.21 *** | 0.04 | 0.29 *** | 0.18 *** |
- animal welfare | 0.05 | 0.15 ** | 0.12 * | 0.05 | 0.10 * | 0.08 |
- health | 0.11 * | 0.10 * | 0.16 *** | 0.05 | 0.15 ** | 0.17 *** |
- global food distribution | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.10 | −0.03 | 0.13 ** | 0.09 |
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
De Groeve, B.; Bleys, B. Less Meat Initiatives at Ghent University: Assessing the Support among Students and How to Increase It. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1550. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091550
De Groeve B, Bleys B. Less Meat Initiatives at Ghent University: Assessing the Support among Students and How to Increase It. Sustainability. 2017; 9(9):1550. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091550
Chicago/Turabian StyleDe Groeve, Benjamin, and Brent Bleys. 2017. "Less Meat Initiatives at Ghent University: Assessing the Support among Students and How to Increase It" Sustainability 9, no. 9: 1550. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091550