Modeling the Effect of Climate Change on Sustainable Food Consumption Behaviors: A Study on Artificial Meat and Edible Insects

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the effects of individuals’ climate change risk perceptions on artificial meat and edible insect diffusion optimism and the mediating role of food neophobia in these effects. The findings of this study are important because of the contribution that the preference behavior of innovative foods for mitigating the impact of climate change and managing climate change-induced food shortages can make within the framework of the Protection Motivation Theory. Türkiye was selected as the research region. The data obtained using quantitative analysis methods were transformed into findings through statistical analysis (such as structural equation modeling). This study revealed that individuals with high climate change risk perception evaluate alternative protein sources such as artificial meat and edible insects more positively. Food neophobia does not play an important role in these trends. This study emphasizes the importance of sustainable food consumption in combating climate change. To promote the spread of alternative protein sources, such as artificial meat and edible insects, individuals’ risk perceptions need to be increased, and food neophobia needs to be reduced. In this context, it is recommended to increase public awareness of climate change and develop educational programs. This study has the potential to contribute to the development of strategies to promote sustainable food consumption behaviors.

1. Introduction

Climate change is one of the serious global problems that calls for behavioral transformations leading to reduced greenhouse gas emissions [1]. The increasing rate of greenhouse gas emission, rising temperatures, melting of glaciers, and increased frequency of extreme weather conditions are ways indicating that climate change is real and urgent [2]. People’s risk perceptions about climate change largely influence their decisions, including food intake, which is central to mitigating the climate change problem [3]. Traditionally, reared meat cannot be sustained environmentally owing to huge emissions of greenhouse gases, water usage, and land occupation; this calls for alternative protein sources, including artificial meat and edible insects [1]. However, when agricultural production is jeopardized due to the changing climate, this can make it much more challenging for societies to obtain the food they need. Against such a backdrop, how individuals perceive the risk of climate change and how those perceptions influence day-to-day choices become very relevant.

This requires an all-inclusive approach that entails the integration of mitigation and adaptation strategies to deal with the challenges climate change poses, especially if they involve food crises [4]. Mitigation involves reducing greenhouse gas emissions so that climate change will not go too far, while the adaptation strategy works on building resilience to the impacts of climate change on food systems [5]. These counterbalancing mitigation measures in terms of environmental impacts from food production and contributing to the mitigation of climate change are represented by a shift towards sustainable agricultural practices, reduction in food waste, and promotion of plant-based diets [6]. On the other hand, another tool that can be used by humankind in this struggle is the diffusion of alternative protein sources [7,8]. Edible insects and artificial meats have slowly come under the spotlight as possible alternatives to traditional animal-based proteins [9]. For instance, edible insect farming can provide one with protein in a much more environmentally friendly manner compared to traditional livestock farming, as these insects turn organic side streams into protein in a very efficient manner [10]. However, a key problem that has to be ascertained is the propensity to consume such food and the rate of adoption by societies. Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) is helpful in explaining a scenario where the perceived risk of climate change influences the propensity to consume artificial meat and edible insects. PMT provides a framework with respect to how individuals respond to threats and their motivation to protect themselves as well [11]. This theory features threat perception, which gives consideration to the severity and susceptibility of a threat, and coping perception, which evaluates the response effectiveness and self-efficacy in performing these responses. Climate change risk perceptions may encourage individuals to consider alternative protein sources, such as artificial meat and edible insects.

It has been proved through research that climate change risk perception signifies a significant level of concern. Such people perceive less uncertainty and more belief in the personal effectiveness of actions against climate change [12]. Moreover, climate change can lead to perceiving a national threat; this perception is linked with legitimization of the food system and denial of climate change. Consequently, people choose food indirectly through less legitimization of the food system [13].

This study aims to examine the mediating role of food neophobia (FN) in the impacts of individuals’ climate change risk perceptions (CCRPs) on the consumption of artificial meat diffusion optimism (AMDO) and edible insects diffusion optimism (EIDO) within the PMT framework. A review of the literature revealed no studies that addressed these issues within a holistic model. Filling this gap in terms of its contribution to scientific knowledge increases the importance of this research. Within the framework of PMT, the role of threat perception and coping perception in the adoption of these alternative protein sources will be discussed based on the existing literature and theoretical foundations. Changes in individuals’ behavior as a result of perceived risk will be explained, and recommendations will be made for the development of strategies to promote sustainable food consumption in the fight against climate change.

2. Theoretical Background

PMT refers to the psychological framework of understanding the responses of individuals whenever they are put in a situation that is threatening and also explains the motivation behind them showing protective behavior [11,14]. It thus gives the conceptual approach to understanding people’s behavior with respect to the magnitude and likelihood of the depicted event and the effectiveness of the protective responses. Two primary constituents of PMT are threat assessment and coping assessment. While threat assessment refers to the evaluation of the degree of severity posed or the susceptibility to the threat, coping assessment refers to the evaluation of the effectiveness of the strategies that are available and the perceived ability of a person to apply them [11]. For example, with this theory, online security [15], weight loss programs [16], and sun protection [17] are explained from many perspectives ranging from the prediction of conservation-related behaviors. According to research, understanding the reasons behind individuals’ participation in conservation activities gives a chance to learn how to handle the driving forces involved in getting them to contribute towards conservation [18].

Persuasive messages about the environmental impacts of livestock production can have significant effects on consumer preferences [19]. Research shows that messages about the negative environmental impacts of meat consumption, in particular, noticeably change the way consumers perceive these products. For example, Djekic et al. [20] found that messages emphasizing the environmental damage of livestock production strongly influenced consumer behavior. In this study, negative environmental messages raised awareness about the environmental impact of animal foods in terms of their production, resulting in consumers’ lower preference for meat products. Such situations can be explained by the effects on individuals’ threat perceptions and coping strategies when evaluated within the framework of Protection Motivation Theory (PMT). Informational messages about environmental hazards may increase individuals’ threat perceptions and influence their propensity to consume alternative protein sources (e.g., artificial meat or edible insects). Djekic et al. also stated that such messages shape consumers’ perceptions and preferences and that individuals who are more aware of environmental impacts are more open to switching to different alternatives [20]. These findings highlight the importance of emphasizing environmental impacts in communication strategies in order to accelerate the transition of societies to sustainable consumption habits. Therefore, such messages can be an effective tool for both changing individual behavior and raising awareness on a large scale.

Research indicates that societies have the potential to adopt and develop a positive attitude towards the consumption of innovative foods [21,22]. For example, an emotional analysis study based on online user comments found that 40.8% of users have a positive perception of artificial meat [22]. These positive comments are based on factors such as the environmental benefits of artificial meat, its contribution to animal welfare and its ability to be a sustainable source of protein. In addition, positive connotative phrases such as “meat, eat, love” suggest that consumers may perceive artificial meat as a real alternative. Negative perceptions of artificial meat consumption, on the other hand, mostly focus on issues such as lack of naturalness, high cost, and health concerns. However, these barriers can be overcome through appropriate strategic approaches. In particular, emphasizing the environmental benefits of artificial meat, reducing production costs, and informing consumers properly can be effective in increasing acceptance. As Batat and Peter [21] note in their study, the adoption of edible insects as a sustainable source of protein can be achieved by increasing their accessibility and offering them in processed, familiar forms. Emphasizing their nutritional value and environmental benefits, supported by educational programs and awareness campaigns, can strengthen positive perceptions of these products. Furthermore, if food taboos can be overcome by providing consumers with positive experiences, acceptance of insect-based products could increase significantly.

This current study, PMT, can provide valuable insights into individuals’ responses to climate change risks and their adoption of alternative protein sources. It also aims to investigate how individuals’ CCRPs influence their consumption behavior regarding artificial meat and edible insects, focusing on the mediating role of FN.

By examining how FN mediates the relationship between CCRP and the consumption of alternative protein sources, this study could shed light on the influence of psychological factors on individuals’ decision-making processes. In explaining these relationships, PMT is an important approach to explaining the existing realities. Understanding how FN interacts with CCRP within the PMT framework can help identify the key determinants of sustainable food consumption behaviors and can be a resource for developing strategies to promote the adoption of environmentally friendly protein sources.

2.1. Climate Change Risk Perception

Climate has always changed naturally on Earth, and there have been colder and warmer periods in the past; however, the climate change that the Earth has undergone for the last decades is not a natural one and is actually caused mainly by human activity [23,24]. Greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere when fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) are burnt in order to generate electricity and run automobiles. In addition, society diminishes the Earth’s capacity to reduce CO₂ by engaging in livestock farming and creating space for agriculture and urban development [25,26]. The results of the changes that have occurred in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, and biosphere have been more visible and severe across the world, leading to the loss of people and nature. Due to climate change, food and water security have been badly affected and worldwide agricultural productivity growth has slowed over the past 50 years, notwithstanding overall increases in production [27,28,29]. Many studies have examined the effects of climate change in terms of shifts in the numbers of vulnerable populations, usually as a result of food and water shortages, malaria infections, and coastal floods brought on by the changing climate [28,30,31,32]. Considering all these negativities, especially the ones about food and alternative and sustainable protein sources, examples of which include edible insects [33] and artificial meat [34], will be needed. At this point, understanding public perceptions about the issue becomes vital, as learning about the public’s risk perceptions is essential to shape the climate policies of the countries as well as shaping people’s attitudes [35,36]. The way individuals or groups perceive and evaluate the dangers associated with climate change, including their opinions, attitudes, and behaviors around these hazards, is known as climate risk perception [37]. Many researchers have developed different models, tested them by using different variables, and tried to understand public risk perception concerning climate change [37,38,39,40,41], and within the scope of this study, CCRP will be evaluated in relation to EIDO, AMDO, and FN.

2.2. Food Neophobia

The food industry is known to be quite challenging because of ongoing difficulties, such as coming up with new ideas in order to meet the more specialized demands of consumers [42]. Nonetheless, there may be resistance to consuming some novel foods, and these foods may not find a market or become ingrained in consumer behavior [43] due to FN, which is defined as “the unwillingness to taste new foods and the avoidance of unfamiliar foods”. FN may be a result of environmental and genetic factors [44], consumer mentality, excessive attachment to tradition, or specific ideology that make them skeptical or hostile. FN is an omnivore species-typical adaptation that shows itself as an aversion to trying new and strange foods. Humans have an inclination to reject unusual foods, even though most foods in modern civilization are rather safe [45]. This is due to an evolutionary adaptation made to prevent potential risks from consuming novel foods. As a result, people frequently just eat what they are acquainted with, which leads to having a limited diet that otherwise would and should be more varied. Because of the fact that FN still affects the modern human diet today, measuring it gains importance and reasons for assessing FN extends from applied research to forecast product adoption in a particular market to basic scientific knowledge [46]. Moreover, in order to preserve our natural bioresources and attain food security over the next 30 years, a shift from the current food system to one that is more equitable, efficient, healthy, and focused on the needs of both consumers and the environment is required even if it is intricate. Since increasing food production seems to be a must [47], FN should be the focus of more studies.

2.3. Edible Insects Diffusion Optimism

Insect-eating practice, referred to as “entomophagy”, is derived from the two Greek words ἔντομον éntomon, meaning “insect”, and φᾰγεῖν phagein, meaning “to eat” [48]. A wide variety of insects have been eaten throughout the world in either raw form or processed [49]. The recorded number of insect species being consumed is over 2000, and these insects are known to have a rich nutrient profile. It is possible to consume them at different stages of their metamorphological life cycle, like eggs, larvae, or mealworms [50], and the nutritional value of an insect might vary within the same species based on its diet, ecological niche, and stage of metamorphosis; however, in general, edible insects are rich in fat, protein, vitamin, fiber, and mineral content. Edible insects are also considered healthy substitutes for chicken, pork, beef, and fish and include calcium, iron, zinc, protein, and healthy fats [51]. The use of edible insects is rapidly increasing despite their novelty status, and they are beginning to be regarded as food [52]. The reasons why entomophagy should be promoted can be categorized under three titles: health, environment, and livelihoods. Numerous regional and national diets already include insects as a traditional component [51]. From the environmental perspective, while insects are being raised for food, greenhouse gas emissions are reduced and ammonia emissions are lower compared to livestock [53]. At the same time, raising insects does not always require the removal of land to increase production. As insects are cold-blooded animals, they are highly efficient at turning food into protein, and last but not least, organic waste can feed the insects. When it comes to economic and social benefits of edible insects, it is reasonable to consider the fact that they create a low-tech and low-capital investment opportunity so that the most impoverished members of society, such as women and people having no land, could make use of it [51]. Furthermore, as Gahukar [54] states, the increasing human population combined with declining crop yield and decreasing food supply has resulted in a dilemma for food security in numerous developed and underdeveloped countries. Consequently, due to their renewability, edible insects can be considered sustainable food sources that could alleviate food crisis.

2.4. Artificial Meat Diffusion Optimism

Consumers make significant environmental decisions with their everyday food choices, which is a crucial component of overall sustainable consumption [55]. There is ample evidence to suggest that the production of food is one of the main causes of environmental change in the world since it affects the global nitrogen and phosphorus cycles, freshwater consumption, biodiversity loss, and climate change [56]. According to the FAO [57], raising livestock takes up 26% of the planet’s ice-free terrestrial surface, and it makes up roughly 18% of the effect of global warming. Livestock produces 37% of methane and 65% of nitrous oxide emissions and contributes 9% percent of carbon dioxide emissions. As Weinrich, Strack and Neugebauer [58] point out, the environment currently bears heavy costs from the production of meat, yet only a small number of people are prepared to choose a vegetarian diet, or alternatively, meat substitutes and this problem can be solved through the application of artificial meat. Artificial meat, also known as in vitro, artificial, or lab-grown meat, is promoted by proponents as a healthy substitute for consumers who want to be more conscientious but do not want to adjust their diet in order to meet the growing demand for food by the world’s expanding population [59]. Along with the environmental advantages, artificial meat has additional potential benefits compared to meat produced traditionally. Because there is less human–animal contact, artificial meat can stop the spread of outbreak zoonoses and animal-borne illnesses [60]. It is also possible to modify the nutritional, textural, and taste qualities under controlled circumstances. Moreover, it is feasible to regulate both the amount and quality of fat, which will help to lower the prevalence of diseases linked to diet, such as cardiovascular disorders [34]. Even though large-scale manufacturing of artificial meat is now unfeasible due to ongoing development, debates regarding sustainability and ethical and religious concerns [61,62,63,64,65], the most important thing to be considered is consumer acceptance. Public acceptance of artificial meat depends on various factors, such as consumption trends and public emotional perceptions. In Onur’s [22] study, it is stated that the results of sentiment analysis of online comments about artificial meat shape public perceptions of this product.

Artificial meat seems to be approaching commercial viability. With the use of this technology, consumers may be able to avoid the moral and environmental problems that come with consuming conventional meat. At the same time, they may prefer such artificial meats due to the perceived risk of global crises such as climate change. Artificial meat’s acceptance by consumers, however, is unpredictable and somewhat reliant on how the product is positioned [66]. Although there are some studies focused on the issue [63,64,67,68,69,70], more studies might be needed to see the level of consumer acceptance of this novel food. In this study, consumption tendency or consumer acceptance towards these foods is examined in terms of the risk (climate change) perceived by individuals.

3. Hypothetical Model

3.1. The Effect of Climate Change Risk Perception on Artificial Meat Diffusion Optimism and Edible Insect Diffusion Optimism

A literature review on CCRP shows that when the causes and effects of climate change are known, the perception of it as a risk increases. Risk perception is positively affected by environmental attitudes and beliefs [41]. In addition, the most important factor in supporting climate policy precautions seems to be the risk perception, and when people experience the natural hazards themselves, they become more aware of these risks [71]. The overall environmental effects of producing artificial meat are found to be significantly less than those of producing meat through conventional means, notwithstanding the high level of uncertainty [34]. Moreover, edible insects, being renewable sources, can be considered sustainable food sources that could alleviate the food crisis [54]. Consequently, learning about the public’s risk perceptions is essential for shaping the climate policies of countries and influencing people’s attitudes. Refs. [35,36] and enhancing public awareness of the local effects of climate change, climate literacy, and basic education are essential for increasing public participation in and support for climate action [52,72]. Therefore, there is thought to be a link among the concepts of CCRP, AMDO and EIDO. The hypotheses outlining the relationships between these variables are as follows:

H1. 

Climate change risk perception has a positive and significant effect on artificial meat diffusion optimism.

H2. 

Climate change risk perception has a positive and significant effect on edible insect diffusion optimism.

3.2. The Effect of Climate Change Risk Perception on Food Neophobia

Upon reviewing the literature on CCRP and FN, no studies were found that wholly address both concepts. However, as found in the literature, people whose food preferences were influenced by culture exhibited higher levels of sustainable FN. Those with stronger sustainability motivations experienced less fear towards such foods [73]. Based on the given information, the hypothesis outlining the relationships between these variables is as follows:

H3. 

Climate change risk perception has a negative and significant effect on food neophobia.

3.3. The Effect of Food Neophobia on Artificial Meat Diffusion Optimism

When the existing literature was reviewed, a link between the concepts of FN and AMDO was encountered [43,68,70,74,75]. The hypothesis outlining the relationships between these variables are as follows:

H4. 

Food neophobia has a negative and significant effect on artificial meat diffusion optimism.

3.4. The Effect of Food Neophobia on Edible Insect Diffusion Optimism

A review of the studies concerning FN and EIDO shows that these two concepts are linked [43,74,75,76,77,78,79,80]. Studies show that the general tendency towards edible insects as food is low, and FN is one of the most important reasons for this. Hence, the hypothesis outlining the relationship between these variables is as follows:

H5. 

Food neophobia has a negative and significant effect on edible insect diffusion optimism.

3.5. Mediating Role of Food Neophobia

Upon reviewing the existing literature, it was noted that no study has comprehensively examined the CCRP, AMDO, EIDO, and FN variables together. However, the existing literature indicates that there is a relationship between FN and AMDO [34,43,70,74,75] and a relationship between FN and EIDO [43,74,75,76,77,78,79]. According to these studies, an increase in FN is associated with a decrease in willingness to consume both artificial meat and edible insects. On the other hand, people who are more motivated by sustainability showed reduced fear of sustainably produced food [73], which might mean FN may mediate the effect of CCRP on AMDO and CCRP on EIDO. Thus, the hypotheses outlining the relationship between these variables are as follows:

H6. 

Food neophobia has a mediating effect on the relationship between climate change risk perception and artificial meat diffusion optimism.

H7. 

Food neophobia has a mediating effect on the relationship between climate change risk perception and edible insect diffusion optimism.

In Figure 1, the direct effect hypotheses (H1–H5) for the current study are shown with a solid line. Hypotheses H6 and H7 (indirect effect) showing the mediation effect are indicated with dashed lines.

4. Research Design and Methodology

4.1. Study Region

The population of this study consists of individuals living in Türkiye. Türkiye is a country with a wide variety of vegetation, animals, and climate diversity due to its geographical location in the world. The country is divided into seven different geographical regions. Topographic conditions and orographic features that differ regionally play an important role in dividing the country into many different geographical regions [81]. This situation contributes to the formation of different vegetation and landforms in each region of the country. In addition, Türkiye’s geographical structure and climatic conditions allow for the cultivation of various agricultural products [82]. For example, in the Black Sea region, tea is harvested at least three times a year due to rainfall. Other agricultural products include hazelnuts in the Central Black Sea region; garlic in the Western Black Sea region; olives, figs, and grapes in the Aegean region; bananas, grapefruit, lemons, and oranges in the Mediterranean region; cotton, corn, wheat, peanuts, and pistachios in the Southeastern Anatolia region; wheat, beans, chickpeas, and sunflowers in the Eastern Anatolia region; rice, olives, and sunflower seeds in the Marmara region; and sugar beet, corn, wheat, and grapes in the Central Anatolia region [83]. As can be seen, different agricultural products are grown in every region of Türkiye from east to west and north to south. Due to its location, Türkiye experiences four seasons in 12 months, which may explain the high diversity of products and climate diversity. However, in recent years, climate has started to change in the world with the effect of global warming. In Türkiye, this global warming has had a negative impact on the climate and vegetation, with the effect of not receiving enough rainfall in the summer months [84,85,86]. For this reason, Türkiye, which has an important position in the world, has been determined as the universe in this research.

4.2. Measurement Instruments

The questionnaire form prepared for the research consisted of two parts. The first part of the questionnaire included statements regarding CCRP, FN, AMDO, and EIDO scales. The second part of the questionnaire included demographic statements regarding the gender, age, and educational status of the participants. In the current study, the CCRP scale is independent, while the AMDO and EIDO scales are dependent and the FN scale is the mediating variable. The CCRP variables were measured with the five-point scale developed and applied by Zobeidi et al. [41]. In the case of the AMDO scale, this study made use of the four-word scale developed and applied in the study by Weinrich et al. [58], while for the EIDO scale, the study utilized a four-word cultural meet scale used in the Weinrich et al. [58] study. The 10-item scale developed by Pliner and Hobden [87] was the scale of preference in the measurement of the mediating variable, FN. The statements were graded on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Since the population represents a very large geographical area, an e-survey created with the help of Google Forms was used in this study. While creating the e-survey, detailed information about the questionnaire was given, and the statements in the first section with the scale statements were marked as mandatory. With the help of the e-survey, 448 questionnaires from across Türkiye were obtained. A minimum of 400 data samples is required for the analysis with a 95% confidence interval [88]. Since the number of samples obtained in the current study is 448, it can be stated that sampling adequacy is provided in the current study. It was also observed that the number of statements × 10 was used to calculate the sampling adequacy for structural equation modeling. According to this calculation, there are 23 statements in the current study (23 × 10 = 230) [89]. In this context, it can be stated that sampling adequacy is provided in this study.

4.3. Data Collection

The prepared questionnaire form was applied throughout Türkiye between March and April 2024. By representing seven geographical regions of Türkiye with three researchers, an online questionnaire was prepared, and data were collected using the maximum diversity sampling method. Maximum diversity sampling is a way of reaching participants with different structures by defining participant characteristics. In the current research, seven geographical regions of Türkiye were identified, and a total of 448 people residing in these regions could be reached [90]. In the current study, three experts on the subject of this study were identified, and these people sent the questionnaire online to people living in seven geographical regions of Türkiye. Through this, maximum diversity could be reached. During the data collection process, before completing the questionnaire, all participants were provided with an informed consent statement outlining the aims of this study, the voluntary nature of participation, and the confidentiality of responses. This information was presented in a clear and understandable manner to ensure that participants fully understood the nature of their participation in the research. Participants were asked to read the informed consent statement and confirm that they understood it before proceeding with the survey. Specifically, at the beginning of the online survey, the informed consent process was displayed, and participants were required to confirm their consent by checking an option indicating their agreement. Only those who gave explicit consent were allowed to continue with the survey, thus ensuring that no participant was included in this study without prior informed consent. In the absence of consent, participants were automatically excluded from this study and the survey was terminated. This procedure adhered to ethical standards and ensured that all the participants voluntarily participated in this study with full knowledge of their rights and the research process.

Since there were no missing values in the collected questionnaires, the number of questionnaires that could be used can be expressed as 448. Next, statements 2, 3, 7, 8, and 10 in the FN scale were reverse coded. Those statements were reverse coded as 1-5, 2-4, 3-3, 4-2, and 5-1 in the SPSS 24 system. In the second step, outliers were identified in the collected questionnaires. Outlier detection is an important aspect with respect to the normal distribution of the data. In that respect, Mahalonobis distances of the statements were used. The questionnaires numbered 405, 400, 407, and 420 were rejected for this study after the Mahalonobis distances of the SPSS data were analyzed [91]. After the outlier analysis, the analysis continued with 444 available data samples. Considering the sample calculation method for an unknown population, it is observed that 444 responses exceed the required 384. Therefore, it can be said that the number of collected questionnaires is sufficient to represent the population [92,93,94]. Descriptive statistics regarding the age and gender status of the individuals participating in this study are given in

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the sample.

Demographic Variables	F	%
Gender
Female	229	51.6
Male	115	48.4
Total	444	100
Age
20 and below	84	18.9
21–30	126	28.4
31–40	146	32.9
41–50	52	11.7
51–60	24	5.4
61 and above	12	2.7
Total	444	100

.

Table 1 presents a statistical description of the demographic profile of the respondents of this study. In general, it was determined that the majority of respondents, 51.6 percent, were females; in addition, 32.9 percent of the age group fell within the category of 31–40 years.

5. Findings

5.1. Pre-Analysis Requirements

The statements in the scales were recoded in order to prepare the research data for analysis. In this context, five statements in the FN scale were reverse coded in the questionnaire. Before analyzing the collected data, the statements FN2, FN3, FN7, FN8, and FN10 in the FN scale were reverse coded. In this way, all of the statements in the FN scale were made positive.

The normal distribution of the scales used in this study was tested. It was stated that the variables were normally distributed both separately and in total in terms of analyses [95]. In order to check the normality assumption, kurtosis and skewness values were analyzed. In this study, the values of ±2.58 at a 0.05 significance level and ±1.96 at a 0.01 significance level specified by Hair, Black, Babin, and Anderson [91] were accepted as threshold values. In this context, the kurtosis and skewness values of the scales used in this study are given in

Table 2. Kurtosis and skewness values.

Variables	Items	Kurtosis	Skewness
Climate change risk perception	The standard of living of many people around the world will fall. (CCRP1)	0.661	−0.991
	There will be water shortages worldwide. (CCRP2)	1.811	−1.222
	There will be an increase in serious diseases worldwide. (CCRP3)	1.527	−1.014
	My standard of living will fall. (CCRP4)	−0.309	−0.548
	My chances of becoming seriously ill will increase. (CCRP5)	−0.546	−0.230
Artificial meat diffusion optimism	It will be cheaper to meet global protein demand with artificial meat rather than conventionally produced meat. (AMDO1)	−0.985	0.444
	Future consumption of artificial meat could solve world hunger. (AMDO2)	−0.704	0.427
	Future consumption of artificial meat will reduce the impact of global warming caused by emissions from livestock. (AMDO3)	−0.787	0.332
	In the future, artificial meat consumption will be a viable alternative to traditional protein. (AMDO4)	−1.115	0.348
Edible insects diffusion optimism	It will be cheaper to meet global protein demand with edible insects rather than conventionally produced meat. (EIDO1)	0.047	1.067
	Future consumption of edible insects could solve world hunger. (EIDO2)	0.071	0.942
	Future consumption of edible insects will reduce the impact of global warming caused by emissions released by livestock. (EIDO3)	−0.716	0.490
	In the future, edible insects will be a viable alternative to traditional protein. (EIDO4)	−0.565	0.686
Food neophobia	I am constantly trying new and different foods. (FN1)	0.342	−1.123
	I am very picky about the food I eat. (FN2)	0.904	−1.187
	I do not eat ethnic food because it looks strange to me. (FN3)	0.334	−0.944
	I like going to restaurants that serve food from different cultures. (FN4)	1.019	−1.106
	I try new foods at social events. (FN5)	0.077	−0.758
	I do not choose food; I eat everything. (FN6)	0.837	−1.269
	I do not try food I do not know. (FN7)	−0.383	−0.620
	I do not trust new foods. (FN8)	−0.374	−0.553
	I like food from different cultures. (FN9)	−0.694	−0.303
	I am afraid of eating food I have not eaten before. (FN10)	0.574	−1.014

. The kurtosis values of the CCRP scale vary between 1.811 and −0.546, while the skewness values vary between −1.222 and −0.230. The kurtosis values of the AMDO scale are between −1.115 and −0.704, and the skewness values are between 0.444 and 0.332. The kurtosis values of the EIDO scale range between −0.716 and 0.047, and the skewness values range between 1.067 and 0.490. The kurtosis values in the FN scale vary between −0.694 and 1.019, and the skewness values vary between −1.269 and −0.303. In general, the kurtosis values of all scales are between 1.811 and −1.115, and the skewness values are between 1.067 and −1.269. Since these values are between the threshold values specified by Hair et al. [91], it can be said that the scales used in this study meet the normality assumption.

In this current research, the structure of the variables was checked for reliability by using factor analysis. Factor analysis is divided into two groups. There are exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Exploratory factor analysis is used to determine how many dimensions the statements in a newly created scale are distributed across. In other words, exploratory factor analysis is used first in the development of a scale. The second is confirmatory factor analysis. In confirmatory factor analysis, once again, the inter-structural validity is tested; the difference here is that of scale validity, that is, the structures to which the statements in the scale belong have been previously tested. In confirmatory factor analysis, these constructs are tested [91,95]. With the above explanations in mind, it was decided to conduct a confirmatory factor analysis in this study. This is because the scales of the four variables used in this study are the scales in the literature.

Table 3. Confirmatory factor analysis.

Dimensions	Items	Mean	Std. Factor Load	t Values	CR	AVE	Cronbach’s Alpha	Correlation (Correlation Squares)
Climate change risk perception	CCRP1	4.09	0.622	11.816	0.84	0.52	0.852	Artificial meat diffusion optimism 0.261 (0.068)
	CCRP2	4.27	0.855	15.176				Edible insects diffusion optimism 0.131 (0.017)
	CCRP3	4.22	0.842	15.073				Food neophobia −0.007 (−0.014)
	CCRP4	3.74	0.569	14.073
	CCRP5	3.59	0.677	Fixed *
Artificial meat diffusion optimism	AMDO1	2.32	0.832	Fixed *	0.92	0.74	0.916	Edible insects diffusion optimism 0.800 (0.64)
	AMDO2	2.19	0.839	21.248				Food neophobia −0.073 (−0.146)
	AMDO3	2.29	0.897	20.478
	AMDO4	2.31	0.873	22.500
Edible insects diffusion optimism	EI1	1.89	0.739	Fixed *	0.87	0.63	0.882	Food neophobia −0.045 (−0.09)
	EIDO2	1.91	0.807	17.004
	EIDO3	2.08	0.747	15.678
	EIDO4	2.05	0.879	18.452
Food neophobia	FN1	4.20	0.839	Fixed *	0.89	0.51	0.907
	FN2	4.20	0.724	16.749
	FN3	4.05	0.731	16.953
	FN4	4.18	0.735	17.193
	FN5	4.07	0.642	14.381
	FN6	4.14	0.776	18.515
	FN8	3.87	0.593	13.108
	FN10	4.08	0.635	14.276

Fit indices: χ²/sd = 2.472; AGFI = 0.892; CFI = 0.953; RMSEA = 0.057; GFI = 0.917; SRMR = 0.037; and TLI = 0.945. * 1′ Fixed.

provides statistical information about the measurement model. When the relevant table is examined, it is determined that the smallest AVE value belongs to the FN variable (0.51), and the highest AVE value belongs to the AMDO variable (0.74). It can be stated that the expressed values are above the minimum value (0.50) expressed in Hair et al. (2013) [91]. When the CR value is analyzed, it is determined that the lowest value belongs to the CCRP (0.84) variable, while the highest CR value belongs to the AMDO scale (0.92). These values were found to be above the minimum CR value of 0.70 (Hair et al. [91]). When reviewing the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients used to assess the reliability of the scales, the CCRP variable has the lowest value at 0.852. The highest Cronbach’s alpha is found in the AMDO variable, with a value of 0.916. These values exceed the minimum acceptable threshold of 0.70 for Cronbach’s alpha [91,96]. In this study, the CR and AVE values obtained from the CFA indicate that the convergent validity of the variables is achieved. Additionally, the discriminant validity is confirmed, as the squared correlations of the latent variables are below their respective AVE values. To assess the reliability of the scales, Cronbach’s alpha values were examined, and all variables showed coefficients above the acceptable threshold of 0.70. Consequently, the scales are deemed reliable. The model fit indices from the CFA analysis are detailed in

Table 4. SEM and CFA goodness-of-fit indices.

Fitness Criteria	Good Fit	Acceptable Fit	References
Overall Model Fit
χ2	0 ≤ χ2 ≤ 3 df	-	Byrne, 2010 [94]
χ2/df	0 ≤ χ2/df ≤ 2	2 < χ2/df ≤ 5
p-value	0.05 < p ≤ 1.00	0.01 ≤ p ≤ 0.05
Comparative Fit Indices
RMSEA	0 ≤ RMSEA ≤ 0.05	0.05 < RMSEA ≤ 0.08	Schermelleh-Engel et al., 2003 [97] Marsh & Hau, 1996 [98] Byrne, 2010 [94]; Hair, Black, Babin & Anderson, 2013 [91] Mulaik et al., 1989 [99]; Hu & Bentler, 1999 [100]
RMSEA (<0.05)	0.10 < p ≤ 1.00	0.05 ≤ p ≤ 0.10
NFI	0.95 ≤ NFI ≤ 1.00	0.90 ≤ NFI < 0.95
NNFI	0.95 ≤ NNFI ≤ 1.00	0.90 ≤ NNFI < 0.95
CFI	0.95 ≤ CFI ≤ 1.00	0.90 ≤ CFI < 0.95
Absolute Fit Indices
GFI	0.90 ≤ GFI ≤ 1.00	0.80 ≤ GFI ≤ 0.89	Marsh, Balla & McDonald, 1988 [101] Doll, Xia & Torkzadeh, 1994 [102]
SRMR	0 ≤ SRMR ≤ 0.05	0.05 < SRMR ≤ 0.08
RMR	0 ≤ RMR ≤ 0.05	0.05 < RMR ≤ 0.08

. Upon reviewing Table 3, it can be concluded that the model fit indices fall within the acceptable ranges listed in Table 4. For this reason, it can be stated that the data collected and the analysis performed are compatible.

Table 4 shows the model goodness-of-fit values used in confirmatory factor analysis, structural equation modeling, and the references of these values. In the structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis used to test the model created in the current study, the goodness-of-fit values specified in Table 4 were taken as the basis.

Correlation coefficients among the scales of CCRP, AMDO, EIDO, and FN are shown in

Table 5. Correlation coefficients.

	Mean	Standard Deviation	1	2	3	4
1. Climate change risk perception	3.982	0.715
2. Artificial meat diffusion optimism	2.278	1.001	0.243 **
3. Edible insects diffusion optimism	1.984	0.921	0.137 **	0.733 **
4. Food neophobia	4.099	0.744	−0.027 NS	−0.068 NS	−0.030 NS

** Correlation is significant at 0.01 level (two-tailed). ^NS Not significant.

. As observed in Table 5, at the significance level of 0.001, the correlation coefficient between CCRP and AMDO is 0.243 **; between CCRP and EIDO, it is 0.137 **; and between AMDO and EIDO, it is 0.733 **. The FN scale is, moreover, negatively and nonsignificantly related to the other variables.

Table 5 shows the means of the statements within the scales. The lowest mean belongs to the edible EIDO (1.984) scale. The highest mean belongs to the FN scale (4.099).

5.2. Hypothesis Testing

5.2.1. Direct Effect Testing

The reason for using structural equation modeling (SEM) in our research is the ability to test direct and indirect effects in a holistic manner with the models created [91]. For this purpose, the model created for this study was tested using the SPSS and AMOS 24 programs [103]. The effect levels of our hypotheses are analyzed according to Kline [104]. The standardized factor loadings (β) values are considered low if they are 0.10, medium if they are around 0.30, and high if they are greater than 0.50. The R2 values of the tested variables were also interpreted according to Kline [104]. According to Kline, R2 values are considered low if they are less than 0.01, medium if they are around 0.10 and high if they are greater than 0.30. The SEM results of the hypotheses formed for the current research are observed in

Table 6. Structural equation modeling.

Hypotheses	Relationships	Std. Factor Load (β)	t Values	p-Value	Results	Power of Influence (a1)
H1	CCRP → AMDO	0.305 **	5.977	<0.001	supported	Near high medium
H2	CCRP → EIDO	0.147 **	3.348	<0.001	supported	Near low medium
H3	CCRP → FN	−0.022 NS	−0.493	0.622	rejected	Low
H4	FN → AMDO	−0.082 NS	−1.365	0.172	rejected	Low
H5	FN → EIDO	−0.030 NS	−0.578	0.563	rejected	Low

Fit indices: χ²/sd = 2.463; AGFI = 0.890; CFI = 0.955; RMSEA = 0.057; GFI = 0.915; SRMR = 0.080; TLI = 0.947. R2: AM = 0.298; EI = 0.175; and FN = −0.026. ** p < 0.01; ^NS: not significant. CCRP: climate change risk perception; AMDO: artificial meat diffusion optimism; EIDO: edible insects diffusion optimism; FN: food neophobia. a¹ = 0.10 and below low; 0.30 and above medium; and 0.50 and above high.

.

Table 6 shows that CCRP has a significant and positive relationship with AMDO (β = 0.305; t = 5.977; p < 0.01). This relationship level is close to high [104], and H1 is accepted. The effect of CCRP on EIDO (β = 0.147; t = 3.348; p < 0.01) was also found to be positive and significant. According to Kline [104], this relationship is close to low, and H2 is accepted. CCRP has a negative and insignificant effect on FN (β = −0.022; t = −0.493; p > 0.05). In this context, H3 is rejected. It is possible to talk about a negative and insignificant relationship between AMDO (β = −0.082; t = −1.365; p > 0.05) and EIDO (β = −0.030; t = −0.578; p > 0.05). In line with these explanations, H4 and H5 are not supported.

The CCRP, which is analyzed as an independent variable of this current research, was found to explain the AMDO as 0.298. According to Kline [104] this level has a medium effect size. CCRP explains the variance of 0.175 on EIDO. This level has a medium effect, according to Kline [104]. Finally, CCRP explains a variance of −0.026 on FN. This value expresses a low effect power, according to Kline [104].

5.2.2. Indirect Effect Testing

The preloading confidence interval method was employed to evaluate the mediating role of the FN variable. This method is recognized as one of the most reliable and precise under various conditions [105]. To assess the mediation effect of the variables in this research, the bootstrap confidence interval method was used, with a preference for the BC bootstrapping technique [105,106]. The BC boot technique involves determining a specific number of samples, and in this study, 1000 iterations and a 95% confidence interval, as suggested in the literature, were utilized [107]. The mediating effect in the SEM model was analyzed using the framework provided by Zhao et al. [108]. The mediating effect of the FN variable is presented in

Table 7. Mediating role of food neophobia.

FN	Relation	Specific Indirect Effect	p	Confidence Intervals		Confidence Intervals	Direct Effect	p	Type of Mediation	Support
				Lower	Upper
H6	CCRP → FN → AMDO	0.002	0.455	−0.003	0.017	CCRP → AMDO	0.297	0.025	Direct only (Non-mediation)	No
H7	CCRP → FN → EIDO	0.001	0.475	−0.002	0.012	CCRP → EIDO	0.174	0.026	Direct only (Non-mediation)	No

Notes: CCRP: climate change risk perception, AMDO: artificial meat diffusion optimism, EIDO: edible insects diffusion optimism, FN: food neophobia.

.

When Table 7 is examined, it is observed that FN does not mediate the effect of CCRP on the AMDO variable (Indirect effect = 0.002; 99% CI [−0.003 to 0.017]). The standardized indirect effect of FN in mediating the relationship between CCRP and AMDO is 0.002. This value is between the lower bond and upper bonds, but the mediation effects are rejected because these values contain zero (Preacher & Hayes, 2008) [105]. In this section, according to Zhao et al. [108], the type of mediation effect can be expressed as a direct effect or no mediation effect. It can also be stated that the mediating effect of FN on the effect of CCRP on EIDO is not supported (Indirect effect = 0.001; 99% CI [−0.002 to 0.012]). The standardized indirect effect of FN in mediating the relationship between CCRP and EIDO is 0.001. Although this value is between the lower and upper bonds, the mediation effect is not supported due to the zero value between the lower bond and upper bond values [105]. If the type of mediation effect of these variables is summarized according to the table in Zhao et al. [108], it can be interpreted as there is a direct effect and no indirect effect.

6. Discussion

This study examines the mediating effect of FN on the effect of CCRP on AMDO and EIDO. Having tested the research findings using the AMOS 24 analysis program, this study presents some important findings. It is seen that CCRP positively affect the consumption of artificial meat. This finding is in line with studies in the literature [109]. This finding shows that AMDO will increase with an increase in CCRP in individuals. In this section, discussion is necessary by giving examples from the theory and relationships. It is seen that consumers tend to consume artificial meat, which is accessible as a result of the changing climate in the world and limited access to food and beverages.

Such findings add to the depth of understanding of how CCRP, FN, and acceptance of food innovations such as AMDO and EIDO are interrelated. The embedding of these dynamics within the PMT framework tends to shed a lot of light on important insights relevant to the academic community and industry stakeholders.

It was also found that CCRP had a positive and significant effect on AMDO with β = 0.305, p < 0.01. This result was supported by the threat appraisal component under PMT, indicating that people who are more aware of the risks of climate change tend to be more optimistic in their attitude towards adopting artificial meat as a more sustainable option. The optimism could be founded on a number of other things, including the environmental benefits associated with artificial meat, such as reduced GHG emissions and less land and water use [53]. To that end, individuals who are better informed about the environmental implications of their diet will be more likely to consider and opt for more environmentally friendly options such as artificial meat. This relationship is reflected in the existing body of research indicating that a large number of people are worried about climate risks and are indeed tracking the consequences for agricultural systems [110,111,112]. Research also underlines the requirement to reduce the intake of meat in order to contribute to a reduction in the effects of climate change. Artificial meat is promoted as an environmentally friendly alternative to traditional meat products [113]. It offers great taste and texture, just like meat, but is more sustainable [114]. Knowing how people’s behavior is affected within the framework of PMT can be an important source of information for plans, policies, and strategies to be developed for the impacts of climate change.

Raising awareness to adopt meat alternatives and educating consumers about the importance of their actions in mitigating the threat of climate change motivates consumers to reduce their meat consumption or change their attitude [115]. Consumers who are aware of the impact of meat on the world and are willing to stop or significantly reduce their meat consumption are a small minority [116], but understanding the fundamentals of human behavior within the PMT framework will help guide the fight against the negative impacts of climate change. In other words, it can be said that individuals whose behavioral fundamentals are understood will change their meat consumption behaviors, thereby reducing the negative impacts associated with traditional meat consumption. In addition, in a scenario where climate change causes food shortages [117], knowing the basics of people’s consumption behaviors may reveal the possibility of optimal management of existing resources.

Another point that should also be emphasized from the research findings is that compared with EIDO, the tendency or predisposition towards the consumption of artificial meat is much more positive in terms of CCRP. This can be explained by the socio-cultural characteristics of the region in which the research was conducted. As mentioned above, people in this region, which has a very rich culinary culture, will not tend to consume these innovative foods without perceiving any risk. However, when the perception of risk sets in, people would naturally be biased towards the artificial meat product with which they are relatively more familiar due to their own culinary culture.

Similarly, CCRP was found to have a moderately positive effect on EIDO (β = 0.147, p < 0.01). This suggests that individuals who perceive high climate change risks also tend to view edible insects as a sustainable source of protein. The nutritional value and low environmental impact of EIDO are factors supporting this positive attitude [118]. Edible insects provide a healthy diet and all the necessary nutrients for daily intake and can reduce environmental impact by reducing the use of non-renewable resources [119]. In this context, it will be possible to manage the level of EIDO within the PMT framework for individuals who perceive a risk of climate change. As a result, in a scenario where a climate change-induced food shortage occurs, it will be possible to meet the nutritional needs of societies with edible insects [120]. The carbon emissions generated during the production and consumption of edible insects are lower compared to the emissions of traditional meat (animal) production [121]. Therefore, individuals who perceive risks to climate change will tend to change their behavior positively towards insect consumption within the PMT framework. D’Antonio et al. [122] discuss the functional properties of edible insects and emphasize their potential as an environmentally sustainable alternative to meat to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Similarly, Huis and Oonincx [123] suggest that insects can be used as food to combat the effects of anthropogenic climate change.

Climate change is one of the biggest environmental threats facing our planet. This has significant impacts on agriculture and food production. Sustainability in food production plays a critical role in combating climate change. However, there are some psychological and behavioral barriers to this transition, one of which is FN [73]. However, in this current study, no significant relationship was found between CCRP and FN (β = −0.022, p > 0.05). In another hypothesis test, the relationship between FN and AMDO was examined, and no significant relationship was found (β = −0.082, p > 0.05). Similarly, no significant relationship was found between FN and edible insect consumption diffusion optimism (β = −0.030, p > 0.05). Türkiye, being the research region, has a deep-rooted structure in terms of culinary culture. To illustrate, provinces such as Gaziantep, Kahramanmaraş, Hatay, Şanlıurfa, and Mardin in the Southeastern Anatolia region have made a name for themselves in terms of gastronomy in Türkiye and even in the world [124]. Therefore, it can be said that individuals in society are selective about food consumption [125]. Therefore, people may not prefer to consume artificial meat or edible insects. However, it should be noted that not preferring food and the neophobic rejection of food are different consumer behaviors. Our research findings within the PMT framework show that individuals may tend to consume these foods when they perceive risks in terms of climate change. However, at this point, it may be possible to explain this behavior as non-preference rather than FN. In fact, the aforementioned provinces are popular destinations for tourists visiting Türkiye for gastronomy in the international arena. Therefore, there may not be a significant relationship between CCRP and FN. The fact that no significant result was found in the relationship between FN, AMDO, and EIDO can be explained by the same reason.

In this study, it was found that FN did not play a mediating role in the relationship between CCRP, AMDO, and EIDO. The direct effects of FN on both AMDO (β = 0.297, p < 0.05) and EIDO (β = 0.174, p < 0.05) were significant. However, no significant indirect effect was found in the model where the mediation effect was tested (β = 0.002, p > 0.05; β = 0.001, p > 0.05). This result suggests that individuals’ general reservations about novel foods do not significantly inhibit optimism towards food innovations triggered by climate change concerns.

7. Conclusions and Implications

This current study aims to reveal the mediating role of FN in the effect of CCRP on AMDO and EIDO. Climate change is one of today’s important realities, and overcoming the many consequences of this change are among the issues that human beings should prioritize. From this point of view, revealing the tools that human beings can use to combat the negative effects of climate change is an issue that should be on the agenda of researchers. By understanding the basics of human behavior, it will be possible for humans to develop proactive and active strategies to cope with food production patterns that accelerate climate change and food crises that may arise in the future. At this point, the findings of this current study have the characteristics of a study that can contribute to both theoretical and practical recommendations with significant findings.

One of the important findings of this study is that CCRP has a significant effect on AMDO and EIDO. In other words, when people’s behaviors are examined within the scope of PMT, they may engage in behaviors that go beyond their daily routines in the face of the risk they perceive. At this point, it is possible to evaluate this behavioral change from two different perspectives. First of all, with this behavioral change, we can see a tendency to reduce the production of traditional protein (animal protein) that causes climate change. With successful management, knowing these behavioral bases will contribute to achieving the objectives. Another point is that in scenarios where climate change-induced food shortages occur, we see that people may change their behavior within the framework of PMT and consume foods that they do not prefer in their daily lives. This result emerges as a tool that can be used to combat the impacts of climate change.

7.1. Theoretical Implications

This study offers important implications for how the PMT can be extended to the context of food consumption. Examining the impact of PMT on CCRP and attitudes towards innovative food choices increases the validity and applicability of the theory. The impact of CCRP on AMDO and edible insects diffusion optimism has important implications for the environmental psychology and consumer behavior literature. Consumers’ concerns about climate change appear to increase positive attitudes towards sustainable food options such as artificial meat and edible insects. This suggests that sustainability-conscious individuals are more open to new food technologies that have the potential to reduce environmental impacts.

This study extends PMT by including FN as a potential mediator in the context of climate change and sustainable food consumption. Although FN was not a significant mediator in the research model, this research highlights the importance of investigating psychological barriers to the adoption of new food technologies.

7.2. Practical Implications

The findings from the research can facilitate awareness campaigns to increase CCRPs by organizing and encouraging innovative food consumption. Education programs, media campaigns, or even social media content can be used to raise consumer awareness of the impact of climate change on food choices. Information provision about environmental benefits coming out of innovative food products can be indicated on product labels and packaging. For example, labels such as “Climate Friendly” and “Made from Sustainable Resources” might influence purchasing unconsciously.

Policies at public institutions can take various forms that address climate change and also encourage new food choices. Artificial meat and edible insects can be encouraged by reducing tax rates and offering other incentives, such as subsidies.

Another avenue for reducing the decline in preference for artificial meat and edible insects involves improving their characteristics in terms of taste, texture, and appearance. Designing products that better resemble the tastes and textures people are used to increases the acceptance rate of these new foodstuffs. Some strategies can be designed to increase preference for innovative and sustainable food, taking cultural and social factors into consideration. It can make consumers more willing to try new food products by providing recipes and dishes pertinent to local cuisines.

Marketers and producers of food can focus on consumers with a high-risk perception of climate change. Such a consumer group would use innovative food products, like artificial meat and edible insects, most positively. Therefore, marketing strategies could be developed for such consumers.

Artificial meat and edible insects are two such sustainable protein sources whose production and consumption can be encouraged to manage food shortages emerging due to climate change. These alternative protein sources offer ample scope to enhance the sustainability of food production by lessening the environmental burden placed by the animal husbandry industry.

7.3. Limitations and Future Agenda

The sample of this study was obtained from a specific geographical region. This may limit the generalizability of the results. It is unclear whether similar results would be obtained in different cultures, age groups or socioeconomic levels. For future studies, it is recommended to examine this in different research regions and demographic groups. In addition, this study consists of self-reported data. As in any research, there is a possibility that such data may influence the findings due to factors such as social desirability bias or recall bias.

Cultural factors are highly determinant for food consumption habits. For example, there are significant differences between Eastern and Western cultures regarding the consumption of edible insects. Religious beliefs and religious culture also have an impact on these preferences. This is another limitation of this study.

This study was conducted within the framework of PMT. Future research could integrate other psychological theories (e.g., Theory of Planned Behavior, Health Belief Model) to provide a more comprehensive explanation of consumer behavior. The influence of psychological and social factors on CCRPs and sustainable food consumption needs to be examined in more depth. For example, the role of factors such as social norms, group influence, and individual environmental awareness in these relationships should be investigated. Studies measuring the effects of education and communication strategies to increase climate change awareness are also recommended. This could reveal how such strategies affect consumers’ CCRPs and sustainable food consumption.

This study adopted the Turkish population as its context, which is characterized by its distinctive traditions, consumption habits, and religious considerations. These factors are likely to influence individuals’ attitudes towards alternative protein sources such as artificial meat and edible insects. As a consequence, it should be noted that the findings cannot be directly generalized to other regions or cultural contexts. Future studies are recommended to investigate similar relationships in other countries and regions, taking into account differences in cultural, social, and religious dynamics. Comparative studies across different populations could further expand the body of scientific knowledge on the global acceptance and adoption of sustainable food consumption behaviors.