- Email: [email protected]
Exploring future patterns of meat consumption
Meat Science 109 (2015) 112–116
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Meat Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/meatsci
Exploring future patterns of meat consumption Erik Mathijs Division of Bioeconomics, University of Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 300 E-2411, 3001 Leuven, Belgium
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 2 March 2015 Received in revised form 11 May 2015 Accepted 12 May 2015 Available online 16 May 2015 Keywords: Meat consumption Nutrition transition
a b s t r a c t The nutrition transition encompasses a set of major shifts in human diet and nutritional status, throughout history and that is influenced by a wide range of factors such as income, technical change, urbanisation and culture. High-income societies are witnessing a shift towards diets with more fat, sugar, processed foods and less fibre, leading to a sharp increase in non-communicable diseases, such as obesity. This trend can also be observed among the middle classes of emerging countries. However, increasing evidence suggests that a final shift is occurring, following behavioural change towards consuming higher-quality fats, more whole grains, fruit and vegetables, and particularly less meat. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, an assessment is made of where different countries are located in the different phases of the nutrition transition. Second, a qualitative investigation is made into the factors enhancing and hindering the latest phase of the transition—particularly towards less meat consumption—taking into account cultural differences between consumer groups across countries. The analysis of both objectives generates insights into possible future scenarios of meat consumption. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction The role of meat, and more generally animal-based foodstuffs, in human consumption has changed over time and still differs across geographies. While meat consumption tends to increase with economic development, it is increasingly contested in affluent societies due to the environmental and human health implications of too high meat consumption (Tilman & Clark, 2014). These shifts in diets have been described and explained by Popkin (1993, 2006) as nutrition transitions. Nutrition transitions encompass a set of major shifts in human diet and nutritional status throughout history and are influenced by a wide range of factors such as income, technical change, urbanisation and culture. High-income societies are witnessing a shift towards diets with more fat, sugar, processed foods and less fibre, leading to a sharp increase in non-communicable diseases, such as obesity. This trend can also be observed among the middle classes of emerging countries. However, increasing evidence suggests that a next shift is occurring, following behavioural change towards consuming higher-quality fats, more whole grains, fruit and vegetables, and particularly less meat. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, an assessment is made of where different countries are located in the different phases of the nutrition transition. Second, a qualitative investigation is made into the factors enhancing and hindering the latest phase of the transition—particularly towards less meat consumption—taking into account cultural differences between consumer groups across countries. The analysis of both objectives generates insights into possible future
E-mail address: [email protected].
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.05.007 0309-1740/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
scenarios of meat consumption. This paper is organised as follows. Section 2 discusses and explores the various patterns of nutrition transition theory. Section 3 provides an overview of factors influencing reduced meat consumption, while Section 4 concludes. 2. Nutrition transition patterns 2.1. The nutrition transition theory Throughout time, populations go through a set of nutrition transitions. While the literature tends to focus on the westernisation of diets involving the increased intake of meat, fat, processed foods, sugar and salt (Kearney, 2010), Popkin (1993, 2006) described five patterns: 1. The collecting food pattern occurs in the hunter-gatherer society. The diet is high in carbohydrates and fibre and low in fat. It is a primitive society with low fertility, high mortality, low life expectancy and many infectious diseases. 2. The famine pattern occurs in agricultural societies. Diets are predominantly based on diets that are much less varied and subject to large variations. Food production is still mainly subsistence based. Natural fertility is high, but life expectancy is still low with high infant and maternal mortality. Endemic diseases prevail, as do diseases based on deficiencies. 3. The receding famine pattern occurs when societies shift from being agricultural to being industrial. Technology advances, but diets still display low variety, as they are based on fewer starchy staples and more fruit and vegetables and also animal protein. Entails a shift towards diets with more consumption of fruits, vegetables and animal
E. Mathijs / Meat Science 109 (2015) 112–116
protein. Mortality declines, while fertility starts to decrease. 4. The degenerative diseases pattern emerges when physical activity decreases following the growth of the service sector. Sedentary diets are characterised by high levels of total fat, cholesterol, sugar and refined carbohydrates and low levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids and fibre. While life expectancy is high, obesity and chronic diseases related to diet increase. 5. The behavioural change pattern entails consuming less fat and more fruit and vegetables, following increased awareness of the implications of dietary choices. Physical activity increase during leisure time. Body fat levels and obesity decrease, while bone health increases. Literature focuses mainly on the second and third patterns, that is, first the increased consumption of animal protein followed by the westernisation of diets characterised by high fat and sugar intake, because of the effects these patterns have on food demand and thus resource use, particularly in emerging countries such as China (Kearney, 2010). The combination of these two patterns is called the nutrition transition—a term also introduced by Popkin (1993). So the question rises whether a convergence of diets is actually occurring on a global scale. Vranken, Avermaete, Petalios, and Mathijs (2014) refer to the transition to the fifth pattern—behavioural change involving, among others, a reduction in meat consumption—as the second nutrition transition. Further, food consumption in general (and nutrition transitions in particular) is influenced by many economic, social, cultural and other factors, but income is an important driving force that motivates or enables people to change their consumption patterns. In other words, the progression through the various nutrition patterns is highly correlated with development patterns, which in turn is highly correlated with income. This is particularly relevant in the first nutrition transition, as meat is a relatively expensive commodity, but also in the second nutrition transition, as richer consumers start to value health and environmental concerns (Vranken et al., 2014). 2.2. Empirical evidence To explore patterns in the nutrition transition in general and meat consumption in particular, we characterise diets based on the FAOSTAT food balances and express them in energy units (kcal/capita/ day), following da Silva et al. (2009) and Oggioni, Lara, Wells, Soroka, and Siervo (2014). The FAO food balance sheets are an often used data source for consumption data, as more accurate data from individual dietary surveys or household budget surveys are only available for a limited number of countries and a limited number of years. Using food balance sheets, food availability in a country is estimated as the food produced and imported in that country minus the food exported and used for feed or otherwise not available for human consumption (Kearney, 2010). First, we focus on broad consumption patterns only, by aggregating data into the following four food categories that are based on FAO categories: (1) sugar (sweeteners, honey and sugar); (2) vegetal sources (vegetable oils, fruits, starchy roots, cereals, pulses and vegetables); (3) animal sources (meat, animal fat, eggs, milk and fish & seafood) and (4) alcoholic beverages. Using these definitions it can be established that sugar represents between 1.6 and 20.7%, vegetal sources between 34.4 and 89.1% and animal sources between 3.4 and 44% (Table 1). Table 1 Extreme values in sugar, vegetal and animal based food sources.
Lowest Highest
Sugar
Vegetal
Animal
1.6% (Nepal) 20.7% (Guatemala)
34.4% (Iceland) 89.1% (Bangladesh)
3.4% (Rwanda) 44.0% (Iceland)
Source: own calculations based on FAOSTAT.
113
The variation in these numbers highlights a very diverse composition in diets worldwide at this aggregate level. Fig. 1 shows the relationship between consumption based on sugar, vegetal and animal sources as defined earlier as a function of income (GDP per capita) for 2011. Clear trends can be observed: food consumption from animal and sugar sources is increasing with income, while food consumption from vegetal sources is decreasing with income. These results clearly support the third and fourth patterns of nutrition transition theory, while there seems to be no evidence for the final nutrition transition pattern entailing behavioural change. Second, we focus on meat consumption specifically, as that is the focus of this paper. Fig. 2 expresses the absolute energy intake from meat as a function of total energy intake. It shows a clear positive relationship, that is, meat consumption increases when total calorie consumption increases. However, a decreasing rate in the positive trend supporting behavioural change cannot be observed. This suggests that behavioural change not only implies a reduction in meat consumption, but also of absolute energy intake. Fig. 3 depicts the relationship between income and meat consumption. It shows no clear relation between meat consumption and income, but reveals the existence of a set of high-income countries in which meat consumption is relatively low. When we decompose Fig. 3 into four extreme quadrants looking at low meat consumption (arbitrarily set at less than 5% of total energy intake) versus high meat consumption (arbitrarily set at more than 10% of total energy intake) on the one hand and poor versus rich countries on the other. Following Kharas (2010), we consider poor countries those countries where consumers spend on average less than 10 $ per day, while in rich countries consumers spend on average more than 100 $ per day. Table 2 lists the countries in each of these four quadrants. Only countries in which meat consumption is lower than 5% or higher than 10% are reported. Analysing Table 2 in more detail reveals that in some cases the relationship between income and meat consumption is not as expected by nutrition transition theory. Quadrant II encompasses a set of countries that have higher meat consumption than countries with similar income levels, which may be explained by the presence of a herding culture and/or low fish consumption as these countries are landlocked (e.g., Tanzania and Uzbekistan). Quadrant I lists countries with relatively high fish consumption (e.g., Cambodia and Indonesia). A similar mechanism can be seen in Quadrant III with some countries with high fish consumption (e.g., Japan and Norway), but there is no straightforward explanation why some rich countries are in Quadrant III (e.g., Belgium), while very similar countries are in Quadrant IV (e.g., Netherlands). This does suggest that behavioural change is taking place, a result also suggested by Vranken et al. (2014) who have shown a non-linear, U-shaped relationship between meat consumption and income: initially, meat consumption increases with income, but from a certain point onwards higher levels of income lead to lower levels of meat consumption. To conclude, the evidence for a convergence of diets worldwide towards higher meat consumption does not seem be confirmed by empirical evidence. This suggests that other factors play a role in dietary choices, as will be explored in the next section. 3. Factors influencing the second nutrition transition 3.1. The basic economic model Two universal economic principles determine consumer behaviour: (1) consumers maximize utility and (2) the additional utility consumers enjoy from consuming an additional unit diminishes. Consumers are forced to make choices when their income is limited. As a result, relative prices allocate scarce resources to maximize utility. The demand curve reflects the amount of money consumers are willing and able to pay for products at various prices. Of course, price and quantity demanded have a negative relationship (law of demand).
114
E. Mathijs / Meat Science 109 (2015) 112–116
100 90 80 70
%
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 5
25
45
65
85
105
125
145
165
185
ln(income) sugar
vegetal
animal
Linear (sugar)
Linear (vegetal)
Linear (animal)
Fig. 1. Consumption of sugar, vegetal and animal based foodstuffs (% of total energy intake) as a function of income (logarithmic scale) (source: own calculations based on FAOSTAT).
Seven factors influence demand (Beierlein, Schneeberger, & Osburn, 2008): • • • • • • •
Own price of the product Seasonality Price of substitute products Price of complement products Income Population Taste and preferences.
Note that the own price results in a movement along the demand curve, while all other factors will result in a shift in demand. The demand curve reflects how price changes influence sales. This is captured by the price elasticity of demand which is defined as the percentage change in demand divided by the percentage change in price. Similar indicators can be calculated with the price of substitute or complement products (cross-price elasticity) or with income instead of price (income elasticity). Food products tend to be price inelastic, unless they
are branded. They also tend to be income inelastic as they are necessities, again, unless they are branded. However, an overview of the results of European research projects highlighted a much wider set of factors influencing food choice which include (European Commission, 2007): • Biological determinants (hunger, satiety, palatability of food, taste, sensory aspects) • Economic determinants (cost, income, availability of foods) • Physical determinants (ease of access to food, education, specific skills, time constraints) • Social determinants (culture, family, peer-group pressures, meal patterns) • Psychological determinants (mood, stress, guilt) • Attitudes, beliefs and knowledge about food. It is clear that the basic economic model does not capture this complexity and that to understand consumer choices requires more interdisciplinary efforts.
800
25
20
600 500
15
400
%
Meat intakein kcal/day
700
10
300 200
5
100 0 1800
0
2300
2800
3300
3800
Total energy intake in kcal/day Fig. 2. Meat consumption (in kcal/day) as a function of total consumption (in kcal/day) (source: own calculations based on FAOSTAT).
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
ln(income) Fig. 3. Meat consumption (% of total energy intake) as a function of income (logarithmic scale) (source: own calculations based on FAOSTAT).
E. Mathijs / Meat Science 109 (2015) 112–116 Table 2 Categorisation of a subset of countries based on meat consumption and income.
Poor countries (b3650 $)
Rich countries (N36,500 $)
Low meat consumption (b5% of energy intake)
High meat consumption (N10% of energy intake)
Quadrant I Ethiopia (3.5%) Liberia (2.8%) Mozambique (0.7%) Guinea-Bissau (2.3%) Haiti (4.7%) Cambodia (3.2%) Timor-Leste (4.6%) Mauritania (2.7%) Djibouti (1.8%) Solomon Islands (3.8%) Nicaragua (3.3%) Honduras (3.2%) Bolivia (4.1%) Nigeria (2.0%) Georgia (1.2%) Guatemala (4.4%) Vanuatu (1.8%) Armenia (4.0%) Indonesia (1.5%) Ukraine (4.9%)
Quadrant II Uganda (16.4%) Guinea (18.1%) Central African Republic (15.1%) Sierra Leone (11.8%) Tanzania (17.4%) Nepal (20.7%) Mali (13.2%) Zimbabwe (13.0%) Tajikistan (10.68%) Kenya (10.4%) Chad (10.4%) Kyrgyzstan (14.2%) Pakistan (14.7%) Lesotho (23.0%) Yemen (18.8%) Uzbekistan (12.5%) Sudan (10.2%) Moldova (10.1%) Egypt (16.1%) Morocco (13.3%) Guyana (10.3%) Swaziland (11.2%) Quadrant IV New Zealand (11.4%) Italy (13.4%) Kuwait (12.6%) Canada (13.0%) Netherlands (11.9%) Sweden (12.0%) Bermuda (15.7%)
Quadrant III United Arab Emirates (4.0%) Germany (2.3%) Japan (3.2%) Belgium (3.5%) USA (3.5%) Ireland (2.0%) Switzerland (4.2%) Norway (3.2%) Luxembourg (4.3%)
Source: own calculations based on FAOSTAT.
3.2. Going beyond the basic economic model A comprehensive model of food consumption has been developed by Jager (2000) and is depicted in Fig. 4. As food consumption is a daily routine, consumer choices are also daily routines. Habitual behaviour is in fact an evolutionary advantage as we do not need to invest mental effort in routine decisions that have served us well in the past. As a result, we can use our mental capacity for more important choices. Jager's model also shows that our cognitive processing is also a consumer-specific process that is very context dependent. The mainstream consumer is not tempted to change his or her consumption pattern. To summarize, consumers are tied up in a web of preferences, constraints and assumptions all of which are relatively fixed. As a result, consumer behaviour is usually based on automatisms and heuristics, that is, simple rules based on the underlying assumptions or mental models that guide behaviour. Therefore, it is difficult to fundamentally change consumer behaviour. Research investigating why individuals reduce their meat consumption is emerging, but still relatively scarce. They suggest human health reasons, environmental reasons and ethical reasons related to animal welfare as important factors influencing reduced meat consumption (Beardsworth & Bryman, 1999; De Backer & Hudders, 2014, 2015; Forestell, Spaeth, & Kane, 2012; Fox & Ward, 2008; Hoek, Pieternel, Stafleu, & de Graaf, 2004; Jabs, Devine, & Sobal, 1998; Lea & Worsley, 2003; Leahy, Lyons, & Tol, 2011), although these effects may differ between cultures as demonstrated by Ruby, Heine, Kamble, Cheng, and Waddar (2013) comparing Euro-American with Indian vegetarians. This reinforces the findings that too high consumption of animal based products leads both to higher incidence of diseases such as type II diabetes, coronary heart disease and other chronic non-communicable diseases on the one hand and increased environmental pressure on the other (Tilman & Clark, 2014).
115
Ethical motivations play a special role in meat consumption. In general, the ethical consumer does not act out of self-interest but out of moral obligation, which reflects the internalised ethical rules, that is, personal beliefs about what is right and wrong (Gorsuch & Ortberg, 1983). Research suggests the value of self-identity as additional explanatory concept (Sparks & Shepherd, 1992). Consumers may make ethical choices because these start to become an important part of their identity (Shaw, Shiu, & Clarke, 2000). Increasingly, green consumerism matches certain (post-modern) lifestyles in which the expression of identity coincides with a certain consumption patterns (Haanpää, 2007). Hence, there is also a strong relationship with culture. In the context of meat consumption, research has established that reduced meat consumption and particularly vegetarianism is associated by a more liberal, humanistic and female values and worldviews (see Ruby, 2012, for an overview).
4. Concluding remarks Future consumption of animal-based products in developing countries is projected to increase from 29% to 35% in 2030 and 37% in 2050 which compares to an average of 48% in industrial countries (FAO, 2006). These projections take into account the wide diversity in consumption patterns around the world. In fact, FAO does not expect the same kind of rapid growth in demand for meat as occurred in China and Brazil. As a result, annual meat demand growth, which was 3% in the period 1961–2001 is expected to slow down to 1.7% in the period up to 2030 and to 1% in the period 2030–2050. In other words, the major part of the growth in meat demand has already taken place, as global projections of food demand take into account the wide diversity of global consumption patterns. This paper explored the questions whether human diets are converging towards a western diet that is rich in animal protein and fat on the one hand and towards behavioural change towards less meat consumption on the other. While there is a clear relationship between the consumption of animal-based foodstuffs and income, the pattern of meat consumption is less obvious. We also could not give a conclusive answer to the question whether a second trend of meat reduction is taking place beyond the weak signals of meat consumption reduction that can be observed in a limited set of highincome countries, following concerns for human health, animal welfare and the environment. Meat production and consumption are increasingly contested. The production of meat consumes a considerable amount of resources, both directly and indirectly through the cultivation of feed, and has several negative impacts on the environment. However, production practices vary widely, from grass-fed only beef production to intensive pig production based imported feed. The consumption of meat is a twosided story: in developing countries, consuming meat means positive effects for health, while in developed countries consuming too much meat has negative health impacts. In addition, food consumption in general and meat consumption in particular is strongly influenced by culture, as for instance beef is not to be consumed in some cultures and pork in others. The diversity in production and consumption practices and challenges results in a complex research agenda for the future. Future research needs to be context-specific. Research themes range from the sustainable intensification of animal production, that is, increasing animal productivity within environmental and social boundaries, to the reduction of food losses and a better understanding of consumer concerns and how to deal with these concerns. The USA's National Research Council even calls for a new roadmap for animal science research (NRC, 2015). Important elements of such a roadmap—and thus of future research—include more in-depth socio-economic and cultural research to better guide and inform animal and meat sciences as well as bridging the communication gap between research, industry and the public.
116
E. Mathijs / Meat Science 109 (2015) 112–116
Fig. 4. Conceptual model of consumer behaviour (Jager, 2000).
References Beardsworth, A., & Bryman, A. (1999). Meat consumption and vegetarianism among young adults in the UK: An empirical study. British Food Journal, 101, 289–300. Beierlein, J.C., Schneeberger, K.C., & Osburn, D.D. (2008). Principles of agribusiness management (Fourth ed.). Long Grove: Waveland Press. da Silva, R., Bach-Faig, A., Raidó Quintana, B., Buckland, G., Vaz de Almeida, M.D., & SerraMajem, L. (2009). Worldwide variation of adherence to the Mediterranean diet, in 1961–1965 and 2000–2003. Public Health Nutrition, 12, 1676–1684. De Backer, C.J.S., & Hudders, L. (2014). From meatless Mondays to meatless Sundays: Motivations for meat reduction among vegetarians and semi-vegetarians who mildly or significantly reduce their meat intake. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 53, 639–657. De Backer, C.J.S., & Hudders, L. (2015). Meat morals: Relationship between meat consumption consumer attitudes towards human and animal welfare and moral behavior. Meat Science, 99, 68–74. European Commission (2007). Food consumer science. Lessons learnt from FP projects in the field of food and consumer science, Brussels. FAO (2006). World agriculture: Towards 2030/2050. Interim report. Prospects for food, nutrition, agriculture and major commodity groups. Rome: FAO. Forestell, C.A., Spaeth, A.M., & Kane, S.A. (2012). To eat or not to eat red meat. A closer look at the relationship between restrained eating and vegetarianism in college females. Appetite, 58, 319–325. Fox, N., & Ward, K.J. (2008). You are what you eat? Vegetarianism, health and identity. Social Science and Medicine, 66, 2585–2595. Gorsuch, R.L., & Ortberg, J. (1983). Moral obligation and attitudes: Their relation to behavioral intentions. Journal of Personality Social Psychology, 44, 1025–1028. Haanpää, L. (2007). Consumers' green commitment: Indication of a postmodern lifestyle? International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31, 478–486. Hoek, A.C., Pieternel, A.L., Stafleu, A., & de Graaf, C. (2004). Food-related lifestyle and health of Dutch vegetarians, non-vegetarian consumers of meat substitutes, and meat consumers. Appetite, 42, 265–272. Jabs, J., Devine, C.M., & Sobal, J. (1998). Model of the process of adopting vegetarian diets: Health vegetarians and ethical vegetarians. Journal of Nutrition Education, 30, 196–202. Jager, W. (2000). Modelling consumer behaviour. (PhD dissertation) Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
Kearney, J. (2010). Food consumption trends and drivers. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 365, 2793–2807. Kharas, H. (2010). The emerging middle class in developing countries. Working Paper No. 285. OECD Development Centre. Lea, E., & Worsley, A. (2003). Benefits and barriers to the consumption of a vegetarian diet in Australia. Public Health Nutrition, 6, 505–511. Leahy, E., Lyons, S., & Tol, R.S.J. (2011). Determinants of vegetarianism and meat consumption frequency in Ireland. The Economic and Social Review, 42, 407–436. NRC (2015). Critical role of animal science research in food security and sustainability. Committee on Considerations for the Future of Animal Science Research. Washington D.C.: National Research Council (NRC). Oggioni, C., Lara, J., Wells, J.C.K., Soroka, K., & Siervo, M. (2014). Shifts in population dietary patterns and physical inactivity as determinants of global trends in the prevalence of diabetes: An ecological analysis. Nutrition, Metabolism, and Cardiovascular Diseases, 24, 1105–1111. Popkin, B.M. (1993). Nutritional patterns and transitions. Population and Development Review, 19, 138–157. Popkin, B.M. (2006). Global nutrition dynamics: The world is shifting rapidly toward a diet linked with noncommunicable diseases. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 84, 289–298. Ruby, M.B. (2012). Vegetarianism. A blossoming field of study. Appetite, 58, 141–150. Ruby, M.B., Heine, S.J., Kamble, S., Cheng, T.K., & Waddar, M. (2013). Compassion and contamination. Cultural differences in vegetarianism. Appetite, 71, 340–348. Shaw, D., Shiu, E., & Clarke, I. (2000). The contribution of ethical obligation and selfidentity to the theory of planned behaviour: An exploration of ethical consumers. Journal of Marketing Management, 16, 879–894. Sparks, P., & Shepherd, R. (1992). Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: Assessing the role of identification with ‘green consumerism’. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 388–399. Tilman, D., & Clark, M. (2014). Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature, 515, 518–522. Vranken, L., Avermaete, T., Petalios, D., & Mathijs, E. (2014). Curbing global meat consumption: Emerging evidence of a second nutrition transition. Environmental Science & Policy, 39, 1–12.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Meat Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/meatsci
Exploring future patterns of meat consumption Erik Mathijs Division of Bioeconomics, University of Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 300 E-2411, 3001 Leuven, Belgium
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 2 March 2015 Received in revised form 11 May 2015 Accepted 12 May 2015 Available online 16 May 2015 Keywords: Meat consumption Nutrition transition
a b s t r a c t The nutrition transition encompasses a set of major shifts in human diet and nutritional status, throughout history and that is influenced by a wide range of factors such as income, technical change, urbanisation and culture. High-income societies are witnessing a shift towards diets with more fat, sugar, processed foods and less fibre, leading to a sharp increase in non-communicable diseases, such as obesity. This trend can also be observed among the middle classes of emerging countries. However, increasing evidence suggests that a final shift is occurring, following behavioural change towards consuming higher-quality fats, more whole grains, fruit and vegetables, and particularly less meat. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, an assessment is made of where different countries are located in the different phases of the nutrition transition. Second, a qualitative investigation is made into the factors enhancing and hindering the latest phase of the transition—particularly towards less meat consumption—taking into account cultural differences between consumer groups across countries. The analysis of both objectives generates insights into possible future scenarios of meat consumption. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction The role of meat, and more generally animal-based foodstuffs, in human consumption has changed over time and still differs across geographies. While meat consumption tends to increase with economic development, it is increasingly contested in affluent societies due to the environmental and human health implications of too high meat consumption (Tilman & Clark, 2014). These shifts in diets have been described and explained by Popkin (1993, 2006) as nutrition transitions. Nutrition transitions encompass a set of major shifts in human diet and nutritional status throughout history and are influenced by a wide range of factors such as income, technical change, urbanisation and culture. High-income societies are witnessing a shift towards diets with more fat, sugar, processed foods and less fibre, leading to a sharp increase in non-communicable diseases, such as obesity. This trend can also be observed among the middle classes of emerging countries. However, increasing evidence suggests that a next shift is occurring, following behavioural change towards consuming higher-quality fats, more whole grains, fruit and vegetables, and particularly less meat. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, an assessment is made of where different countries are located in the different phases of the nutrition transition. Second, a qualitative investigation is made into the factors enhancing and hindering the latest phase of the transition—particularly towards less meat consumption—taking into account cultural differences between consumer groups across countries. The analysis of both objectives generates insights into possible future
E-mail address: [email protected].
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.05.007 0309-1740/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
scenarios of meat consumption. This paper is organised as follows. Section 2 discusses and explores the various patterns of nutrition transition theory. Section 3 provides an overview of factors influencing reduced meat consumption, while Section 4 concludes. 2. Nutrition transition patterns 2.1. The nutrition transition theory Throughout time, populations go through a set of nutrition transitions. While the literature tends to focus on the westernisation of diets involving the increased intake of meat, fat, processed foods, sugar and salt (Kearney, 2010), Popkin (1993, 2006) described five patterns: 1. The collecting food pattern occurs in the hunter-gatherer society. The diet is high in carbohydrates and fibre and low in fat. It is a primitive society with low fertility, high mortality, low life expectancy and many infectious diseases. 2. The famine pattern occurs in agricultural societies. Diets are predominantly based on diets that are much less varied and subject to large variations. Food production is still mainly subsistence based. Natural fertility is high, but life expectancy is still low with high infant and maternal mortality. Endemic diseases prevail, as do diseases based on deficiencies. 3. The receding famine pattern occurs when societies shift from being agricultural to being industrial. Technology advances, but diets still display low variety, as they are based on fewer starchy staples and more fruit and vegetables and also animal protein. Entails a shift towards diets with more consumption of fruits, vegetables and animal
E. Mathijs / Meat Science 109 (2015) 112–116
protein. Mortality declines, while fertility starts to decrease. 4. The degenerative diseases pattern emerges when physical activity decreases following the growth of the service sector. Sedentary diets are characterised by high levels of total fat, cholesterol, sugar and refined carbohydrates and low levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids and fibre. While life expectancy is high, obesity and chronic diseases related to diet increase. 5. The behavioural change pattern entails consuming less fat and more fruit and vegetables, following increased awareness of the implications of dietary choices. Physical activity increase during leisure time. Body fat levels and obesity decrease, while bone health increases. Literature focuses mainly on the second and third patterns, that is, first the increased consumption of animal protein followed by the westernisation of diets characterised by high fat and sugar intake, because of the effects these patterns have on food demand and thus resource use, particularly in emerging countries such as China (Kearney, 2010). The combination of these two patterns is called the nutrition transition—a term also introduced by Popkin (1993). So the question rises whether a convergence of diets is actually occurring on a global scale. Vranken, Avermaete, Petalios, and Mathijs (2014) refer to the transition to the fifth pattern—behavioural change involving, among others, a reduction in meat consumption—as the second nutrition transition. Further, food consumption in general (and nutrition transitions in particular) is influenced by many economic, social, cultural and other factors, but income is an important driving force that motivates or enables people to change their consumption patterns. In other words, the progression through the various nutrition patterns is highly correlated with development patterns, which in turn is highly correlated with income. This is particularly relevant in the first nutrition transition, as meat is a relatively expensive commodity, but also in the second nutrition transition, as richer consumers start to value health and environmental concerns (Vranken et al., 2014). 2.2. Empirical evidence To explore patterns in the nutrition transition in general and meat consumption in particular, we characterise diets based on the FAOSTAT food balances and express them in energy units (kcal/capita/ day), following da Silva et al. (2009) and Oggioni, Lara, Wells, Soroka, and Siervo (2014). The FAO food balance sheets are an often used data source for consumption data, as more accurate data from individual dietary surveys or household budget surveys are only available for a limited number of countries and a limited number of years. Using food balance sheets, food availability in a country is estimated as the food produced and imported in that country minus the food exported and used for feed or otherwise not available for human consumption (Kearney, 2010). First, we focus on broad consumption patterns only, by aggregating data into the following four food categories that are based on FAO categories: (1) sugar (sweeteners, honey and sugar); (2) vegetal sources (vegetable oils, fruits, starchy roots, cereals, pulses and vegetables); (3) animal sources (meat, animal fat, eggs, milk and fish & seafood) and (4) alcoholic beverages. Using these definitions it can be established that sugar represents between 1.6 and 20.7%, vegetal sources between 34.4 and 89.1% and animal sources between 3.4 and 44% (Table 1). Table 1 Extreme values in sugar, vegetal and animal based food sources.
Lowest Highest
Sugar
Vegetal
Animal
1.6% (Nepal) 20.7% (Guatemala)
34.4% (Iceland) 89.1% (Bangladesh)
3.4% (Rwanda) 44.0% (Iceland)
Source: own calculations based on FAOSTAT.
113
The variation in these numbers highlights a very diverse composition in diets worldwide at this aggregate level. Fig. 1 shows the relationship between consumption based on sugar, vegetal and animal sources as defined earlier as a function of income (GDP per capita) for 2011. Clear trends can be observed: food consumption from animal and sugar sources is increasing with income, while food consumption from vegetal sources is decreasing with income. These results clearly support the third and fourth patterns of nutrition transition theory, while there seems to be no evidence for the final nutrition transition pattern entailing behavioural change. Second, we focus on meat consumption specifically, as that is the focus of this paper. Fig. 2 expresses the absolute energy intake from meat as a function of total energy intake. It shows a clear positive relationship, that is, meat consumption increases when total calorie consumption increases. However, a decreasing rate in the positive trend supporting behavioural change cannot be observed. This suggests that behavioural change not only implies a reduction in meat consumption, but also of absolute energy intake. Fig. 3 depicts the relationship between income and meat consumption. It shows no clear relation between meat consumption and income, but reveals the existence of a set of high-income countries in which meat consumption is relatively low. When we decompose Fig. 3 into four extreme quadrants looking at low meat consumption (arbitrarily set at less than 5% of total energy intake) versus high meat consumption (arbitrarily set at more than 10% of total energy intake) on the one hand and poor versus rich countries on the other. Following Kharas (2010), we consider poor countries those countries where consumers spend on average less than 10 $ per day, while in rich countries consumers spend on average more than 100 $ per day. Table 2 lists the countries in each of these four quadrants. Only countries in which meat consumption is lower than 5% or higher than 10% are reported. Analysing Table 2 in more detail reveals that in some cases the relationship between income and meat consumption is not as expected by nutrition transition theory. Quadrant II encompasses a set of countries that have higher meat consumption than countries with similar income levels, which may be explained by the presence of a herding culture and/or low fish consumption as these countries are landlocked (e.g., Tanzania and Uzbekistan). Quadrant I lists countries with relatively high fish consumption (e.g., Cambodia and Indonesia). A similar mechanism can be seen in Quadrant III with some countries with high fish consumption (e.g., Japan and Norway), but there is no straightforward explanation why some rich countries are in Quadrant III (e.g., Belgium), while very similar countries are in Quadrant IV (e.g., Netherlands). This does suggest that behavioural change is taking place, a result also suggested by Vranken et al. (2014) who have shown a non-linear, U-shaped relationship between meat consumption and income: initially, meat consumption increases with income, but from a certain point onwards higher levels of income lead to lower levels of meat consumption. To conclude, the evidence for a convergence of diets worldwide towards higher meat consumption does not seem be confirmed by empirical evidence. This suggests that other factors play a role in dietary choices, as will be explored in the next section. 3. Factors influencing the second nutrition transition 3.1. The basic economic model Two universal economic principles determine consumer behaviour: (1) consumers maximize utility and (2) the additional utility consumers enjoy from consuming an additional unit diminishes. Consumers are forced to make choices when their income is limited. As a result, relative prices allocate scarce resources to maximize utility. The demand curve reflects the amount of money consumers are willing and able to pay for products at various prices. Of course, price and quantity demanded have a negative relationship (law of demand).
114
E. Mathijs / Meat Science 109 (2015) 112–116
100 90 80 70
%
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 5
25
45
65
85
105
125
145
165
185
ln(income) sugar
vegetal
animal
Linear (sugar)
Linear (vegetal)
Linear (animal)
Fig. 1. Consumption of sugar, vegetal and animal based foodstuffs (% of total energy intake) as a function of income (logarithmic scale) (source: own calculations based on FAOSTAT).
Seven factors influence demand (Beierlein, Schneeberger, & Osburn, 2008): • • • • • • •
Own price of the product Seasonality Price of substitute products Price of complement products Income Population Taste and preferences.
Note that the own price results in a movement along the demand curve, while all other factors will result in a shift in demand. The demand curve reflects how price changes influence sales. This is captured by the price elasticity of demand which is defined as the percentage change in demand divided by the percentage change in price. Similar indicators can be calculated with the price of substitute or complement products (cross-price elasticity) or with income instead of price (income elasticity). Food products tend to be price inelastic, unless they
are branded. They also tend to be income inelastic as they are necessities, again, unless they are branded. However, an overview of the results of European research projects highlighted a much wider set of factors influencing food choice which include (European Commission, 2007): • Biological determinants (hunger, satiety, palatability of food, taste, sensory aspects) • Economic determinants (cost, income, availability of foods) • Physical determinants (ease of access to food, education, specific skills, time constraints) • Social determinants (culture, family, peer-group pressures, meal patterns) • Psychological determinants (mood, stress, guilt) • Attitudes, beliefs and knowledge about food. It is clear that the basic economic model does not capture this complexity and that to understand consumer choices requires more interdisciplinary efforts.
800
25
20
600 500
15
400
%
Meat intakein kcal/day
700
10
300 200
5
100 0 1800
0
2300
2800
3300
3800
Total energy intake in kcal/day Fig. 2. Meat consumption (in kcal/day) as a function of total consumption (in kcal/day) (source: own calculations based on FAOSTAT).
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
ln(income) Fig. 3. Meat consumption (% of total energy intake) as a function of income (logarithmic scale) (source: own calculations based on FAOSTAT).
E. Mathijs / Meat Science 109 (2015) 112–116 Table 2 Categorisation of a subset of countries based on meat consumption and income.
Poor countries (b3650 $)
Rich countries (N36,500 $)
Low meat consumption (b5% of energy intake)
High meat consumption (N10% of energy intake)
Quadrant I Ethiopia (3.5%) Liberia (2.8%) Mozambique (0.7%) Guinea-Bissau (2.3%) Haiti (4.7%) Cambodia (3.2%) Timor-Leste (4.6%) Mauritania (2.7%) Djibouti (1.8%) Solomon Islands (3.8%) Nicaragua (3.3%) Honduras (3.2%) Bolivia (4.1%) Nigeria (2.0%) Georgia (1.2%) Guatemala (4.4%) Vanuatu (1.8%) Armenia (4.0%) Indonesia (1.5%) Ukraine (4.9%)
Quadrant II Uganda (16.4%) Guinea (18.1%) Central African Republic (15.1%) Sierra Leone (11.8%) Tanzania (17.4%) Nepal (20.7%) Mali (13.2%) Zimbabwe (13.0%) Tajikistan (10.68%) Kenya (10.4%) Chad (10.4%) Kyrgyzstan (14.2%) Pakistan (14.7%) Lesotho (23.0%) Yemen (18.8%) Uzbekistan (12.5%) Sudan (10.2%) Moldova (10.1%) Egypt (16.1%) Morocco (13.3%) Guyana (10.3%) Swaziland (11.2%) Quadrant IV New Zealand (11.4%) Italy (13.4%) Kuwait (12.6%) Canada (13.0%) Netherlands (11.9%) Sweden (12.0%) Bermuda (15.7%)
Quadrant III United Arab Emirates (4.0%) Germany (2.3%) Japan (3.2%) Belgium (3.5%) USA (3.5%) Ireland (2.0%) Switzerland (4.2%) Norway (3.2%) Luxembourg (4.3%)
Source: own calculations based on FAOSTAT.
3.2. Going beyond the basic economic model A comprehensive model of food consumption has been developed by Jager (2000) and is depicted in Fig. 4. As food consumption is a daily routine, consumer choices are also daily routines. Habitual behaviour is in fact an evolutionary advantage as we do not need to invest mental effort in routine decisions that have served us well in the past. As a result, we can use our mental capacity for more important choices. Jager's model also shows that our cognitive processing is also a consumer-specific process that is very context dependent. The mainstream consumer is not tempted to change his or her consumption pattern. To summarize, consumers are tied up in a web of preferences, constraints and assumptions all of which are relatively fixed. As a result, consumer behaviour is usually based on automatisms and heuristics, that is, simple rules based on the underlying assumptions or mental models that guide behaviour. Therefore, it is difficult to fundamentally change consumer behaviour. Research investigating why individuals reduce their meat consumption is emerging, but still relatively scarce. They suggest human health reasons, environmental reasons and ethical reasons related to animal welfare as important factors influencing reduced meat consumption (Beardsworth & Bryman, 1999; De Backer & Hudders, 2014, 2015; Forestell, Spaeth, & Kane, 2012; Fox & Ward, 2008; Hoek, Pieternel, Stafleu, & de Graaf, 2004; Jabs, Devine, & Sobal, 1998; Lea & Worsley, 2003; Leahy, Lyons, & Tol, 2011), although these effects may differ between cultures as demonstrated by Ruby, Heine, Kamble, Cheng, and Waddar (2013) comparing Euro-American with Indian vegetarians. This reinforces the findings that too high consumption of animal based products leads both to higher incidence of diseases such as type II diabetes, coronary heart disease and other chronic non-communicable diseases on the one hand and increased environmental pressure on the other (Tilman & Clark, 2014).
115
Ethical motivations play a special role in meat consumption. In general, the ethical consumer does not act out of self-interest but out of moral obligation, which reflects the internalised ethical rules, that is, personal beliefs about what is right and wrong (Gorsuch & Ortberg, 1983). Research suggests the value of self-identity as additional explanatory concept (Sparks & Shepherd, 1992). Consumers may make ethical choices because these start to become an important part of their identity (Shaw, Shiu, & Clarke, 2000). Increasingly, green consumerism matches certain (post-modern) lifestyles in which the expression of identity coincides with a certain consumption patterns (Haanpää, 2007). Hence, there is also a strong relationship with culture. In the context of meat consumption, research has established that reduced meat consumption and particularly vegetarianism is associated by a more liberal, humanistic and female values and worldviews (see Ruby, 2012, for an overview).
4. Concluding remarks Future consumption of animal-based products in developing countries is projected to increase from 29% to 35% in 2030 and 37% in 2050 which compares to an average of 48% in industrial countries (FAO, 2006). These projections take into account the wide diversity in consumption patterns around the world. In fact, FAO does not expect the same kind of rapid growth in demand for meat as occurred in China and Brazil. As a result, annual meat demand growth, which was 3% in the period 1961–2001 is expected to slow down to 1.7% in the period up to 2030 and to 1% in the period 2030–2050. In other words, the major part of the growth in meat demand has already taken place, as global projections of food demand take into account the wide diversity of global consumption patterns. This paper explored the questions whether human diets are converging towards a western diet that is rich in animal protein and fat on the one hand and towards behavioural change towards less meat consumption on the other. While there is a clear relationship between the consumption of animal-based foodstuffs and income, the pattern of meat consumption is less obvious. We also could not give a conclusive answer to the question whether a second trend of meat reduction is taking place beyond the weak signals of meat consumption reduction that can be observed in a limited set of highincome countries, following concerns for human health, animal welfare and the environment. Meat production and consumption are increasingly contested. The production of meat consumes a considerable amount of resources, both directly and indirectly through the cultivation of feed, and has several negative impacts on the environment. However, production practices vary widely, from grass-fed only beef production to intensive pig production based imported feed. The consumption of meat is a twosided story: in developing countries, consuming meat means positive effects for health, while in developed countries consuming too much meat has negative health impacts. In addition, food consumption in general and meat consumption in particular is strongly influenced by culture, as for instance beef is not to be consumed in some cultures and pork in others. The diversity in production and consumption practices and challenges results in a complex research agenda for the future. Future research needs to be context-specific. Research themes range from the sustainable intensification of animal production, that is, increasing animal productivity within environmental and social boundaries, to the reduction of food losses and a better understanding of consumer concerns and how to deal with these concerns. The USA's National Research Council even calls for a new roadmap for animal science research (NRC, 2015). Important elements of such a roadmap—and thus of future research—include more in-depth socio-economic and cultural research to better guide and inform animal and meat sciences as well as bridging the communication gap between research, industry and the public.
116
E. Mathijs / Meat Science 109 (2015) 112–116
Fig. 4. Conceptual model of consumer behaviour (Jager, 2000).
References Beardsworth, A., & Bryman, A. (1999). Meat consumption and vegetarianism among young adults in the UK: An empirical study. British Food Journal, 101, 289–300. Beierlein, J.C., Schneeberger, K.C., & Osburn, D.D. (2008). Principles of agribusiness management (Fourth ed.). Long Grove: Waveland Press. da Silva, R., Bach-Faig, A., Raidó Quintana, B., Buckland, G., Vaz de Almeida, M.D., & SerraMajem, L. (2009). Worldwide variation of adherence to the Mediterranean diet, in 1961–1965 and 2000–2003. Public Health Nutrition, 12, 1676–1684. De Backer, C.J.S., & Hudders, L. (2014). From meatless Mondays to meatless Sundays: Motivations for meat reduction among vegetarians and semi-vegetarians who mildly or significantly reduce their meat intake. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 53, 639–657. De Backer, C.J.S., & Hudders, L. (2015). Meat morals: Relationship between meat consumption consumer attitudes towards human and animal welfare and moral behavior. Meat Science, 99, 68–74. European Commission (2007). Food consumer science. Lessons learnt from FP projects in the field of food and consumer science, Brussels. FAO (2006). World agriculture: Towards 2030/2050. Interim report. Prospects for food, nutrition, agriculture and major commodity groups. Rome: FAO. Forestell, C.A., Spaeth, A.M., & Kane, S.A. (2012). To eat or not to eat red meat. A closer look at the relationship between restrained eating and vegetarianism in college females. Appetite, 58, 319–325. Fox, N., & Ward, K.J. (2008). You are what you eat? Vegetarianism, health and identity. Social Science and Medicine, 66, 2585–2595. Gorsuch, R.L., & Ortberg, J. (1983). Moral obligation and attitudes: Their relation to behavioral intentions. Journal of Personality Social Psychology, 44, 1025–1028. Haanpää, L. (2007). Consumers' green commitment: Indication of a postmodern lifestyle? International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31, 478–486. Hoek, A.C., Pieternel, A.L., Stafleu, A., & de Graaf, C. (2004). Food-related lifestyle and health of Dutch vegetarians, non-vegetarian consumers of meat substitutes, and meat consumers. Appetite, 42, 265–272. Jabs, J., Devine, C.M., & Sobal, J. (1998). Model of the process of adopting vegetarian diets: Health vegetarians and ethical vegetarians. Journal of Nutrition Education, 30, 196–202. Jager, W. (2000). Modelling consumer behaviour. (PhD dissertation) Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
Kearney, J. (2010). Food consumption trends and drivers. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 365, 2793–2807. Kharas, H. (2010). The emerging middle class in developing countries. Working Paper No. 285. OECD Development Centre. Lea, E., & Worsley, A. (2003). Benefits and barriers to the consumption of a vegetarian diet in Australia. Public Health Nutrition, 6, 505–511. Leahy, E., Lyons, S., & Tol, R.S.J. (2011). Determinants of vegetarianism and meat consumption frequency in Ireland. The Economic and Social Review, 42, 407–436. NRC (2015). Critical role of animal science research in food security and sustainability. Committee on Considerations for the Future of Animal Science Research. Washington D.C.: National Research Council (NRC). Oggioni, C., Lara, J., Wells, J.C.K., Soroka, K., & Siervo, M. (2014). Shifts in population dietary patterns and physical inactivity as determinants of global trends in the prevalence of diabetes: An ecological analysis. Nutrition, Metabolism, and Cardiovascular Diseases, 24, 1105–1111. Popkin, B.M. (1993). Nutritional patterns and transitions. Population and Development Review, 19, 138–157. Popkin, B.M. (2006). Global nutrition dynamics: The world is shifting rapidly toward a diet linked with noncommunicable diseases. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 84, 289–298. Ruby, M.B. (2012). Vegetarianism. A blossoming field of study. Appetite, 58, 141–150. Ruby, M.B., Heine, S.J., Kamble, S., Cheng, T.K., & Waddar, M. (2013). Compassion and contamination. Cultural differences in vegetarianism. Appetite, 71, 340–348. Shaw, D., Shiu, E., & Clarke, I. (2000). The contribution of ethical obligation and selfidentity to the theory of planned behaviour: An exploration of ethical consumers. Journal of Marketing Management, 16, 879–894. Sparks, P., & Shepherd, R. (1992). Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: Assessing the role of identification with ‘green consumerism’. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 388–399. Tilman, D., & Clark, M. (2014). Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature, 515, 518–522. Vranken, L., Avermaete, T., Petalios, D., & Mathijs, E. (2014). Curbing global meat consumption: Emerging evidence of a second nutrition transition. Environmental Science & Policy, 39, 1–12.