Food labeling strategies to alter meat analogue consumption willingness in Midwestern adults

High levels of meat consumption pose well-documented risks to both human health and environmental sustainability. Given the substantial resources required for meat production and the pressures of population growth, continued reliance on meat as the dominant protein source is increasingly untenable. The Midwest region of the United States, which exhibits disproportionately high rates of both meat production and consumption, represents a particularly critical context for interventions aimed at shifting dietary behavior. Encouraging adoption of meat analogues in this region could have an outsized impact on both consumption patterns and environmental outcomes. The present study draws on theories of limited-resource social dilemmas and extends prior research on pro-environmental messaging and food labeling to evaluate strategies for increasing acceptance of meat analogues. A 2 (label present vs. absent) × 3 (label type: education, identity, social norm) factorial experiment was conducted to assess expected liking, willingness to try, willingness to purchase, and willingness to substitute meat analogues for conventional meat among Midwestern adults. Findings revealed a significant interaction between social norm and identity labels: when presented in combination, these labels increased expected liking (p = .013), willingness to purchase (p = .007), and willingness to substitute (p = .011). In contrast, education labels produced a significant backfiring effect on willingness to try (p = .013), raising important concerns about the efficacy of commonly used sustainability messaging. Finally, results indicated that the majority of participants were not willing to pay more for environmentally sustainable meat analogues, a pattern that diverges from past findings and highlights the need for pricing strategies.