Young Australians are reluctant to embrace cell-based meat, according to the University of Sydney and Curtin University’s latest survey findings.

The study, which surveyed 227 Generation Z Australians, found that 72 percent “viewed cultured meat with disgust,” despite the young population’s ongoing concerns over sustainability and animal welfare.

Other concerns include perceiving lab-grown meat as chemically produced and heavily processed. However, more than a quarter believed cultured meat could be acceptable if the technology could be mastered.

“In vitro meat and other alternatives are important as they can help to reduce greenhouse emissions and lead to better animal welfare conditions. However, if cultured meat is to replac livestock-based proteins, it will have to emotionally and intellectually appeal to the Gen Z consumers,” says Dr. Diana Bogueva from the University of Sydney’s School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering.

Frontiers in Nutrition published the research, which pitted slaughtered animals against a “lab-grown meat alternative produced by in vitro cell cultures of animal cells.”

While the majority of respondents claimed they had no interest in cultured meat, the reasons for the rejection varied across the 18 to 25-year-old demographic.

The participants had several concerns relating to cultured meat, including an anticipated taste or disgust, health and safety, and whether it is a more sustainable option. Researchers identified five attitudes toward cultured meat acceptability:

• 17 percent of respondents rejected all alternatives, including cultured meat, seeing it as chemically produced and heavily processed.
• 11 percent rejected all alternatives in favor of increased consumption of fruit and vegetables, saying they will stick with a vegetarian diet.
• 35 percent rejected cultured meat and edible insects but accepted plant-based alternatives because they “sounded more natural” and are “normal.”
• 9 percent rejected cultured meat but accepted edible insects, as the former was too artificial and “not natural” like insects. 
• 28 percent believed cultured meat was acceptable or possibly acceptable if the technology could be mastered.

Better for the planet?
Despite only 28 percent of respondents deeming cultured meat acceptable, more than twice that amount of participants (59 percent) were concerned about the environmental impact of traditional livestock farming.  

However, the researchers observed that many participants were not clear on the environmental impacts of livestock farming, nor did they understand the associated resource depletion. 

“Generation Z is unsure whether cultured meat is more environmentally sustainable [than conventional livestock farming],” details Dr. Bogueva.

Several respondents described cultured meat as potentially “resource consuming” and not being “environmentally friendly.”

Animal welfare was also a concern of the interviewees, with 41 percent believing that cultured meat could be a viable nutritional source due to the need to transition to more sustainable food options and improve animal welfare.

“The respondents were effectively divided into two groups: those against [cultured meat] described it as ‘another thing our generation has to worry about’ and questioned the motivations of those developing it. Meanwhile, supporters described it as ‘money invested for a good cause’ and ‘a smart move’ by people who are ‘advanced thinkers,’” Dr. Bogueva continues. 

A question of identity
Societal concerns were also prevalent throughout the study, the researchers report, with a large number of respondents worried that eating cultured meat would be in conflict with their gender and identity. 

“Gen Z values Australia’s reputation as a supplier of quality livestock and meat, and many view traditional meat-eating as being closely tied to concepts of masculinity and Australian cultural identity,” says Dr. Bogueva.

Some viewed cultured meat as a conspiracy orchestrated by the rich and powerful and were determined not to be convinced to consume it, she adds. 

“Gen Z has vast information at its fingertips but is still concerned that they will be left with the legacy of exploitative capitalism that benefits only a few at the expense of many. They have witnessed such behavior resulting in climate change and are now afraid that a similar scenario may develop in relation to food, particularly as investors are pursuing a broader adoption of cultured meat,” Dr. Bogueva concludes.