meatTheory and practice of meat processingТеория и практика переработки мяса2414-438X2414-441XФГБНУ «Федеральный научный центр пищевых систем им. В.М. Горбатова» РАН10.21323/2414-438X-2025-10-1-54-66meat-433Research ArticleСтатьиAssessment of the consumers’ attitude to the alternative meat. ReviewAssessment of the consumers’ attitude to the alternative meat. Reviewhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4249-9316GorbunovaN. А.GorbunovaN. A.

Nataliya A. Gorbunova - Candidate of Technical Sciences, Scientific Secretary, V. M. Gorbatov Federal Research Center for Food Systems.

26, Talalikhin str., 109316, Moscow. Tel.: +7–495–676–95–11 (316)

Nataliya A. Gorbunova - Candidate of Technical Sciences, Scientific Secretary, V. M. Gorbatov Federal Research Center for Food Systems.

26, Talalikhin str., 109316, Moscow. Tel.: +7–495–676–95–11 (316)

n.gorbunova@fncps.ruV.M. Gorbatov Federal Research Center for Food SystemsРоссияV.M. Gorbatov Federal Research Center for Food SystemsRussian Federation2025060420251015466Copyright © Gorbunova N.A., 20252025Gorbunova N.А.Gorbunova N.A.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.meatjournal.ru/jour/article/view/433

Cultivated meat technology is a new and pretty controversial food technology presented as a method of meat production without dependence on large-scale farming of industrial livestock. It is based on the principles of people’s humanistic attitude to animals and environmental care. The article summarizes the results of the “life cycle” assessment of the cultivated meat and the possible environmental effect of its production technology on global warming. The presented review is aimed at assessing consumer perception of cultivated meat by analyzing and systematizing the results of previous studies that examined the consumers’ attitudes to the risks and benefits of the alternative meat. Systematized research data allowed identifying key factors that influence onto the consumers’ perception of the food products. For example, one of the main reasons for a negative attitude towards cultivated meat is food neophobia. In addition, differences in this product acceptance by various consumers groups were analyzed. Generalization of the results allowed systematizing the motivators and barriers that may affect the mass consumption of the cultivated meat in the future, taking into account the innovations in the new food technologies development. Acceptance rates of the cultivated meat vary in relevance with demographics, socio-cultural, religious, ethical perceptions and traditions. However, it should be noted that there is no consensus on the perceived advantages, disadvantages, threats and opportunities of the consumers’ acceptance of the cultivated meat. This review notes that a number of studies show a relatively high level of consumer/population willingness to try the cultivated meat. However, the acceptance rates of the cultivated meat are generally lower than for other alternative proteins (e. g. legumes, plant-based meat). The main negative factor in the acceptance of the cultivated meat is that consumers perceive the cultivated meat as the unnatural one.

The study therefore examines various issues related to the formation of both positive and negative attitudes towards the cultivated meat. It also helps to better understanding the consumers’ psychology and allows more accurate prediction of their behavior.

Cultivated meat technology is a new and pretty controversial food technology presented as a method of meat production without dependence on large-scale farming of industrial livestock. It is based on the principles of people’s humanistic attitude to animals and environmental care. The article summarizes the results of the “life cycle” assessment of the cultivated meat and the possible environmental effect of its production technology on global warming. The presented review is aimed at assessing consumer perception of cultivated meat by analyzing and systematizing the results of previous studies that examined the consumers’ attitudes to the risks and benefits of the alternative meat. Systematized research data allowed identifying key factors that influence onto the consumers’ perception of the food products. For example, one of the main reasons for a negative attitude towards cultivated meat is food neophobia. In addition, differences in this product acceptance by various consumers groups were analyzed. Generalization of the results allowed systematizing the motivators and barriers that may affect the mass consumption of the cultivated meat in the future, taking into account the innovations in the new food technologies development. Acceptance rates of the cultivated meat vary in relevance with demographics, socio-cultural, religious, ethical perceptions and traditions. However, it should be noted that there is no consensus on the perceived advantages, disadvantages, threats and opportunities of the consumers’ acceptance of the cultivated meat. This review notes that a number of studies show a relatively high level of consumer/population willingness to try the cultivated meat. However, the acceptance rates of the cultivated meat are generally lower than for other alternative proteins (e. g. legumes, plant-based meat). The main negative factor in the acceptance of the cultivated meat is that consumers perceive the cultivated meat as the unnatural one.

The study therefore examines various issues related to the formation of both positive and negative attitudes towards the cultivated meat. It also helps to better understanding the consumers’ psychology and allows more accurate prediction of their behavior.

meat substitutes (analogues)cultivated meatalternative proteinsconsumers’ behaviorfood neophobiameat substitutes (analogues)cultivated meatalternative proteinsconsumers’ behaviorfood neophobiaThe article was published as part of the research topic No. FGUS-2024–0001 of the state assignment of the V. M. Gorbatov Federal Research Center for Food Systems of RASReferencesPakseresht, A., Ahmadi Kaliji, S., Canavari, M. (2022). Review of factors affecting consumer acceptance of cultured meat. Appetite, 170, Article 105829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105829Pakseresht, A., Ahmadi Kaliji, S., Canavari, M. (2022). Review of factors affecting consumer acceptance of cultured meat. Appetite, 170, Article 105829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105829Mahoney, B. (2022). Let them eat cultured meat: Diagnosing the potential for meat alternatives to increase inequity. Food Ethics, 7(2), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-022-00108-0Mahoney, B. (2022). Let them eat cultured meat: Diagnosing the potential for meat alternatives to increase inequity. Food Ethics, 7(2), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-022-00108-0Petrunina, I.V., Gorbunova, N.A., Zakharov, A.N. (2023). Assessment of causes and consequences of food and agricultural raw material loss and opportunities for its reduction. Theory and Practice of Meat Processing, 8(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.21323/2414-438X-2023-8-1-51-61Petrunina, I.V., Gorbunova, N.A., Zakharov, A.N. (2023). Assessment of causes and consequences of food and agricultural raw material loss and opportunities for its reduction. Theory and Practice of Meat Processing, 8(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.21323/2414-438X-2023-8-1-51-61Stephens, N., Di Silvio, L., Dunsford, I., Ellis, M., Glencross, A., Sexton, A. (2018). Bringing cultured meat to market: Technical, socio-political, and regulatory challenges in cellular agriculture. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 78, 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.04.010Stephens, N., Di Silvio, L., Dunsford, I., Ellis, M., Glencross, A., Sexton, A. (2018). Bringing cultured meat to market: Technical, socio-political, and regulatory challenges in cellular agriculture. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 78, 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.04.010Lin-Hi, N., Schäfer, K., Blumberg, I., Hollands, L. (2022). The omnivore’s paradox and consumer acceptance of cultured meat: An experimental investigation into the role of perceived organizational competence and excitement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 338, Article 130593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130593Lin-Hi, N., Schäfer, K., Blumberg, I., Hollands, L. (2022). The omnivore’s paradox and consumer acceptance of cultured meat: An experimental investigation into the role of perceived organizational competence and excitement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 338, Article 130593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130593Lazarus, O., McDermid, S., Jacquet, J. (2021). The climate responsibilities of industrial meat and dairy producers. Climatic Change, 165(1), Article 30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03047-7Lazarus, O., McDermid, S., Jacquet, J. (2021). The climate responsibilities of industrial meat and dairy producers. Climatic Change, 165(1), Article 30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03047-7Godfray, H. C. J., Aveyard, P., Garnett, T., Hall, J. W., Key, T. J., Lorimer, J. et al. (2018) Meat consumption, health, and the environment. Science, 361, Article eaam5324. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam5324Godfray, H. C. J., Aveyard, P., Garnett, T., Hall, J. W., Key, T. J., Lorimer, J. et al. (2018) Meat consumption, health, and the environment. Science, 361, Article eaam5324. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam5324Hocquette, J.-F. (2023). Consumer perception of livestock production and meat consumption; an overview of the special issue “Perspectives on consumer attitudes to meat consumption”. Meat Science, 200, Article 109163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2023.109163Hocquette, J.-F. (2023). Consumer perception of livestock production and meat consumption; an overview of the special issue “Perspectives on consumer attitudes to meat consumption”. Meat Science, 200, Article 109163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2023.109163Biscarra-Bellio, J. C., de Oliveira, G. B., Marques, M. C. P., Molento C. F. M. (2023). Demand changes meat as changing meat reshapes demand: The great meat revolution. MeatScience, 196, Article 109040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.109040Biscarra-Bellio, J. C., de Oliveira, G. B., Marques, M. C. P., Molento C. F. M. (2023). Demand changes meat as changing meat reshapes demand: The great meat revolution. MeatScience, 196, Article 109040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.109040Springmann, M., Clark, M., Mason-D’Croz, D., Wiebe, K., Bodirsky, B.L., Lassaletta, L. et al. (2018). Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature, 562(7728), 519–525. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0594-0Springmann, M., Clark, M., Mason-D’Croz, D., Wiebe, K., Bodirsky, B.L., Lassaletta, L. et al. (2018). Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature, 562(7728), 519–525. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0594-0Faccio, E., Guiotto Nai Fovino, L. (2019). Food neophobia or distrust of novelties? Exploring consumers’ attitudes toward GMOs, insects and cultured meat. Applied Sciences, 9(20), Article 4440. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9204440Faccio, E., Guiotto Nai Fovino, L. (2019). Food neophobia or distrust of novelties? Exploring consumers’ attitudes toward GMOs, insects and cultured meat. Applied Sciences, 9(20), Article 4440. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9204440Gómez-Luciano, C. A., de Aguiar, L. K., Vriesekoop, F., Urbano, B. (2019). Consumers’ willingness to purchase three alternatives to meat proteins in the United Kingdom, Spain, Brazil and the Dominican Republic. Food Quality and Preference, 78, Article 103732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103732Gómez-Luciano, C. A., de Aguiar, L. K., Vriesekoop, F., Urbano, B. (2019). Consumers’ willingness to purchase three alternatives to meat proteins in the United Kingdom, Spain, Brazil and the Dominican Republic. Food Quality and Preference, 78, Article 103732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103732Wilks, M., Crimston, C. R., Hornsey M. J. (2024). Meat and morality: The moral foundation of purity, but not harm, predicts attitudes toward cultured meat, Appetite, 197, Article 107297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2024.107297Wilks, M., Crimston, C. R., Hornsey M. J. (2024). Meat and morality: The moral foundation of purity, but not harm, predicts attitudes toward cultured meat, Appetite, 197, Article 107297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2024.107297Li, H., Van Loo, E. J., Trijp, H. C. M. van, Chen, J., Bai J. (2023). Will cultured meat be served on Chinese tables? A study of consumer attitudes and intentions about cultured meat in China. Meat Science, 197, Article 109081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.109081Li, H., Van Loo, E. J., Trijp, H. C. M. van, Chen, J., Bai J. (2023). Will cultured meat be served on Chinese tables? A study of consumer attitudes and intentions about cultured meat in China. Meat Science, 197, Article 109081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.109081Chriki, S., Ellies-Oury, M.-P., Hocquette, J.-F. (2022). Is “cultured meat” a viable alternative to slaughtering animals and a good comprise between animal welfare and human expectations? Animal Frontiers, 12(1), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/af/vfac002Chriki, S., Ellies-Oury, M.-P., Hocquette, J.-F. (2022). Is “cultured meat” a viable alternative to slaughtering animals and a good comprise between animal welfare and human expectations? Animal Frontiers, 12(1), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/af/vfac002Rodríguez Escobar, M. I., Cadena, E., Nhu, T. T., Cooreman-Algoed, M., De Smet, S., Dewulf, J. (2021). Analysis of the cultured meat production system in function of its environmental footprint: Current status, gaps and recommendations. Foods, 10(12), Article 2941. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10122941Rodríguez Escobar, M. I., Cadena, E., Nhu, T. T., Cooreman-Algoed, M., De Smet, S., Dewulf, J. (2021). Analysis of the cultured meat production system in function of its environmental footprint: Current status, gaps and recommendations. Foods, 10(12), Article 2941. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10122941Post, M. J. (2012). Cultured meat from stem cells: Challenges and prospects. Meat Science, 92 (3), 297–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.008Post, M. J. (2012). Cultured meat from stem cells: Challenges and prospects. Meat Science, 92 (3), 297–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.008Tuomisto, H. L., Teixeira de Mattos, M. J. (2011). Environmental impacts of cultured meat production. Environmental Science and Technology, 45(14), 6117–6123. https://doi.org/10.1021/es200130uTuomisto, H. L., Teixeira de Mattos, M. J. (2011). Environmental impacts of cultured meat production. Environmental Science and Technology, 45(14), 6117–6123. https://doi.org/10.1021/es200130uLynch, J., Pierrehumbert, R. (2019). Climate impacts of cultured meat and beef cattle. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 3, Article 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00005Lynch, J., Pierrehumbert, R. (2019). Climate impacts of cultured meat and beef cattle. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 3, Article 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00005Lin-Hi, N., Reimer, M., Schäfer, K., Böttcher, J. (2023). Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: An empirical analysis of the role of organizational factors. Journal of Business Economics, 93(4), 707–746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-022-01127-3Lin-Hi, N., Reimer, M., Schäfer, K., Böttcher, J. (2023). Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: An empirical analysis of the role of organizational factors. Journal of Business Economics, 93(4), 707–746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-022-01127-3Jairath, G., Mal, G., Gopinath, D., Singh, B. (2021). A holistic approach to access the viability of cultured meat: A review. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 110, 700–710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.02.024Jairath, G., Mal, G., Gopinath, D., Singh, B. (2021). A holistic approach to access the viability of cultured meat: A review. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 110, 700–710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.02.024Hocquette, J.-F. (2016). Is in vitro meat the solution for the future? Meat Science, 120, 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.036Hocquette, J.-F. (2016). Is in vitro meat the solution for the future? Meat Science, 120, 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.036Treich, N. (2021). Cultured meat: Promises and challenges. Environmental and Resource Economics, 79 (1), 33–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-021-00551-3Treich, N. (2021). Cultured meat: Promises and challenges. Environmental and Resource Economics, 79 (1), 33–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-021-00551-3Patil Akshay, R., Bhavana, A., Patil Roopa, B., Deepak (2024). Cultured meat: The upcoming meat production having sustainable benefits over conventional meat production: A review. Agricultural Reviews, 45(1), 82–88. https://doi.org/10.18805/ag.R-2333Patil Akshay, R., Bhavana, A., Patil Roopa, B., Deepak (2024). Cultured meat: The upcoming meat production having sustainable benefits over conventional meat production: A review. Agricultural Reviews, 45(1), 82–88. https://doi.org/10.18805/ag.R-2333Mancini, M. C., Antonioli F. (2022). Italian consumers standing at the crossroads of alternative protein sources: Cultivated meat, insect-based and novel plant-based foods. Meat Science, 193, Article 108942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.108942Mancini, M. C., Antonioli F. (2022). Italian consumers standing at the crossroads of alternative protein sources: Cultivated meat, insect-based and novel plant-based foods. Meat Science, 193, Article 108942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.108942Chriki, S, Hocquette, J.-F. (2020). The myth of cultured meat: A Review. Frontiers in Nutrition, 7, Article 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2020.00007Chriki, S, Hocquette, J.-F. (2020). The myth of cultured meat: A Review. Frontiers in Nutrition, 7, Article 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2020.00007Verbeke, W., Marcu, A., Rutsaert, P., Gaspar, R., Seibt, B., Fletcher, D. et al. (2015). ‘Would you eat cultured meat?’: Consumers’ reactions and attitude formation in Belgium, Portugal and the United Kingdom. Meat Science, 102, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.11.013Verbeke, W., Marcu, A., Rutsaert, P., Gaspar, R., Seibt, B., Fletcher, D. et al. (2015). ‘Would you eat cultured meat?’: Consumers’ reactions and attitude formation in Belgium, Portugal and the United Kingdom. Meat Science, 102, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.11.013Wilks, M., Phillips, C. J. C., Fielding, K., Hornsey, M. J. (2019). Testing potential psychological predictors of attitudes towards cultured meat. Appetite, 136, 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.01.027Wilks, M., Phillips, C. J. C., Fielding, K., Hornsey, M. J. (2019). Testing potential psychological predictors of attitudes towards cultured meat. Appetite, 136, 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.01.027Bryant, C., Barnett, J. (2020). Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: An updated review (2018–2020). Applied Sciences, 10(15), Article 5201. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10155201Bryant, C., Barnett, J. (2020). Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: An updated review (2018–2020). Applied Sciences, 10(15), Article 5201. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10155201Mylan, J. (2018). Sustainable consumption in everyday life: A qualitative study of UK consumer experiences of meat reduction. Sustainability, 10(7), Article 2307. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072307Mylan, J. (2018). Sustainable consumption in everyday life: A qualitative study of UK consumer experiences of meat reduction. Sustainability, 10(7), Article 2307. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072307Meeprom, S., Jaratmetakul, P., Boonkum, W. (2023) Examining the effect of consumer experience on co-creation and loyalty for healthy meat consumption. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7, Article 1123984. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1123984Meeprom, S., Jaratmetakul, P., Boonkum, W. (2023) Examining the effect of consumer experience on co-creation and loyalty for healthy meat consumption. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7, Article 1123984. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1123984Torrico, D. D. (2021). Novel techniques to measure the sensory, emotional, and physiological responses of consumers toward foods. MDPI, 10(11), Article 2620. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10112620Torrico, D. D. (2021). Novel techniques to measure the sensory, emotional, and physiological responses of consumers toward foods. MDPI, 10(11), Article 2620. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10112620Miller, M. F., Hoover, L. C., Cook, K. D., Guerra, A. L., Huffman, K. L., Tinney, K. S., et al. (1995). Consumer acceptability of beef steak tenderness in the home and restaurant. Journal of Food Science, 60(5), 963–965. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1995.tb06271.xMiller, M. F., Hoover, L. C., Cook, K. D., Guerra, A. L., Huffman, K. L., Tinney, K. S., et al. (1995). Consumer acceptability of beef steak tenderness in the home and restaurant. Journal of Food Science, 60(5), 963–965. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1995.tb06271.xDeliza, R., Rodríguez, B., Reinoso-Carvalho, F., Lucchese-Cheung, T. (2023). Cultured meat: A review on accepting challenges and upcoming possibilities. Current Opinion in Food Science, 52, Article 101050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2023.101050Deliza, R., Rodríguez, B., Reinoso-Carvalho, F., Lucchese-Cheung, T. (2023). Cultured meat: A review on accepting challenges and upcoming possibilities. Current Opinion in Food Science, 52, Article 101050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2023.101050Hefferon, K. L., De Steur, H., Perez-Cueto, F. J. A., Herring, R. (2023). Alternative protein innovations and challenges for industry and consumer: An initial overview. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7, Article 1038286. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1038286Hefferon, K. L., De Steur, H., Perez-Cueto, F. J. A., Herring, R. (2023). Alternative protein innovations and challenges for industry and consumer: An initial overview. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7, Article 1038286. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1038286Joseph, P., Searing, A., Watson, C., McKeague, J. (2020). Alternative proteins: Market research on consumer trends and emerging landscape. Meat and Muscle Biology, 4(2), Article 16. https://doi.org/10.22175/mmb.11225Joseph, P., Searing, A., Watson, C., McKeague, J. (2020). Alternative proteins: Market research on consumer trends and emerging landscape. Meat and Muscle Biology, 4(2), Article 16. https://doi.org/10.22175/mmb.11225Nawaz, A. H., Hussain, A., Fujian, W., Zhang, W. L., Zheng, J. H., Hai J. Z. et al. (2022). Future of cultured meat production: Hopes and hurdles. Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture and Society, 10(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.17170/kobra-202204136014Nawaz, A. H., Hussain, A., Fujian, W., Zhang, W. L., Zheng, J. H., Hai J. Z. et al. (2022). Future of cultured meat production: Hopes and hurdles. Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture and Society, 10(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.17170/kobra-202204136014Akinmeye, F., Chriki, S., Liu, C., Zhao, J., Ghnimi S. (2024). What factors influence consumer attitudes towards alternative proteins? Food and Humanity, 3, Article 100349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foohum.2024.100349Akinmeye, F., Chriki, S., Liu, C., Zhao, J., Ghnimi S. (2024). What factors influence consumer attitudes towards alternative proteins? Food and Humanity, 3, Article 100349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foohum.2024.100349Lurie-Luke, E. (2024). Alternative protein sources: science powered startups to fuel food innovation. Nature Communications, 15(1), Article 4425. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-47091-0Lurie-Luke, E. (2024). Alternative protein sources: science powered startups to fuel food innovation. Nature Communications, 15(1), Article 4425. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-47091-0Andreoli, V., Bagliani, M., Corsi, A., Frontuto, V. (2021). Drivers of protein consumption: A cross-country analysis. Sustainability, 13(13), Article 7399. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137399Andreoli, V., Bagliani, M., Corsi, A., Frontuto, V. (2021). Drivers of protein consumption: A cross-country analysis. Sustainability, 13(13), Article 7399. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137399van der Weele, C., Feindt, P., Jan van der Goot, A., van Mierlo, B., van Boekel, M. (2019). Meat alternatives: An integrative comparison. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 88, 505–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2019.04.018van der Weele, C., Feindt, P., Jan van der Goot, A., van Mierlo, B., van Boekel, M. (2019). Meat alternatives: An integrative comparison. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 88, 505–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2019.04.018Sexton, A.E., Garnett, T., Lorimer, J. (2019). Framing the future of food: The contested promises of alternative proteins. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 2(1), 47–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848619827009Sexton, A.E., Garnett, T., Lorimer, J. (2019). Framing the future of food: The contested promises of alternative proteins. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 2(1), 47–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848619827009Parodi, A., Leip, A., De Boer, I. J. M., Slegers, P. M., Ziegler, F., Temme, E. H. M. et al. (2018). The potential of future foods for sustainable and healthy diets. Nature Sustainability, 1(12), 782–789. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0189-7Parodi, A., Leip, A., De Boer, I. J. M., Slegers, P. M., Ziegler, F., Temme, E. H. M. et al. (2018). The potential of future foods for sustainable and healthy diets. Nature Sustainability, 1(12), 782–789. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0189-7Mwangi, M. N., Oonincx, D. G. A. B., Stouten, T., Veenenbos, M., Melse-Boonstra, A., Dicke, M. et al. (2018). Insects as sources of iron and zinc in human nutrition. Nutrition Research Reviews, 31(2), 248–255. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954422418000094Mwangi, M. N., Oonincx, D. G. A. B., Stouten, T., Veenenbos, M., Melse-Boonstra, A., Dicke, M. et al. (2018). Insects as sources of iron and zinc in human nutrition. Nutrition Research Reviews, 31(2), 248–255. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954422418000094Gorbunova, N. A., Zakharov, A. N. (2021). Edible insects as a source of alternative protein. A review. Theory and Practice of Meat Processing, 6(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.21323/2414–438X-2021-6-1-23-32Gorbunova, N. A., Zakharov, A. N. (2021). Edible insects as a source of alternative protein. A review. Theory and Practice of Meat Processing, 6(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.21323/2414–438X-2021-6-1-23-32Gravel, A., Doyen, A. (2020). The use of edible insect proteins in food: Challenges and issues related to their functional properties. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 59, Article 102272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2019.102272Gravel, A., Doyen, A. (2020). The use of edible insect proteins in food: Challenges and issues related to their functional properties. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 59, Article 102272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2019.102272Dobermann, D., Swift, J. A., Field, L. M. (2017). Opportunities and hurdles of edible insects for food and feed. Nutrition Bulletin, 42(4), 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/nbu.12291Dobermann, D., Swift, J. A., Field, L. M. (2017). Opportunities and hurdles of edible insects for food and feed. Nutrition Bulletin, 42(4), 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/nbu.12291Zaitseva N. V., Zelenkin S. E., Shur P. Z., Suvorov D. V. (2023). Identification of potential hazards and analysis of critical control points in cultured meat (in vitro meat) production. Voprosy Pitaniia [Problems of Nutrition], 92(6), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.33029/0042-8833-2023-92-6-45-53 (In Russian)Zaitseva N. V., Zelenkin S. E., Shur P. Z., Suvorov D. V. (2023). Identification of potential hazards and analysis of critical control points in cultured meat (in vitro meat) production. Voprosy Pitaniia [Problems of Nutrition], 92(6), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.33029/0042-8833-2023-92-6-45-53 (In Russian)Sukhikh, S.A., Ulrikh, E.V., Noskova, S. Yu., Kalashnikova, O.B., Babich, O.O. (2024) Cellular meat cultivation: Scoping review. FOOD METAENGINEERING, 2(1), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.37442/2024.1.40 (In Russian)Sukhikh, S.A., Ulrikh, E.V., Noskova, S. Yu., Kalashnikova, O.B., Babich, O.O. (2024) Cellular meat cultivation: Scoping review. FOOD METAENGINEERING, 2(1), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.37442/2024.1.40 (In Russian)Verbeke, W., Sans, P., Van Loo, E. J. (2015). Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(2), 285–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60884-4Verbeke, W., Sans, P., Van Loo, E. J. (2015). Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(2), 285–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60884-4Moritz, M. S. M., Verbruggen, S. E. L., Post, M. J. (2015). Alternatives for large-scale production of cultured beef: A review. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(2), 208–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60889-3Moritz, M. S. M., Verbruggen, S. E. L., Post, M. J. (2015). Alternatives for large-scale production of cultured beef: A review. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(2), 208–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60889-3Onwezen, M. C., Bouwman, E. P., Reinders, M. J., Dagevos H. (2021). A systematic review on consumer acceptance of alternative proteins: Pulses, algae, insects, plant-based meat alternatives, and cultured meat. Appetite, 159, Article 105058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.105058Onwezen, M. C., Bouwman, E. P., Reinders, M. J., Dagevos H. (2021). A systematic review on consumer acceptance of alternative proteins: Pulses, algae, insects, plant-based meat alternatives, and cultured meat. Appetite, 159, Article 105058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.105058Hartmann, C., Siegrist, M. (2017). Consumer perception and behaviour regarding sustainable protein consumption: A systematic review. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 61, 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.12.006Hartmann, C., Siegrist, M. (2017). Consumer perception and behaviour regarding sustainable protein consumption: A systematic review. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 61, 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.12.006Hocquette, A., Lambert, C., Sinquin, C., Peterolff, L., Wagner, Z., Bonny, S. P. F. et al. (2015). Educated consumers don't believe artificial meat is the solution to the problems with the meat industry. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(2), 273–284. http://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60886-8Hocquette, A., Lambert, C., Sinquin, C., Peterolff, L., Wagner, Z., Bonny, S. P. F. et al. (2015). Educated consumers don't believe artificial meat is the solution to the problems with the meat industry. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(2), 273–284. http://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60886-8Lähteenmäki-Uutela, A., Rahikainen, M., Lonkila, A., Yang, B. (2021). Alternative proteins and EU food law. Food Control, 130, Article 108336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2021.108336Lähteenmäki-Uutela, A., Rahikainen, M., Lonkila, A., Yang, B. (2021). Alternative proteins and EU food law. Food Control, 130, Article 108336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2021.108336Rozin, P., Vollmecke, T. A. (1986). Food likes and dislikes. Annual Review of Nutrition, 6(1), 433–456. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.nu.06.070186.002245Rozin, P., Vollmecke, T. A. (1986). Food likes and dislikes. Annual Review of Nutrition, 6(1), 433–456. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.nu.06.070186.002245Nazzaro, C., Lerro, M., Stanco, M., Marotta, G. (2019). Do consumers like food product innovation? An analysis of willingness to pay for innovative food attributes. British Food Journal, 121(6), 1413–1427. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-2018-0389Nazzaro, C., Lerro, M., Stanco, M., Marotta, G. (2019). Do consumers like food product innovation? An analysis of willingness to pay for innovative food attributes. British Food Journal, 121(6), 1413–1427. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-2018-0389Hamlin, R. P., McNeill, L. S., Sim, J. (2022). Food neophobia, food choice and the details of cultured meat acceptance. Meat Science, 194, Article 108964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.108964Hamlin, R. P., McNeill, L. S., Sim, J. (2022). Food neophobia, food choice and the details of cultured meat acceptance. Meat Science, 194, Article 108964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.108964Verbeke, W., Frewer, L. J., Scholderer, J., De Brabander, H. F. (2007). Why consumers behave as they do with respect to food safety and risk information. Analytica Chimica Acta, 586(1–2), 2–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2006.07.065Verbeke, W., Frewer, L. J., Scholderer, J., De Brabander, H. F. (2007). Why consumers behave as they do with respect to food safety and risk information. Analytica Chimica Acta, 586(1–2), 2–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2006.07.065Bekker, G. A., Fischer, A. R. H., Tobi, H., van Trijp, H. C. M. (2017). Explicit and implicit attitude toward an emerging food technology: The case of cultured meat. Appetite, 108, 245–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.10.002Bekker, G. A., Fischer, A. R. H., Tobi, H., van Trijp, H. C. M. (2017). Explicit and implicit attitude toward an emerging food technology: The case of cultured meat. Appetite, 108, 245–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.10.002Kadim, I. T., Mahgoub, O., Baqir, S., Faye, B., Purchas, R. (2015). Cultured meat from muscle stem cells: A review of challenges and prospects. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(2), 222–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60881-9Kadim, I. T., Mahgoub, O., Baqir, S., Faye, B., Purchas, R. (2015). Cultured meat from muscle stem cells: A review of challenges and prospects. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(2), 222–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60881-9Zhang, M., Li, L., Bai, J. (2020). Consumer acceptance of cultured meat in urban areas of three cities in China. Food Control, 118, Article 107390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2020.107390Zhang, M., Li, L., Bai, J. (2020). Consumer acceptance of cultured meat in urban areas of three cities in China. Food Control, 118, Article 107390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2020.107390Wilks, M., Phillips, C. J. С. (2017). Attitudes to in vitro meat: A survey of potential consumers in the United States. PLoS One, 12(2), Article e0171904. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171904Wilks, M., Phillips, C. J. С. (2017). Attitudes to in vitro meat: A survey of potential consumers in the United States. PLoS One, 12(2), Article e0171904. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171904Mancini, M. C., Antonioli, F. (2019). Exploring consumers’ attitude towards cultured meat in Italy. Meat Science, 150, 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.12.014Mancini, M. C., Antonioli, F. (2019). Exploring consumers’ attitude towards cultured meat in Italy. Meat Science, 150, 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.12.014Sanchez-Sabate, R., Sabaté, J. (2019) Consumer attitudes towards environmental concerns of meat consumption: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(7), Article 1220. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071220Sanchez-Sabate, R., Sabaté, J. (2019) Consumer attitudes towards environmental concerns of meat consumption: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(7), Article 1220. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071220Siddiqui, S. A., Khan, S., Murid, M., Asif, Z., Oboturova, N. P., Nagdalian, A. A. et al. (2022). Marketing strategies for cultured meat: A review. Applied Sciences, 12(17), Article 8795. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12178795Siddiqui, S. A., Khan, S., Murid, M., Asif, Z., Oboturova, N. P., Nagdalian, A. A. et al. (2022). Marketing strategies for cultured meat: A review. Applied Sciences, 12(17), Article 8795. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12178795Tsvakirai, C. Z. (2024). The valency of consumers’ perceptions toward cultured meat: A review. Heliyon, 10, Article e27649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27649Tsvakirai, C. Z. (2024). The valency of consumers’ perceptions toward cultured meat: A review. Heliyon, 10, Article e27649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27649Dolgin, E. (2019). Sizzling interest in lab-grown meat belies lack of basic research. Nature, 566(7743), 161–162. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00373-wDolgin, E. (2019). Sizzling interest in lab-grown meat belies lack of basic research. Nature, 566(7743), 161–162. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00373-wThorrez, L., Vandenburgh, H. (2019). Challenges in the quest for ‘clean meat’. Nature Biotechnology, 37(3), 215–216, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0043-0Thorrez, L., Vandenburgh, H. (2019). Challenges in the quest for ‘clean meat’. Nature Biotechnology, 37(3), 215–216, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0043-0Klöckner, C. A., Engel, L., Moritz, J., Burton, R. J., Young, J. F., Kidmose, U. et al. (2022). Milk, meat, and fish from the Petri dish — which attributes would make cultured proteins (un)attractive and for whom? Results from a Nordic Survey. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 6, Article 847931. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.847931Klöckner, C. A., Engel, L., Moritz, J., Burton, R. J., Young, J. F., Kidmose, U. et al. (2022). Milk, meat, and fish from the Petri dish — which attributes would make cultured proteins (un)attractive and for whom? Results from a Nordic Survey. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 6, Article 847931. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.847931Boler, D. D., Woerner, D. R. (2017). What is meat? A perspective from the American Meat Science Association. Animal Frontiers, 7(4), 8–11. https://doi.org/10.2527/af.2017.0436Boler, D. D., Woerner, D. R. (2017). What is meat? A perspective from the American Meat Science Association. Animal Frontiers, 7(4), 8–11. https://doi.org/10.2527/af.2017.0436Hong, T. K., Shin, D.-M., Choi, J., Do, J. T., Han, S. G. (2021). Current issues and technical advances in cultured meat production: A review. Food Science of Animal Resources, 41(3), 355–372. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2021.e14Hong, T. K., Shin, D.-M., Choi, J., Do, J. T., Han, S. G. (2021). Current issues and technical advances in cultured meat production: A review. Food Science of Animal Resources, 41(3), 355–372. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2021.e14Krings, V. C., Dhont, K., Hodson, G. (2022). Food technology neophobia as a psychological barrier to clean meat acceptance. Food Quality and Preference, 96, Article 104409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104409Krings, V. C., Dhont, K., Hodson, G. (2022). Food technology neophobia as a psychological barrier to clean meat acceptance. Food Quality and Preference, 96, Article 104409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104409Takala, T. (2004). The (im)morality of (un)naturalness. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 13(01), 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180104131046Takala, T. (2004). The (im)morality of (un)naturalness. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 13(01), 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180104131046Tomiyama, A. J., Kawecki, N. S., Rosenfeld, D. L., Jay, J. A., Rajagopal, D., Rowat, A. C. (2020). Bridging the gap between the science of cultured meat and public perceptions. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 104, 144–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2020.07.019Tomiyama, A. J., Kawecki, N. S., Rosenfeld, D. L., Jay, J. A., Rajagopal, D., Rowat, A. C. (2020). Bridging the gap between the science of cultured meat and public perceptions. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 104, 144–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2020.07.019de Barcellos, M. D., Kügler, J. O., Grunert, K. G., Van Wezemael, L., Péreze-Cueto, F. J. A., Ueland, O. et al. (2010). European consumers' acceptance of beef processing technologies: A focus group study. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 11(4), 721–732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2010.05.003de Barcellos, M. D., Kügler, J. O., Grunert, K. G., Van Wezemael, L., Péreze-Cueto, F. J. A., Ueland, O. et al. (2010). European consumers' acceptance of beef processing technologies: A focus group study. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 11(4), 721–732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2010.05.003Guerrero, L., Claret, A., Verbeke, W., Enderli, G., Zakowska-Biemans, S., Vanhonacker, F. et al. (2010). Perception of traditional food products in six European regions using free word association. Food Quality and Preference, 21(2), 225–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.06.003Guerrero, L., Claret, A., Verbeke, W., Enderli, G., Zakowska-Biemans, S., Vanhonacker, F. et al. (2010). Perception of traditional food products in six European regions using free word association. Food Quality and Preference, 21(2), 225–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.06.003Bedanta Roy, Hagappa, A., Ramalingam, Y. D., Mahalingam, N., Shaik, A. B. (2021). A review on lab-grown meat: Advantages and disadvantages. Quest International Journal of Medical and Health Sciences, 4(1), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5201528Bedanta Roy, Hagappa, A., Ramalingam, Y. D., Mahalingam, N., Shaik, A. B. (2021). A review on lab-grown meat: Advantages and disadvantages. Quest International Journal of Medical and Health Sciences, 4(1), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5201528Bhat, Z. F., Fayaz, H. (2011). Prospectus of cultured meat — advancing meat alternatives. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 48(2), 125–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-010-0198-7Bhat, Z. F., Fayaz, H. (2011). Prospectus of cultured meat — advancing meat alternatives. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 48(2), 125–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-010-0198-7Edelman, P. D., McFarland, D. C., Mironov, V. A., Matheny, J. G. (2005). Commentary: In vitro-cultured meat production. Tissue Engineering, 11(5–6), 659–662. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.2005.11.659Edelman, P. D., McFarland, D. C., Mironov, V. A., Matheny, J. G. (2005). Commentary: In vitro-cultured meat production. Tissue Engineering, 11(5–6), 659–662. https://doi.org/10.1089/ten.2005.11.659Escribano, A. J., Peña, M. B., Díaz-Caro, C., Elghannam, A., Crespo-Cebada, E., Mesías, F. J. (2021). Stated preferences for plant-based and cultured meat: A choice experiment study of Spanish consumers. Sustainability, 13(15), Article 8235. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158235Escribano, A. J., Peña, M. B., Díaz-Caro, C., Elghannam, A., Crespo-Cebada, E., Mesías, F. J. (2021). Stated preferences for plant-based and cultured meat: A choice experiment study of Spanish consumers. Sustainability, 13(15), Article 8235. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158235Asioli, D., Fuentes-Pila, J., Alarcón, S., Han, J., Liu, J., Hocquette, J. F. et al. (2022). Consumers’ valuation of cultured beef burger: A multi-Country investigation using choice experiments. Food Policy, 112, Article 102376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2022.102376Asioli, D., Fuentes-Pila, J., Alarcón, S., Han, J., Liu, J., Hocquette, J. F. et al. (2022). Consumers’ valuation of cultured beef burger: A multi-Country investigation using choice experiments. Food Policy, 112, Article 102376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2022.102376Rolland, N. C. M., Markus, C. R., Post, M. J. (2020). The effect of information content on acceptance of cultured meat in a tasting context. PLoS One, 15(4), Article e0231176. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231176Rolland, N. C. M., Markus, C. R., Post, M. J. (2020). The effect of information content on acceptance of cultured meat in a tasting context. PLoS One, 15(4), Article e0231176. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231176Piochi, M., Micheloni, M., Torri, L. (2022). Effect of informative claims on the attitude of Italian consumers towards cultured meat and relationship among variables used in an explicit approach. Food Research International, 151, Article 110881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2021.110881Piochi, M., Micheloni, M., Torri, L. (2022). Effect of informative claims on the attitude of Italian consumers towards cultured meat and relationship among variables used in an explicit approach. Food Research International, 151, Article 110881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2021.110881Bryant, C. J., Barnett, J. C. (2019). What’s in a name? Consumer perceptions of in vitro meat under different names. Appetite, 137, 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.02.021Bryant, C. J., Barnett, J. C. (2019). What’s in a name? Consumer perceptions of in vitro meat under different names. Appetite, 137, 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.02.021Bryant, C. J., Anderson, J. E., Asher, K. E., Green, C., Gasteratos, K. (2019). Strategies for overcoming aversion to unnaturalness: The case of clean meat. Meat Science, 154(4), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2019.04.004Bryant, C. J., Anderson, J. E., Asher, K. E., Green, C., Gasteratos, K. (2019). Strategies for overcoming aversion to unnaturalness: The case of clean meat. Meat Science, 154(4), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2019.04.004van der Weele, C., Driessen, C. (2019). How normal meat becomes stranger as cultured meat becomes more normal; Ambivalence and ambiguity below the surface of behavior. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 3, Article 69. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00069van der Weele, C., Driessen, C. (2019). How normal meat becomes stranger as cultured meat becomes more normal; Ambivalence and ambiguity below the surface of behavior. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 3, Article 69. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00069

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.