Kamin Tanja, Vezovnik Andreja, Bolko Irena
Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Foods. 2024 Oct 10;13(20):3215. doi: 10.3390/foods13203215.
Flexitarian diets have gained attention for their potential positive impact on human health and greenhouse gas emissions reduction. However, a critical question remains: Can the segment of flexitarians significantly contribute to necessary changes in our current unsustainable food systems? Our study addresses this gap by examining meat consumption habits among young adults ( = 1023) in a country with traditionally high meat intake. Furthermore, we focus on a subset of flexitarians ( = 286). Our findings reveal two distinct groups of flexitarians: ethical ( = 140) and utilitarian ( = 148). Utilitarian flexitarians exhibit a stronger preference for meat ((284)= -15.180, < 0.001), greater food neophobia ((284) = -4.785, < 0.001), and lower environmental awareness ((284) = 7.486, < 0.001) compared to Ethical flexitarians. The Ethical group, predominantly female ((1) = 13.366, < 0.001), demonstrates higher life satisfaction ((284) = 5.485, < 0.001), better health perceptions ((284) = 5.127, < 0.001), and stronger beliefs in reducing meat consumption ((284) = -8.968, < 0.001). Additionally, Ethical flexitarians hold more positive views on plant-based meat, perceiving it as healthier ((284) = 4.326, < 0.001) and more ethical ((284) = 4.942, < 0.001), and show a greater willingness to adopt it ((284) = 7.623, < 0.001). While both groups possess similar knowledge and willingness regarding cultured meat and insects, Ethical flexitarians view cultured meat more favourably ((250.976) = 2.964, = 0.003). Our study provides insights into the evolving trends of flexitarianism within Central and Eastern European countries, where research on meat consumption and flexitarianism is scarce. These insights hold value for promoting behaviour change toward reduced meat consumption for both health and environmental reasons. Additionally, they offer guidance to the food industry, including producers, sellers, and providers of meals in educational and employment facilities.
弹性素食饮食因其对人类健康和减少温室气体排放的潜在积极影响而受到关注。然而,一个关键问题仍然存在:弹性素食者群体能否对我们当前不可持续的食物系统的必要变革做出重大贡献?我们的研究通过调查一个传统肉类摄入量较高的国家中1023名年轻人的肉类消费习惯来填补这一空白。此外,我们关注弹性素食者的一个子集(286人)。我们的研究结果揭示了两类不同的弹性素食者:道德型(140人)和功利型(148人)。与道德型弹性素食者相比,功利型弹性素食者对肉类表现出更强的偏好((284)=-15.180,P<0.001),食物新恐惧症更强((284)=-4.785,P<0.001),环境意识更低((284)=7.486,P<0.001)。道德型群体主要为女性((1)=13.366,P<0.001),表现出更高的生活满意度((284)=5.485,P<0.001),对健康的认知更好((284)=5.127,P<0.001),以及在减少肉类消费方面有更强的信念((284)=-8.968,P<0.001)。此外,道德型弹性素食者对植物性肉类持有更积极的看法,认为它更健康((284)=4.326,P<0.001)且更符合道德((284)=4.942,P<0.001),并且表现出更愿意采用它((284)=7.623,P<0.001)。虽然两组在关于养殖肉类和昆虫方面拥有相似的知识和意愿,但道德型弹性素食者对养殖肉类的看法更积极((250.976)=2.964,P=0.003)。我们的研究为中东欧国家弹性素食主义的发展趋势提供了见解,在这些国家,关于肉类消费和弹性素食主义的研究很少。这些见解对于出于健康和环境原因促进减少肉类消费的行为改变具有价值。此外,它们为食品行业提供指导,包括教育和就业设施中的生产者、销售者以及餐饮提供者。