Willingness to pay for sustainably innovated animal products and plant-based alternative foods – A meta-analysis

• Food innovations can address health, sustainability, and animal welfare concerns. • Consumers pay more for innovated foods that improve animal welfare and sustainability. • A high level of innovativeness is met with food neophobia which reduces WTP. • Consumers face tradeoff between socially desirable food traits and innovativeness. • Policy could address tradeoff with price incentives for innovative alternatives. Replacing animal-based foods in human diets with innovative alternatives can address concerns regarding health, environmental sustainability and animal welfare. However, whether consumers are willing to pay for such innovations remains unclear. Here, we review 67 existing studies published between 2010 and 2025 in a systematic way and conduct a quantitative meta-analysis to assess how consumers value food innovations that intend to improve environmental sustainability, animal welfare or human health. We focus on animal-based foods and their innovative alternatives including products made from plants, insects, in laboratory settings or using genetic engineering technologies. Our findings reveal that willingness to pay (WTP) estimates are highly heterogeneous, product- and context-specific. On average consumers are willing to pay more for innovative alternatives, when they improve animal welfare or environmental sustainability compared to their respective conventional animal products. In contrast, for plant-based options and foods developed in a laboratory or through genetic engineering, consumers require a discount to choose these alternatives over the conventional product. The higher the level of innovativeness, the less consumers are willing to pay across products. Studies conducted in Europe still show a positive average WTP for the innovative foods, whereas studies from North America or Asia suggest that consumers discount innovative products compared to conventional foods. Policymaking can leverage these insights to positively influence the perception of innovative products with targeted information treatments and consider subsidies where the WTP for the socially desirable alternative remains low.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Future Foods
Published
2025-12-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fufo.2025.100892
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.72
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Willingness to pay for sustainably innovated animal products and plant-based alternative foods – A meta-analysis

Catharina Latka, Tereza Pilařová, Mirta Casati, Linda Arata et al.
1 citations
Future Foods
Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
1.72
article

Willingness to pay for sustainably innovated animal products and plant-based alternative foods – A meta-analysis

Catharina Latka, Tereza Pilařová, Mirta Casati, Linda Arata, Samuel Kudjo Ahado, Md. Ayat Ullah
article en
1 citations

Abstract

• Food innovations can address health, sustainability, and animal welfare concerns. • Consumers pay more for innovated foods that improve animal welfare and sustainability. • A high level of innovativeness is met with food neophobia which reduces WTP. • Consumers face tradeoff between socially desirable food traits and innovativeness. • Policy could address tradeoff with price incentives for innovative alternatives. Replacing animal-based foods in human diets with innovative alternatives can address concerns regarding health, environmental sustainability and animal welfare. However, whether consumers are willing to pay for such innovations remains unclear. Here, we review 67 existing studies published between 2010 and 2025 in a systematic way and conduct a quantitative meta-analysis to assess how consumers value food innovations that intend to improve environmental sustainability, animal welfare or human health. We focus on animal-based foods and their innovative alternatives including products made from plants, insects, in laboratory settings or using genetic engineering technologies. Our findings reveal that willingness to pay (WTP) estimates are highly heterogeneous, product- and context-specific. On average consumers are willing to pay more for innovative alternatives, when they improve animal welfare or environmental sustainability compared to their respective conventional animal products. In contrast, for plant-based options and foods developed in a laboratory or through genetic engineering, consumers require a discount to choose these alternatives over the conventional product. The higher the level of innovativeness, the less consumers are willing to pay across products. Studies conducted in Europe still show a positive average WTP for the innovative foods, whereas studies from North America or Asia suggest that consumers discount innovative products compared to conventional foods. Policymaking can leverage these insights to positively influence the perception of innovative products with targeted information treatments and consider subsidies where the WTP for the socially desirable alternative remains low.

Future FoodsVol. 13
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore (IT), University of Bonn (DE), Czech University of Life Sciences Prague (CZ)
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
1.72
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.