New research shows that health is the priority for Chinese consumers when it comes to plant-based food – and the more they know about the benefits, the more they’ll eat it.

When you inform people in China about the benefits of a vegan diet, nearly all of them (98%) would be willing to eat more plant-based foods, according to a new survey.

This number stays the same for flexitarians, though this demographic has more people displaying a ‘strong willingness’ to add plant-based foods (64%, versus 57% of the total). This makes sense considering that flexitarian by definition refers to people actively reducing their meat intake – but even amongst meat-eaters (or omnivores), 54% are willing to up their vegan consumption once learning about the benefits.

The results are from a poll carried out by Kantar for ProVeg International, covering 1,000 consumers from Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou. It found that nearly a third (32%) of Chinese people identify as flexitarians, though the incidence of vegetarianism (1.5%) and veganism (0.9%) is low.

They were presented with 15 benefit statements about plant-based foods, 14 of which were based on peer-reviewed research. These included preventing or lowering the risk of type 2 diabetes, breast cancer, and antibiotic resistance; lowering body mass index (BMI); cutting greenhouse gas emissions; reducing global hunger; and being a source of delicious and satisfying meals (among others).

“We found that most people are concerned that they eat healthy food and that once they know just how healthy and climate-friendly plant-based food is, they will eat a lot more of it,” said Shirley Lu, managing director and Asia and China representative at ProVeg.

Health high on the agenda for China’s consumers

The survey participants were asked to agree or disagree with each of the statements, while also rating which ones would be the most effective in persuading them to eat plant-based food. Using this data, the pollsters created a four-quadrant Agreement/Persuasion Matrix.

Seven of the top 10 statements that respondents agreed with were related to health. The most popular was the one that suggested plant-based diets lowered BMI and reduced obesity rates, therefore also reducing rates of heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol. More than half (56%) of Chinese people believe this is true.

The BMI statement was also the most persuasive in encouraging increased plant-based consumption, leading the first quadrant of the matrix. The three other statements in this quadrant – which combined strong agreement with strong persuasion – were health-related too. They stated that plant-based diets are high in calcium and bioavailability (52% agreement), provide adequate protein (49%), and are iron-rich (51%).

In quadrant 2, which highlights benefits that were met with low agreement but still tend to be influential in increasing uptake of plant-based foods, the top statement suggests that these foods lower the risk of developing antibiotic resistance. This was also the most persuasive statement overall, and was followed in this quadrant by the statements that animal agriculture makes up 80% of rainforest destruction, beef and dairy are among the biggest sources of methane, and vegan diets can help reduce world hunger.

In contrast, the idea that plant-based foods are more energy-efficient and use fewer natural resources was the least persuasive argument, despite 49% agreeing with this. The statement people agreed with the least was that animal agriculture accounts for up to 20% of all greenhouse gas emissions, something that was also one of the most insignificant benefits for respondents.

Who should plant-based companies market to?

This reflects the emphasis Chinese consumers put on health over the environment. Overall, the main reasons for consuming plant-based food were health (46%), nutrition (39%) and food safety (35%). Only 24% are motivated by the fact that they are climate-friendly.

Conversely, the biggest barriers are dissatisfaction with the freshness of ingredients (cited by 36%) and the taste (31%), and uncertainty about the nutritional completeness (30%).

For food manufacturers, targeting the right demographic is key to hit home your message. While more women (59%) expressed a strong willingness to change their diet than men (41%), responses were very similar across the age ranges of both sexes, at between 24% for those aged 18-24 and 27% for 40- to 60-year-olds.

Meanwhile, 36% of flexitarians displayed a strong willingness to eat more plant-based food. Among income groups, it seemed the richer the person, the less willing they were to change. People earning between ¥15,000 and ¥25,000 ($2,000-$3,300) each month were most happy to shift to a plant-based diet (29%), and those on the highest household income (above ¥40,000/5,400) were the least likely to do so (16%).

The report recommends companies leverage the high-awareness and high-persuasion factors from the matrix, amplify the benefits that had low agreement but were still highly convincing, and market popular benefits with low persuasion rates in ways that can be more relevant to consumers.

Spotlight health, whether it’s produce or plant-based meat

In 2016, the Chinese government introduced the Healthy China 2030 policy, which stipulated that public health should be a precondition for all future socio-economic development. And four years later, it announced the 30-60 policy, committing to hit peak emissions by 2030 and become carbon-neutral by 2060.

Last year, a study by Singapore-based firm Asia Research Engagement found that China – the world’s largest producer of pork, fish and eggs – is expected to see animal consumption increase by 2030 despite falling population numbers. But if it is to meet the 1.5°C goal, 50% of all protein consumption in the country must be from alternative sources by 2060.

There are several things industry players can do to help nudge more plant-based consumption. Social media was found to be the most effective marketing tool, while a focus on nutritional transparency and lower price points will go a long way too.

Companies need to improve the knowledge and awareness of nutrition and food processing, and finance R&D efforts to develop healthier and tastier plant-based meat products. More investment in consumer education about meat analogues’ health benefits is crucial too.

Finally, vegetables that are high in protein, iron and calcium are particularly appealing to consumers, so marketing strategies that highlight the nutritional value of both fresh produce and meat and dairy analogues can be highly influential.

“China boasts a rich heritage of plant-based diets and a wealth of healthy plant ingredients. Government agencies, educational institutions, and plant-based food businesses can leverage this study to educate consumers about the benefits and impact of plant-based diets,” said Lu.

“By highlighting the health, environmental, and culinary advantages, we can collectively work towards transforming our food system to one that is beneficial for humans, plants, and animals alike.”

The post When Told About the Benefits, Almost Everybody in China Would Eat More Plant-Based Foods appeared first on Green Queen.

Hellmann’s has made a big splash by rebranding its vegan mayo to appeal to flexitarians, in a sign of the influence of labels on sustainable food purchases.

In the UK, Hellmann’s egg-free mayonnaise is no longer labelled ‘vegan’, with the Unilever-owned brand opting for ‘Plant Based Mayo’ as a way to become more “inclusive” to flexitarians.

The relaunched spread – which first appeared in the UK market in 2018 – now comes with a new recipe and redesigned packaging in a move that aims to solve multiple pain points at once: food waste, health concerns, and label barriers.

The decision to drop the term ‘vegan’ from packaging is a conscious one, with the brand saying there was “considerable headroom for growth” in the vegan mayo world, “particularly from consumers who want to cut back on animal-based products without becoming fully vegan”.

Currently rolling out across UK supermarkets, the new mayo now also has less rapeseed oil (down from 72% to 52%), supplementing it with a seemingly lower amount of sunflower oil. Plus, it now has xanthan gum.

Hellmann’s leans into vegan labelling research

Explaining its reasoning, Hellmann’s said its consumer research has shown that “the word ‘vegan’ can be a barrier for flexitarians, who see ‘plant-based’ as more inclusive”.

This chimes with a plethora of other studies on sustainable food labelling. In 2019, analysis by alternative protein think tank the Good Food Institute found that terms like ‘100% plant-based’ and plant-based (both 53%) are much more appealing to consumers than ‘vegan’ (35%), which was amongst the least effective ways to label vegan food.

Similarly, an oft-cited study by the University of Southern California last year – covering 7,341 people – used gift baskets as a gauge for which labels work. Participants were asked to choose between a vegan and non-vegan food basket, with the former being labelled in five different ways.

Only 20% chose the ‘vegan’ gift basket over the meat and dairy one, while 27% picked it when labelled ‘plant-based’. However, describing them with impactful attributes represented a significant upturn: when marked as ‘healthy’, 42% went with the vegan basket, while 43% did so for those tagged as ‘sustainable’ or 44% when labelled as both ‘healthy’ and ‘sustainable’.

This is why phrases like “100% sustainably sourced oils”, “free from artificial colours and flavours”, and “good source of omega-3” are prominent in Hellmann’s messaging around the rebranded Plant Based Mayo.

Vegan giants like Impossible Foods and Eat Just have also been using terms like ‘meat from plants’ and ‘made from plants’ for their meat and egg analogues, respectively. In fact, the latter simply labels its relaunched vegan spread as ‘Just Mayo’ to attract flexitarians, who hold the key to success for plant-based food manufacturers.

But when the world’s largest mayonnaise brand – a subsidiary of one of the biggest CPG companies globally – bids adieu to the word ‘vegan’, it’s a telling reminder that labelling matters. Hellmann’s plant-based sales have been growing for four consecutive years, so for Unilever to make the change, it’s an indicator that ‘vegan’ wording may be blocking the full potential of climate-friendly food sales.

Since the company is aiming to reach €1.5B ($1.6B) in annual sales from plant-based products in categories that would have traditionally used animal-derived ingredients by next year, targeting flexitarians with its Plant Based Mayo is a shrewd move. In a similar move, its latest non-dairy ice cream is branded as Magnum Chill Blueberry Cookie, a departure from the Magnum Vegan moniker.

Redesigned packaging leaves less Plant Based Mayo in the bottle

The announcement accompanied a change in the egg-free mayo’s packaging, part of the brand’s long-standing efforts to cut food waste. Debuting in the UK and Ireland later this year, the new squeeze bottles are now lined with an edible plant-based coating that prevents the mayonnaise from sticking to the sides and minimises the amount left over after the spread is used up.

“We know consumers want to be able to squeeze out as much product as possible – it’s an important cost and value benefit,” Krassimir Velikov, senior science and programme leader at Unilever, said of the new “easy-out” technology. “Some of the ingredients used in the plant-based mayo presented us with specific challenges, as they made the mayo more prone to getting stuck in the bottle. Correcting this issue involved creating an edible, vegan coating that would prevent this sticking problem by making the inside of the bottle more slippery,” he explained.

“We had to make sure that this ‘easy out’ coating hit a balance that would achieve the desired ‘easy out’ effect without interacting with the product. Even a slight change could make an enormous difference. For example, a tenth of a percentage increase of the plant-based ‘egg’ could add a full 15g leftover portion to the waste.”

Velikov added that by minimising the leftover mayo, the tech helps keep its bottles – which are “made with 100% recycled plastic where technically feasible” – in the recycling process. “If they exceed the maximum weight threshold needed, they will be rejected for recycling. By helping consumers to leave less mayo in the bottles, we in effect help them recycle more successfully,” he said.

Hellmann’s has a commendable record with food waste, having launched a Make Taste, Not Waste campaign in 2018 to fight this issue. Its research shows that 59% of consumers feel brands have a role to play here, especially since food waste accounts for 8-10% of global emissions.

The mayo maker’s food waste initiatives have involved a four-week-long Fridge Night challenge, dedicated Super Bowl ads for the last four years, a partnership with Ogilvy for use-what-you’ve-got recipes, a Smart Jar that revealed hidden messages when placed in fridges at 5°C or lower, a Meal Reveal tool to provide recipe ideas from what people have in their fridges, and a collaboration with Italy’s ID.Eight to launch a collection of sneakers made from food waste.

That said, Unilever itself is walking back on several of its climate pledges, including abandoning its goal of cutting food waste in its operations by 50% by 2025. Its commitment to roll out carbon labels on the packaging of all 75,000 of its products by 2026 seems to be forgotten too. “It is possible that some of our brands may wish to communicate product carbon footprints in the future, and for this having accurate data is essential,” a company representative told Green Queen in April.

“We also know information must be provided in context to be meaningful to consumers,” they added, outlining that the business was “committed to improving transparency of GHG emissions” in its value chain. “Our collection of more accurate data will help Unilever to make more informed procurement decisions as we work towards our climate targets.

The post Is Hellmann’s Plant-Based Mayo Rebrand Proof That ‘Vegan’ Labels Hamper Sustainable Sales? appeared first on Green Queen.

A new consumer survey highlights the three key barriers to plant-based food purchases in the US, and the opportunities for brands to overcome them.

Alternative protein finds itself at a bit of a crossroads in the US, where sales and investment have dwindled, as has the number of vegans. But while plant-based meat did lose a bit of steam in terms of purchases, dairy analogues remained on their growth trajectory, and traditional proteins like tofu and tempeh gained slightly.

Over the last year, the health focus has really taken over how people interact with food. Cleaner labels, whole foods, and high-fibre are all-important now. Taste still remains crucial, however, and plant-based meat brands are doubling down on the flavour and nutrition focus to regain customers who may have had a loss of faith.

So while there’s been a dip, there’s also a lot of opportunity. A new survey by Dig Insights – in consultation with the Good Food Institute and the Plant Based Foods Association – dives into the thoughts of 1,500 Americans to find out what’s missing in the alternative protein industry, and how to address it.

The poll revealed that 64% of US consumers are looking to increase their protein intake, especially younger demographics. But there’s a gap to fill with older respondents – 60% of Gen Xers, for example, haven’t tried tofu, tempeh or seitan, while 52% have never tried meat analogues either. Meanwhile, for 47% of Americans, finding plant-based meat in the grocery store isn’t easy.

All these challenges open up new opportunities for plant-based food companies. Here are the three major barriers to widespread consumer adoption, and how to address them.

Barrier #1: Not everyone sees plant-based as healthier

The research found that the number of Americans who think plant-based meat or seafood products are healthier than their conventional counterparts (29%) is the same as those who believe the opposite to be true. Across the board, over 40% of people find vegan foods to be nutritionally on par with animal proteins.

In fact, there are more respondents who find tofu, tempeh, seitan and plant-based dairy healthier than those who don’t, with the largest gap appearing for milk – 40% say plant-based milk is healthier, but only 19% think it’s less healthy than cow’s milk. The perception of vegan eggs, however, is on the flip side, with more Americans finding them unhealthier.

But even with a majority of consumers trying to up their protein consumption, 47% aren’t too familiar with plant-based meat. And therein lies the opportunity, says the report, which found a correlation between those who want more protein and their willingness to buy plant-based protein in supermarkets and restaurants.

Among these consumers, 28% have ordered dishes with plant-based proteins in restaurants (4% more than those who aren’t looking to increase protein consumption) – 45% of these respondents state it’s very important for restaurants to have options with plant proteins. Similarly, nearly a third (32%) of protein-seekers expressed a willingness to buy these products in the grocery store, versus 28% of those not looking to eat more protein.

“The consumers becoming more accustomed to plant-based proteins are also those who will be dining out regularly,” the report suggests. “Creating plant-based protein-filled meal options, with an emphasis on protein content, caters to a wide audience of consumers, including those who may not typically consume plant-based protein.”

Barrier #2: Taste and texture need a perception change

Despite 57% of survey respondents ordering food weekly, only 24% have opted for a plant-based dish off the menu. Meanwhile, 84% of people who will decidedly not buy plant-based meat in the supermarket never see themselves eating these analogues. Dig Insights ascribes this to “taste, texture, and familiarity”.

About 30% of consumers are just not familiar with plant-based meat, tofu, tempeh, et al. And, even among the Americans either likely to buy meat alternatives or leaning against it (but aren’t decided yet), only 16% would purchase them for their taste and texture attributes. Similarly, in a restaurant setting, taste (54%) is the biggest reason deterring consumers from choosing meat analogues, followed by texture (42%) and unfamiliarity (30%).

However, 91% of Americans who try plant-based protein like the taste and texture and are satisfied with it. This highlights a major perception gap for plant-based meat products, and the need for greater education. Focusing on product samples in retail locations and promotions in restaurants are two of the best ways of doing this.

This is because 31% of Americans would buy plant-based meat in grocery stores if they were offered free samples, and 30% would do so if it were on sale. And 15% don’t eat these products in restaurants due to a lack of offerings, and because the people they’re dining with don’t consume them either.

Another key aspect of consumer education is the environmental impact of plant-based foods compared to meat. The latter emits twice as many greenhouse gases as the former, and makes up 60% of the food system’s emissions. Despite this, 62% of Americans think the climate footprint of plant-based meat is the same or even bigger. This should come as no surprise, as previous research has shown that 74% of Americans don’t think eating meat is bad for the planet.

“There’s a large opportunity to educate omnivores and carnivores (who make up 45% and 21% of consumers, respectively) on the environmental benefits of eating plant-based meats,” the report says. “Educating consumers on the impacts will lead to them being more persuaded on purchasing and incorporating plant-based proteins in their diet regularly.”

Barrier #3: It’s hard to identify plant-based products

Plant-based meats are going through a bit of an identity crisis, both in the metaphorical and literal sense. Only 38% of Americans find it easy to identify meat analogues on supermarket shelves. And, surprisingly, Gen Zers and millennials have a harder time doing so than Gen X consumers. Similarly, spotting these products is most challenging for vegans (50%), while omnivores and carnivores are much more adept at this.

“Convenience, visibility, and brand awareness are crucial factors when it comes to consumer purchasing decisions in grocery stores,” says the report. While conventional practice is to separate plant-based from animal-derived meats, study upon study has shown the benefits of putting the former in the meat aisle.

The survey saw a majority of Americans agree that all plant-based foods should be placed in the same refrigerated section as animal foods, with 69% saying so for meat and 75% for milk. There are two ways of doing this: fully incorporating plant proteins alongside their animal counterparts, or putting them in the same aisle but in a separate subsection – more respondents preferred the latter, although preferences vary based on purchase frequency.

When it comes to restaurants, menu descriptions and placements are influential. Four in five (81%) want the words ‘plant-based’ in the dish’s name, and another 80% want the source of the protein mentioned. Customisation options (78%) and flavour indicators (86%) are vital too.

Finally, brand recognition and recommendations/reviews continue to be important purchase drivers for plant-based meat in retail, and clear labelling and differentiation in restaurants represent further education opportunities for consumers.

“Despite the surge in popularity, there remain significant untapped markets and consumer misconceptions to address. By focusing on education, product visibility, and catering to the increasing demand for protein-rich options, brands can effectively expand their reach and capitalise on the diverse preferences of consumers,” states Dig Insights.

“Through strategic initiatives such as sampling programmes, promotional offers, and enhanced product placement, the plant-based protein industry can overcome existing barriers and pave the way for sustained growth in the future.”

The post The Three Main Barriers Stopping Americans from Buying Plant-Based Food – and How to Fix Them appeared first on Green Queen.

A survey of 60 Europarties and national parties outlines the political stance on plant-based policies ahead of the EU elections in June.

Next month, people in the EU will take to the ballot in the bloc’s latest elections, at a time when it is cracking down on deforestation and greenwashing, but has questions over its caged farming, green fertiliser and alternative protein policies.

To make things a little clearer, the European Vegetarian Union (EVU) polled 60 parties from the EU and its member states, asking them about the common agriculture policy (CAP), the promotion and development of plant-based analogues, VATs and financial incentives, and their views on environment and health.

The most universally supported policy recommendation was the implementation of binding targets to improve the climate impact of the CAP, with nearly 79% of parties in favour. The implementation of a ‘polluter pays’ principle to agriculture (such as a carbon tax) was also popular, with 69% of parties indicating their support. Introducing binding targets to enhance health within the CAP was the third-most-popular policy, with 65% in favour.

But it seems the most polarising policy for EU lawmakers is the VAT on plant-based proteins. While 30% say they would support a lower tax for these products than their animal-derived counterparts, 26% are against this, while 38% have no position on the issue.

The mandatory inclusion of plant-based meals in public canteens also divided opinion, with 42% for and 26% against the measure. Meanwhile, 23% of parties were against setting binding targets to increase plant protein consumption – though 46% supported this idea.

EU parties show positive views on contentious issues

The disproportionate amount of subsidies afforded to animal proteins has been a major source of criticism for the EU. Between 2014 and 2020, the livestock agriculture sector received 1,200 times more public funding in the region than alternative proteins, with 50% of cattle farmers’ income coming directly from subsidies.

In fact, 82% of farmer subsidies under the CAP go towards animal agriculture – a fact that parties seem to recognise, with 54% expressing support for shifting subsidies away from the livestock sector towards whole foods and plant-based products. Such a transition has been encouraged by the World Bank on a global level, with multi-pronged benefits for food security and the planet.

Meanwhile, 47.5% of parties say they recognise that plant-based diets are an essential tool to achieve climate targets. It chimes with research published earlier this month that supportive policies for alternative proteins in Europe could see the region achieve levels of self-sufficiency last seen 30 years ago, with major cost reductions for carbon removal and a significant expansion of nature restoration projects enabling the EU to surpass its Farm to Fork targets.

Another thorny issue in the EU relates to the labelling of plant-based meat and dairy – while the bloc voted to keep allowing companies to use meat-related terms on the former, those producing milk and dairy alternatives were prohibited from using words like ‘milk’, ‘yoghurt’ or ‘cheese’ in 2020. But when the EVU asked if parties believe vegan products should be able to use labelling terms like ‘plant-based sausage’ or ‘soy milk’, nearly half (49%) said yes.

Meanwhile, tax disparities on meat and dairy analogues are another hotly debated issue. But while there are differing opinions on whether the VAT on these products should be lower than conventional animal proteins, there’s much clearer support for an equal levy, with 56% of parties backing a levelling of the playing field.

EU politicians are divided over other alternative proteins like cultivated meat or fermentation-derived proteins – while 39% are in favour, the same number have no position on these foods, and 21% are against them.

Which EU parties are the most supportive of plant-based food?

The policy recommendations featured in the questionnaire were based on the EVU’s Plant-Based Manifesto, which sets out the climate actions needed by EU officials, which currently fall short. Released ahead of the elections, the manifesto asks for targets to increase the share of plant protein consumption by 60% by the end of the decade, 70% by 2040, and 80% by mid-century.

Elected officials in the EU need to base the CAP on the One Health approach, lower VAT rates for plant-based alternatives, develop carbon pricing for agriculture and prioritise the scale-up of vegan products. They’re also asked to adopt a Sustainable Food Systems Framework, and ensure a just transition that supports farmers’ shift towards plant-based production.

The national parties surveyed by the EVU mostly support its recommendations, though the percentage of ‘no position’ answers is significant (crossing 30% in 10 out of the total 16 questions), demonstrating the need for further internal discussions about these issues.

France’s Parti Animaliste and Partido Equitable, and Spain’s Partido Animalista con el Medio Ambiente all displayed 100% alignment with the policies at hand. Zeleni in Czechia and the Danish Red-Green Alliance agree with 15 of the 16 recommendations, not stating a position in just one recommendation.

In terms of the Europarties, the prevalence of ‘no position’ was higher, but overall rejection was still low –it must be noted that while EVU approached 11 of these parties, the European Democratic Party, European People’s Party, European Conservatives and Reformists Party, and the Identity and Democracy Party did not respond.

Of the remaining seven, the highest alignment was found in Volt’s answers, which agreed with all 16 policy recommendations. This was followed by the European Green Party (13 affirmative answers, and three with no position). On the other end of the spectrum was the European Christian Political Movement, which rejected seven policies and had no position on eight others; and the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Party, which agreed with two, but had no position on the rest.

June 6-9 are pivotal dates for the future of the EU, with its citizens deciding who will represent them in the European Parliament for the next five years. In a climate election year, when half the world is voting, supportive policies for the climate will go a long way.

When asked if they would support the development of an EU-wide Plant-Based Action Plan or fund to increase R&D, production and consumption of alternative proteins – the way Denmark has done with its national plan – 55.7% of the parties said yes. But whether all this is purely words or actually translates into policy, we’ll find out soon enough.

The post Ahead of EU Elections, Here’s How Parties View Plant-Based Policy Issues appeared first on Green Queen.

Lidl Netherlands has completed a successful pilot experiment by placing plant-based analogues next to meat in stores. The results? A 7% sales growth.

Discount retailer Lidl is continuing its recent efforts to ramp up its vegan product sales, following the lowering of prices from its private-label plant-based range in certain markets.

In the Netherlands, Lidl partnered with the Wageningen University and the World Resources Institute to find the answer to a much-debated question in the plant-based world: does placement matter?

There have been plenty of trials and studies to determine whether putting meat analogues in the conventional meat section has an effect on the sales of vegan products. Some have found that the move boosted purchases of plant-based meat but didn’t decrease the sales of conventional meat, others have discovered a smaller hike for the former, but no effect on the latter.

So there’s been a slight lack of clarity, but the results of Lidl’s pilot couldn’t be much clearer. After placing plant-based meats next to animal-derived meats in 70 of its branches in the Netherlands for six months, the retailer saw a 7% spike in sales of the vegan products.

Visibility, taste and volume were key factors, and Lidl is addressing each of them as it progresses towards its goal of having 60% of its protein sales sourced from plants by 2030.

Lidl promises tastier, healthier meat analogues

While the positive sales impact on meat analogues decreased slightly over time, the overall effect was still significant at the end of the trial, according to Monique van der Meer, a researcher at Wageningen University. “Sales figures for meat products also fell slightly, but this was not significant,” she said.

“During the pilot period, customers were also interviewed in the store and customer cardholders could complete an online questionnaire,” added van der Meer. “This showed, among other things, that most customers generally think the placement of meat substitutes on the meat shelf is a good idea.”

The pilot revealed a clear need for larger quantities of plant-based meat. “We immediately put this into practice. The large packages are now in all our 440 stores,” said Chantal Goenee, sustainability and health advisor at Lidl Netherlands.

The retailer has promised an improvement in the quality of its plant-based meat products by the end of the year, both in terms of flavour and health, which were shown to be important consumption drivers. In fact, an EU-wide survey last year suggested that taste is the most influential aspect pushing people to eat plant-based, with 59% citing it. On the other hand, health is why most are reducing meat intake (45%).

Lidl’s plant-based push has seen it reduce the prices of own-label vegan meat and dairy products to match their conventional counterparts in its German and Belgian stores. In the former, it now also places plant-based analogues in the meat and dairy aisles, following a trial that increased the visibility of its four bestselling meat alternatives.

The results chime with previous research. A 2020 trial by US retailer Kroger and the Plant Based Foods Association (PBFA) revealed that when sold in the meat aisle, plant-based analogue sales rose by 23%, with one consumer explaining that their first thought is that these products will be in the meat section, while another said it makes buying vegan a lot easier.

And in 2021, a UK-wide report by the Institute of Grocery Distribution (IGD) found that 57% of respondents strongly agreed that moving plant-based products into the meat aisle would make it easier for them to follow healthier and more sustainable diets.

Lidl to focus on in-store visibility of plant-based meat

The aforementioned poll also found that nearly half (49%) of Dutch consumers had reduced their meat intake over the previous year. The country comprises 53% meat-eaters, and another 38% who identify as flexitarians or pescatarians.

Meanwhile, supermarkets are their preferred purchase point for meat analogues (59%), and a third of consumers say they’re cutting back on meat for environmental reasons. “If consumers choose more climate-friendly food in the supermarket, it makes a big difference,” said Stientje van Veldhoven, VP and director of Europe at WRI. “The question is how food producers and supermarket chains can respond to such a change as effectively as possible.”

Dutch animal rights charity Wakker Dier has been facilitating this push. One of its campaigns is to get retailers to commit to plant-based proteins making up 60% of protein sales by 2030, in response to the national health guidelines. This is why Lidl has adopted that target. As part of the move, the nine supermarkets involved have pledged to have 50% plant protein sales by next year, and agreed to monitor and publicly report sales data.

Plus, meat sales in Dutch supermarkets have plummeted by 16.4% since 2020, falling 2.3% last year. “This joint research project with Lidl Netherlands and Wageningen University is helping us build scientific evidence on what really works to shift consumer demand, and it’s encouraging to see Lidl responding to the findings,” said van Veldhoven.

“We know from the research that visibility of our meat substitutes is an important factor in the customer’s choice to purchase or try a meat substitute, especially for customers who do not yet purchase meat substitutes,” said Lidl Netherlands’s Goenee. “That is why we will focus even more on this in our stores and marketing in the near future.”

And it’s not just in retail that such interventions have been shown to work. Last September, McDonald’s Netherlands began promoting plant-forward eating by listing its vegan offerings before beef on the menu. It came after a ProVeg International report on fast-food chains stated: “Integrate plant-based options with similar items and list them first, while repeating them in a separately labelled plant-based section. This will nudge consumers to choose more plant-based options while making it easier to navigate the menu.”

And, earlier this month, WRI published an updated version of its foodservice playbook. One of the 18 most promising strategies derived from its analysis of research involved integrating plant-based products into meat sections on menu displays. It received an expert score of 11.04 out of 15 (which was at the higher end), and a ‘promise ratio’ of 5 (the proportion of effective versus ineffective trials).

The post Lidl Boosts Plant-Based Meat Sales by 7% by Putting Them in the Meat Aisle appeared first on Green Queen.

People’s decisions when eating out are heavily impacted by the dining environments they’re in – here’s how foodservice operators can nudge plant-based choices.

A host of trials recently have shown the power of behavioural science in the food system’s fight against climate change. Some foodservice operators have chosen to make plant-based the default option, for example; others have moved away from words like ‘vegan’ or ‘plant-based’.

All these interventions have varying degrees of success, but studying different behavioural science techniques can help outline robust strategies that encourage low-carbon eating habits in restaurants, colleges, offices and hospitals, among other places.

In 2020, the World Resources Institute (WRI) neatly distilled 57 of these strategies into a playbook to help foodservice operators nudge diners to pick plant-based dishes. As part of its Coolfood initiative to help reduce foodservice emissions by 25% by 2030, the playbook was used by companies collectively serving eight billion meals a year annually. As a result, the members of the Coolfood pledge have cut per-plate GHG emissions by 10% since 2020 already.

But as more research has come out, WRI has compiled those insights to update its foodservice playbook, which now has 90 techniques. Of these, 18 are ‘priority’ techniques that have been found defective and feasible in trials, and operators can adapt without hesitation.

The new priority list is shorter than the 23-strong list in the first iteration of the playbook. But the latest strategies are organised into six categories, as opposed to five. Price now joins the “6P framework”, which retains the previous segments of product, presentation, people, promotion and placement.

WRI decided to add the price category because the one focused on promotions was overly long, and a distinct subset of approaches involving price modification had emerged. Price techniques involve redesigning the cost of plant-rich dishes, plus new ways to incentivise diners to choose these options or otherwise disincentivise selection of meat dishes,” the report states.

Here are the highlights from WRI’s low-carbon foodservice playbook 2.0.

Blended meat, flavour focus and chef support

Some of the highest-ranking techniques in the new playbook fall into the product category, which involves techniques that involve modifying the food being served. Increasing the variety and ratio of plant-rich dishes on offer has been found effective in over two dozen trials collectively, while enhancing the appearance of these options and arranging them so that the most appealing ingredients are visible are highly effective too.

Improving the flavours and texture of dishes is crucial, too. For most people, while health has become an important consideration, taste still drives consumption habits. “Products tasting great is, I would say, a necessary condition for change to happen,” says Sophie Attwood, senior behavioural scientist at WRI, and one of the report’s authors.

WRI suggests that blending plant-based ingredients into conventional meat to reduce the animal content could deliver some key gains. This is an approach that is becoming increasingly popular in the foodservice sector – Disneyland is using 50/50 Foods’ Both Burger, while US meat purveyor Pat LaFrieda has incorporated Mush Foods’ 50Cut mycelium meat into a beef burger.

“One common option is to replace a portion of the beef content with mushrooms, with the ratio of 70% meat to 30% mushrooms already trialled with success in food service,” the report suggests. “Meat will remain the main focal taste of the dish, and diners will likely not notice the difference, all while a significant reduction in GHG emissions can be achieved.”

One of the highest-rated suggestions comes from the people category (which targets foodservice employees), and involves giving chefs access to tools and ingredients that can help them prepare appealing plant-based dishes. This received a 12.44 expert score out of a maximum of 14 – but it wasn’t one of the promising techniques as there have been no trials to support this theory.

However, there have been two studies where chefs have been trained to cook and prepare plant-rich dishes, which has high potential. “It’s in recognition of the importance of chefs to the sustainable food movement by creating healthy and sustainable dishes the diners actually want to buy,” says Attwood. “This is really the cornerstone of the whole movement.”

Carbon labels and the importance of language

How dishes are labelled and communicated to consumers is a key theme of the playbook. This is highlighted by the promotion category, which includes communication, marketing, advertising and campaign approaches. Using marketing materials to promote the benefits of plant-rich diets across flavour, environment and local touchpoints has high potential, as does creating social media groups for diners to share ideas and reviews.

The messaging focus continues with the presentation techniques too (which involve modifying the language, imagery and layout of menus, signs and labels). One of the most trialled and successful interventions is to add carbon labels on foodservice menus.

“Key considerations when adding environmental labels to menus include ensuring that the labels will be understood by diners, communicate relevant information, and do not misrepresent the true impact of different foods across multiple environmental outcomes (e.g., biodiversity, GHG emissions, land use, water use, etc.),” the report suggests. “At present, there is no frontrunner in terms of optimal label design, although certain characteristics, such as the colour green, are received positively by customers.”

Meanwhile, there’s a spotlight on the type of language used on menus, with WRI advocating to remove unappealing terms like ‘meat-free’ or ‘vegetarian’, and instead use indulgent and selective language to describe plant-based dishes (such as ‘chef’s special’ or words describing umami flavours). Multiple studies have shown that people are discouraged from labels like ‘vegan’, and the foodservice playbook confirms their inefficacy.

“The language that we use to describe food can have a powerful influence on how we subsequently experience it. Research shows that certain language works particularly well to evoke mental simulations (or ‘mental images’) of what a dish will be like to eat. If these simulations are positive, they can tempt diners to change their choices by creating desire for plant-rich options,” says the playbook.

Terms like ‘healthy’, ‘light’ or ‘low-calorie’ aren’t too effective either, but flavour descriptors and indulgent wording go a long way. “Enjoyable, figurative language (i.e., use of wordplay, idioms, rhymes, or metaphor) can also have a similar, positive effect.”

The other two Ps of the framework are placement (food displays and physical environment) and price. In the former category, integrating plant-based meat into the same sections as conventional meat is an effective strategy – but so is introducing a dedicated section for plant-rich foods. In terms of price, the most effective way to nudge low-carbon behaviours is to run cross-product promotions involving plant-forward dishes with drinks, sides or desserts.

“Chefs, culinary directors, marketers, and nearly anyone involved in shaping a dining environment has a big hand in also shaping what foods customers choose to buy, everywhere,” says WRI president and CEO Ani Dasgupta. “In the grand scheme, that can make a significant contribution towards accelerating our transition to a healthier and more sustainable food future.”

The post The Foodservice Playbook: How to Nudge Diners Into Picking Sustainable, Plant-Based Dishes appeared first on Green Queen.

Speaking on his Prof G Pod, marketing expert and professor Scott Galloway laid out the steps plant-based meat brands need to take to secure their future.

Scott Galloway is a man known for being right when it comes to the business world. He’s the face behind WeWTF, the famous critical report that accused WeWork of having an inflated valuation, and questioning if an IPO would actually happen. As he predicted, it didn’t, and WeWork’s stock crashed.

He’s also the guy who prophesied Amazon’s takeover of Whole Foods Market, as well as where its new headquarters would launch. Oh, and he said Twitter would be sold in 2022.

A founder and entrepreneur with several successful exits, Galloway knows a thing or two about business. He’s a professor of marketing at the New York University Stern School of Business, and his work on WeWork was a catalyst in the company’s fortunes, memorialised by the 2022 series WeCrashed.

On the latest episode of The Prof G Pod: Office Hours, where he takes listener questions and provides them with advice and insights, he was asked by the founder of a plant-based dumpling brand what he would do to a plant-based meat company’s branding and marketing to take a bigger chunk of the overall meat market.

Last year, meat analogue sales in US retail fell by 12% to $1.2B, on the back of a multitude of challenges for the sector, including high production costs and supply chain shocks, concerns over ultra-processed foods, misinformation about these products, and a loss of faith from investors. Several companies called it quits, some made employee cutbacks, and some withdrew products from the market.

Currently, plant-based meat makes up only 0.9% of the overall meat market. Here’s how companies in this space can succeed, according to Galloway.

1) Cut your losses – you’re in survival mode

Galloway started off by recapping the challenges of plant-based meat over the last couple of years. “During the pandemic, more people bought alternative meat products due to health concerns, environmental reasons and meat shortages. Since, sales have plummeted and experts suggested the ‘plant-based bubble has burst’,” he said.

He pointed to data that shows plant-based beef is twice as expensive as conventional beef, and vegan chicken is four times as high in cost. Investment in the overall alternative protein category, meanwhile, dipped by at least 44%.

Galloway praised the founder’s startup (which is likely Sobo), saying it has good packaging, a nice website, and elegant branding. “And to be blunt, I don’t think it matters,” he said. “I think you’re in a nuclear winter, and you go… I think you cut costs like crazy.”

“If I was on your board, I’d… lay off 60% of my staff, cut my burn, and get through this nuclear winter. Because I would bet somewhere between 50% and 80% of alternative meat companies go away in the next 24 months, because they assumed that it was going to be the next big thing – and it might be, but ‘next’ is the dangerous word. When is ‘next’ gonna happen?”

2) Don’t spend much on marketing, and focus on taste

Galloway suggested that meat analogues will eventually work and be a viable part of our food ecosystem. But once companies have bought into that mindset, they’re going to “have to get to the other side”, where there will be “a valley of death”.

“It’s got to be near impossible to raise money right now. So you want to, quite frankly, just hunker down. I wouldn’t focus on the sustainability of it, I’d focus on the taste of it,” he said.

This was echoed by Impossible Foods CEO Peter McGuinness in a recent interview with Bloomberg Television, where he suggested that the plant-based meat sector launched incorrectly. His company has moved away from highlighting its products’ planetary advantages, instead honing in on taste descriptors and health benefits. “It’s gotta be delicious… It’s gotta be nutritious… And then you gotta be price-competitive,” said McGuinness.

In a similar vein, Galloway said: “I would not spend much money on marketing at all, and I’d keep my prices as low as I could. I would just try and extend my runway as long as possible and execute well, have really good relationships with my partners, do a lot of sampling a lot of earned media, try and write a lot, a lot of thought leadership.”

3. Plant-based meat will be resurgent – but consolidated

“I would be really scrappy. I would not spend a lot of time on traditional branding here because I would be throwing nickels around like they’re manhole covers. Because the bad news is, I think this ecosystem is gonna lose a ton of players,” suggested Galloway.

In the last year, startups like Nowadays, Ordinary Seafood, New Wave Foods and Sunfed Meats have all ceased operations, while others like Meatless Farm, VBites and Tattooed Chef have come close.

“The good news,” Galloway continued, “is that when the market comes back, it should be champagne and cocaine for alternative beef, whatever that would be. Because there’ll be just much fewer players. And if you can survive, you’re gonna come out the other end really, really robustly.”

We’re already seeing this happen – a host of businesses in this sector have merged or been acquired as part of the alternative protein industry’s consolidation era. “In the context of flat or declining category demand, consolidation, and M&As are vital for rapid growth in the plant-based sector,” Matthew Glover, founder of the Vegan Food Group, told Green Queen after the company acquired TofuTown. “These strategies allow companies to scale, innovate, and navigate through resilience challenges more effectively.”

Food non-profit ProVeg International agrees with this take too. Hédi Farhat, investment manager at ProVeg Incubator, told Green Queen last month: “We expect to see the effects of consolidation, along with signs of recovery in the sector, between 2025-26, with more corporate investors driving innovation in the sector.”

4) Animal rights (and TikTok) are major drivers of plant-based meat

The business expert’s final point outlined that he still loved meat, and eats his fair share of it. But he’s starting to question his intake now, thanks to TikTok. He saw a video of a rancher playing ‘catch’ with his bull with a barrel, who is jumping up and down waiting to retrieve it. This reminded him of his Great Dane.

“[It’s] just impossible for me to ignore the fact that these are mammals with big brains, very emotional, but subtle. They’re young, they give live birth, and want to be around other beings, and are probably at their core, you know, kind, wonderful beings,” said Galloway.

“And when you have the unfortunate experience of learning anything about the industrial food production business, what we do to these animals is… ‘inhuman’ is the wrong word, because we would never treat humans this way. It’s just totally amoral… no, it’s not amoral, it’s immoral. And it’s starting to weigh on me for the first time that there’s more birds in captivity than birds in the wild because of chickens and the way they raise veal.

“We should hope there’s not a hell. Because if there is a hell – or even if there is a heaven – and we have to reconcile our activities with animals, it’s going to be pretty fucking ugly.”

Galloway concluded by telling the founder his work is important, and that we should all be thinking about plant-based alternatives. “I come at it from a humanity standpoint, or just, you know, having dogs has just changed my outlook on the industrial food complex.”

As for the plant-based meat world, it’s “in survival mode”, but it’s “going to work” and “grow”. “You want to be one of the survivors and have your sales up, or at least have your sales and tax such that when the winds come back, you’re ready,” he said.

“It’s not aspirational. Branding is not going to save you right here. This is about survival.”

For a man who’s got so much right in his predictions, you’d bet on him being spot-on about plant-based meat, too.

The post Business Guru Scott Galloway on the Four Things Plant-Based Meat Businesses Should Do appeared first on Green Queen.

Nestlé has introduced six new coffee lines to China, which include plant-based beverages and a first-of-its-kind upcycled innovation.

Already a market leader for 36 years now, global CPG giant Nestlé has invigorated its coffee portfolio in China to meet the growing demand for sustainable, plant-based bottled drinks.

Part of the new range are two vegan ready-to-drink offerings (Coconut Americano and Oatmeal Latte) and an upcycled coffee offering (Guoran Light Coffee) that is new to the Chinese market. The shake-up, which sees all sub-brands integrated into the Nescafé lineup, comes as Nestlé aims to consolidate its position in the country’s evolving coffee sector.

“Consumers’ coffee consumption is increasing, from initially one cup a day to possibly two to three cups a day. For us, this is an opportunity,” Alfonso Troisi, senior VP for coffee at Nestlé Greater China, said in a press chat at the FBIC summit last month. “As consumers enjoy coffee in more scenarios, we also need to expand more applicable products.”

Keying into consumer preferences

The Coconut Americano contains over 20% coconut water and is low in sugar and fat content, while the oat-based Oatmeal Latte has 7g of dietary fibre (which is why it’s positioned as a breakfast option).

This will speak to the increasingly health-conscious Chinese consumer. A 2023 report by Asymmetrics Research noted how milk alternative brands are highlighting attributes like ‘no sugar/cholesterol/trans fat’, ‘good for brains/eyes’, and ‘high protein/calcium’ on product packaging, alongside cleaner labels.

“China is promoting healthier and more nutritious food options in response to the Healthy China policy,” said David J Ettinger, chief representative officer at law firm Keller and Heckman Shanghai. “Therefore, foods offering health benefits and high nutritional value are going to likely lead the way. Chinese consumers will look to healthier options, like alt-proteins, so it will be up to the alt-protein industry to demonstrate that these novel foods provide another nutritious option for consumers.”

Moreover, the use of coconut and oat is a shrewd move from Nestlé, as Chinese consumers have indicated their preference for these flavours. There are more oat milk options in China than any other plant-based alternatives, thanks to its dominance in coffee. In tier 1 and 2 cities, oat and coconut have become common milk choices in lattes.

As for the upcycled beverage, this makes use of cascara, the outer husk of coffee cherries that are typically discarded. In many cultures and countries, this red ‘coffee fruit’ is used to make hot and iced teas, and it’s something increasingly being adopted by specialty coffee companies.

Cascara has a slightly sweet and fruity flavour, and while it does contain caffeine, it’s present in much smaller amounts than the seeds enclosed within, Troiso explained. “In Yunnan, people will make coffee peels into coffee fruit tea for drinking. Therefore, we use it as the main ingredient to make it a drinkable drink every day,” he added.

The Nestlé executive suggested that this product – the result of 10 years of work – was launched with the circular economy and the regenerative food system in mind. “The use of the same coffee bean has expanded from the conventional method of making coffee to the use of the entire coffee fruit, including the peel, and its value has been fully explored,” he said.

“Chinese consumers still like fruit tea flavours, whether it is fruit juice, or other flavoured and tea-based beverages. Therefore, we hope that in addition to coffee lovers, we will also want some other users to try this new product.”

Taking on the Chinese coffee boom

Coffee consumption in China is increasing, with people drinking two to three cups a day. The market reached 617.8 billion yuan ($85.5B) in 2023, and is slated to surpass the trillion-yuan mark ($138B) by next year. It has resulted in increased competition between coffee companies like Luckin, Costa, Starbucks, as well as Nestlé. While it dominates the instant coffee realm, the latter’s targeted move into bottled drinks represents its need – and willingness – to adapt.

“China has a highly dynamic coffee market and growth, and tends to form its own unique and constantly evolving coffee consumption trends,” Troiso told FoodNavigator-Asia.​ “Based on insights into the local coffee market, we have rearranged our product lines based on consumption scenarios and target groups to ensure better and more targeted product innovation based on consumer needs.”

In fact, last year, Nestlé appointed its first local R&D head for Greater China to identify emerging market trends and preferences of younger consumers. The conglomerate has also shortened its product launch cycle from 12-18 months to eight to 10 months, and is now aiming to bring that down to six months. Nescafé, meanwhile, will soon launch a coffee innovation centre in Shanghai to capitalise on the coffee opportunity.

“We pay close attention to the various stages of consumers’ lives and what kind of coffee needs they have in those stages,” Troiso said at FBIF. “We found that the majority of Chinese users were exposed to coffee for the first time during the gaokao [the national college entrance exam]… As they enter the workforce, their needs change, and we adapt our products to those changes.”

He added: “Our goal is to be a brand that can stay close to the needs of consumers, such as providing products that lift spirits and meet the needs of different user groups. We want to create a brand image that is close to the minds of consumers. In recent years, we have also worked to promote the sustainability of coffee, which has also resonated more with young people.”

Troiso suggested sustainability is the joint responsibility of the entire industry, reiterating Nescafé’s 2030 plan of cutting emissions in half and sourcing 50% of its coffee through regenerative agriculture by the year. “We have clear targets to reduce carbon emissions, so we have taken different measures at all levels,” he said.

“In addition, consumer awareness is also very important. We strive to educate consumers about the sustainability of coffee and share information about sustainable coffee, because consumer choices drive progress on sustainable projects.”

The post Nestlé Brings Plant-Based & Upcycled RTD Coffee Products to China appeared first on Green Queen.

Health, e-commerce and almond milk are vital in a sector that shows long-term potential despite recent headwinds, according to a new report by the Plant-Based Foods Association.

In spite of a rough year for sales and investment in the vegan sector, if certain barriers are removed, plant-based food is here to stay. That’s the consensus of the 2023 State of the Marketplace report by US-based trade body the Plant-Based Foods Association (PBFA).

Leveraging data from multiple insight firms, the analysis looks at the retail, foodservice and e-commerce sectors to find the challenges and opportunities for plant-based brands.

“Despite inflationary pressures and economic challenges that have affected the entire food landscape, plant-based has held strong and established its faithful role in the shopping carts, shelves, and menus of a large and diverse group of consumers,” said PBFA’s VP of marketplace development, Julie Emmett.

“The plant-based foods segment remains an important priority offering for our customers that continues to evolve with changing customer trends,” added Lee Robinson, VP of merchandising at Whole Foods Market, a PBFA partner. “Putting the ‘plant’ back in ‘plant-based’ through simpler, plant-forward ingredient decks, elevated sourcing, and reduced processing are areas of focus to usher the industry into advancing agricultural practices.”

What can companies learn from the state of the plant-based marketplace in 2023? Here are the big takeaways.

Gen Z doesn’t make up a large majority of plant-based shoppers

The share of vegan consumers is evenly split across age and income demographics. Over-65s actually accounted for the largest share (23.5%), followed by the 18-34 age group (19.5%). So it appears that Gen Zers don’t represent a large majority of plant-based shoppers, although their purchasing power is predicted to grow when 2024 tax changes take effect.

Meanwhile, over 41% of people who buy plant-based have high incomes, a trend that “aligns with unavoidable industry realities”, according to PBFA. Vegan food is still competing with the low prices of industrially farmed, government-subsidy-backed animal foods. But research has shown that plant-based consumers spend more overall, making them highly valuable to retailers and operators.

Additional data shows that 62% of US households are buying plant-based foods, and 81% are repeating these purchases, indicating their strong faith in these products.

Health over everything

The importance of health has skyrocketed in the post-pandemic and mid-Ozempic eras. Industry leaders are already repositioning their brands to be more health-skewed to meet these needs, and PBFA’s analysis confirms the vitality of health.

The report outlines how health can mean different things to people, spanning personal illness, food safety or even specific nutritional requirements. Among primary US grocer shoppers, 80% consider themselves health-conscious, and 65% eat plant-based because they think these products are healthy.

Similarly, 51% of Kroger shoppers said they buy vegan products since they’re healthy, and 38% do so because they want to reduce animal consumption due to personal health concerns.

Only four categories actually declined in dollar sales

Despite concerns about the industry’s alleged downfall (if you’re to believe certain media outlets), only four product categories saw sales dip, while the overall sector held relatively steady (down from $8.2B in 2022 to $8.1B in 2023), suggesting that it was a year of flatlines instead of declines.

From 2021 to 2023, meat and seafood (-6.6%), ready meals (-7.9%), ice cream (-7.4%), and cheese (-5.4%) were the only plant-based categories that witnessed a decrease. PBFA recommends that retailers merchandise meat or seafood analogues with products that are frequently purchased together, such as conventional meat/seafood or dairy cheese, as about three in 10 people who buy the former also buy the latter.

Milk is still the plant-based leader

Plant-based milk is still the leading category in the sector, making up over a third (36%) of all sales last year, and representing a 4.2% annual growth since 2021. In 2023, dollar sales grew slightly by 0.7%, but unit sales dropped by 7.5%, an indication of the higher cost of products (milk alternatives saw prices hike by over 8%).

Still, this category represents the highest dollar share in the overall market (15%) across the plant-based sector. This is even higher (41%) in the natural channel, which entails supermarkets with over $2M of annual sales and at least 50% of sales from natural or organic products (excluding Whole Foods).

Despite a 3.6% decline, almond milk is still the leader in the US, making up 55% ($1.6B) of the category’s total sales. Oat has held strong at second position with a 7.6% increase, while coconut milk saw the largest increase (24.8%).

In foodservice, meanwhile, operators increased their spend on plant-based milk much more than dairy. While they bought 8.2% more conventional milk and spent 7.1% more than the year before, their purchases of plant-based milk grew by 18.3% in volume, representing a 20.9% higher spend.

Watch out for the creamers

Non-dairy creamers are expanding rapidly in the US. It’s a market that has seen constant growth over the years, and saw annual sales increase by 16.2% (the highest in the industry) from 2021 to 2023 to reach $701M. Last year alone, dollar sales were up by 10.4%, and units also increased by 3.7%.

Across the US, 15% of households bought plant-based creamers last year, and over 65% repeated their purchase. Among the 73% of Americans who drink coffee every day, a majority prefer to add creamers and/or sweeteners instead of drinking it black. Here, the preference for oat milk creamers climbed by 90% and almond-based options by 71% since 2022.

“As long as the demand for coffee exists, consumers will search for creamers to go with it – and as environmental awareness grows, consumers may seek out more plant-based options,” the report stated. “Brands and retailers can emphasize plant-based creamers’ environmental benefits to help consumers make choices that are more aligned with their values.”

Don’t sleep on e-commerce

In the US, 33% of shoppers buy plant-based foods online – convenience, a wide array of options, and the absence of physical shelf space constraints make this channel attractive to brands. E-commerce plant-based sales reached $394M in 2023, with an annual growth rate of 16.4% over three years. They also occupy a larger share of online sales (6.8%) than brick-and-mortar retail (3.8%).

And while animal-based foods outpaced vegan categories in dollar sale growth last year, plant-based products actually saw a higher increase in unit sales than their conventional counterparts, illustrating strong, sustained shopper interest and engagement.

Restaurants are down on plant-based – other operators are not

Dollar sales of plant proteins – including meat analogues and traditional food like tofu, tempeh, grains and nuts – in foodservice dipped slightly by 1% last year, with restaurants representing the biggest decline. Quick-service establishments spent 10% less on these foods, and full-service ones shelled out 7% less.

But this was offset by other industry operators – mainly workplace cafeterias, which bought 25% more plant proteins and spent 13% more on them. Dollar and pound sales of plant-based food also increased in education, healthcare and government establishments.

Rob Morasco, VP of innovation at Sodexo, which is aiming to make 50% of its food plant-based by 2025, outlined three main challenges for adding plant-based products to foodservice. “Our customers can be anywhere on the ‘knowledge spectrum’ on these products, especially those that don’t identify as vegan or vegetarian. Educating them on the choices available to them without ‘preaching or dictating’ is very important,” he explained.

“Second, our operators and chefs also need the same education on plant-based overall – whether alt products or whole food plant-based, there is work to do to help our chefs feel more comfortable in this space. Lastly, cost and distribution are still a challenge – normalization compared to their ordinary alternatives and achieving price parity will be a pretty big deal.”

Different forks, different strokes

The business, industry, government, healthcare, casino and lodging sectors all invested the most in plant-based foods, especially tofu, representing the growing focus on whole foods.

“We do think, however, that the products that emulate the big ‘ordinary’ protein movers – beef, chicken, pork, seafood – are the most important to the non-commercial space,” said Morasco. “We sell a lot of hamburgers and chicken tenders and need plant-based alternatives to those that taste like the ordinary version.”

But for restaurants, plant-based meat, egg and cheese analogues present a major opportunity. An analysis of 20 eateries over six months found that introducing these options increased the total sales of all plant-based orders by 112% and mixed orders by 35%.

First-time guests placing vegan orders were twice more likely to return for a second visit than those who ordered animal-based foods. Moreover, plant-based orders boosted check averages by 8% (versus 1% for animal-based orders), indicating that higher-quality offerings justify the premiums on plant-based food.

The post 2023 State of the Marketplace: 8 Takeaways for Plant-Based Brands from PBFA’s Latest Report appeared first on Green Queen.

Fewer people in Europe have trust in their food system and are taking sustainability into account, and the lack of progress in improving their diets is “worrying”, according to a new report.

European consumer confidence in the health and sustainability credentials of their food remains low, and that has impeded the progress towards better eating habits and a more resilient food system, a new report by European research hub the EIT Food Consumer Observatory has found.

The study surveyed 19,624 Europeans from 18 countries to find that less than half (45%) have trust in the food they eat, in terms of taste, safety, health, authenticity and sustainability (though this is up from 44% in 2022). Even fewer (43%) have confidence in food technology.

While Europeans are slightly more confident that the food they eat is safe (53%) and tasty (59%), only 36% think it’s sustainable and 44% believe it’s healthy.

Confidence in food and food tech has been low for years and is correlated to openness to trying new food (which dipped to 34% in 2023), and EIT Food suggests that people who are the most conservative in their food choices are also the ones whose diets need the most attention. This is because only 14% of people who rarely choose healthy products and 15% of those who pick sustainable ones are open to food innovation.

“Consumers need to be able to trust that the food they eat is both good for them, and good for the planet,” said Klaus G Grunert, lead of the EIT Food Consumer Observatory. “If we are to support people to make long-term changes to how they eat, we need the food sector to work with consumers to provide better information, options and access for diets that are healthy, nutritious and sustainable – while being affordable and inclusive for everyone.”

Europeans are turning away from sustainability

While 78% of Europeans intended to lead a sustainable lifestyle in 2020, this dropped to 71% in 2023. Meanwhile, the number of people who don’t want to live sustainably has increased from 8% to 12%.

Things are bleaker when it comes to food choices – only 49% of respondents take sustainability into account when making food choices, up from 48% in 2022 but down from 51% in the two years prior. The gap between the intention to live and eat sustainably points to the need for greater consumer education in achieving a planet-friendly diet.

Similarly, the intention to eat healthily is also waning, dipping from 60% in 2021 to 56% in 2023. However, that hasn’t impacted people’s choice of healthy foods, which was up by 4% last year. This means there’s no attitude-intention gap with health – more consumers take this into account when making food choices (60%) than those who state their intention to do so (56%).

The report suggests that this could be because there’s a general awareness about what is considered healthy and unhealthy food, making it easier to incorporate the former into diets. This doesn’t seem to be the case with sustainability, where Europeans are finding it harder to establish what such food looks like.

People with a lower education, those without dietary restrictions, youngsters, men and consumers living in a single household are least concerned with both sustainable and healthy diets. But there’s a link between the two, with most consumers eating sustainably also eating healthily, and vice-versa.

Food tech neophobia engulfs Europe

New products, ingredients and tech can help build a healthier and more sustainable food system, according to the report, but the topic of innovation is often met with distrust and scepticism in the continent.

When consumers think of new ways to produce foods, they think of circular, organic, natural or homegrown methods – not high-tech solutions. This is despite alternative protein startups gaining steam in the continent and coming up with novel foods that harm the planet much less and aid the body much more. But it’s unsurprising given that only 27% of Europeans believe vegan analogues are better for the climate, and 57% feel they have a worse impact, according to a separate study by EIT Food in February,

However, younger consumers are more open to new innovations than older ones – but they’re also the people with the least healthy and sustainable diets. Reaching this demographic, therefore, may prove to be the catalyst for a better food system.

Who do Europeans trust in the food system?

Europeans place the most trust in farmers, with 65% expressing confidence in them. As for all other actors in the food system, there’s a substantial gap to fill. Authorities are the least-trusted source (45%), behind manufacturers (46%), foodservice (48%) and retailers (50%). Overall, just 41% of respondents find that the food system is open about its practices, 43% think it cares about their opinions, and 53% find it competent.

The trust in farmers, though, is down from 67% in 2022, driven by a decline in beliefs about their competence. But not all farmers are equal, warns the report: small, local producers using eco-friendly methods are the most trusted, while industrial farmers are seen as the cause of many problems (they’re perceived as working against nature). Meanwhile, there’s a growing scepticism about livestock farmers and how they treat animals.

Meanwhile, Europeans see authorities as important, but not doing a good job. Only 42% feel they’re doing a good job, down from 45% in 2022. Moreover, just 37% think policymakers care about what the public thinks about food, and 38% believe they’re sufficiently open about how they regulate food.

Some expressed concerns that specific regulations could be overly stringent, potentially encouraging a standardised approach to farming that may not be suitable for all regions. They mentioned the need for more flexibility to accommodate local, sustainable farming practices. This is relevant to the stringent regulations imposed on novel foods in the EU, which has driven food startups away from the region in search of more open markets.

Speaking of novel foods, restaurants and caterers are often the ideal first point of contact for these, as the risk of chefs preparing a bad meal is less than cooking something at home for the first time. This sector has the power to present new foods in an appealing manner via presentation and menu communication – this indicates they’re a great entry point for alternative protein companies.

“The food sector has faced unprecedented challenges in recent years, and will continue to do so as climate change takes its toll on food production,” Sofia Kuhn, director of public insights and engagement at EIT Food.

“Now, more than ever, we need partnership between the food sector and Europe’s citizens if we are to create a healthier and more sustainable food system for everyone. To achieve this, we need to understand and work with consumers to foster trust and engagement in embracing food innovations and making conscious choices about what to eat.”

The post Europeans Are Less Trusting of Their Food Now, and Care Less About Sustainability Too appeared first on Green Queen.