A new open-access article published in Future Foods (Volume 13, June 2026) provides the most comprehensive quantitative evidence to date on how consumers value innovative alternatives to conventional animal-based foods.
In “Willingness to pay for sustainably innovated animal products and plant-based alternative foods – A meta-analysis”, Latka et al. systematically review 67 studies published between 2010 and 2025 and conduct a large-scale meta-analysis of consumer willingness to pay (WTP) for food innovations aimed at improving environmental sustainability, animal welfare, and human health. The analysis covers a wide range of products, including plant-based alternatives, insect-based foods, lab-grown and genetically engineered products, as well as innovations within animal-based production systems.
Key findings
- Consumers are, on average, willing to pay a price premium for food innovations that improve animal welfare and environmental sustainability, particularly when the level of perceived innovativeness is low.
- In contrast, plant-based, lab-grown, and genetically engineered alternatives often face consumer resistance, with many consumers requiring a price discount to choose them over conventional animal products.
- A higher degree of perceived innovativeness consistently reduces willingness to pay, highlighting the role of food and technology neophobia.
- Regional differences are pronounced: studies conducted in Europe show a positive average willingness to pay for innovative foods, while studies from North America and Asia indicate that consumers tend to discount such products.
- Over time, willingness to pay for innovative foods has slightly declined, suggesting persistent trade-offs between perceived societal benefits and consumer familiarity or acceptance.
Policy and market relevance
The authors conclude that not all food innovations are equally positioned for market success. Innovations that deliver clear animal welfare or environmental benefits without radically altering production or product characteristics appear most promising. For more disruptive alternatives, targeted information strategies, improved product framing, and price-based policy instruments—such as subsidies—may be necessary to overcome consumer hesitation and support socially desirable dietary transitions.
The article is published under a Creative Commons licence and is freely accessible:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fufo.2025.100892
This research offers valuable insights for policymakers, researchers, and food system stakeholders working on sustainable diets, alternative proteins, and innovation pathways in the agri-food sector.
Source: UBO, TC-Prague, CZU, UCSC
