Multi-country consumer analysis reveals distinct segments in willingness to pay for meat and dairy products, suggesting targeted interventions.
• Consumers were segmented on their WTP for animal- versus plant-based products • Across meat and dairy categories, two WTP-based clusters consistently emerged • Pro animal-based cluster was smaller and reported wider price premiums • Pro plant-based cluster was larger and reported narrower price premiums • Clusters differed on psychographics including behavior change stage A gradual shift from animal-based consumption toward more plant-based diets is crucial for public and planetary health. However, one practical barrier for this protein transition includes the (perceived) financial accessibility of plant-based alternatives. We further explore this tension by examining whether consumers in a large multi-country sample can be reliably distinguished based on their relative willingness to pay for animal- versus plant-based products (WTP Δ ) across meat and dairy categories. We subsequently profiled emergent segments on psychographic characteristics, including their readiness to reduce animal-based consumption (i.e., behavior change stage). Participants from the USA (N = 1614), the UK (N = 1664), and the Netherlands (N = 1967) completed an online survey that measured their WTP for animal- and plant-based variants of diverse meat and dairy products. Segments were identified using a k -means algorithm on standardized WTP Δ scores across countries. Consistently among product categories, two clusters emerged: a pro animal-based cluster and a pro plant-based cluster. Pro animal-based consumers (25.2% for meat and 19.8% for dairy) exhibited a higher relative valuation of animal-based products (M WTPΔMeat = 1.35; M WTPΔDairy = 1.64), while pro plant-based consumers (74.8% for meat and 80.2% for dairy) reported a higher WTP for plant-based alternatives (M WTPΔMeat = -0.46; M WTPΔDairy = -0.41). For both categories, the pro animal-based cluster expressed a lower behavior change stage, lower intention to consume plant-based alternatives, greater perceived barriers for reducing animal-based intake, and more older and rurally-situated consumers. Our findings allude to the potential utility of tailoring behavioral interventions to emergent cluster profiles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vries et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: