Analyzes the social-political characteristics influencing vegetarian diet adoption in higher and lower-income EU countries, suggesting implications for sustainable diets.
Due to the recent politicization of everyday activities in several countries, people may attach explicit political meaning to the consumption choices of themselves and others, including meat-related diet choices. This makes it important for research and policy making to assess whether the adoption of veg(etari)an (“veg⁎n”) diet choices is associated with particular social-political characteristics and to determine how these characteristics may influence the further promotion of healthy and sustainable diets in different countries. We looked for patterns in the characteristics of veg⁎n diet adopters by analyzing an existing survey in the 27 countries of the European Union (EU), complemented by country-level data. The countries differed in National income and dominant farm type, which were highly interrelated. We first identified social-political similarities of adopters in comparison with non-adopters, using a multilevel regression analysis. Among the adopters ( N = 1,184), we next reduced the number of similarities statistically to a smaller set of components, based on which we formed clusters of adopters. The clusters covered a variety of viewpoints, including veg⁎n conservatives, veg⁎n moderates, veg⁎n young students, and veg⁎n progressives. Their share varied across countries. In higher-income countries, the prevalence of veg⁎n diet adopters was higher and their profile very different. They had the lowest % veg⁎n conservatives and the highest % veg⁎n progressives, probably due to higher climate change politicization. The reverse applied to the lower-income countries. The results provide a recognizable overview of the various possible backgrounds of veg⁎n diet adopters and the prospects of healthy and sustainable diets.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Boer et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: