This study examined consumer perceptions, acceptance, and perceived barriers to products derived from animals fed insect-based protein in Saudi Arabia, a topic relevant to sustainable protein production and future feed regulations. A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted using convenience sampling of a structured Arabic instrument that assessed sociodemographic characteristics, prior awareness, post-information attitudes, acceptance, and concerns. The survey measured perceptions of safety, regulatory trust, environmental benefits, and economic considerations and assessed predefined barriers, including insufficient knowledge, religious concerns, disgust, food-safety concerns, allergy risk, and possible sensory changes. Results showed relatively high awareness of insect protein and its nutritional and environmental values. After brief exposure to information, respondents generally expressed favorable attitudes, with many indicating a willingness to consume, purchase, or try products from insect-fed animals. Acceptance increased when products were perceived as safe, officially approved, environmentally beneficial, and halal-certified, with halal certification emerging as the condition receiving the highest level of agreement on purchase intention. Price also influenced willingness to buy, with stronger acceptance at prices equal to or below conventional products and only moderate willingness to pay a small premium. However, higher price increases reduced acceptance. Overall, respondents in this convenience sample reported generally favorable attitudes toward insect-based feed following brief informational exposure; however, these findings should not be generalized to all Saudi consumers. The study recommends public education, transparent regulation, and clear labeling to support market introduction and consumer confidence in products from animals fed insect-based protein.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alhasyani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: