Should we stop meating like this? Reducing meat consumption through substitution

Food Policy

Volumn 65, Issue , 2016, Pages 74-89

  Apostolidis, Chrysostomos ^a   McLeay, Fraser ^a  

^a NORTHUMBRIA UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Choice experiment; Latent class; Market segmentation; Meat reduction; Meat substitutes

Indexed keywords

CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; FOOD CONSUMPTION; FOOD MARKET; FOOD POLICY; MEAT; SEGMENTATION;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 85006713650     PISSN: 03069192     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.11.002     Document Type: Article

References (129)

1. Aiking, H., de Boer, J., Vereijken, J., Sustainable Protein Production and ConsumptionPigs or Peas?. 2006, Springer Science & Business Media.
2. Akdeniz, B., Calantone, R.J., Voorhees, C.M., Effectiveness of marketing cues on consumer perceptions of qualitythe moderating roles of brand reputation and third-party information. Psychol. Market. 30:1 (2013), 76–89.
3. Baba, Y., Kallas, Z., Costa-Font, M., Gil, J.M., Realini, C.E., Impact of hedonic evaluation on consumers’ preferences for beef attributes including its enrichment with n-3 and CLA fatty acids. Meat Sci. 111 (2016), 9–17.
4. Bajželj, B., Richards, K.S., Allwood, J.M., Smith, P., Dennis, J.S., Curmi, E., Gilligan, C.A., Importance of food-demand management for climate mitigation. Nat. Clim. Change 4:10 (2014), 924–929.
5. BBC, Can eating Less Meat Help Reduce Climate Change (November, 24). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34899066, 2015 (accessed 01.04.16).
6. BBC, 2014. Red Meat ‘Linked to Breast Cancer’. News, BBC (June, 11). < http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-27777210> (accessed 17.01.15).
7. Bíró, A., Did the junk food tax make the Hungarians eat healthier?. Food Policy 54 (2015), 107–115.
8. Bødker, M., Pisinger, C., Toft, U., Jørgensen, T., The rise and fall of the world's first fat tax. Health Policy 119:6 (2015), 737–742.
9. Boxall, P.C., Adamowicz, W.L., Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility modelsa latent class approach. Environ. Resource Econ. 23:4 (2002), 421–446.
10. Boztuğ, Y., Juhl, H.J., Elshiewy, O., Jensen, M.B., Consumer response to monochrome Guideline Daily Amount nutrition labels. Food Policy 53 (2015), 1–8.
11. Carlsson, F., Frykblom, P., Lagerkvist, C.J., Consumer benefits of labels and bans on GM foods—choice experiments with Swedish consumers. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 89:1 (2007), 152–161.
12. Childs, J.L., Thompson, J.L., Lillard, J.S., Berry, T.K., Drake, M., Consumer perception of whey and soy protein in meal replacement products. J. Sens. Stud. 23:3 (2008), 320–339.
13. Coast, J., Al-Janabi, H., Sutton, E.J., Horrocks, S.A., Vosper, A.J., Swancutt, D.R., Flynn, T.N., Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experimentsissues and recommendations. Health Econ. 21:6 (2012), 730–741.
14. Dagevos, H., Voordouw, J., Sustainability and meat consumptionis reduction realistic. Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy 9:2 (2013), 60–69.
15. de Bakker, E., Dagevos, H., Reducing meat consumption in today's consumer societyquestioning the citizen-consumer gap. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 25:6 (2012), 877–894.
16. de Boer, J., Schösler, H., Aiking, H., “Meatless days” or “less but better”? Exploring strategies to adapt Western meat consumption to health and sustainability challenges. Appetite 76 (2014), 120–128.
17. de Jonge, J., van der Lans, I.A., van Trijp, H.C., Different shades of greycompromise products to encourage animal friendly consumption. Food Qual. Prefer. 45 (2015), 87–99.
18. de Jonge, J., van Trijp, H., Heterogeneity in consumer perceptions of the animal friendliness of broiler production systems. Food Policy 49 (2014), 174–185.
19. Defra, Sustainable Consumption Report. Follow-up to the Green Food Project. 2013, Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, London (accessed 28.10.13).
20. Defra, Family Food 2012. 2013, Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, London (accessed 29.05.2014).
21. Department of Health, Guide to Creating a Front of Pack (FoP) Nutrition Label for Pre-packed Products sold through Retail Outlets. , 2013 (accessed 30.09.14).
22. Department of Health, National Diet and Nutrition Surveyheadline results from years 1 and 2 (combined) of the Rolling Programme, 2008/9-2009/10. , 2011 (accessed 30.05.14).
23. DeFrance, S.D., Zooarchaeology in complex societiesPolitical economy, status, and ideology. J. Archaeol. Res. 17 (2009), 105–168.
24. Draper, A.K., Adamson, A.J., Clegg, S., Malam, S., Rigg, M., Duncan, S., Front-of-pack nutrition labellingare multiple formats a problem for consumers?. Euro. J. Public Heal. 23:3 (2013), 517–521.
25. Drichoutis, A.C., Lazaridis, P., Nayga, R.M., Nutrition knowledge and consumer use of nutritional food labels. Euro. Rev. Agri. Econ. 32:1 (2005), 93–118.
26. EBLEX, UK Yearbook 2012 – Cattle. Available at: , 2013 (accessed 20.01.15).
27. Edjabou, L.D., Smed, S., The effect of using consumption taxes on foods to promote climate friendly diets–the case of Denmark. Food Policy 39 (2013), 84–96.
28. Elzerman, J.E., van Boekel, M.A., Luning, P.A., Exploring meat substitutesconsumer experiences and contextual factors. Brit. Food J. 115:5 (2013), 700–710.
29. EUFIC, Global Update on Nutrition Labelling. , 2015 (accessed 01.04.2015).
30. European Commission, Commission implementing regulation (EU) No 1337/2013 of 13 December 2013 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the indication of the country of origin or place of provenance for fresh, chilled and frozen meat of swine, sheep, goats and poultry. Off. J. Euro. Union L335:12 (2013), 19–22.
31. European Commission, Council Regulation (EC) No. 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No. 2092/91. Off. J. Euro. Union L189:07 (2007), 1–122.
32. Feunekes, G.I., Gortemaker, I.A., Willems, A.A., Lion, R., Van Den Kommer, M., Front-of-pack nutrition labellingtesting effectiveness of different nutrition labelling formats front-of-pack in four European countries. Appetite 50:1 (2008), 57–70.
33. Finnigan, T., Lemon, M., Allan, B., Paton, I., Mycoprotein, life cycle analysis and the food 2030 challenge. Aspects Appl. Biol. 102 (2010), 81–90.
34. Font-i-Furnols, M., Tous, N., Esteve-Garcia, E., Gispert, M., Do all the consumers accept marbling in the same way? The relationship between eating and visual acceptability of pork with different intramuscular fat content. Meat Sci. 91:4 (2012), 448–453.
35. Food Standards Agency, Guide to Creating a Front of Pack (FoP) Nutrition Label for Pre-packed Products Sold through Retail Outlets. , 2013 (accessed 10.01.16).
36. Food Standards Agency, Short ConsultationEU Harmonisation of ‘GM-free’ Labelling. , 2013 (accessed 10.01.16).
37. Food Standards Agency, Public Attitudes to Food Issues. , 2009 (accessed 03.03.15).
38. Foresight, The Future of Food and Farming, Final Project Report. 2011, Government Office for Science, London.
39. Gadema, Z., Oglethorpe, D., The use and usefulness of carbon labelling fooda policy perspective from a survey of UK supermarket shoppers. Food Policy 36:6 (2011), 815–822.
40. Geeroms, N., Verbeke, W., Van Kenhove, P., Health advertising to promote fruit and vegetable intakeapplication of health-related motive segmentation. Food Qual. Prefer. 19:5 (2008), 481–497.
41. German Council for Sustainable Development, The Sustainable Shopping BasketA Guide to Better Shopping. 4th ed., 2013, German Council for Sustainable Development, Berlin.
42. Golan, E., Unnevehr, L., Food product composition, consumer health, and public policyintroduction and overview of special section. Food Policy 33:6 (2008), 465–469.
43. Grebitus, C., Jensen, H.H., Roosen, J., US and German consumer preferences for ground beef packaged under a modified atmosphere–different regulations, different behaviour?. Food Policy 40 (2013), 109–118.
44. Green, C., Gerard, K., Exploring the social value of health-care interventionsa stated preference discrete choice experiment. Health Econ. 18:8 (2009), 951–976.
45. Grunert, K.G., Fernández-Celemín, L., Wills, J.M., genannt Bonsmann, S.S., Nureeva, L., Use and understanding of nutrition information on food labels in six European countries. J. Public Heal. 18:3 (2010), 261–277.
46. Grunert, K.G., Hieke, S., Wills, J., Sustainability labels on food productsconsumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy 44 (2014), 177–189.
47. Hallström, E., Röös, E., Börjesson, P., Sustainable meat consumptiona quantitative analysis of nutritional intake, greenhouse gas emissions and land use from a Swedish perspective. Food Policy 47 (2014), 81–90.
48. Hamerschlag, K., Venkat, K., Meat Eater's Guide to Climate Change and Health–Life-Cycle AssessmentsMethodology and Results. 2011, Environmental Working Group, Washington, DC.
49. Health Council of the Netherlands, Guidelines for a Healthy DietThe Ecological Perspective. 2011, Gezondheidsraad, The Hague, Netherlands.
50. Hoek, A.C., Elzerman, J.E., Hageman, R., Kok, F.J., Luning, P.A., de Graaf, C., Are meat substitutes liked better over time? A repeated in-home use test with meat substitutes or meat in meals. Food Qual. Prefer. 28:1 (2013), 253–263.
51. Hoek, A.C., Luning, P.A., Weijzen, P., Engels, W., Kok, F.J., de Graaf, C., Replacement of meat by meat substitutes. A survey on person- and product-related factors in consumer acceptance. Appetite 56:3 (2011), 662–673.
52. Hoen, A., Koetse, M.J., A choice experiment on alternative fuel vehicle preferences of private car owners in the Netherlands. Transport. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 61 (2014), 199–215.
53. Horne, R.E., Limits to labelsthe role of eco-labels in the assessment of product sustainability and routes to sustainable consumption. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 33:2 (2009), 175–182.
54. Hoyos, D., The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments. Ecol. Econ. 69:8 (2010), 1595–1603.
55. Hu, W., Hünnemeyer, A., Veeman, M., Adamowicz, W., Srivastava, L., Trading off health, environmental and genetic modification attributes in food. Euro. Rev. Agri. Econ. 31:3 (2004), 389–408.
56. IARC, IARC Monographs Evaluate the Consumption of Red Meat and Processed Meat. , 2015 (accessed on 14.01.16).
57. Jaeger, S.R., Hedderley, D., MacFie, H.J., Methodological issues in conjoint analysisa case study. Eur. J. Mark. 35:11/12 (2001), 1217–1239.
58. Jensen, J.D., Smed, S., The Danish tax on saturated fat–short run effects on consumption, substitution patterns and consumer prices of fats. Food Policy 42 (2013), 18–31.
59. Johnson, F.R., Lancsar, E., Marshall, D., Kilambi, V., Mühlbacher, A., Regier, D.A., Bridges, J.F., et al. Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experimentsreport of the ISPOR conjoint analysis experimental design good research practices task force. Value Health 16:1 (2013), 3–13.
60. Keynote, Meat & Meat Products Market Assessment 2013. 2013, Key Note Ltd., Richmond upon Thames.
61. Koistinen, L., Pouta, E., Heikkilä, J., Forsman-Hugg, S., Kotro, J., Mäkelä, J., Niva, M., The impact of fat content, production methods and carbon footprint information on consumer preferences for minced meat. Food Qual. Prefer. 29:2 (2013), 126–136.
62. Krystallis, A., Grunert, K.G., de Barcellos, M.D., Perrea, T., Verbeke, W., Consumer attitudes towards sustainability aspects of food productioninsights from three continents. J. Market. Manage. 28:3–4 (2012), 334–372.
63. Laestadius, L.I., Neff, R.A., Barry, C.L., Frattaroli, S., “We don't tell people what to do”an examination of the factors influencing NGO decisions to campaign for reduced meat consumption in light of climate change. Glob. Environ. Change 29 (2014), 32–40.
64. Lancaster, K.J., A new approach to consumer theory. J. Polit. Econ., 1966, 132–157.
65. Latvala, T., Niva, M., Mäkelä, J., Pouta, E., Heikkilä, J., Kotro, J., Forsman-Hugg, S., Diversifying meat consumption patternsConsumers’ self-reported past behaviour and intentions for change. Meat Sci. 92:1 (2012), 71–77.
66. Loureiro, M.L., Umberger, W.J., A choice experiment model for beefwhat US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability. Food Policy 32:4 (2007), 496–514.
67. Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., Swait, J.D., Stated Choice MethodsAnalysis and Application. 2000, Cambridge University Press, New York.
68. Lüthi, S., Prässler, T., Analyzing policy support instruments and regulatory risk factors for wind energy deployment—a developers’ perspective. Energy Policy 39:9 (2011), 4876–4892.
69. McEachern, M.G., Schröder, M.J., The role of livestock production ethics in consumer values towards meat. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 15:2 (2002), 221–237.
70. McFadden, Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. Zarembka, P., (eds.) Frontiers in Econometrics, 1973, Academic Press, New York, 105–142 1974.
71. McFadden, D., Economic choices. Am. Econ. Rev., 2001, 351–378.
72. MINTEL, Red Meat-UK. 2015, Mintel International Group Limited.
73. MINTEL, Meat-Free and Free-From Foods-UK. 2014, Mintel International Group Limited.
74. MINTEL, Meat-Free and Free-From Foods-UK. 2013, Mintel International Group Limited.
75. MINTEL, Red Meat-UK. 2013, Mintel International Group Limited.
76. Mintel, Food Retailers-UK. 2011, Mintel International Group Limited.
77. Mueller, S., Lockshin, L., Louviere, J.J., What you see may not be what you getAsking consumers what matters may not reflect what they choose. Market. Lett. 21:4 (2010), 335–350.
78. Mueller, S., Osidacz, P., Francis, I.L., Lockshin, L., Combining discrete choice and informed sensory testing in a two-stage processcan it predict wine market share?. Food Qual. Prefer. 21:7 (2010), 741–754.
79. Nederkoorn, C., Havermans, R.C., Giesen, J.C., Jansen, A., High tax on high energy dense foods and its effects on the purchase of calories in a supermarket. An experiment. Appetite 56:3 (2011), 760–765.
80. Nestle, M., Ludwig, D.S., Front-of-package food labelspublic health or propaganda?. JAMA 303:8 (2010), 771–772.
81. Nguyen, T.L.T., Hermansen, J.E., Mogensen, L., Environmental consequences of different beef production systems in the EU. J. Cleaner Prod. 18:8 (2010), 756–766.
82. Nijdam, D., Rood, T., Westhoek, H., The price of proteinreview of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes. Food Policy 37:6 (2012), 760–770.
83. Nocella, G., Boecker, A., Hubbard, L., Scarpa, R., Eliciting consumer preferences for certified animal-friendly foodscan elements of the theory of planned behavior improve choice experiment analysis?. Psychol. Market. 29:11 (2012), 850–868.
84. Nordgren, A., A climate tax on meat?. Climate Change and Sustainable Development, 2012, Wageningen Academic Publishers, 109–114.
85. Office for National Statistics, 2011 Census – Population and Household Estimates for England and Wales. , 2013 (accessed 03.03.14).
86. Olmedilla-Alonso, B., Jiménez-Colmenero, F., Sánchez-Muniz, F.J., Development and assessment of healthy properties of meat and meat products designed as functional foods. Meat Sci. 95:4 (2013), 919–930.
87. Piazza, J., Ruby, M.B., Loughnan, S., Luong, M., Kulik, J., Watkins, H.M., Seigerman, M., Rationalizing meat consumption. The 4Ns. Appetite 91 (2015), 114–128.
88. Pieniak, Z., Verbeke, W., Olsen, S.O., Hansen, K.B., Brunsø, K., Health-related attitudes as a basis for segmenting European fish consumers. Food Policy 35:5 (2010), 448–455.
89. Radnitz, C., Beezhold, B., DiMatteo, J., Investigation of lifestyle choices of individuals following a vegan diet for health and ethical reasons. Appetite 90 (2015), 31–36.
90. Rayner, M., Boaz, A., Higginson, C., Consumer use of health-related endorsements on food labels in the United Kingdom and Australia. J. Nutrition Edu. 33:1 (2001), 24–30.
91. Realini, C.E., Font i Furnols, M., Sañudo, C., Montossi, F., Oliver, M.A., Guerrero, L., Spanish, French and British consumers’ acceptability of Uruguayan beef, and consumers’ beef choice associated with country of origin, finishing diet and meat price. Meat Sci. 95:1 (2013), 14–21.
92. Reed, Z., McIlveen-Farley, H., Strugnell, C., Factors affecting consumer acceptance of chilled ready meals on the island of Ireland. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 27:1 (2003), 2–10.
93. Ripoll-Bosch, R., De Boer, I.J.M., Bernués, A., Vellinga, T.V., Accounting for multi-functionality of sheep farming in the carbon footprint of lamba comparison of three contrasting Mediterranean systems. Agric. Syst. 116 (2013), 60–68.
94. Röös, E., Mat-Klimat-Listamn Version 1.0 (The Food-Climate-List Version 1.0) Report 2012040., 2012, Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala.
95. Röös, E., Ekelund, L., Tjärnemo, H., Communicating the environmental impact of meat productionchallenges in the development of a Swedish meat guide. J. Cleaner Prod. 73 (2014), 154–164.
96. Röös, E., Sundberg, C., Tidåker, P., Strid, I., Hansson, P.A., Can carbon footprint serve as an indicator of the environmental impact of meat production?. Ecol. Ind. 24 (2013), 573–581.
97. Röös, E., Tjärnemo, H., Challenges of carbon labelling of food productsa consumer research perspective. Brit. Food J. 113:8 (2011), 982–996.
98. Ruto, E., Garrod, G., Scarpa, R., Valuing animal genetic resourcesa choice modeling application to indigenous cattle in Kenya. Agri. Econ. 38:1 (2008), 89–98.
99. Säll, S., Gren, M., Effects of an environmental tax on meat and dairy consumption in Sweden. Food Policy 55 (2015), 41–53.
100. Schmeer, K.K., Married women's resource position and household food expenditures in Cebu, Philippines. J. Marriage Family 67:2 (2005), 399–409.
101. Schösler, H., de Boer, J., Boersema, J.J., Fostering more sustainable food choices: Can Self-Determination Theory help?. Food Qual. Prefer. 35 (2014), 59–69.
102. Schösler, H., De Boer, J., Boersema, J.J., Can we cut out the meat of the dish? Constructing consumer-oriented pathways towards meat substitution. Appetite 58:1 (2012), 39–47.
103. Silayoi, P., Speece, M., The importance of packaging attributesa conjoint analysis approach. Eur. J. Mark. 41:11/12 (2007), 1495–1517.
104. Sofi, F., Abbate, R., Gensini, G.F., Casini, A., Accruing evidence on benefits of adherence to the Mediterranean diet on healthan updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Am. J. Clin. Nutrition 92:5 (2010), 1189–1196.
105. Spiller, A., Nitzko, S., 2015. 12. Peak meatthe role of meat in sustainable consumption. InHandbook of Research on Sustainable Consumption, 192.
106. Sutton, C., Dibb, S., 2013. Prime CutsValuing the Meat We Eat. WWF-UK (World Wide Fund For Nature) and the Food Ethics Council, Surrey, UK.
107. Tabi, A., Hille, S.L., Wüstenhagen, R., What makes people seal the green power deal?—Customer segmentation based on choice experiment in Germany. Ecol. Econ. 107 (2014), 206–215.
108. Thøgersen, J., Zhou, Y., Chinese consumers’ adoption of a ‘green’ innovation–the case of organic food. J. Market. Manage. 28:3–4 (2012), 313–333.
109. Thorndike, A.N., Riis, J., Sonnenberg, L.M., Levy, D.E., Traffic-light labels and choice architecture: promoting healthy food choices. Am. J. Prev. Med. 46:2 (2014), 143–149.
110. Thunström, L., Nordström, J., The impact of meal attributes and nudging on healthy meal consumption-evidence from a lunch restaurant field experiment. Modern Econ. 4:10A (2013), 1–8.
111. Tiffin, R., Arnoult, M., The public health impacts of a fat tax. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 65:4 (2011), 427–433.
112. Troy, D.J., Kerry, J.P., Consumer perception and the role of science in the meat industry. Meat Sci. 86:1 (2010), 214–226.
113. Tubiello, F.N., Salvatore, M., Cóndor Golec, R.D., Ferrara, A., Rossi, S., Biancalani, R., Flammin, A., et al. (2014). Agriculture, forestry and other land use emissions by sources and removals by sinks1990–2011 analysis. FAO Statistics Division. Working Paper Series ESS/14-02. < http://www.fao.org/docrep/019/i3671e/i3671e.pdf> (accessed 24.10.14).
114. Tucker, C.A., The significance of sensory appeal for reduced meat consumption. Appetite 81 (2014), 168–179.
115. Tukker, A., Emmert, S., Charter, M., Vezzoli, C., Sto, E., Munch Andersen, M., Lahlou, S., et al. Fostering change to sustainable consumption and productionan evidence based view. J. Cleaner Prod. 16:11 (2008), 1218–1225.
116. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2015. Scientific report of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. < http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015-scientific-report/PDFs/Scientific-Report-of-the-2015-Dietary-Guidelines-Advisory-Committee.pdf> (accessed 13.03.15).
117. van Dooren, C., Marinussen, M., Blonk, H., Aiking, H., Vellinga, P., Exploring dietary guidelines based on ecological and nutritional valuesa comparison of six dietary patterns. Food Policy 44 (2014), 36–46.
118. Van Kleef, E., Dagevos, H., The growing role of front-of-pack nutrition profile labelinga consumer perspective on key issues and controversies. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 55:3 (2015), 291–303.
119. Van Loo, E.J., Caputo, V., Nayga, R.M. Jr., Meullenet, J.F., Ricke, S.C., Consumers’ willingness to pay for organic chicken breastevidence from choice experiment. Food Qual. Prefer. 22:7 (2011), 603–613.
120. Van Loo, E.J., Caputo, V., Nayga, R.M., Verbeke, W., Consumers’ valuation of sustainability labels on meat. Food Policy 49 (2014), 137–150.
121. Van Wezemael, L., Caputo, V., Nayga, R.M., Chryssochoidis, G., Verbeke, W., European consumer preferences for beef with nutrition and health claimsa multi-country investigation using discrete choice experiments. Food Policy 44 (2014), 167–176.
122. Vanhonacker, F., Van Loo, E.J., Gellynck, X., Verbeke, W., Flemish consumer attitudes towards more sustainable food choices. Appetite 62 (2013), 7–16.
123. Verain, M., Dagevos, H., Antonides, G., Flexitarianism a range of sustainable food styles. Reisch, L.A., Thøgersen, J., (eds.) Handbook of Research on Sustainable Consumption, 2015, Edward Elgar Publishing, 209–223.
124. Verbeke, W., Pérez-Cueto, F.J., Barcellos, M.D.D., Krystallis, A., Grunert, K.G., European citizen and consumer attitudes and preferences regarding beef and pork. Meat Sci. 84:2 (2010), 284–292.
125. Vergnaud, A.C., Norat, T., Romaguera, D., Mouw, T., May, A.M., Travier, N., Couto, E., Meat consumption and prospective weight change in participants of the EPIC-PANACEA study. Am. J. Clin. Nutrition 92:2 (2010), 398–407.
126. Westhoek, H., Lesschen, J.P., Rood, T., Wagner, S., De Marco, A., Murphy-Bokern, D., Oenema, O., Food choices, health and environmenteffects of cutting Europe's meat and dairy intake. Glob. Environ. Change 26 (2014), 196–205.
127. Westland, S., Crawley, H., Healthy and Sustainable Diets in the Early Years. 2012, First Steps Nutrition Trust.
128. Wirsenius, S., Azar, C., Berndes, G., How much land is needed for global food production under scenarios of dietary changes and livestock productivity increases in 2030?. Agric. Syst. 103:9 (2010), 621–638.
129. Yadavalli, A., Jones, K., Does media influence consumer demand? The case of lean finely textured beef in the United States. Food Policy 49 (2014), 219–227.