Skip to main content
English Cymraeg
Food and You 2: Wave 8 Key Findings

F&Y2 Wave 8: Chapter 7 Changes to eating habits, meat alternatives and genetic technologies

This chapter provides an overview of respondent knowledge, attitudes and behaviours related to changes in eating habits, meat alternatives and genetic technologies.

Last updated: 17 October 2024
Last updated: 17 October 2024

Introduction

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has a broad remit and plays a major role in increasing the sustainability, productivity and resilience of the agriculture, fishing, food and drink sectors, enhancing biosecurity at the border and raising animal welfare standards. In addition, Defra oversees the regulation of genetic technologies such as genetically modified organisms (GMO), gene edited (GE) organisms and precision bred foods.  

This chapter provides an overview of respondent knowledge, attitudes and behaviours related to changes in eating habits, meat alternatives and genetic technologies.  

Figure 26. Changes respondents had made in the previous 12 months.

Bar chart showing changes respondents had made in the previous 12 months.
Changes made in the previous 12 months Percentage of respondents (%)
Stopped eating meat or poultry or fish completely 2
Started buying foods that have been produced with minimal water usage and / or minimal deforestation 4
Started buying foods grown organically 8
Started buying animal products with high welfare standards 9
Don�t know 13
None of these 6
Started buying fair trade products 8
Started buying foods grown organically 8
Started buying sustainably sourced fish 8
Started buying animal products with high welfare standards 10
Started growing fruit and/or vegetables 12
Eaten/drunk less dairy 13
Started buying locally produced food or food that is in season 22
Started buying foods with minimal or no packaging 23
Eaten less meat, poultry or fish 25
Started eating more fruit and/or vegetables 32
Started minimising food waste 38
Eaten less processed food 43

Download this chart

Source: Food and You 2: Wave 8

Respondents were asked, from a list of options, which, if any changes they had made in the previous 12 months. The most common changes reported by respondents were that they had eaten less processed food (43%) and started minimising food waste (38%). Almost a third of respondents reported that they had started eating more fruit and vegetables (32%). Around a quarter of respondents reported that they had eaten less meat, poultry, or fish (25%), started buying food with minimal or no packaging (23%) and/or started buying locally produced food or food that is in season (22%) in the previous 12 months. However, 6% of respondents reported that they had not made any of the listed changes and 13% of respondents reported that they did not know if they had made any of the listed changes in the previous 12 months (Figure 26) (footnote 1).

Meat, poultry, and fish: changes in consumption habits 

Figure 27. Types of meat, poultry or fish respondents had eaten less of in the previous 12 months.

Bar chart showing types of meat, poultry or fish respondents had eaten less of in the previous 12 months.
Types of meat, poultry or fish Percentge of respondents (%)
Only some types of fish 6
All fish 18
Poultry 36
Processed meat 72
Red meat 86

Download this chart

Source: Food and You 2: Wave 8

Respondents who reported that they had eaten less meat, poultry, or fish in the previous 12 months were asked which types of products the changes related to. Of these respondents, most (86%) had eaten less red meat (for example, beef, pork, or lamb) and 72% had eaten less processed meat (for example, chicken nuggets, ham, bacon) in the previous 12 months. Around a third (36%) reported that they had eaten less poultry and 18% reported that they had eaten less of all types of fish, with 6% eating less of only some types of fish in the previous 12 months (Figure 27) (footnote 2).

Reasons for changes in consumption habits 

Figure 28. Common reasons respondents had eaten less of specified foods in the previous 12 months.

Bar chart showing common reasons respondents had eaten less of specified foods in the previous 12 months.
Reason for eating less of the specified food Fish Poultry Dairy/Eggs Red meat Processed meat Processed foods
Because of concerns about food poisoning 6 11 4 3 9 7
Because other people in my household or my friends have reduced their consumption / don't eat this product 10 11 7 11 11 8
For financial reasons 26 30 8 33 18 15
Because of the bad or unpleasant physical reaction 6 3 25 4 8 9
For animal welfare reasons 26 32 18 24 21 9
Because I wanted a change 10 16 18 14 16 16
For environmental or sustainability reasons 35 31 26 44 27 20
Because of concerns about where the product comes from 28 28 19 18 30 42
For health reasons 18 35 44 59 71 79

Download this chart

Source: Food and You 2: Wave 8   

Respondents who reported that they had eaten less processed food, red meat, processed meat, poultry, fish or dairy and/or eggs in the previous 12 months were asked, which, if any of the given options, was the reason that they had eaten less of that product. The most common reason to have eaten less processed food (79%), processed meat (71%), red meat (59%), dairy and/or eggs (44%) and poultry (35%) was for health reasons (for example, to be more healthy or lose weight). The most common reason to have eaten less fish (35%) was for environmental or sustainability reasons (for example, impact on climate change). Around 3 in 10 respondents reported that they had eaten less red meat (33%), poultry (30%) and/or fish (26%) for financial reasons. Respondents were more likely to report that they had eaten less dairy and/or eggs (25%) because of a bad or unpleasant physical reaction compared to other foods (Figure 28) (footnote 3)

Meat alternatives 

Meat alternatives are meat-free products that may be eaten instead of meat, such as seitan or vegetarian sausages and burgers (for example, Quorn, Linda McCartney, or Beyond Meat products). 

Meat alternative consumption

Respondents were asked if they had ever eaten meat alternatives. Around a quarter (27%) of respondents reported that they currently eat meat alternatives, 22% of respondents reported that they used to eat meat alternatives but no longer do, and 44% of respondents reported that they had never eaten meat alternatives (footnote 4).

Of the respondents who currently eat meat alternatives, 30% reported eating meat alternatives 2-3 times a week or more often (i.e., every day, most days, 2-3 times a week), 43% reported eating meat alternatives occasionally (i.e., about once a week, 2-3 times a month) and 25% reported eating meat alternatives about once a month or less often (footnote 5)
Respondents who reported that they currently eat meat alternatives were asked why they eat meat alternatives from a list of options. The most common reasons were for environmental or sustainability reasons (34%), for health reasons (34%), because they like the taste (33%), and for animal welfare reasons (32%) (footnote 6).

Willingness to try lab-grown meat

‘Lab-grown meat’ is grown in a laboratory from the cells or tissue of a live animal such as a cow, without having to kill the animal.

Respondents were asked if they would like to try including lab-grown meat in their diet if it became available in this country. Almost 3 in 10 (28%) respondents reported that they would like to try lab-grown meat and 60% would not. However, 11% of respondents reported that they didn’t know whether they would like to try including lab-grown meat in their diet (footnote 7).

Awareness of gene-edited (GE) and genetically modified (GM) foods 

Genetically modified foods can be defined as organisms (i.e. plants or animals) in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination.

Precision breeding is a way of changing the DNA of plants or animals in a precise way, using techniques including gene-editing. Gene-editing uses specialised enzymes to cut DNA at specific points. These changes must be equivalent to those that could have been made using traditional plant or animal breeding methods.

Figure 29. Awareness and knowledge of genetically modified (GM), gene-edited/genome-edited (GE), and precision bred food.

Bar chart showing awareness and knowledge of genetically modified (GM), gene-edited/genome-edited (GE), and precision bred food.
Level of awareness and/or knowledge Genetically modified (GM) food Gene-edited/genome-edited (GE) food Precision bred food
Yes, I've heard of it and know quite a lot about it 13 6 3
Yes, I've heard of it and know a bit about it 41 16 6
Yes, I've heard of it but don't know much about it 28 21 10
Yes, I've heard of it but don't know anything about it 8 13 9
No, I've never heard of it 10 45 71

Download this chart

Source: Food and You 2: Wave 8 

Respondents were asked if they had ever heard of genetically modified (GM) food, gene-edited or genome-edited food, and precision bred food. Respondents reported greater awareness and knowledge of genetically modified (GM) food than gene-edited or genome-edited food (GE) and least knowledge of precision bred food. For example, 71% of respondents had never heard of precision bred food, 45% of respondents had never heard of GE food, 10% of respondents had never heard of GM food (Figure 29) (footnote 8).