Hubbry Logo
Meat alternativeMeat alternativeMain
Open search
Meat alternative
Community hub
Meat alternative
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Meat alternative
Meat alternative
Meat alternative
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A tempeh burger
Chinese style tofu from Buddhist cuisine is prepared as an alternative to meat.
Two slices of vegetarian bacon

A meat alternative or meat substitute (also called plant-based meat, mock meat, or alternative protein),[1] is a food product made from vegetarian or vegan ingredients, eaten as a replacement for meat. Meat alternatives typically aim to replicate qualities of whatever type of meat they replace, such as mouthfeel, flavor, and appearance.[2][3][4][5][6][7] Plant- and fungus-based substitutes are frequently made with soy (e.g. tofu, tempeh, and textured vegetable protein), but may also be made from wheat gluten as in seitan, pea protein as in the Beyond Burger, or mycoprotein as in Quorn.[8] Alternative protein foods can also be made by precision fermentation, where single cell organisms such as yeast produce specific proteins using a carbon source; or can be grown by culturing animal cells outside an animal, based on tissue engineering techniques.[9] The ingredients of meat alternative include 50–80% water, 10–25% textured vegetable proteins, 4–20% non-textured proteins, 0–15% fat and oil, 3-10% flavors/spices, 1–5% binding agents and 0–0.5% coloring agents.[10]  

Meatless tissue engineering involves the cultivation of stem cells on natural or synthetic scaffolds to create meat-like products.[11] Scaffolds can be made from various materials, including plant-derived biomaterials, synthetic polymers, animal-based proteins, and self-assembling polypeptides.[12] It is these 3D scaffold-based methods provide a specialized structural environment for cellular growth.[13][14] Alternatively, scaffold-free methods promote cell aggregation, allowing cells to self-organize into tissue-like structures.[15]

Meat alternatives are typically consumed as a source of dietary protein by vegetarians, vegans, and people following religious and cultural dietary laws. However, global demand for sustainable diets has also increased their popularity among non-vegetarians and flexitarians seeking to reduce the environmental impact of animal agriculture.

Meat substitution has a long history. Tofu was invented in China as early as 200 BCE,[16] and in the Middle Ages, chopped nuts and grapes were used as a substitute for mincemeat during Lent.[17] Since the 2010s, startup companies such as Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat have popularized pre-made plant-based substitutes for ground beef, burger patties, and chicken nuggets as commercial products.

History

[edit]
A nut and lentil roast from the Good Health journal, in 1902
Advert for John Harvey Kellogg's Protose meat substitute, 1900
The vegan Beyond Burger from Beyond Meat
Cheeseburger made with a vegan patty from Impossible Burger

Tofu, a meat alternative made from soybeans, was invented in China during the Han dynasty (206 BC–220 CE).[16] Drawings of tofu production have been discovered in a Han dynasty tomb.[16][18] Its use as a meat alternative is recorded in a document written by Tao Gu (simplified Chinese: 陶谷; traditional Chinese: 陶穀; pinyin: Táo Gǔ, 903–970). Tao describes how tofu was popularly known as "small mutton" (Chinese: 小宰羊; pinyin: xiǎo zǎiyáng), which shows that the Chinese valued tofu as an imitation meat.[16] Tofu was widely consumed during the Tang dynasty (618–907), and likely spread to Japan during the later Tang or early Song dynasty.[16]

In the third century CE, Athenaeus describes a preparation of mock anchovy in his work Deipnosophistae:[19]

He took a female turnip, shred it fine
Into the figure of the delicate fish;
Then did he pour on oil and savoury salt
With careful hand in due proportion.
On that he strew'd twelve grains of poppy seed,
Food which the Scythians love; then boil'd it all.
And when the turnip touch'd the royal lips,
Thus spake the king to the admiring guests:
"A cook is quite as useful as a poet,
And quite as wise, and these anchovies show it."

Wheat gluten has been documented in China since the sixth century.[20] The oldest reference to wheat gluten appears in the Qimin Yaoshu, a Chinese agricultural encyclopedia written by Jia Sixie (Chinese: 賈思勰; pinyin: Jiǎsīxié) in 535.[16] The encyclopedia mentions noodles prepared from wheat gluten called bo duo.[20] Wheat gluten was known as mian jin (Chinese: 麵筋; pinyin: Miànjīn) by the Song dynasty (960–1279).

Before the arrival of Buddhism, northern China was predominantly a meat-consuming culture. The vegetarian dietary laws of Buddhism led to development of meat substitutes as a replacement for the meat-based dishes that the Chinese were no longer able to consume as Buddhists. Meat alternatives such as tofu and wheat gluten are still associated with Buddhist cuisine in China and other parts of East Asia.[21] Meat alternatives were also popular in medieval Europe during Lent, which prohibited the consumption of warm-blooded animals, eggs, and dairy products. Chopped almonds and grapes were used as a substitute for mincemeat. Diced bread was made into imitation cracklings and greaves.[17]

John Harvey Kellogg developed meat replacements variously from nuts, grains, and soy, starting around 1877, to feed patients in his vegetarian Battle Creek Sanitarium.[22] Kellogg's Sanitas Nut Food Company sold his meat substitute Protose, made from peanuts and wheat gluten. It became Kellogg's most popular product as several thousand tons had been consumed by 1930.[22]

There was an increased interest in meat substitutes during the late 19th century and first half of the 20th century.[23] Prior to 1950, interest in plant-based meat substitutes came from vegetarians searching for alternatives to meat protein for ethical reasons, and regular meat-eaters who were confronted with food shortages during World War I and World War II.[23]

Lentils were used at the turn of the century. In 1897, Food, Home and Garden published a positive review of London's vegetarian restaurants, claiming, "For fivepence one could get a lentil cutlet, which was very appetizing, and looked like a meat croquette".[24]

Henrietta Latham Dwight authored a vegetarian cookbook, The Golden Age Cook-Book, in 1898 that included meat substitute recipes such as a "mock chicken" recipe made from breadcrumbs, eggs, lemon juice and walnuts and a "mock clam soup" made from marrowfat beans and cream.[25] Dietitian Sarah Tyson Rorer authored the cookbook Mrs. Rorer's Vegetable Cookery and Meat Substitutes in 1909.[25] The book includes a mock veal roast recipe made from lentils, breadcrumbs and peanuts.[25] In 1943, Kellogg made his first soy-based meat analog, called Soy Protose, which contained 32% soy.[22] In 1945, Mildred Lager commented that soybeans "are the best meat substitute from the vegetable kingdom, they will always be used to a great extent by the vegetarian in place of meat."[26]

In July 2016, Impossible Foods launched the Impossible Burger, a beef substitute which claims to offer appearance, taste and cooking properties similar to meat.[27] In April 2019, Burger King partnered with Impossible Foods to launch the plant-based Impossible Whopper, which was released nationwide later that year,[28] becoming one of the most successful product launches in Burger King's history.[29] By October 2019, restaurants, such as Carl's Jr., Hardee's, A&W, Dunkin' Donuts, and KFC were selling plant-based meat products.[30] Nestlé entered the plant-based burger market in 2019 with the introduction of the "Awesome Burger".[31] Kellogg's Morningstar Farms brand tested its Incogmeato line of plant-based protein products in early September 2019, with plans for a US-wide rollout in early 2020.[32]

Types

[edit]
See also: List of meat substitutes, Milk substitute, and Egg substitute
A vegan faux-meat pie, containing soy protein and mushrooms, from an Australian bakery

Some vegetarian meat alternatives are based on centuries-old recipes for seitan (wheat gluten), rice, mushrooms, legumes, tempeh, yam flour or pressed-tofu, with flavoring added to make the finished product taste like chicken, beef, lamb, ham, sausage, seafood, etc. Other alternatives use modified defatted peanut flour, yuba and textured vegetable protein (TVP); yuba and TVP are both soy-based meat alternatives, the former made by layering the thin skin which forms on top of boiled soy milk,[33] and the latter being a dry bulk commodity derived from soy and soy protein concentrate. Some meat alternatives include mycoprotein, such as Quorn which usually uses egg white as a binder. Another type of single cell protein-based meat alternative (which does not use fungi however but rather bacteria[34]) is Calysta.

Production and composition

[edit]
A plant-based pulled pork vendor demonstrating its texture

To produce meat alternatives with a meat-like texture, two approaches can be followed: bottom-up and top-down.[35] With bottom-up structuring, individual fibers are made separately and then assembled into larger products. An example of a meat alternative made using a bottom-up strategy is cultured meat. The top-down approach, on the other hand, induces a fibrous structure by deforming the material, resulting in fibrousness on a larger length scale. An example of a top-down technique is food extrusion.

Both bottom-up and top-down processing can be used alone or in combination to offer various benefits. As discussed later, different meat alternative products have varying nutritional values.[36] A notable advantage of the bottom-up approach is its ability to provide precise control over the composition and characteristics of the end product, allowing for optimized nutritional profiles. On the other hand, meat alternatives produced by top-down approaches may have limited malleability but are more scalable and can utilize available agricultural resources and infrastructure effectively.[37] According to a study by Wageningen University & Research titled "Structuring Processes for Meat Analogues," Techniques that follow the bottom-up strategy have the potential to resemble the structure of meat most closely.".[38] A cross-national survey conducted among meat-eaters with varying degrees of meat alternative consumption showed that those who consumed higher quantities of meat were more willing to switch to meat alternatives if they resembled authentic meat more accurately. Which can be accomplished through bottom-up approaches. The study concludes that sensory experience plays a crucial role in utilizing plant-based alternatives for heavy meat eaters.[39]

The types of ingredients that can be used to create meat substitutes is expanding, from companies like Plentify, which are using high-protein bacteria found in the human microbiome,[40] to companies like Meati Foods, that are cultivating the mycelium of fungi—in this case, Neurospora crassa—to form steaks, chicken breasts, or fish.[41][42]

Soy protein isolates or soybean flour and gluten are usually used as foundation for most meat substitutes that are available on the market. Soy protein isolate is a highly pure form of soy protein with a minimum protein content of 90%. The process of extracting the protein from the soybeans starts with the dehulling, or decortication, of the seeds. The seeds are then treated with solvents such as hexane to extract the oil from them. The oil-free soybean meal is then suspended in water and treated with alkali to dissolve the protein while leaving behind the carbohydrates. The alkaline solution is then treated with acidic substances to precipitate the protein, before being washed and dried. The removal of fats and carbohydrates results in a product that has a relatively neutral flavor.[43] Soy protein is also considered a "complete protein" as it contains all of the essential amino acids that are crucial for proper human growth and development.[44]

After the textured base material is obtained, a number of flavorings can be used to give a meaty flavor to the product. The recipe for a basic vegan chicken flavor is known since 1972, exploiting the Maillard reaction to produce aromas from simple chemicals.[45] Later understanding of the source of aroma in cooked meat also found lipid oxidation and thiamine breakdown to be important processes. By using more complex starting materials such as yeast extract (considered a natural flavoring in the EU), hydrolyzed vegetable protein, various fermented foods, and spices, these reactions are also replicated during cooking to produce richer and more convincing meat flavors.[46][47]

Commerce

[edit]
In 2020, the world retail value of meat substitutes was 10.9% of the combined meat and substitutes market. The remaining 89.1% was meat.[48]
Average price of meat substitutes worldwide from 2013 to 2021 with projections to 2026. Includes vegetarian and vegan meat substitutes.[49] Projection made in October 2021. Prices were converted to USD using average exchange rates of the first year.[50][clarification needed]

Meat substitutes represent around 11% of the world's meat and substitutes market in 2020. As shown in the graph, this market share is different from region to region.[48] From 2013 to 2021, the world average price of meat substitutes fell continuously, by an overall 33%. The only exception was a 0.3% increase in 2020, compared to 2019. The price will continue to decrease, according to projections by Statista (see average price graph).[49] Meat substitutes are often priced higher than comparable meat products, but the price can vary depending on product characteristics such as credence attributes or main ingredients.[51]

The motivation for seeking out meat substitutes varies among consumers.[52] The market for meat alternatives is highly dependent on "meat-reducers", who are primarily motivated by health consciousness and weight management. Consumers who identify as vegan, vegetarian or pescetarian are more likely to endorse concerns regarding animal welfare and environmentalism as primary motivators.[53][54] Additionally, some cultural beliefs and religions place prohibitions on consuming some or all animal products, including Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Jainism, and Buddhism.

Vegan meats are consumed in restaurants, grocery stores, bakeries, vegan school meals, and in homes. The sector for plant-based meats grew by 37% in North America over 2017–18.[55] In 2018–19, sales of plant-based meats in the United States were $895 million,[56] with the global market for meat alternatives forecast to be $140 billion by 2029.[57] Seeking a healthy alternative to meat, curiosity, and trends toward veganism were drivers for the meat alternative market in 2019.[58] Sales of plant-based meats increased during the COVID-19 pandemic.[59] The book The End of Animal Farming by Jacy Reese Anthis argues that plant-based food and cultured meat will completely replace animal-based food by 2100.[60]

Impact

[edit]

Environmental

[edit]

Besides ethical and health motivations, developing better meat alternatives has the potential to reduce the environmental impact of meat production, an important concern given that the global demand for meat products is predicted to increase by 15 percent by 2031. Research on meats and no-meat substitutes suggests that no-meat products can offer substantial benefits over the production of beef, and to a lesser extent pork and chicken, in terms of greenhouse gas production, water and land use.[8] A 2022 report from the Boston Consulting Group found that investment in improving and scaling up the production of meat and dairy alternatives leads to big greenhouse gas reductions compared with other investments.[61]

According to The Good Food Institute, improving efficiency of the Western diet is crucial for achieving sustainability.[62] As the global population grows, the way land is used will be reconsidered. 33% of the habitable land on Earth is used to support animals. Of all the land used for agriculture, 77% is used on animal agriculture even though this sector only supplies 17% of the total food supply. Plant-based meat can use a potential 47–99% less land than conventional meat does, freeing up more opportunities for production. Of the total water used in global agriculture, 33% goes to animal agriculture while it could be used for drinking water or other growing purposes under a different strategy. Plant-based meat uses 72–99% less water than conventional meat production.[62]

Pollution is the next largest contribution to wasted water. Pesticides used in animal feed production as well as waste runoff into reservoirs can cause ecological damage and even human illness as well as taking water directly out of the usable supply. Animal agriculture is the main contributor to the food sector greenhouse gas emissions. Production of plant-based meat alternatives emits 30–90% less than conventional meat production.[63] While also contributing less to this total pollution, much of the land being used for animal feed could be used to mitigate the negative effects we've already had on the planet through carbon recycling, soil conservation, and renewable energy production.[62] In addition to the ecological harm caused by the current industry, excess antibiotics given to animals cause resistant microbes that may render some of the life-saving drugs used in human medicine useless. Plant-based meat requires no antibiotics and would greatly reduce microbe antibiotic resistance.[62]

A 2023 study published in Nature Communications found that replacing just half of the beef, chicken, dairy and pork products consumed by the global population with plant-based alternatives could reduce the amount of land used by agriculture by almost a third, bring deforestation for agriculture nearly to a halt, help restore biodiversity through rewilding the land and reduce GHG emissions from agriculture by 31% in 2050, paving a clearer path to achieving both climate and biodiversity goals.[64][65][66] The switch to plant-based protein is reported to deliver the biggest climate-heating emission cuts per investment dollar of all industrial sectors.[67]

Health

[edit]

Meat alternatives have lower amounts of saturated fat, vitamin B12 and zinc than meat products but higher amounts of carbohydrates, dietary fibre, sodium, iron and calcium.[68][69] Meat alternatives are rated as ultra-processed foods under the Nova classification, but when the UK nutritional profiling system is used, not all products classified as ultra-processed are rated as unhealthy.[70]

In 2021, the American Heart Association stated that there is "limited evidence on the short- and long-term health effects" of plant-based meat alternatives.[71] The same year, the World Health Organization stated that there are "significant knowledge gaps in the nutritional composition" of meat alternatives and more research is needed to investigate their health impacts.[72]

A 2023 review concluded that replacing red and highly-processed meat with a variety of meat alternatives improved quality-adjusted life years, led to significant health system savings and reduced greenhouse gas emissions; replacement of meat with minimally-processed vegetarian alternatives, such as legumes had the greatest effect.[73] Another review found that meat alternatives are likely to be healthier than meat products and more environmentally friendly but are more expensive.[74]

A 2024 review found that plant-based meat alternatives have the potential to be healthier than animal source foods and have smaller environmental footprints.[75]

A comprehensive study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2024 shows that processed plant-based substitutes such as veggie burgers improve nutrition compared to animal products, but less than unprocessed plant-based foods; they offer significant health benefits over meat, but are not as nutritious and balanced as unprocessed alternatives.[76]

Criticism

[edit]

Dietitians have claimed foods made by companies like Beyond Meat are not necessarily healthier than meat due to their highly processed nature and sodium content.[77][78] However, among ultra-processed foods, consumption of the "plant-based alternatives" subcategory is associated with decreased risks of cardiometabolic diseases.[79]

John Mackey, co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods, and Brian Niccol, CEO of Chipotle Mexican Grill, have criticized meat alternatives as ultra-processed foods. Chipotle has claimed it will not carry these products at their restaurants due to their highly processed nature. CNBC wrote in 2019 of Chipotle joining "the likes of Taco Bell ... and Arby's in committing to excluding meatless meats on its menu."[80] In response, Beyond Meat invited Niccol to visit its manufacturing site to see the production process.[80] Chipotle later developed its own "plant-based chorizo".[81][82] In September 2022, Taco Bell also began adding plant-based meat alternatives to its menu.[83]

Some consulting firms and analysts demand more transparency in terms of the environmental impact of plant-based meat.[84] Through a survey, analysts from Deloitte discovered that some consumers negatively linked meat alternatives to being "woke" and politically-left leaning.[85] These ideas emerged in response to Cracker Barrel's introduction of Impossible Sausages in their restaurants in August, 2022.[86] In 2021, 68% of consumers who purchased plant based meats believed it was healthier than animal meat. The number dropping to 60% in 2022, demonstrating a decline in consumers beliefs in the healthiness of these meats.[85]

Some states have instituted legislation stating that meat alternatives are not allowed to label themselves as "meat". In Louisiana, the so-called, "Truth in Labeling of Food Products Act" was challenged by Tofurky, complaining of free speech violations[87] and was successful on those grounds.[88]

Alternative meats companies Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods have attempted to appeal to meat eaters. University of Oregon marketing professor Steffen Jahn thinks that this has run afoul of human psychology, saying "the mimicking of real meat introduces that comparison of authenticity."[59] Jahn argues that marketing plant-based meats with traditional meats leads to an artificiality that many consumers do not love. Consumer psychologists split foods into categories of "virtue" and "vice" foods, which ultimately guide how products are marketed and sold. Virtue foods are those that less gratifying appealing in the short term, and typically healthier, whereas vice foods are the opposite, having more long term consequences.[89] Many ready-made meat alternatives combine these categories with their long list of ingredients. Consumers who are likely to want to be "virtuous" by avoiding damage to the environment or animals are also likely to want "virtuous" food in the form of simple ingredients.[59]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Meat alternative

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
![Beyond Meat burger][float-right]
Meat alternatives are processed food products formulated to mimic the sensory attributes—such as , texture, and appearance—of derived from animals, primarily through the use of plant-sourced proteins including soy, peas, wheat gluten, and , often combined with fats, binders, flavor enhancers, and colorants to achieve similarity. These substitutes encompass a range of formats from analogs to whole cuts, with historical precedents in ancient Asian innovations like and dating back over a millennium, though contemporary Western developments accelerated in the mid-20th century with textured vegetable proteins and escalated in the via technologies enabling closer replication of fibrous muscle structure. Despite marketed for environmental —evidenced by meta-analyses showing plant-based variants typically emitting 50% fewer gases than equivalents—and advantages like reduced and , nutritional comparisons reveal shortcomings including inferior protein digestibility, elevated sodium content, and reliance on additives, with metabolomic profiles differing substantially from grass-fed despite comparable labeling. Market growth, which surged post-2019 with companies like achieving high valuations, has decelerated sharply, with U.S. retail dropping 7.5% year-over-year through mid-2025 amid consumer reports of suboptimal taste and texture, pricing premiums, and doubts over long-term viability, while global projections anticipate modest annual expansion to $11.34 billion by year's end. Emerging categories like mycelium-based and cultivated cell meats promise further but face scalability barriers and higher production costs, underscoring that while technological feats have broadened accessibility, causal factors such as entrenched dietary preferences and incomplete substitution for 's nutritional completeness limit widespread displacement of products.

History

Pre-20th century origins

The development of meat alternatives in pre-20th century stemmed primarily from religious imperatives within , which prohibited the consumption of animal flesh to avoid harm to sentient beings and promote compassion. Chinese Buddhist monks innovated plant-based substitutes to replicate the texture and nutritional role of , using available staples like soybeans and . This first-principles approach addressed protein scarcity in vegetarian diets through empirical trial, fermenting or coagulating plant proteins into firm, versatile forms suitable for cooking. Tofu, a coagulated soy milk product, represents one of the earliest documented meat substitutes, with traditions attributing its invention to the around 206 BCE–9 CE, though the first textual reference appears in 965 AD in the Chinese document Ch'ing I Lu. Produced by curdling with a coagulant like nigari, tofu provided a neutral, absorbent base that could be seasoned to mimic various meats, fulfilling dietary needs during monastic . Similarly, wheat gluten, known as miàn jīn, emerged in by the 6th century AD, created by washing dough to isolate elastic protein strands, which were then flavored and shaped into meat-like preparations for . In , arose as a fermented cake, likely originating in before 1800, possibly as early as the , through natural mold that bound beans into a solid, nutritious patty. While not exclusively tied to , served as a practical protein source in resource-limited tropical environments, offering a chewy texture akin to meat without reliance on . These innovations persisted through manual processes, driven by necessity rather than industrialization. European precedents were less focused on textural mimicry and more on caloric substitution during religious fasts like , where warm-blooded meats were forbidden from the onward. Communities relied on , nuts, and grains—such as porridges or pastes—but lacked the protein isolation techniques of , often supplementing with permitted or amid scarcity from famines or sieges.

20th century advancements

In the mid-1960s, the British company (RHM) initiated research into fungal protein production to address anticipated global protein shortages, selecting the fungus strain A3/5 for its rapid growth and high protein yield via continuous processes. This mycoprotein precursor demonstrated efficient conversion of carbohydrates into biomass with a protein content exceeding 45% on a dry basis, offering a scalable alternative to animal-derived proteins through controlled aerobic cultivation. The approach emphasized principles, such as optimizing shear and temperature in fermenters to mimic meat's fibrous texture, independent of later ideological drivers. Parallel advancements occurred in soy-based textured vegetable protein (TVP), invented via extrusion by Archer Daniels Midland in the 1960s, which applied high shear and heat to defatted soy flour to create fibrous, rehydratable structures nutritionally comparable to ground meat, with protein levels around 50%. This technology enabled low-cost production for applications including space food evaluation by NASA, where TVP's stability and compactness were tested for long-duration missions, and famine relief efforts. Extrusion parameters, such as temperatures of 140–180°C and moisture contents of 20–30%, were refined to enhance digestibility and reduce anti-nutritional factors like trypsin inhibitors in soy, facilitating broader adoption in fortified foods. By the 1970s, early extruded plant proteins, predominantly soy isolates, underwent field trials in developing nations to assess nutritional equivalence to animal proteins, with studies showing protein efficiency ratios approaching 2.0–2.5 when supplemented with limiting like . These efforts, often supported by international agencies, prioritized causal factors like improved protein structuring for better over alone, though challenges in sensory acceptance persisted due to beany flavors from residual activity. Such developments underscored extrusion's role in industrial scalability, yielding products with meat-like water-holding capacities exceeding 300% upon rehydration.

Modern commercialization (2000s–2010s)

In the 2000s and 2010s, meat alternatives transitioned from marginal products to investor-driven ventures focused on engineering sensory replication of animal meat through , flavor compounds, and structural analogs, supported by rising patent activity in plant-based formulations. , founded in 2009 by Ethan Brown, pioneered pea protein-based patties designed to mimic beef's chewiness and juiciness, launching the Beyond Burger in May 2016 as its first major retail product. The company's approach emphasized simple plant ingredients to achieve meat-like cooking behavior, drawing early funding from investors including to scale production. Impossible Foods, established in July 2011 by biochemist , advanced this trend with the Impossible Burger, debuted in July 2016 at select restaurants, incorporating genetically engineered soy leghemoglobin to produce that enables a bleeding effect, sizzle, and akin to cooked beef. The U.S. granted a no-objection letter in July 2018 for the ingredient's safety in ground beef analogs, followed by full approval as a color additive in July 2019 after petition review, clearing hurdles for uncooked retail sales. Venture capital inflows accelerated commercialization, with U.S. plant-based meat startups securing approximately $2.7 billion from 2010 to early 2020, much of it concentrated in the late to fund facilities and distribution. Partnerships with fast-food giants exemplified scaling; tested a plant-based burger using patties in 28 Canadian locations starting September 30, 2019, marking a push into high-volume channels. Marketing evolved from niche appeals to vegetarians and health seekers toward mainstream narratives of , highlighting reduced land and water use compared to , which broadened consumer adoption beyond ethical or dietary niches. This reframing, evident in product launches and investor pitches, aligned with growing public concern over meat production's environmental footprint, facilitating shelf space in major grocers like and by the decade's end.

Recent developments (2020s)

In the United States, retail sales of plant-based alternatives peaked around 2019–2020 before entering a sustained decline amid cooling consumer demand and economic pressures. Dollar sales fell 7.5% to $1.13 billion for the 52 weeks ending April 20, 2025, while unit sales dropped 10%, per market tracking data. This followed earlier contractions, with 2024 seeing a 7% dollar sales decrease and 11% unit sales drop for plant-based and categories. Such trends reflected broader category challenges, including price sensitivity and from conventional proteins, contrasting with pre-2020 growth narratives from industry advocates. Manufacturers responded by emphasizing hybrid formulations that blend plant-based components with animal-derived to enhance appeal and affordability. These products, which combine varying ratios of proteins with conventional for improved texture and nutrition, saw rising adoption; the global hybrid meat market valued $2.5 billion in recent estimates, with a projected 10% through the mid-2030s. Examples include blends displacing portions of with ingredients to optimize flavor and cost, as explored by firms like . This pivot aimed to address pure plant-based limitations without fully abandoning animal proteins. Cultured meat advanced regulatorily but faced persistent scalability hurdles. The US Food and Drug Administration issued "no questions" letters for chicken cell lines from in November 2022 and Good Meat in March 2023, affirming safety data; the USDA followed with production and labeling approvals in June 2023, enabling limited restaurant sales in select states. Despite these milestones, high production costs—estimated at $63 per in 2025 analyses—continued to limit commercial viability, far exceeding conventional meat prices due to expenses and media requirements. Innovations like cost reductions to €7 per at scale by firms such as Gourmey offered promise but did not yet resolve economic barriers for mass-market entry.

Types

Plant-based alternatives

Plant-based meat alternatives are formulated from proteins derived from plants such as soy, peas, , and to replicate the appearance, texture, flavor, and of animal-derived meat, without incorporating animal cells or employing cellular cultivation methods. These products dominate the meat substitute category, with the global plant-based meat market valued at USD 7.17 billion in 2023, far outpacing other emerging types like cultivated meat, which remain in early pilot stages with negligible commercial sales. Soy protein, often in the form of soy protein concentrate or , has historically been a primary due to its functional properties and availability; for instance, the Impossible Burger relies on as its main protein source. Pea protein isolate has gained prominence in recent formulations for its neutral flavor and high protein content, serving as the core protein in Beyond Meat's burger patties alongside rice and lentil proteins. gluten, known for its elasticity, is commonly blended with other proteins to enhance binding and chewiness in products like seitan-based analogs. To mimic the fibrous texture of muscle , proteins are processed using techniques such as high-moisture , which applies shear and to align protein molecules into anisotropic, string-like structures. This method, distinct from dry used for rehydratable chunks, enables the production of juicy, shreddable mimics suitable for burgers, sausages, and alternatives. Common commercial examples include - and soy-based patties, ground crumbles, and links, which together account for the bulk of plant-based offerings on the market.

Fermentation-derived proteins

Fermentation-derived proteins encompass microbial processes that produce protein-rich or targeted molecules for use in meat alternatives, distinct from direct extraction or cell cultivation. fermentation involves cultivating fungi or in large-scale bioreactors to generate whole-cell protein matrices, yielding products with inherent fibrous textures that mimic 's structure. A prominent example is , derived from the fungus through continuous submerged using glucose or feedstocks, followed by harvesting, to kill cells, and mechanical processing to align hyphal filaments for texture. Commercialized by Foods since the 1980s, contains approximately 45-50% protein by dry weight, along with for and beta-glucans for potential health benefits, and is incorporated into products like patties and nuggets. Precision fermentation, by contrast, employs genetically engineered microorganisms—such as or —to biosynthesize specific animal-like proteins, enabling precise replication of functional attributes like flavor or binding. For instance, soy (), produced via engineered pastoris yeast, imparts a meaty "bleeding" effect and taste in plant-hybrid burgers, as utilized by since 2016. Other applications include or mimics for analogs adaptable to formulations, and emerging proteins like or analogs to enhance gelation and marbling in alt-meats. These processes occur in controlled fermenters at scales up to thousands of liters, with downstream purification via and , though they demand significant energy for aeration, temperature control, and sterility. While fermentation-derived proteins constitute a growing but minor segment of the alternative protein market—estimated at under 5% of commercial meat substitutes as of 2023 due to scaling hurdles—their modularity supports hybrid applications, blending with plant bases for improved sensory profiles. Scalability relies on bioreactor advancements, yet high capital costs and feedstock dependencies limit widespread adoption compared to plant extrusion methods. Regulatory approvals, such as FDA clearance for heme in 2019, have facilitated market entry, though allergenicity from fungal sources and novel protein safety remain under scrutiny in peer-reviewed assessments.

Cultured or cell-based meat

, also termed cell-based or cultivated meat, is produced by extracting stem cells—typically muscle satellite cells—from a living animal via a small and expanding them to form muscle, fat, and connective tissues that replicate the composition of conventional meat. These cells proliferate in bioreactors, large vessels providing a sterile, temperature-controlled environment with nutrient media containing , vitamins, sugars, and growth factors to sustain division and differentiation without the animal host. Unlike plant-based substitutes, this method yields tissue with identical cellular and molecular profiles to animal-derived meat, including myofibrils and animal-specific proteins like , ensuring biological equivalence in structure and function. Scaffolding techniques enhance structural fidelity by offering a three-dimensional matrix for cell attachment and organization, mimicking the extracellular framework of natural muscle where fibers align to produce texture and chewiness. Edible scaffolds, often derived from or plant , support multilayered tissue growth up to several millimeters thick, addressing limitations of two-dimensional cultures that fail to replicate 's hierarchical architecture. Cell differentiation into mature components occurs under controlled conditions, such as mechanical tension or biochemical signals, yielding products genetically and biochemically indistinguishable from slaughtered . The first U.S. regulatory milestone came on November 16, 2022, when the FDA completed its pre-market consultation for ' cell-cultivated , confirming safety in cell sourcing, media, and final product. This was followed by USDA approval on June 21, 2023, enabling limited commercial sales of produced from stem cells. As it derives directly from cells harboring the source organism's DNA and proteome, does not qualify as vegan, distinguishing it from non- proxies despite shared goals of reducing reliance. Projections indicate the global market could expand to $6.9 billion by 2030 from $246.9 million in 2022, contingent on scaling and media cost reductions to approach parity with conventional pricing. Achieving broader adoption requires overcoming proliferation yields currently limited to grams per liter in pilot systems, though advances in show potential for kilogram-scale outputs.

Other emerging types

Insect-based alternatives, such as (Acheta domesticus) flour incorporated into patties, offer high protein content and have been tested as partial replacers, with up to 10% substitution in patties yielding viable texture and reduced cooking loss. These products leverage ' nutritional density, including essential and micronutrients like and iron, but empirical sensory trials show limited viability for direct consumption due to off-flavors and visual aversion. While sustainability analyses highlight lower resource demands compared to —requiring 10 times less feed for equivalent protein—insect proteins exhibit less than 1% globally, constrained by regulatory hurdles and cultural resistance in major markets. Algal proteins derived from microalgae, such as or Spirulina, are emerging for meat analogs owing to their complete profiles and rapid biomass growth, enabling up to 50% protein yields under controlled cultivation. Studies position them as sustainable options with 90% lower land use than soy, though processing challenges like bitter tastes and fibrous textures necessitate blending with binders for analog formation. acceptability remains niche, with pilot integrations into burgers showing nutritional enhancements but insufficient sensory appeal for broad substitution, mirroring low adoption rates akin to . 3D-printed hybrids merge these sources—e.g., or algal matrices with scaffolds—to engineer fibrous structures mimicking muscle, as demonstrated in extrusion-based prototypes achieving 80% shape fidelity post-printing. Viability trials confirm potential for customized delivery, with algal-ink prints retaining bioactive compounds better than traditional molding. Despite academic emphasis on for —projecting 75% reductions versus —consumer panels report persistent "yuck factor" barriers, limiting these to speculative rather than commercial scales with negligible current market share.

Production and composition

Key ingredients and sourcing

Soy protein isolates and concentrates, derived from defatted , serve as primary protein sources in many meat alternatives due to their high and emulsification properties. These are predominantly sourced from farms in and , which together account for over 80% of global exports; 's production reached 169 million metric tons in the 2024/25 season, with significant expansion linked to of over 794,000 hectares in supply chain-associated areas from 2020 to recent years. Pea protein isolates, favored for allergen-free profiles and neutral flavor, originate mainly from field peas grown in , the , and , where the plant-based sector's demand is projected to consume up to 34% of global pea production by 2030, heightening reliance on yield stability amid variable weather patterns. Wheat gluten, extracted from via wet milling, provides elastic texture and is sourced from major grain belts in the U.S., EU, and , often as a complementary binder in soy-pea blends. Lipids for fat , essential for juiciness and marbling effects, commonly include , , and , selected for their saturation levels that yield semi-solid states at . , prevalent in products like burgers, is harvested from tropical plantations in and the , while draws from Southeast Asian estates prone to habitat conversion pressures. Binders such as methylcellulose, a chemically modified from wood pulp or linters, enable gelation and moisture retention during ; it is industrially produced via treatment and etherification processes. Flavor additives, including yeast extracts from autolyzed , are manufactured through industrial fermentation and to deliver via glutamates and nucleotides, masking beany off-notes from proteins. These ingredients predominantly derive from large-scale agricultural monocultures, rendering supply chains susceptible to disruptions from droughts, pests, and geopolitical factors, as evidenced by soy yield volatility in during recent La Niña events. For fermentation-derived alternatives, proteins like precision-fermented rely on microbial cultures fed glucose from corn or , tying back to similar dependencies. production sources animal stem cells initially from biopsies but scales via nutrient media with plant-derived and sugars, amplifying agricultural inputs.

Manufacturing processes

High-moisture extrusion (HME) represents the dominant engineering technique for fabricating fibrous textures in plant-based meat alternatives, enabling the alignment of plant proteins into anisotropic structures that mimic muscle fibers. In this process, a hydrated protein matrix—typically comprising soy, pea, or wheat isolates with moisture levels exceeding 50%—is processed through a twin-screw extruder under controlled conditions of high temperature (140–180°C), pressure (up to 10 MPa), and shear rates (200–1000 s⁻¹), followed by rapid cooling to induce protein denaturation and fiber formation. This thermomechanical treatment disrupts protein aggregates, promotes cross-linking via disulfide bonds and hydrogen interactions, and yields products with directional tensile strength comparable to animal meat, as patented in early food science applications for textured vegetable proteins. To replicate juiciness and marbling, emulsification techniques are integrated, wherein phases (e.g., oils or structured fats) are stabilized within the protein matrix using high-shear mixing or co-extrusion, preventing during cooking and enhancing moisture retention through interfacial tension control. These methods, often rooted in patents for fat analogs, involve homogenizers operating at 10,000–20,000 rpm to form stable emulsions with droplet sizes below 10 μm, improving sensory attributes like succulence without compromising shelf-stability via added stabilizers such as methylcellulose. Shelf-life extension further relies on post-extrusion steps like (at 72–85°C for 15–30 seconds) and under modified atmospheres to inhibit microbial growth, achieving refrigerated stability of 7–21 days. Commercial scaling transitions these lab-scale processes to continuous production lines, as exemplified by Beyond Meat's expansion to a 90,000-square-foot facility in , by 2019, where multiple extrusion units produce woven protein fibers at rates exceeding 10 tons per day through automated dough preparation, , and cutting. demands in dominate , with specific consumption of 200–400 kWh per ton due to heating elements, screw drives, and cooling systems—levels akin to extruded snacks or cereals but elevated relative to handling, which avoids such intensive structuring.

Nutritional profile

Plant-based meat alternatives generally provide 15–25 grams of protein per standard serving (e.g., a 113-gram ), approaching the protein density of lean (around 22 grams per similar serving) but often with incomplete profiles reliant on combinations of , soy, or proteins. These products derive protein from plant sources, which can exhibit lower digestibility compared to animal proteins due to factors like anti-nutritional compounds such as trypsin inhibitors. They typically contain 2–5 grams of per serving from ingredients like and , a absent in unprocessed animal meats, alongside lower (often under 5 grams per serving) but higher carbohydrates and added sugars in some formulations. Sodium levels are commonly elevated for flavor and texture, averaging 400–500 milligrams per serving—substantially higher than in unseasoned (around 70 milligrams). Micronutrient profiles show total iron content often comparable to or exceeding (e.g., 20–25% daily value per serving in fortified products), yet is reduced because plant-based iron is predominantly non-, with absorption hindered by phytates and oxalates, unlike the highly absorbable iron in . follows a similar pattern: higher total amounts in many alternatives (e.g., from ) but lower fractional absorption (estimated 15–25% vs. 30–40% from ) due to similar inhibitors. Vitamin , absent in plant-derived foods without , is added to many commercial meat alternatives (e.g., 100–250% daily value per serving via ), but absorption rates decline with dose—approximately 50% for low amounts but dropping to under 1% for milligram levels—potentially limiting efficacy compared to natural B12 in animal products. Untargeted analysis of a popular plant-based burger versus grass-fed , despite aligned Facts panels for macros, identified a 90% difference in metabolite abundances, encompassing , , and bioactive compounds with implications for nuanced nutritional value.

Health effects

Claimed benefits and supporting evidence

Proponents of meat alternatives claim they offer health advantages over animal-derived primarily due to reduced content and absence of dietary , which may contribute to improved profiles when substituted in diets. Plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs) typically contain lower levels of saturated fats—often sourced from or palm oils in processed forms—compared to or , potentially mitigating elevations in () associated with high intake. A randomized crossover , the SWAP-MEAT study involving 36 healthy adults, found that replacing animal with PBMAs for eight weeks led to a statistically significant reduction in LDL by approximately 10 mg/dL, alongside decreases in N-oxide (TMAO) and body weight, though these changes were modest and reversed upon returning to animal consumption. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of short-term substitution trials support potential cardiovascular benefits, including lowered total cholesterol (by 6%) and LDL cholesterol (by 12%) in adults without preexisting cardiovascular disease when PBMAs replace meat for up to eight weeks. These effects are attributed to fiber content in PBMAs, which binds bile acids and promotes cholesterol excretion, a mechanism absent in animal meats. However, such reviews aggregate data from small-scale interventions (often n<50) with limited duration, precluding assessment of long-term outcomes like actual cardiovascular event rates, and many studies rely on self-reported adherence or industry-funded products, introducing potential confounding. No large-scale, long-term randomized controlled trials demonstrate sustained reductions in cardiovascular disease incidence specifically from PBMAs. Claims of anti-inflammatory effects stem from plant-derived components like polyphenols and in unprocessed alternatives, which broader research links to reduced levels. Yet, evidence specific to processed meat alternatives is sparse and inconclusive; one analysis of substitution trials found no differential impact on inflammatory biomarkers compared to animal meats, suggesting any benefits may derive from overall dietary shifts rather than PBMAs uniquely. These findings underscore that while substitution can yield surrogate marker improvements in controlled settings, causal links to clinical outcomes remain tentative without robust, extended-duration data.

Risks, deficiencies, and counter-evidence

Many -based meat alternatives are classified as ultra-processed foods due to extensive formulation with isolates, additives, and emulsifiers, which observational studies link to elevated risks of , cardiometabolic diseases, and all-cause mortality. A 2025 review indicated that while such products may yield marginally better short-term cardiometabolic outcomes than unprocessed meats, they remain inferior to minimally processed whole foods in preserving benefits like reduced and sustained nutrient density. These alternatives often contain elevated sodium levels, frequently exceeding 1 g per 100 g serving, comparable to or higher than processed meats, contributing to risk through mechanisms like fluid retention and vascular stiffness. Products such as certain burger patties have been noted for sodium contents up to 2 g per 100 g in cold-cut varieties, potentially exacerbating elevation in sodium-sensitive populations despite any additions. Nutritionally, plant-based meat substitutes typically provide lower bioavailable levels of calcium, , vitamin B12, iron, and compared to animal-derived meats or fortified whole foods, with protein quality diminished by anti-nutritional factors like phytates in bases. Diets relying on these products show deficiencies in these micronutrients, particularly B12, which requires supplementation to avoid neurological risks, as plant sources inherently lack it. Long-term health impacts remain understudied, with most trials limited to 8 weeks or less, revealing short-term LDL-cholesterol reductions but no on chronic outcomes like cancer incidence or sustained metabolic shifts. A 2024 highlighted that substituting meats with these alternatives does not replicate the mortality risk reductions seen with unprocessed plant foods, underscoring potential overreliance on processing to mimic texture at the expense of holistic dietary quality. Countering claims of broad superiority, intervention studies demonstrate that plant-based meat alternatives fail to outperform whole foods in cardiometabolic markers, with potentially negating benefits through reduced digestibility and microbiome diversity alterations. While some microbiome analyses report increased butyrate production from occasional use, habitual consumption may disrupt bacterial profiles less favorably than unprocessed plants, lacking the prebiotic synergies of intact s.

Environmental assessments

Lifecycle analysis metrics

Lifecycle analysis (LCA) metrics for meat alternatives quantify environmental impacts across stages from extraction to and distribution, often using cradle-to-gate boundaries. Key indicators include (GHG) emissions, measured in kg CO₂ equivalents (CO₂e) per kg of product; in square meters (m²) per kg; freshwater consumption in liters per kg; and eutrophication potential in grams of equivalents (PO₄e) per kg, reflecting from fertilizers and runoff. These metrics derive from peer-reviewed LCAs, which emphasize empirical data from supply chains, though results vary with ingredient sourcing, such as soy or origins, and manufacturing energy intensity. For plant-based meat analogues, GHG emissions typically range from 0.5 to 2.4 kg CO₂e per kg product, with a of 1.7 kg CO₂e/kg across reviewed studies up to 2021; averages for processed variants hover around 2.2 kg CO₂e/kg. Cultivation of protein-rich ingredients like soy accounts for a substantial portion, while and other processing steps add 20-50% more emissions due to use. Land use averages 1.6-3.7 m² per kg for processed products, driven by crop yields; isolates from peas or soy can elevate this to 5-35 m²/kg if low-yield sourcing prevails. Freshwater use varies widely, from 450 L/kg in soy-based alternatives to over 1,000 L/kg in irrigated or imported ingredient scenarios.
MetricTypical Range/Average for Plant-Based AnaloguesKey Influencing Factors
GHG Emissions (kg CO₂e/kg)0.5–2.4 (median 1.7); avg. ~2.2 processedIngredient cultivation, processing energy
Land Use (m²/kg)1.6–3.7; up to 35 for isolatesCrop yields, sourcing region
Freshwater Use (L/kg)450–2,000+Irrigation, supply chain distance
Eutrophication (g PO₄e/kg)~12 (soy-based examples)Fertilizer application in soy/legume farming
Eutrophication potential stems primarily from and in crop fertilizers, with soy-based products showing around 12 g PO₄e per kg. impacts, often proxied through change in LCAs, arise from soy production's association with habitat conversion in regions like , where monoculture expansion contributes to and species loss, potentially inflating indirect emissions by 10-30% in global averages. Baselines from meta-analyses like Poore and Nemecek (2018) inform ingredient impacts, showing soy and proteins at 0.5-2 kg CO₂e/kg dry weight before processing, underscoring the need for sustainable sourcing to minimize variability.

Direct comparisons to animal-derived meat

Plant-based meat alternatives typically demonstrate lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in lifecycle assessments compared to most animal-derived meats, though margins vary by animal type and production system. A 2024 comparative lifecycle analysis of U.S. production systems found average GHG emissions for plant-based meats at 0.75–0.98 kg CO₂e per kg, contrasted with 27.2 kg CO₂e/kg for , 7.2 kg CO₂e/kg for , and 4.6 kg CO₂e/kg for , yielding overall reductions of 89%, with 91% versus , 88% versus , and 71% versus . A review of multiple studies reported median PBMA emissions at 1.7 kg CO₂e/kg (range: 0.5–2.4 kg), generally below (4–11 kg CO₂e/kg) and (2–6 kg CO₂e/kg) medians but with potential overlap at the lower ends for .
MetricPlant-Based Meat (kg CO₂e/kg) (kg CO₂e/kg) (kg CO₂e/kg) (kg CO₂e/kg)
GHG Emissions0.75–0.98 (avg.)27.27.24.6
Median/Review1.7 (median)9–1204–112–6
Land use for plant-based alternatives averages 79% lower than animal meats overall, though often similar to (~6.5 m²/kg), due to reliance on crop-based ingredients like soy and peas that enable higher yields per area but promote with associated risks. Water consumption shows 95% average reductions for plant-based meats versus animal products, though variability exists; some alternatives using irrigated crops can approach or exceed levels for and in water-scarce regions. These comparisons assume intensive conventional animal farming and cradle-to-gate boundaries, with plant-based impacts potentially increasing at scale due to expanded imports of ingredients like soy, which have been linked to in source countries such as . For alternatives specifically, regenerative grazing systems incorporating holistic management can achieve net GHG parity or sequestration through storage; a 2019 lifecycle analysis of such a U.S. operation reported 3.5 pounds of CO₂ sequestered per pound of protein, offsetting emissions to near-neutral levels. However, broader meta-analyses indicate that even regenerative often retains higher net emissions than plant-based options when from is fully accounted for, absent verified long-term sequestration data.

Limitations and overhyped claims

Many lifecycle assessments (LCAs) of plant-based meat alternatives cite dramatic reductions—such as 90% fewer emissions for products like the Beyond Burger compared to —but independent reviews recalculating data from multiple studies find more modest averages, with impacts around 1.7 kg CO₂ equivalents per kg of product and variations up to fourfold due to differences in modeling assumptions like yield assumptions and allocation methods. These models often idealize supply chains by excluding real-world factors such as energy-intensive high-moisture processing, which requires significant electricity for heating, shearing, and cooling to mimic texture, thereby inflating footprints beyond simplistic crop-to-product calculations. Global shipping of ingredients like soy from or from further elevates emissions, contradicting claims of near-zero environmental burdens from production alone. Reliance on soy and pea proteins in many alternatives links them to in regions like the Amazon, where crop expansion for these ingredients—often genetically modified monocultures—drives habitat loss and decline, partially offsetting touted savings when indirect land-use changes are considered. Critiques note that industry-sponsored LCAs, such as those from , tend to emphasize favorable scenarios while downplaying such upstream impacts, whereas holistic assessments reveal conditional gains dependent on sustainable sourcing that is not yet widespread. In comparisons to animal agriculture, overhyped narratives ignore cases where regenerative grazing systems achieve net ; for example, a Quantis LCA of White Oak Pastures beef found -3.5 kg CO₂ equivalents per kg due to buildup from holistic management, outperforming conventional beef (around 33 kg CO₂ equivalents per kg) and rivaling or exceeding plant-based products like the Beyond Burger (4 kg CO₂ equivalents per kg). Such findings underscore that benefits are not universally superior but context-specific, with scalability debates highlighting how plant-based claims assume unproven systemic shifts away from industrial farming. Empirical data on behavior further tempers expectations of broad environmental impact, as for alternatives driving net reductions in total consumption remains weak and largely correlational; surveys show 98% of buyers also purchase conventional , indicating addition rather than substitution in most diets. This limited displacement suggests that while alternatives may offer marginal gains in controlled scenarios, they do not reliably catalyze the causal dietary changes needed for substantial emissions cuts.

Commercial and economic aspects

Market growth and contractions

The global market for meat substitutes reached USD 18.78 billion in 2023, reflecting sustained expansion driven by earlier innovations and consumer interest in protein diversification. This figure encompassed plant-based alternatives across retail and foodservice channels, with prior years showing robust dollar sales growth, such as an 8% increase in global retail plant-based meat sales to $6.1 billion in 2022. However, regional variations emerged, with investments peaking at approximately USD 3.1 billion in 2020—over half of the decade's total funding—fueled by hype around scalable production and inflows, before shifting to caution amid maturing sales trajectories. In the United States, retail sales of plant-based meat contracted notably from 2024 onward, with dollar sales falling 7% year-over-year to $1.2 billion in 2024, followed by a 2.3% decline by year-end and steeper unit volume drops signaling reduced consumer repeat purchases. These trends extended into 2025, where nearly all plant-based meat categories experienced double-digit declines in both units and dollars, contrasting with overall meat sales growth exceeding 5% in 2024. Foodservice channels showed relative resilience, with earlier data indicating 8% sales growth to $304 million in 2022, though broader contraction pressures persisted. Empirical drivers of these contractions included persistent pricing premiums, where plant-based alternatives often cost 1.5 to 2 times more per pound than conventional , hindering price parity and volume uptake despite scale efficiencies. and texture shortcomings further contributed, as evidenced by consumer preference tests favoring animal-derived products and distribution reductions by retailers in response to low velocities. Unit sales declines, rather than mere inflation-adjusted dollar metrics, underscored fundamental market rejection, with refrigerated segments like burgers dropping 26% year-over-year in early 2025 tracking periods.

Major companies and strategies

, a leading producer of plant-based meat substitutes, experienced revenue stagnation and contraction following its 2019 , with full-year 2024 net revenues at $326.45 million, down 4.93% from 2023, alongside net losses of $160.28 million. In 2025, quarterly revenues continued to decline, dropping 9.1% to $68.7 million in the first quarter and 19.6% to $75.0 million in the second quarter year-over-year, attributed to overexpansion into international markets and persistent unprofitability amid weakening demand. The company has pivoted toward cost-cutting measures, including workforce reductions and facility optimizations, while exploring new product lines like through joint ventures, such as the PLANeT Partnership with launched in 2021 to develop plant-based snacks. Impossible Foods, another prominent player in heme-based plant burgers, has emphasized strategic partnerships with quick-service restaurants like and to drive volume sales and menu integration, rather than direct-to-consumer retail dominance. In response to market pressures, the company underwent a 2023 reorganization involving 6% staff layoffs to streamline operations and focus on scalable production. Unlike pure plant-based peers, Impossible has avoided broad consumer-packaged goods expansions akin to Beyond's PepsiCo snack venture, prioritizing B2B channels for steady revenue amid retail slowdowns. In the cultured meat segment, has targeted cost reductions through advancements in media optimization, addressing the high expense of nutrients which constitute the bulk of production costs in bioreactor-grown products. Efforts include developing serum-free media formulations and process efficiencies to lower per-unit pricing, enabling limited commercial launches like products approved for sale in 2023, though remains constrained by and infrastructure needs. Broader industry strategies include hybrid formulations blending proteins with animal-derived components to enhance sensory appeal, nutritional profiles, and affordability for flexitarian consumers, leveraging existing supply chains to bypass full reinvention of processing infrastructure. Private-label offerings from retailers have gained traction as a low-cost , driving incremental sales growth in by 2% in 2024 through own-brands priced below branded alternatives, thus broadening accessibility without relying on premium positioning. These approaches reflect a shift from aggressive expansion to pragmatic adjustments amid stalled category growth, with plant-based dollar sales declining 19% in 2023 per industry tracking.

Consumer preferences and barriers

Flexitarians, who occasionally reduce consumption without fully abstaining, represent the primary demographic adopting meat alternatives on a semi-regular basis, outpacing strict vegans and vegetarians in purchase frequency and openness to substitution. A 2022 study indicated that 53% of flexitarians would incorporate plant-based meat substitutes into their diets, with 49% willing to make regular purchases assuming comparable and to animal-derived meat. In contrast, omnivores largely treat these products as occasional novelties rather than dietary staples, with trial purchases rarely leading to habitual use. Repeat purchase rates underscore limited sustained preference, as only 63% of households that initially bought plant-based meat in 2023 made subsequent purchases, reflecting patterns of one-time experimentation. Consumer surveys consistently identify taste and texture shortcomings as key deterrents to repeat buying, with many reporting dissatisfaction due to inferior sensory profiles compared to conventional . Price parity remains a significant barrier, particularly for omnivores and flexitarians sensitive to cost premiums, with 42% of respondents in a 2024 global survey citing affordability as the top obstacle amid rising food prices. Availability constraints, such as limited retail distribution and variety, further hinder broader uptake, especially in regions outside urban centers. Adoption patterns vary globally, with stronger voluntary engagement in and parts of compared to a contraction in the market. European meat substitute sales reached USD 3.53 billion in 2025 projections, driven by higher flexitarian interest and policy support for alternatives, while plant-based meat dollar sales declined 7% in 2024 following a 2023 downturn attributed to waning novelty appeal. In , cultural familiarity with traditional plant proteins bolsters acceptance among meat-reducers, though overall penetration remains below European levels.

Criticisms and controversies

Sensory and practical shortcomings

Blind taste tests and sensory evaluations consistently reveal that many plant-based meat alternatives, such as burgers and nuggets, score lower than animal-derived counterparts in mimicking authentic flavor and . In a 2023 analysis of 32 products, several faux burgers like and received only 2/5 ratings for being spongy or bland, while nuggets from brands like Raised & Rooted scored 3/5 due to sponginess, highlighting persistent gaps in meat-like savoriness and tenderness. Even higher-rated options, such as Impossible products at 4/5, often exhibit subtle flaws like rubbery textures in tenders or a lack of true juiciness compared to real or . Off-flavors arise prominently from the process used in many alternatives, where high temperatures (140–180°C) trigger oxidation of unsaturated fatty acids in proteins like soy and , producing volatile compounds such as hexanal and beany or grassy notes. Thermal degradation and unintended Maillard reactions during further generate bitter, pungent, or roasted undertones from and sugars, which proteins bind and retain, exacerbating astringency and aftertaste issues not typical in animal . Texture inconsistencies compound these sensory deficits, with plant-based analogues often registering lower instrumental metrics for , cohesiveness, and chewiness post-cooking compared to benchmarks. Extruded products struggle to replicate the aligned fibrous structure of real , leading to softer, less resilient profiles that can become mushy or overly dense, as sensory correlations show plant extrudates deviating in attributes like "chewy" and "mouthcoating." Cooking methods like pan-frying or air-frying yield minimal mitigation, with plant patties shrinking less but retaining inferior springiness and resilience versus . Practical challenges include divergent cooking behaviors, where plant-based items require adjusted techniques—such as lower temperatures or shorter times—to avoid exacerbating mushiness, unlike the forgiving sear of real meat. Shelf-life variability poses further hurdles, as diverse plant ingredients introduce higher initial bacterial loads and non-standard spoilage thresholds (e.g., exceeding 10^6 CFU/g without overt signs), complicating preservation compared to meat's more predictable microbial profile reliant on legacy methods like curing. Allergen risks from common bases like soy or add handling complexities, often necessitating separate production lines to prevent cross-contamination absent in single-source animal products.

Processing and ultra-processed concerns

Many commercial meat alternatives, such as those from and , are classified under the NOVA system as group 4 ultra-processed foods due to their inclusion of cosmetic additives, non-culinary ingredients like protein isolates, and industrial formulations involving multiple processing steps. These products typically contain 10 to 20 or more ingredients, including or isolates, refined oils (e.g., canola or ), emulsifiers like methylcellulose, binders such as , and synthetic flavors or extracts to mimic meat's texture and taste. In contrast to animal-derived , which retains natural enzymes, bioavailable iron, and complex fat profiles from minimal processing like grinding or cooking, plant-based alternatives require extensive , , and to achieve structural and nutritional equivalence. Protein extraction often involves chemical or enzyme-assisted methods to isolate components from plants, followed by recombination with additives absent in whole animal tissues, leading to formulations lacking the endogenous digestive aids and synergies found in unprocessed . This heavy reliance on isolates and fortificants, such as added iron or , introduces potential issues not seen in meat's inherent matrix. Ultra-processed meat alternatives share causal mechanisms with other NOVA group 4 foods that promote overeating, including hyper-palatability from optimized fat-sugar-salt combinations and disrupted satiety signaling due to rapid digestion of isolates versus the slower breakdown of whole-food matrices. Randomized trials demonstrate that ultra-processed diets induce excess calorie intake—up to 500 kcal/day more than unprocessed equivalents—through passive overconsumption, a effect attributable to formulation rather than mere calorie density. While short-term nutrient profiles may appear favorable (e.g., lower saturated fat), long-term health impacts remain understudied, with observational data linking higher ultra-processed food intake to elevated risks of obesity, cardiometabolic disease, and all-cause mortality, though causation specific to plant-based variants requires further causal inference beyond associative epidemiology.

Ideological and policy-driven promotion

The promotion of meat alternatives has been significantly advanced by organizations aligned with climate activism, such as the Good Food Institute (GFI), which lobbies governments for public funding, favorable labeling policies, and research support to scale plant-based and cultivated proteins. GFI, a nonprofit network, has advocated for these measures framing alternatives as essential for reducing livestock-related emissions, securing commitments for alternative protein R&D and commercialization incentives that totaled $1.67 billion globally by 2023. This advocacy often prioritizes environmental imperatives over market-driven consumer demand, with GFI influencing policies in multiple countries to position alternatives as sustainability solutions despite their limited market penetration. In the United States, federal agencies have provided targeted grants for alternative proteins, including $9.7 million from the Department of Energy in 2025 for projects aimed at decarbonizing food production through innovations like precision fermentation. Similarly, the has allocated funds such as over $2.5 million via the European Institute of Innovation and Technology in 2025 to promote plant-based foods under initiatives like the ISAAP project, alongside calls for an EU for Plant-Based Foods by 2026 to bolster the sector's role in agri-food transitions. These incentives contrast with vastly larger subsidies for conventional —over $72 billion in the US since 1995—yet reflect policy efforts to reallocate resources toward alternatives amid climate goals, sometimes encountering resistance through measures like proposed EU restrictions on meat-like terms for plant-based products (e.g., "burger"). Despite such ideological and policy-driven pushes, including levers explored for reducing production like fiscal disincentives and promotional limits, global meat consumption has continued to rise, reaching projections of 453 million tonnes by 2025 and increasing 14% in protein terms by 2030 compared to 2018-2020 baselines. This growth, driven by and economic factors in regions like , indicates that subsidies and have failed to significantly curb demand, highlighting a disconnect between elite-driven narratives in climate-focused institutions—which often exhibit systemic biases toward interventionist solutions—and empirical consumer behavior. Critics from perspectives emphasizing argue that these policies distort markets by funneling public funds to corporate agrotechnology firms developing patented alternatives, sidelining support for decentralized, regenerative livestock systems that could align with local farming traditions and nutritional self-reliance. Such interventions, motivated by precautionary climate modeling rather than proven causal reductions in emissions at scale, risk consolidating control over protein supply chains in hands of a few multinational entities, echoing historical patterns where subsidized innovations favor industrial consolidation over resilient, community-based .

References

  1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7463075/
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9861156/
  3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9936781/
  4. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-93100-3
  5. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0963996924005301
  6. https://agfundernews.com/plant-based-meat-by-numbers-grim-reading-for-the-us-retail-market-brighter-spots-in-foodservice-and-globally
  7. https://www.statista.com/outlook/cmo/food/meat/meat-substitutes/worldwide
  8. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344922006632
  9. https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2023/08/can-alternative-meat-compete
  10. https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/china-fake-meat-vegetarian-intl-hnk
  11. https://www.thendobetter.com/arts/2020/1/25/fake-meat-origins-with-chinese-monks
  12. https://www.soyinfocenter.com/HSS/tofu1.php
  13. https://www.soyinfocenter.com/chronologies_of_soyfoods-tofu.php
  14. https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=41139
  15. https://www.soyinfocenter.com/HSS/tempeh1.php
  16. https://www.foodunfolded.com/article/the-origin-of-meat-alternatives
  17. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224425001177
  18. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11954786/
  19. https://journals.lww.com/nutritiontodayonline/fulltext/2019/01000/mycoprotein__nutritional_and_health_properties.4.aspx
  20. https://www.foodnavigator.com/News/Promotional-features/Fungi-based-protein-mycoprotein-for-sustainable-food-production/
  21. https://www.adm.com/en-us/products-services/human-nutrition/products/plant-proteins/textured-protein-ingredients/
  22. https://www.thespruceeats.com/what-is-tvp-3376820
  23. https://making.com/stories/how-to-produce-textured-vegetable-protein-tvp
  24. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10323939/
  25. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772566925000333
  26. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214799324000705
  27. https://investors.beyondmeat.com/news-releases/news-release-details/brand-new-beyond-burgerr-launches-grocery-stores-nationwide
  28. https://fortune.com/well/article/why-beyond-meat-ceo-reformulated-products-plant-based-meat-backlash/
  29. https://impossiblefoods.com/media/news-releases/2016/07/momofuku-nishi-launch
  30. https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/06/21/482322571/silicon-valley-s-bloody-plant-burger-smells-tastes-and-sizzles-like-meat
  31. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/fda-brief/fda-brief-fda-approves-soy-leghemoglobin-color-additive
  32. https://impossiblefoods.com/media/news-releases/2019/07/fda-color-additive-approval
  33. https://gfi.org/press/record-3-1-billion-invested-in-alt-proteins-in-2020-3x-the-capital-invested-in-2019/
  34. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/26/mcdonalds-joins-vegan-push-with-beyond-meat-plt.html
  35. https://www.fairr.org/news-events/insights/from-niche-to-norm-the-decade-of-alternative-proteins
  36. https://www.beyondmeat.com/en-US/press/beyond-iv-the-fourth-generation-of-the-beyond-burger-and-beyond-beef-debuts-at-grocery-stores-across-the-u-s-including-at-walmart-and-kroger
  37. https://gfi.org/resource/analyzing-plant-based-meat-and-seafood-sales/
  38. https://gfi.org/marketresearch/
  39. https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2025/02/28/hybrid-meat-could-dominate-future-food-industry/
  40. https://www.greenqueen.com.hk/?p=80000
  41. https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/21/business/cultivated-meat-us-approval
  42. https://www.avma.org/news/companies-cultivated-chicken-cells-obtain-regulatory-approval
  43. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12241508/
  44. https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2025/05/28/gourmey-cultivated-meat-cut-to-7kg/
  45. https://gfi.org/science/the-science-of-plant-based-meat/
  46. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/plant-based-meat-market
  47. https://impossiblefoods.com/nutrition/plant-based-impossible-ingredients
  48. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10743084/
  49. https://www.beyondmeat.com/en-US/products/the-beyond-burger
  50. https://gfi.org/science/the-science-of-plant-based-meat/deep-dive-plant-based-meat-end-product-formulation-and-manufacturing/
  51. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/87559129.2024.2309593
  52. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666833523000345
  53. https://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheet/plant-based-meat-alternatives-and-meat-substitutes/
  54. https://gfi.org/fermentation/
  55. https://www.quorn.co.uk/news/how-is-quorn-made
  56. https://microbiologysociety.org/publication/past-issues/microbes-and-food/article/mycoprotein-production-and-food-sustainability.html
  57. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6554455/
  58. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214799324000729
  59. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10000644/
  60. https://www.mdpi.com/2311-5637/10/6/315
  61. https://gfi.org/science/the-science-of-fermentation/
  62. https://thegoodfoodinstitute.substack.com/p/fermentation-derived-proteins-are-7df
  63. https://www.eufic.org/en/food-production/article/lab-grown-meat-how-it-is-made-and-what-are-the-pros-and-cons
  64. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10513094/
  65. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-20061-y
  66. https://gfi.org/science/the-science-of-cultivated-meat/deep-dive-cultivated-meat-scaffolding/
  67. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2023.1225233/full
  68. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666154324003442
  69. https://www.fda.gov/food/hfp-constituent-updates/fda-completes-first-pre-market-consultation-human-food-made-using-animal-cell-culture-technology
  70. https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Food/fda-approves-1st-cell-cultivated-meat-upside-foods/story?id=100278334
  71. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R47697
  72. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/cultured-meat-market-report
  73. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-97813-7
  74. https://academic.oup.com/ijfst/article/59/1/450/7808226
  75. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10815164/
  76. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1466856422003307
  77. https://straitsresearch.com/report/edible-insects-market
  78. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44264-025-00075-z
  79. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10513374/
  80. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2211926425002917
  81. https://nutrition.org/algae-as-a-surprising-source-of-environmentally-friendly-protein-to-support-muscle-turnover/
  82. https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2022/08/09/insects-or-algae-for-dinner-optimising-3d-printing-can-help-overcome-the-yuck-factor-for-new-protein-sources/
  83. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385395463_Algal_protein-based_3D-printed_fish-analogs_as_a_new_approach_for_sustainable_seafood
  84. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10743141/
  85. https://www.fastmarkets.com/insights/latin-americas-soybean-production-outlook-2025-global-market-implications/
  86. https://www.sei.org/features/brazilian-soy-exports-and-deforestation/
  87. https://gfi.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Plant-based-meat_-anticipating-2030-production-requirements.pdf
  88. https://biospringer.com/en/yeast-extract-meat-analogues/
  89. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2319019121
  90. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9198813/
  91. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8997880/
  92. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095311921638923
  93. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37850862/
  94. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0924224422003582
  95. https://gfi.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Plant-Based-Meat-Manufacturing-Guide-_GFI.pdf
  96. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9330124/
  97. https://making.com/plant-based-meat
  98. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S096399692300234X
  99. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1655210/000162828020003841/bynd201910k.htm
  100. https://www.supplychaindive.com/news/beyond-meat-will-double-production-capacity-by-end-of-2019/559924/
  101. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224417303394
  102. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9914738/
  103. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157525006568
  104. https://gfi.org/resource/the-nutritional-profile-of-plant-based-meat/
  105. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353194118_Nutritional_Composition_of_Novel_Plant-Based_Meat_Alternatives_and_Traditional_Animal-Based_Meats
  106. https://www.heraldopenaccess.us/openaccess/nutritional-composition-of-novel-plant-based-meat-alternatives-and-traditional-animal-based-meats
  107. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/15/12/2732
  108. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10030528/
  109. https://www.vegansociety.com/resources/nutrition-and-health/nutrients/vitamin-b12/what-every-vegan-should-know-about-vitamin-b12
  110. https://ajcn.nutrition.org/article/S0002-9165%2824%2900396-4/fulltext
  111. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996924002540
  112. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32780794/
  113. https://med.stanford.edu/nutrition/research/completed-studies/SWAPMEATstudy.html
  114. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39653176/
  115. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000291652401428X
  116. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002916522008905
  117. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9554424/
  118. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11576095/
  119. https://examine.com/research-feed/study/dEvry1/
  120. https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj-2023-077310
  121. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-88578-0
  122. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13668-025-00704-6
  123. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10058979/
  124. https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2020/08/plant-based-meat-versus-animal-meat.html
  125. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408398.2022.2107994
  126. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2022.819106/full
  127. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8746448/
  128. https://ajcn.nutrition.org/article/S0002-9165%2824%2901428-X/abstract
  129. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nutrition/articles/10.3389/fnut.2025.1641234/full
  130. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8465665/
  131. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352550923000143
  132. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sustainable-food-systems/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1413802/full
  133. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210422425000450
  134. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaq0216
  135. https://gfi.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Comparative-life-cycle-assessment-of-plant-and-animal-based-meats_Key-findings.pdf
  136. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666833522000612
  137. https://blog.whiteoakpastures.com/hubfs/WOP-LCA-Quantis-2019.pdf
  138. https://savory.global/science_library/wop-lca/
  139. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X17310338
  140. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8248168/
  141. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2319003121
  142. https://foodprint.org/reports/the-foodprint-of-fake-meat/
  143. https://civileats.com/2019/06/19/impossible-foods-and-regenerative-grazers-face-off-in-a-carbon-farming-dust-up/
  144. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214799324000602
  145. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/meat-substitutes-market
  146. https://gfi.org/blog/2023-outlook-the-state-of-the-plant-based-meat-category/
  147. https://www.ey.com/en_us/insights/strategy/how-alternative-proteins-are-reshaping-meat-industries
  148. https://nielseniq.com/global/en/insights/education/2025/meat-department-trends-2025/
  149. https://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Article/2025/05/16/vegan-meat-and-dairy-continue-market-slide/
  150. https://www.foodandwine.com/plant-based-meat-taste-test-report-2025-nectar-11718698
  151. https://plantbasedfoods.org/latest/plant-based-foods-state-of-the-marketplace-2022-report
  152. https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/bynd/
  153. https://investors.beyondmeat.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meatr-reports-first-quarter-2025-financial-results
  154. https://investors.beyondmeat.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meatr-reports-second-quarter-2025-financial-results-0
  155. https://www.pepsico.com/our-stories/press-release/beyond-meat-and-pepsicos-planet-partnership-debuts-beyond-meat-jerky-the-joint-v03232022
  156. https://seekingalpha.com/article/4831745-beyond-meat-recent-rally-changes-little
  157. https://www.modernretail.co/retailers/fake-meat-brands-turn-to-partnerships-with-cpg-conglomerates-for-growth/
  158. https://www.foodbusinessnews.net/articles/22387-impossible-foods-undergoes-restructure
  159. https://cen.acs.org/food/Inside-effort-cut-cost-cultivated/101/i33
  160. https://gfi.org/science/the-science-of-cultivated-meat/
  161. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41538-024-00352-0
  162. https://www.bioprocessintl.com/facilities-capacity/upside-foods-touts-lab-grown-meat-as-a-sustainable-market-solution
  163. https://ag.purdue.edu/cfdas/chew-on-this/hybrid-burgers-a-sustainable-strategic-middle-ground/
  164. https://gfieurope.org/blog/affordable-products-driving-plant-based-retail-sales-growth/
  165. https://www.greenqueen.com.hk/plant-based-sales-europe-gfi-circana-vegan-meat-milk-2024/
  166. https://www.forbes.com/sites/claraludmir/2025/03/20/what-beyond-meat-got-wrong-about-the-future-of-plant-based-eating/
  167. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9102955/
  168. https://www.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/retail-distribution/plant-based-meat-consumer-perceptions.html
  169. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10778684/
  170. https://sustainabilityonline.net/research/significant-gap-in-terms-of-adoption-of-plant-based-diets/
  171. https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2024/06/18/affordability-still-major-barrier-to-plant-based-adoption/
  172. https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/europe-meat-substitute-market
  173. https://gfi.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/State-of-the-Industry-report_Plant-based_2023.pdf
  174. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S3050835525000014
  175. https://www.consumerreports.org/health/meat-substitutes/the-meat-lovers-guide-to-plant-based-meat-a1041127424/
  176. https://ift.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1541-4337.12964
  177. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268005X24001036
  178. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666154322000886
  179. https://khni.kerry.com/news/plant-based/the-unique-considerations-for-food-safety-shelf-life-in-plant-based-meat-alternatives/
  180. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10755440/
  181. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37350040/
  182. https://www.beyondmeat.com/en-US/about/our-ingredients/
  183. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10670130/
  184. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157525007665
  185. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7946062/
  186. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39385355/
  187. https://gfi.org/securing-government-funding/
  188. https://gfi.org/advocating-for-fair-labeling/
  189. https://gfi.org/blog/governments-around-the-world-remain-invested-in-alternative-proteins/
  190. https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/good-food-institute-gfi/
  191. https://www.greenqueen.com.hk/?p=77142
  192. https://plantbasednews.org/news/alternative-protein/europe-to-promote-plant-based-foods/
  193. https://vegconomist.com/studies-and-numbers/eu-urged-action-plan-plant-based-foods-2026/
  194. https://www.proteinproductiontechnology.com/post/usdas-us-72-billion-livestock-subsidies-continue-to-overshadow-budding-alternative-protein-sector
  195. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/aug/18/gigantic-power-of-meat-industry-blocking-green-alternatives-study-finds
  196. https://www.greenqueen.com.hk/eu-vegan-labelling-veggie-burger-ban-plant-based-meat-confusion/
  197. https://tastewise.io/foodtrends/meat
  198. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/09e88a46-b005-4d65-8753-9714506afc38/content
  199. https://ourworldindata.org/meat-production
  200. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2025/07/oecd-fao-agricultural-outlook-2025-2034_3eb15914/full-report/meat_5462e384.html
  201. https://grist.org/food-and-agriculture/plant-based-meat-needs-government-support-to-scale-up-but-a-culture-war-stands-in-the-way/
  202. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/362923/plant-based-food-meat-dairy-lobbying-congress-research-schools
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.