Rationalising meat consumption: the perception of meat as natural, necessary, normal or nice in non-vegetarian adolescent males and females in New Zealand

Abstract

Background: the consumption of meat has attracted considerable attention in recent years, in regard to negative health outcomes, environmental impact and animal welfare. Research suggests that adults justify their meat consumption as either ‘natural’, ‘necessary’, ‘normal’ or ‘nice’, however, little is known in regard to adolescents, both worldwide and in New Zealand. Nutritional requirements increase during adolescence due to their rapid growth and development, as too does autonomy surrounding food choices, as they develop and become increasingly aware of their personal values. Dietary habits developed during adolescence may track into adulthood, therefore creating favourable habits is important for short- and long-term health outcomes. Developing consumer-orientated strategies for a transition to a more plant-based diet first requires an understanding of the perceived benefits adolescents hold and how they rationalise their continued consumption of meat. Objective: The primary objective is to describe the perceptions of meat consumption as ‘natural’, ‘necessary’, ‘normal’ or ‘nice’ by non-vegetarian male and female adolescents aged 15-18 years. The secondary objectives are to describe how these perceptions differ between males and females, and how they are related to meat consumption patterns. Design: The Survey of Nutrition Dietary Assessment and Lifestyle (SuNDiAL) project was a cross-sectional study aiming to compare the dietary intakes and habits, nutrition status, motivations, attitudes and physical activity of male and female adolescents aged 15- 18 years in New Zealand. This thesis used questionnaire data, including the ‘4Ns’ questionnaire, which assessed the adolescents’ perception of meat consumption as ‘natural’, ‘necessary’, ‘normal’ or ‘nice’, and the Dietary Habits questionnaire, which assessed meat consumption patterns. Results: Males endorsed all 4N constructs with a higher level of agreement than females. The ‘nice’ subscale had the highest level of endorsement overall for both males and females (mean 5.0 and 4.5 respectively) whereas the ‘necessary’ subscale had the lowest in both males and females (mean 4.3 and 4.0 respectively). At least half of the male adolescents consumed red and processed meats three times per week, whereas at least half of female adolescents consumed red and processed meats more than five times per week. Males with a high self-reported weekly consumption of red meat, endorsed ‘normal’ and ‘nice’ the most, whereas a high consumption of poultry showed a greater endorsement for ‘natural’ and ‘necessary’. In females, higher self-reported weekly consumption of red meat, showed a greater endorsement of all 4N subscales. As consumption of poultry increased, so too did their endorsement of all 4N subscales. Conclusion: Male and female adolescents agreed most strongly that meat is tasty (‘nice’) and agreed less strongly that meat is necessary for survival (‘necessary’), suggesting they are more driven by the taste and pleasure they receive from meat consumption, rather than potential health benefits.