Are consumers willing to pay for in‐vitro meat? An investigation of naming effects
通过选择实验，研究了不同名称（培养肉、实验室培育肉、人造肉）对美国消费者偏好和支付意愿的影响，发现消费者普遍排斥体外培养肉，但“培养肉”一词相对更受欢迎。
Abstract Currently, there is an ongoing debate about whether ‘ in ‐ vitro meat’ (IVM) should be labelled and communicated differently from conventional meat. Naming and labelling IVM can have significant implications and consequences for consumers’ acceptance of this new product as well as for future labelling policies. We provide, for the first time, information on how the use of different terms (i.e., ‘cultured’, ‘lab‐grown’ and ‘artificial’) shapes US consumers’ preferences and marginal willingness to pay for IVM. Using a choice experiment involving chicken meat products that vary across four attributes (i.e., production method, carbon trust label, antibiotics use and price), our results show that consumers prefer chicken meat produced through the conventional production method and tend to generally reject IVM. However, the term ‘cultured’ is less disliked than the terms ‘lab‐grown’ and ‘artificial’, and ‘artificial’ is less disliked than ‘lab‐grown’. Results also indicate that consumers’ valuations are heterogeneous over differing consumer attitudes. Our findings provide insights into the psychology of consumers’ level of acceptance and attitudes, which can be useful in communicating the nature of the IVM to the public. They also have important implications for future labelling policies.