Meatless Meals
Social science research was done to best understand how to implement a Meatless Meal campaign in campus dining halls. By drawing on aspects of psychology, sociology, and economics, we are able to utilize different techniques to encourage participation and increase awareness of the cause.
The Impact of Commitment in Promoting Consumer Energy Conservation - Richard Katzev
Katzev’s article examines the concept of commitments as motivation to take action, which types of commitments are most effective, and how making commitments compares with offering incentives.
METHODS: Katzev employs research synthesis of a series of related, empirical studies.
RESULTS: If people make a commitment, either verbal or written, they would be more likely to follow through as opposed to just offering an incentive. However, both commitments and incentives are effective methods of fostering behavior change. With commitments, written commitments are more effective than verbal commitments, and multiple commitments are more effective than one commitment. With incentives, large incentives tend to be less enduring, while small incentives tend to be more enduring.
Katzev, R. 1986. The impact of commitment in promoting consumer energy conservation. In E. Monnier et al. (Eds.), Consumer behavior and energy policy (pp. 280-294), Praeger, New York, NY.
Climate change and meat eating: An inconvenient couple?
Boer et al.
This paper addresses the relationship between meat eating and climate change focusing on motivational explanations of environmentally-relevant consumer behavior. To motivate consumers, it is preferable not to isolate the meat-climate issue but to develop an approach that combines multiple values regarding food choices, including health and nature-related values.
METHODS: Based on a sample of 1083 Dutch consumers,a survey was conducted on the internet with a small reward given asking questions about the frequency of meat consumption, value of care for nature, attitudes on climate change, and responses to the idea that they can make a big difference to nature and climate protection by choosing one or more meals without meat every week.
RESULTS: As hypothesized, the meat-free meal idea was received more positively by consumers who valued care for nature and more negatively by those who did not value it. Also as hypothesized, the meat-free meal idea was received more negatively by consumers who were skeptical about the seriousness of climate change. The idea was not received more positively by those who did take it seriously. The results support the notion that the meat-free meal idea may serve as a counterproductive message. So to get behavior change, need to appeal to value-based meat-free aspects.
Boer, J., Schosler, H., & Boersema, J. J. (3012). Climate change and meat eating: An inconvenient couple? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 33, 1-8.
Reducing Meat Consumption in Today’s Consumer Society: Questioning the Citizen-Consumer Gap
A sustainable world begins with the consumers who fuel the economy and the demand for products. Consumers can be convinced to alter their food purchases to match a more sustainable diet.
METHODS: Consumers were persuaded to eat sustainably through a combination of:
Stealth-Consumers will accept the buying of sustainable goods if it is not noticeable. Meat substitutes were introduced in grocery stores and advertised as containing less fat, being more healthy, etc.
Moderate Involvement- Promoting a normalization and familiarity with meatless products. Market organizations promote meat-free days and reducing meat purchases.
Cultural Change-Initiating care for the environment, health, or animal welfare into the culture of consumers.
RESULTS: By discretely altering a consumer's purchases to match a sustainable diet, the consumer will become more likely to purchase meat substitutes and sustainable foods as opposed to meat products.
de Bakker, E., & Dagevos, H. (2012). Reducing meat consumption in today's consumer society: Questioning the citizen-consumer gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25(6), 877-894.
Research:
Can Psychology Help Save the World? A Model for Conservation Psychology - Susan Clayton, Amara Brook
Clayton and Brook discuss the importance of conservation psychology. They describe a model for the “social psychology of conservation behaviors” that incorporates the ideas of situational context, existing schemas, and personal motives for why or why not individuals may be inclined to engage in conservation behavior.
METHODS: Clayton and Brook apply their model to a series of sustainability issues and discuss its potential effectiveness.
RESULTS: Clayton and Brooks came to the following conclusions: People are affected by both social context and context from the physical environment. Interpretations of these contexts are strongly affected by past experiences and by their fundamental motives.
People trying to encourage sustainable behavior will be more successful if they pay attention to context, personal schemas, and personal motivations that are implicated in specific behavior.
Clayton, S. and A. Brook. 2005. Can psychology help save the world? A model for conservation psychology. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 5(1): 87-102.
Psychology
Social Psychological and Structural Influences on Vegetarian Beliefs - Kalof et al
This study examines the link between social structural variables (gender, class, education, etc) individual social psychology (altruism, self-interest, etc), and beliefs about the benefits of vegetarianism (for health, the environment, etc) and self-reported vegetarianism.
METHODS: Surveys were distributed to a random sample of 420 US residents and data was collected from these to formulate results. The questions were based on demographics (gender, education) and then several regarding general environmental issues. Finally they responded whether or not they believe vegetarianism positively influences health, world hunger, the environment, etc.
RESULTS: The strongest predictor of vegetarianism as a dietary choice was the belief that vegetarianism is beneficial to the environment. One's background (race, education, etc) affects the likelihood of consenting to a meatless lifestyle.
Kalof, L., Dietz, T., Stern, P., & Guagnano, G. (1999). Social psychological and structural influences on vegetarian beliefs. Rural Sociology, 64(3), 500-511.
Sociology
School Meals: A Nutritional and Environmental Perspective Demas et al.
In addition to analyzing the nutritional values of reducing meat in school lunches, this article provides insight into the economic value of minimizing meat consumption in cafeterias.
METHODS: Demas et. Al conducted a case study of the school meal system in Baltimore City, Maryland. They calculated the energy input required for an individual meal in Baltimore City school system, and compared those values with the energy input required for an alternate meal system that would serve less meat, and more fresh produce. The results were analyzed in terms of both general resource consumption, and financial benefits for the schools.
RESULTS: By eliminating paying for processing whole commodity foods into fast foods, and spending more on produce, schools can save money. Schools can also save money by cutting food transportation costs from distant meat farms. Indirect economic benefits would occur from an overall decrease in energy use when employing the alternate meal system.
Demas, A., Kindermann, D., & Pimentel, D. (2010). School Meals: A Nutritional and Environmental Perspective. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 53(2), 249-56.
Economics