5 Barriers to Accepting Cultivated Meat
- David Bell
- Dec 31, 2025
- 10 min read
Cultivated meat promises a new way to produce real meat by growing animal cells in controlled environments. It could address pressing issues like reducing animal suffering, limiting climate impact, and improving food safety. However, public acceptance remains a major challenge. Here are the five key barriers:
Perception of unnaturalness: Words like "lab-grown" create negative associations, with only 26% of Britons open to eating it.
Distrust in science and industry: 85% of UK consumers worry about its safety, often doubting the motives of companies behind it.
High costs: Despite advances, cultivated meat remains far pricier than traditional options.
Resistance from existing food systems: Farming traditions and concerns about corporate dominance slow acceptance.
Limited impact of ethical arguments: While many acknowledge the benefits for animals and the planet, personal factors like taste and price matter more.
Addressing these issues requires clear communication, trust-building, and practical solutions to make cultivated meat more appealing and accessible.
1. The 'Lab-Grown' Label and Perceptions of Unnaturalness
Words matter, especially when it comes to food. While 74% of Britons are familiar with the term "lab-grown meat", only 26% are open to eating it. This stark contrast shows how the label alone can trigger psychological resistance [8].
The phrase "lab-grown" immediately suggests something artificial. People often evaluate food based on how it's made, not just how it tastes or what it offers [5]. The image of a laboratory, complete with test tubes and sterile procedures, brings up concerns about "tampering with nature" [7]. Interestingly, this reaction is more emotional than logical. Studies reveal a strong negative link (r = −0.72) between seeing meat as "unnatural" and having a favourable opinion of it [6].
"The more unnatural people perceive cultured meat to be, the less positive their attitudes towards it." - Appetite [6]
Ironically, detailed explanations about how cultured meat is made can backfire. They often highlight the artificial aspects of the process, making traditional meat seem more appealing in comparison [7].
The way people respond to these terms also varies by demographic. For example, men (36%) and younger individuals aged 18–24 (36%) are much more open to trying cultivated meat compared to women (16%) and those over 65 (18%) [8]. Notably, the term "cultivated meat" tends to resonate better with consumers, creating more positive impressions than "lab-grown" [5]. On the flip side, words like "artificial" and "lab-grown" are among the least appealing, with "artificial" often leaving people confused about what the product actually is [1]. These differences show how important it is to choose the right terminology for different audiences.
"It is important to explain cultured meat in a nontechnical way that emphasises the final product, not the production method, to increase acceptance of this novel food." - Meat Science Journal [7]
2. Distrust in Science, Food Industry, and Food Safety
When it comes to cultivated meat, trust - or the lack of it - plays a huge role in shaping opinions. Even when people understand how it’s made, trust remains a sticking point. In the UK, a striking 85% of consumers express concerns about cultivated meat[1]. But this isn’t just about the science behind it - it’s also about who’s driving the innovation.
The food industry’s reputation holds more sway than science alone. Studies reveal that people who are wary of food scientists or the food industry tend to see cultivated meat as risky. Their trust often hinges on the credibility of the messenger, rather than the technical details[3]. This highlights the importance of transparency and accountability.
"Trust in the food industry or food scientists may be more relevant to perceptions of cultured meat than general trust in science." - Michael Siegrist, Professor of Consumer Behavior, ETH Zurich[3]
Regulation plays a pivotal role here. Confidence in regulatory oversight emerges as one of the top factors influencing whether consumers are willing to try cultivated meat[1]. For British consumers, approval from the Food Standards Agency (FSA) carries more weight than labels like "slaughter-free" or "carbon-neutral"[1]. Recognising this, the FSA secured £1.6 million in October 2024 to fund a programme aimed at ensuring the safety of cultivated products before they hit the market[1].
Despite these efforts, there’s still a long way to go. Currently, only 16–41% of UK consumers are open to trying cultivated meat[1]. Much of this hesitation stems from uncertainty about who’s responsible for guaranteeing its safety. Without clear labelling and strong regulatory frameworks, scepticism is likely to linger.
3. High Costs and Limited Market Access
One of the biggest hurdles for cultivated meat is its steep production cost. Right now, it simply can't compete with the well-established, highly efficient supply chains that have been perfected over centuries for conventional meat.
Take, for instance, Israeli company SuperMeat. In November 2024, they announced a major achievement: producing cultivated chicken at $11.79 per pound (around £9.20 per pound). According to CEO Ido Savir, this was made possible by introducing advanced cell cultivation techniques and replacing expensive animal-derived components with plant-based alternatives, which helped to cut feed costs significantly [11]. However, even at this reduced cost, it’s still far pricier than traditional chicken - and that’s before adding retail markups. In Singapore, for example, cultivated meat products are sold at prices well above those of their conventional counterparts [11].
To make cultivated meat truly competitive, the industry needs to scale up production massively. Right now, most research relies on small-scale methods, but achieving cost parity would require large stirred tank bioreactors with capacities of 20,000 litres or more. Unfortunately, the necessary infrastructure for this scale doesn’t yet exist [10]. This gap highlights the urgent need for significant industrial investment. As researchers Michael Siegrist and Christina Hartmann point out:
"The industry is still a long time away from producing cultured meat at an industrial scale and a competitive price" [3].
Techno-economic studies back this up, showing that with current technology, cultivated meat is unlikely to match the price of conventional meat anytime soon [10].
For UK consumers, the cost issue is critical. Most aren't willing to pay a premium for cultivated meat over traditional options [1]. While some meat alternatives can justify higher prices due to perceived health or environmental advantages, cultivated meat faces unique resistance when it comes to pricing.
4. Resistance from Established Food Systems and Cultural Practices
The rise of cultivated meat isn't just about cost - it's about navigating deeply rooted traditions and long-standing practices. In the UK, farming is more than an industry; it’s a way of life. For many farmers, raising livestock is tied to their identity, and lab-grown meat feels like a step towards excessive industrialisation, threatening rural livelihoods and cherished traditions [12]. This isn't merely an economic concern - it sparks a broader debate about what we consider to be "real" food. These ingrained traditions strongly influence how consumers perceive and accept cultivated meat.
Interestingly, the UK’s relatively open food culture results in an acceptance score of 52.0, significantly higher than France's 37.9 [3]. Yet, scepticism remains widespread, particularly when it comes to how cultivated meat might disrupt traditional farming and established agricultural practices [1][3][12].
Cultural and religious practices further shape this resistance. For instance, Muslim consumers look for halal certification, while Jewish consumers prioritise kosher labelling [1]. Culinary taboos also play a role: while 54% of UK consumers are open to cultivated beef or chicken, only 9% would consider cultivated dog meat [8]. These cultural nuances tie directly into the ongoing debate around what qualifies as "real" food and how emerging technologies can coexist with traditional food systems.
Another challenge comes from concerns about corporate dominance. Between 2016 and 2022, the main investors in cultivated meat were concentrated in the United States, Israel, the UK, Australia, and France [13]. Many worry that large corporations could monopolise the industry, creating a "corporate lock-in" that might exclude smaller producers and traditional farmers from participating [13].
To address these issues, researchers are exploring hybrid models that involve farmers in the process. Farmers could contribute by supplying cell samples, producing growth media, or hosting small-scale production facilities [12]. Although farm-scale production is about 30% more expensive than factory-scale operations [12], this collaborative approach could shift the narrative from a "lab vs farm" divide to one of partnership and innovation, potentially securing public trust and support for the technology.
Groups like The Cultivarian Society (https://cultivarian.food) are championing this inclusive vision. They emphasise that blending traditional agricultural expertise with cutting-edge technology could lead to a future where meat is produced without animal slaughter. This collaborative approach not only aligns with cultural and ethical concerns but also builds on earlier discussions about trust and identity, offering a path forward that values cooperation over disruption.
5. Limited Impact of Ethical and Environmental Arguments
Despite the broader cultural and systemic barriers, ethical and environmental arguments also struggle to sway consumers towards cultivated meat. While 59% of UK consumers acknowledge that cultivated meat could improve animal welfare and benefit the environment, a significantly higher 85% remain concerned about its safety, perceived unnaturalness, and possible health risks [1]. This disconnect highlights a crucial issue: ethical reasoning alone rarely translates into actual buying behaviour.
Interestingly, raising awareness about animal welfare can sometimes backfire. A study involving 504 young adults revealed that while greater awareness of animal welfare increased concerns about cultivated meat, it did not improve acceptance. As researcher Feray Gençer Bingöl observed:
"Awareness of sustainable nutrition and animal welfare increased concerns regarding cultured meat but did not influence acceptance" [14].
What truly drives consumer acceptance? Personal benefits. Factors like taste, price, safety, and health advantages far outweigh environmental concerns for most consumers [2][15]. Among these, product quality - how cultivated meat looks, cooks, and tastes - remains the most influential driver of purchasing decisions [15]. Recognising this, companies are shifting their strategies. For example, Singapore’s GOOD Meat is focusing on creating lower-cost options for retail markets, while Australia’s Vow is marketing cultivated foie gras as a premium, luxury item [15][16].
Beyond ethical arguments, perceptions of unnaturalness and limited market accessibility further hinder acceptance. Advocates for cultivated meat must pivot their messaging, moving away from moral appeals and instead focusing on practical benefits like taste, affordability, and safety. Organisations such as The Cultivarian Society (https://cultivarian.food) are already working to reshape the narrative, highlighting personal choice and tangible advantages. While ethical considerations remain important, they cannot stand alone in persuading consumers to embrace cultivated meat.
Conclusion
The challenges surrounding cultivated meat are deeply interconnected, with one issue often amplifying another. For instance, mistrust fuels perceptions of "unnaturalness", which in turn heightens aversion [3]. Terms like "lab-grown" only exacerbate these concerns [1], while food neophobia reinforces fears around safety [9]. This lack of trust not only casts cultivated meat in a negative light but also paves the way for practical obstacles to take root.
Although 59% of UK consumers acknowledge the ethical and environmental advantages of cultivated meat [1], their choices are still heavily influenced by cost and sensory expectations [4]. Without confidence in regulatory bodies like the Food Standards Agency (FSA), even the most compelling ethical arguments are unlikely to sway behaviour [3]. A well-funded and transparent FSA initiative is essential to reassure the public [1]. Given these entrenched doubts, addressing practical concerns becomes a priority.
Safety, cost, and cultural resistance are key barriers to acceptance, and overcoming them will require a multi-pronged approach. Public education on safety, clear messaging tailored to cultural contexts, and strong regulatory frameworks are critical. Cultural differences also play a significant role, with acceptance rates varying widely - from 37.9% in France to 56.3% in Mexico - reflecting the influence of culinary traditions and attitudes towards food innovation [3].
Organisations like The Cultivarian Society (https://cultivarian.food) are working to build trust through transparency in science and regulation. By focusing on personal benefits such as taste, safety, and choice - rather than relying solely on moral arguments - they aim to bridge the gap between scepticism and acceptance. As Michael Siegrist, Professor of Consumer Behaviour at ETH Zurich, aptly states:
"The success of cultured meat depends on consumer acceptance. Therefore, a strong understanding of the factors that influence the acceptance of alternative proteins needs to be developed at an early stage of technology and product development" [3].
The journey towards widespread acceptance of cultivated meat demands patience, fact-based communication, and a recognition that consumer perceptions can evolve over time [1]. With ongoing innovation, strategic messaging, and efforts to build institutional trust, these challenges can be gradually overcome. By addressing these interconnected issues, the movement can pave the way for a food system that prioritises sustainability, science, and genuine consumer choice.
FAQs
Why do some people think cultivated meat is unnatural?
Cultivated meat often faces scepticism because it’s made in a lab from animal cells, rather than coming from conventional farming. This production method challenges deeply ingrained ideas about how food should be sourced, which can lead to feelings of unease or mistrust.
The notion of food being crafted through advanced technology, rather than naturally occurring processes, can conflict with what many consider to be 'real' or 'wholesome'. These views are tied to long-standing societal attitudes about food and progress, making cultivated meat feel strange or even off-putting to some.
What can be done to build trust in cultivated meat?
Building trust in cultivated meat means tackling concerns about safety, how "natural" it feels, and whether the process is transparent. Providing clear, science-backed explanations about how it's made - like the use of animal-free media and its similarities to traditional meat production - can go a long way in debunking the idea that it's "unnatural." Independent safety tests, regulatory approvals from trusted organisations like the UK Food Standards Agency, and endorsements from well-known scientists or chefs can also help reassure sceptical consumers.
Interactive experiences, such as tasting events or open-lab tours, give people the chance to see the production process up close and even sample the product themselves. This hands-on approach can help reduce doubts. Transparent labelling that emphasises key points - like the absence of slaughter, sustainability benefits, and clear ingredient sourcing - helps align cultivated meat with established food safety and ethical standards.
The role of trusted voices, including researchers, health professionals, and culinary experts, is crucial in shaping public opinion. Initiatives like The Cultivarian Society contribute by offering educational resources, encouraging open dialogue, and connecting people with reliable information. These efforts work together to create a more informed and open-minded path towards acceptance.
What are the main factors influencing the price of cultivated meat?
The cost of cultivated meat is shaped by a few major factors. One of the biggest drivers is the expensive cell-culture media and the advanced bioreactors needed for production. On top of that, the limited manufacturing capacity currently available adds to the challenge. There's also the issue of specialised infrastructure, which is still in short supply, and the significant expenses tied to complying with rigorous regulatory standards.
However, as the industry expands and production scales up, these costs are likely to drop, paving the way for cultivated meat to become more affordable and widely available in the future.
Comments