The ‘Less but Better’ concept advocates for reducing overall meat intake while prioritising sustainably produced, high-quality products. However, a recent study finds little evidence that consumers necessarily reduce their consumption when they have access to better-quality meat.
Livestock production has long been associated with significant environmental impacts, prompting calls for sustainable transition in both production and consumption
A recent study conducted by researchers at the University of Helsinki and the Stockholm Resilience Center at Stockholm University investigates the relationship between eating less meat and choosing higher-quality meat. Researchers interviewed 21 Finnish consumers who purchase natural pasture-raised beef – meat from cattle that graze on biodiversity-rich, non-cultivated pastures, eating almost exclusively locally produced grass.
Dr. Irina Herzon , senior university lecturer and the study’s lead author, explained the research focus: “We wanted to understand how consumers gaining access to ‘better’ meat rationalise their overall meat consumption – whether they see a link between eating ‘better’ and eating ‘less’.
All interviewees felt that meat can be part of a sustainable diet. Although most of them also acknowledged the need to reduce meat consumption globally, they often viewed reduction as more relevant elsewhere than in Finland. Consumer choices were influenced by health benefits, naturalness, and meat origin. A strong preference was shown for domestically produced options, particularly Finnish beef, which was linked to the environment and local producers.
Perceptions of ‘better’ meat varied, with animal welfare being a key concern, though taste remained the primary purchasing factor. The relationship between ‘better’ and ‘less’ was ambiguous – some saw higher costs as a reason to eat less, while others used premium meat as justification for maintaining or increasing consumption.
The findings highlight the complexities of promoting sustainable diets through the ‘less but better’ approach. The study underscores the need for clearer definitions of ‘better’ meat in relation to sustainability and cultural preferences, as well as stronger guidance on how much ‘less’ is necessary to meet sustainability targets.
Irina Herzon emphasises the importance of addressing both aspects: “We need to encourage reduced meat consumption while also promoting high-quality, sustainable production options.”
Further research is needed to define sustainable meat consumption criteria and to develop strategies for shifting consumer practices so that they align with the objectives of a sustainable food system.
Agriculture and Human Values
Does “better” mean “less”? Sustainable meat consumption in the context of natural pasture-raised beef
13-Feb-2025