Page 14 - Australian Pork Newspaper
P. 14

Study reveals Gen Z not ready to eat lab-grown meat
Australian Pork Limited industry survey confirms producer priorities
AUSTRALIAN Pork Limited has published its 2019-20 Annual In- dustry Survey report, providing valuable and timely feedback from producers on a number of themes, including APL membership and producer engagement, levy investment and in- dustry standards.
percent of respondents. The survey also high- lighted opportunities for APL to prioritise for the benefit of the
Australian Pork Lim- ited policy director Heidi Reid was con- sulting frequently with state-based pig industry organisations, seeking local knowledge on critical issues such as COVID-19 restrictions.
working with larger commercial piggeries and helping to inform Commonwealth and state disease mitigation work, while former APL employee Tony Abel has been re-engaged to work with smaller producers to strengthen their bios- ecurity systems.
A key objective of the survey was to gauge the level of satisfaction felt by Australian pig pro- ducers in terms of APL’s work, and identify ways APL services can con- tinue to evolve to reflect changes in the industry.
A more rigorous as- sessment of the rate of uptake will inform APL and industry about the risk that low adoption will lead to AMS plans being mandated by reg- ulation.
In addition to the re- cent establishment of A PL’s producer rela- tions team to engage regularly with APL members, two part- time industry liaison officers have joined APL as part of ongoing ASF-related collabora- tion with the Federal Government.
“We will continue to listen and act on the priority areas for pro- ducers and remain very grateful for their feed- back.”
Among the encour- aging results, three quarters of respondents were members of APL and 72 percent of total respondents were satis- fied with the member- ship services APL pro- vided.
From a workforce per- spective, 27 percent of respondents reported they were experiencing staffing shortages, while 62 percent saw benefit in having more staff training opportuni- ties in the industry.
Experienced industry veterinarian Dr Kirsty Richards has been
The 2019-20 Annual Industry Survey report can be found on the APL website australi resources/publications/ industry-survey-sum mary-2018-19/
This was reflected in 77 percent of respond- ents indicating they thought APL was doing a good job overall, 64 percent saying that APL was using producer levies effectively and 83 percent satisfaction with the frequency of APL communications.
Australian Pork Lim- ited executive general manager of operations Peter Haydon said the APL policy team had acted on feedback on workforce issues high- lighted in the survey results.
This includes in-
creasing participation in antimicrobial steward- ship, given plans were adopted by only 21 per- cent of respondents.
Effective, ongoing dia- logue between APL and state organisations has been essential, particu- larly to be adequately prepared for an exotic disease incursion in Australia.
“We are always looking for ways to im- prove APL’s services in step with changing industry priorities and challenges,” Mr Haydon said.
From a production perspective, 91 per- cent of sows owned by survey participants were located on gestation stall-free farms.
“We have commis- sioned expert help to in- vestigate solutions and create a formal work- force strategy for the industry,” Mr Haydon said.
Reflecting the priority APL is giving to the industry’s sustainability credentials, 77 percent of respondents indi- cated they have adopted an environmental man- agement plan – repre- senting 98 percent of sows owned by respond- ents.
Complementing the industry survey results has been producer con- sultation as part of the major review of the Australian Pork In- dustry Quality Assur- ance program.
The use of waste bed- ding for on-farm ferti- liser was practiced by 74
Not surprisingly, Af- rican swine fever pre- paredness was promi- nent in producer feed- back, which will guide the recommendations developed by the APIQ team.
NEW research by the University of Sydney and Curtin University has found that, despite having a great concern for the environment and animal welfare, Genera- tion Z was not ready to eat lab-grown meat.
Bogueva said.
“However, if cultured
‘advanced thinkers.’ “This generation has vast information at its fin- gertips but is still con- cerned that they will be left with the legacy of ex- ploitative capitalism, that benefits only a few at the
As a cohort of 5 mil- lion people born between 1995-2015 encompassing 20 percent of the Aus- tralian population, they are consumers to be reck- oned with.
“It may be through its physical appearance, but what seems to be more important is transparency around its environmental and other benefits.”
expense of many.
“They have witnessed
Published in Frontiers in Nutrition, the research found that 72 percent of Generation Z were not ready to accept cultured meat – defined in the survey as a lab-grown meat alternative produced by in-vitro cell cultures of animal cells – in place of meat from slaughtered animals.
The participants had several concerns re- lating to cultured meat, including an anticipated taste or disgust, health and safety, and whether it is a more sustainable option.
Gen Z’s five main at- titudes towards cultured meat
However, despite their lack of enthusiasm for the new meat alternative, 41 percent believed it could be a viable nutri- tional source because of the need to transition to more sustainable food op- tions and improve animal welfare.
“Gen Z value Australia’s reputation as a supplier of quality livestock and meat, and many view tra- ditional meat eating as being closely tied to con- cepts of masculinity and Australian cultural iden- tity,” Dr Bogueva said.
• 11 percent rejected all alternatives in favour of increased consumption of fruit and vegetables, saying they will stick with a vegetarian diet
University of Sydney’s lead researcher for the study Dr Diana Bogueva said they have found that Generation Z – those aged between 18 and 25 – are concerned about the en- vironment and animal welfare, yet most are not ready to accept cultured meat and view it with dis- gust.
Others were concerned about animal welfare, whereas some viewed cul- tured meat as a conspiracy orchestrated by the rich and powerful and were determined not to be con- vinced to consume it.
• 35 percent rejected cultured meat and edible insects but accepted plant- based alternatives because they ‘sounded more nat- ural’ and are ‘normal’
With 59 percent of par- ticipants concerned about the environmental impact of traditional livestock farming specifically, many were not clear on what those impacts were, nor did they understand the associated resource depletion.
How the research was conducted
“In-vitro meat and other alternatives are important as they can help to reduce greenhouse emissions and lead to better animal welfare conditions,” Dr
“The respondents were effectively divided into two groups: the ‘against’ described cultured meat as ‘another thing our generation has to worry about’ and questioned the motivations of those developing it, while sup- porters described it as ‘money invested for a good cause’ and ‘a smart move’ by people who are
The group of 227 ran- domly selected, Aus- tralian-based respondents were asked questions about their demographics’ dietary preferences such as how often they liked to eat meat, how they felt about cultured meat and whether they thought it was necessary to accept and consume.
meat is to replace live- stock-based proteins, it will have to emotionally and intellectually appeal to the Gen Z consumers.
Gen Z’s concerns about cultured meat
such behaviour resulting in climate change and are now afraid that a similar scenario may develop in relation to food, particu- larly as investors are pur- suing broader adoption of cultured meat.”
Societal concerns were also prevalent throughout the study, with a large number of respondents worried that eating cul- tured meat would be in conflict with perceptions of gender and national identity.
• 17 percent of respond- ents rejected all alter- natives, including cul- tured meat, seeing it as chemically produced and heavily processed
Several participants were also unsure whether cultured meat was an en- vironmentally sustainable option.
• 9 percent accepted ed- ible insects but rejected cultured meat as it was too artificial and not natural like insects
“Generation Z are also unsure whether cultured meat is actually more environmentally sustain- able, described by several respondents as potentially ‘resource consuming’ and not being ‘environ- mentally friendly’,” Dr Bogueva said.
The researchers col- lected Generation Z’s opinions of cultured meat via an online survey.
• 28 percent believed cultured meat was ac- ceptable, or possibly ac- ceptable if the technology could be mastered
Digestarom® DC
The Feed Converter ®
Northern Australia - Bruce Hunt 0499 171 010 Southern Australia - Kate Henne 0499 287 710 Tel: +61 2 9872 6324 of
DIGESTAROM is a registered trademark of BIOMIN Holding GmbH (IR-681524).
BIOMIN (IR-509692) and The Feed Converter (AT-292729) are registered trademarks of Erber Aktiengesellschaft.
Digestarom® DC
provides crystal clear bene ts for your animals and your operation.
• Latest innovation in phytogenics for improved feed intake
• Triple action formulation for better performance
• Unique Biomin® Duplex Capsule technology for optimized feed conversion
Naturally ahead
They were also asked their preference for dif- ferent meat alternatives, such as insects, plant- based and cultured meat.
Research from the Uni- versity of Sydney
Page 14 – Australian Pork Newspaper, October 2020
Photo: Oleg Ivanov

   12   13   14   15   16