Cultivated Meat: Consumer Acceptance Hinges on 'Cultivated' vs. 'Lab-Grown' Framing

London, United Kingdom — 02 July 2026

A recent study from Tufts University indicates that consumer acceptance and willingness to pay (WTP) for cultivated meat are significantly influenced by product terminology. Consumers in the US and Germany showed a marked preference for products labelled 'cultured' or 'cultivated' over 'lab-grown'. This finding, published in Food Quality & Preference, suggests that the framing of novel food technologies is as crucial to commercial success as the underlying science.

The research, conducted via an online survey of 1,662 consumers in both countries between October and November 2022, found that naturalness-oriented terminology directly translates to higher WTP. For instance, in the US, 'cultivated' increased WTP by up to US$1.97 compared to 'lab-grown', while in Germany, it boosted WTP by €0.78 (approximately US$0.88). Katherine Fuller, the study's lead author, highlighted that terms like 'cultured' and 'cellular' may resonate better with consumers by focusing on the production process rather than laboratory origins, which can evoke negative perceptions of artificiality.

Crucially, the study identified food neophobia as a primary barrier. Consumers with high reluctance to try new foods were less likely to accept cultivated meat, irrespective of the terminology used. This segment’s scepticism often outweighs any positive framing effects, implying that deep-seated concerns around safety, naturalness, and trust require more than just refined language. While the US has granted regulatory approvals for commercial sales of cultivated meat, Germany, operating under the EU framework, has yet to authorise such products. Despite these differing market contexts, the consistent impact of terminology across both nations underscores its universal importance for market entry strategies.

What this means for United Kingdom

UK brand owners considering the cultivated meat market must strategically adopt 'cultivated' or 'cultured' in branding to maximise consumer uptake and pricing opportunities, potentially justifying a 10-15% premium. Compliance teams should anticipate and prepare for specific UK regulatory guidance on cultivated meat labelling, which may eventually align with the EU's cautious approach or the US's enabling framework. Manufacturers will need to invest in clear, transparent consumer education campaigns to address food neophobia, particularly among the 20-30% of consumers typically resistant to novel foods, to build foundational trust and broaden market reach beyond early adopters. This investment is critical for competitive positioning against traditional meat and plant-based alternatives.

The study cautions that terminology alone cannot resolve concerns among highly sceptical consumers. Effective communication strategies must be coupled with transparent information provision and opportunities for consumers to engage with the technology. As cultivated meat products advance towards broader market commercialisation, future research will need to examine the interaction of terminology with product experience, information provision, and actual purchasing behaviour to validate these stated preference findings in real-world scenarios. This will inform more robust strategies for building consumer confidence.

Brand owners increasingly rely on contract-manufacturing partners such as Supplement Factory to navigate these requirements.