Consumer perceptions of beef healthiness: results from a qualitative study in four European countries.

BACKGROUND: Consumer perception of the healthiness of beef is an important determinant of beef consumption. However, little is known about how consumers perceive the healthiness of beef. The aim of this study is to shed light on the associations between beef and health. METHODS: Eight focus group discussions were conducted in four European countries (France, UK, Germany, Spain), each consisting of seven to nine participants. A content analysis was performed on the transcripts of these discussions. RESULTS: Although beef was generally perceived as healthful, focus group participants expected positive as well as negative effects of beef consumption on their health. Labelled, branded, fresh and lean beef were perceived as signalling healthful beef, in contrast with further processed and packaged beef. Consumers felt that their individual choices could make a difference with respect to the healthiness of beef consumed. Focus group participants were not in favour of improving beef healthiness during processing, but rather focussed on appropriate consumption behaviour and preparation methods. CONCLUSIONS: The individual responsibility for health implies that consumers should be able to make correct judgements about how healthful their food is. However, the results of this study indicate that an accurate assessment of beef healthiness is not always straightforward. The presented results on consumer perceptions of beef healthiness provide insights into consumer decision making processes, which are important for the innovation and product differentiation in the European beef sector, as well as for public health policy decisions related to meat consumption in general and beef consumption in particular.

European beef consumers' interest in a beef eating-quality guarantee Insights from a qualitative study in four EU countries.

Consumer demand in relation to food is shifting towards products that are safe, nutritious, and of good eating quality. Beef consumers are demanding for experience quality that matches their expectations, particularly with respect to beef tenderness. The development of a beef quality grading and guarantee system obtained through muscle profiling research, can allow the beef industry to meet these demands. A qualitative consumer study has been carried out with beef consumers in France, Spain, United Kingdom and Germany to assess their opinions about beef muscle profiling and their interest in a beef eating-quality guarantee. Findings indicate that both concepts are well accepted by European beef consumers, although not unconditional. Participants express some reserve related to the possible upgrading of lower value cuts, too much standardisation, and the fact that tenderness is to some extent subjective. They further require the system to be simple, sufficiently documented and independent-party controlled. This study indicates good opportunities for the development of a beef eating-quality guarantee system in Europe. As an increase in consumers' satisfaction could lead to higher consumption rates and industry profitability, the introduction of an eating-quality guarantee system can contribute to market development and improved competitiveness of the European beef industry.

Relationships between sensory evaluations of beef tenderness, shear force measurements and consumer characteristics.

The supply of tender beef is an important challenge for the beef industry. Knowledge about the profile of consumers who are more optimistic or more accurate in their tenderness evaluations is important for product development and beef marketing purposes. Central location tests of beef steaks were performed in Norway and Belgium (n=218). Instrumental and sensorial tenderness of three muscles from Belgian Blue and Norwegian Red cattle was reported. Consumers who are optimistically evaluating tenderness were found to be more often male, less food neophobic, more positive towards beef healthiness, and showed fewer concerns about beef safety. No clear profile emerged for consumers who assessed tenderness similar to shear force measurements, which suggests that tenderness is mainly evaluated subjectively. The results imply a window of opportunities in tenderness improvements, and allow targeting a market segment which is less critical towards beef tenderness.

Modelling of beef sensory quality for a better prediction of palatability.

Despite efforts by the industry to control the eating quality of beef, there remains a high level of variability in palatability, which is one reason for consumer dissatisfaction. In Europe, there is still no reliable on-line tool to predict beef quality and deliver consistent quality beef to consumers. Beef quality traits depend in part on the physical and chemical properties of the muscles. The determination of these properties (known as muscle profiling) will allow for more informed decisions to be made in the selection of individual muscles for the production of value-added products. Therefore, scientists and professional partners of the ProSafeBeef project have brought together all the data they have accumulated over 20 years. The resulting BIF-Beef (Integrated and Functional Biology of Beef) data warehouse contains available data of animal growth, carcass composition, muscle tissue characteristics and beef quality traits. This database is useful to determine the most important muscle characteristics associated with a high tenderness, a high flavour or generally a high quality. Another more consumer driven modelling tool was developed in Australia: the Meat Standards Australia (MSA) grading scheme that predicts beef quality for each individual muscle×specific cooking method combination using various information on the corresponding animals and post-slaughter processing factors. This system has also the potential to detect variability in quality within muscles. The MSA system proved to be effective in predicting beef palatability not only in Australia but also in many other countries. The results of the work conducted in Europe within the ProSafeBeef project indicate that it would be possible to manage a grading system in Europe similar to the MSA system. The combination of the different modelling approaches (namely muscle biochemistry and a MSA-like meat grading system adapted to the European market) is a promising area of research to improve the prediction of beef quality. In both approaches, the volume of data available not only provides statistically sound correlations between various factors and beef quality traits but also a better understanding of the variability of beef quality according to various criteria (breed, age, sex, pH, marbling etc.).

One technology does not fit all: profiling consumers of tender and tenderised beef steaks.

New production technologies can help the beef sector to improve eating quality, in particular the tenderness, of low-value meat cuts. This paper aims at profiling potential consumers for unprocessed tenderloin M. Psoas major, muscle profiled M. Infraspinatus and marinated by injection M. Semitendinosus in Belgium (n=108) and Norway (n=110). Consumers' hedonic expectations for the three beef cuts, along with their general attitudes towards beef and food technology, were collected in central location tests. Results show that tenderloin triggers the highest hedonic expectations and best appeals to consumers profiled with high beef involvement in both countries. Consumers' expectations for steaks from novel technologies vary with consumers' attitudes towards beef, food technology and food risks and their country of residence, resulting in three additional consumer profiles. Furthermore, general attitudinal profiles of beef consumers also differ between the two countries. The results are useful for the positioning of novel beef products within the two national markets.

The effect of technology information on consumer expectations and liking of beef.

European consumers increasingly attach value to process characteristics of food. Although beef technologies are hardly communicated to consumers, providing consumer-oriented information about technology application might increase perceived transparency and consumer acceptance. This study investigates how information about beef technologies influences consumer expectations and liking of beef. Beef consumers in Belgium (n = 108) and Norway (n = 110) participated in an information experiment combined with sensory testing in which each consumer tasted three beef muscles treated with different technologies: unprocessed tenderloin M. Psoas major, muscle profiled M. Infraspinatus, and marinated (by injection) M. Semitendinosus. The findings indicate that detailed information about beef technologies can enhance consumers' expectations and liking of beef. However, this effect differs between countries and beef technologies. Information becomes either less relevant when the product is actually tasted, as indicated by the findings in Norway, or more relevant when information is confirmed by own experience during tasting, as indicated by the findings in Belgium.

European consumer response to packaging technologies for improved beef safety.

Beef packaging can influence consumer perceptions of beef. Although consumer perceptions and acceptance are considered to be among the most limiting factors in the application of new technologies, there is a lack of knowledge about the acceptability to consumers of beef packaging systems aimed at improved safety. This paper explores European consumers' acceptance levels of different beef packaging technologies. An online consumer survey was conducted in five European countries (n=2520). Acceptance levels among the sample ranged between 23% for packaging releasing preservative additives up to 73% for vacuum packaging. Factor analysis revealed that familiar packaging technologies were clearly preferred over non-familiar technologies. Four consumer segments were identified: the negative (31% of the sample), cautious (30%), conservative (17%) and enthusiast (22%) consumers, which were profiled based on their attitudes and beef consumption behaviour. Differences between consumer acceptance levels should be taken into account while optimising beef packaging and communicating its benefits.