THE ALMEATY GROUP

A Study on Purchase Intention

of Consumers towards
Plant-based Meat
in the Philippines
 INTRODUCTION

Plant-based meat (PBM), products made of plants,

responds to the demand for sustainable and
healthier food options as an alternative to animal
meat. As Filipino consumers become more inclined
to a plant-based diet, PBM remains a option to
ease negative health and environmental
impacts caused by conventional animal meat.

However, there is still a gap in contextualizing

PBM studies in the country, so the researchers
aimed to assess the current presence of PBM in
the Philippine retail market by analyzing
different variables in relation to the purchase
intention of consumers.
1
OBJECTIVES
Determine the socio-demographic and socio-economic
1 information of the target population, which include Age, Gender,
Dietary Preferences, and Monthly Household Income.

Describe the purchase intention of the target population

2 towards plant-based meat.

Describe the variables that may affect the purchasing intention

3 of the target population toward plant-based meat (Perceived
Healthiness, Environmental Concern, Taste, Product
Knowledge, Food Neophobia, Meat Attachment)

2
Determine if these variables influence consumers in their
4 purchase intention towards plant-based meat.
 OUR METHODOLOGY
Data from 215 qualified respondents who were
PARTICIPANTS Milennials and Gen. Z, aged 18 to 34, and
residing in NCR.

Disseminated surveys through Google Forms

with adapted questionnaires from previous studies MATERIALS
to assess PI, PH, EC, T, PK, FN, and MA.

PH, EC, FN, and MA used a 5-point Likert scale, while T used a 5-point Semantic
Differential Scale. PI and PK used a 7-point Likert scale. Their Cronbach's alpha score
also range from 0.68-0.89, which are acceptable and shows internal consistency.

Respondents were randomly selected using

PROCEDURE Convenience Sampling. Correspondingly, the
survey was sent through online channels

Prior to the data gathering proper, pre-testing was conducted to 15 participants and were
asked to give their comments and suggestions on the survey. 3
OBJECTIVE 1
Prefer not to say
25-34 2.8%
12.6%

Male
32.6%

Female
63.7%

18-24
87.4%
AGE GENDER
86.4% aged 18 to 24 (188 responses) 63.7% female (137 responses)
32.6% male (70 responses)
4
12.6% aged 25 to 34 (27 responses)
2.5% prefer not to say (6 responses)
0.9% non-binary (2 responses)
 OBJECTIVE 1
Pescetarian
2.3% Less than ₱9,520
At least ₱190,401 and up 7.9%
18.6%
Between ₱9,521 to ₱19,040
11.2%

Between ₱114, 241 to ₱190,400

11.6%
Between ₱19,041 to ₱38,080
16.3%

Between ₱66,641 to ₱114,240 Between ₱38,081 to ₱66,640

21.4% 13%
Omnivores
95.8%

DIETARY PREFERENCES MONTHLY HOUSEHOLD INCOME

95.8% omnivores (206 responses)
2.3% pescetarian (5 responses)
1.4% vegetarian (3 responses)
0.4% vegan (1 response)
21.4% ₱66,641 to ₱114,240 (46 responses)
18.6% at least ₱190,401 and above (40 responses)
16.3% ₱19,041 to ₱38,080 (35 responses)
13% ₱38, 081 to ₱66, 640 (28 responses)
11.6% ₱114, 241 to ₱190, 400 (25 responses)
11.2% ₱9,521 to ₱19,040 (24 responses)
7.9% less than ₱9,520 (17 responses)
5
 OBJECTIVE 2

VARIABLE MEAN STANDARD DEVIATION

Purchase Intention 3.54 1.61

*Based on the study by Monta, N., Sayruamyat, S., & Premashthira, A. (2022)

6
 OBJECTIVE 3

VARIABLE MEAN STANDARD DEVIATION

Perceived Healthiness 4.09 0.90

Environmental Concern 4.07 0.84

Taste 3.32 0.96

Product Knowledge 3.93 1.70

Food Neophobia 2.81 1.05

Meat Attachment 3.91 1.00

*Food Neophobia comparison was based on the study by Monta, et al. (2022)
7
*Meat Attachment comparison was based on the study by He et al. (2020)
 SIGNIFICANT FACTOR
VARIABLE INTERPRETATION
(p-value)

There is extremely strong evidence that there is

PH p<.001
a significant correlation between PI and PH.
OBJECTIVE 4

There is extremely strong evidence that there is

EC p<.001
a significant correlation between PI and PH.

There is extremely strong evidence that there is

T p<.001
a significant correlation between PI and PH.

There is extremely strong evidence that there is

PK p<.001
a significant correlation between PI and PH.

There is strong evidence that there is a

FN p<.05
significant correlation between PI and PH.

There is extremely strong evidence that there is

8
MA p<.001
a significant correlation between PI and PH.
 PEARSON
CORRELATION
VARIABLE CORRELATION TYPE INTERPRETATION
COEFFICIENT
(r)
PEARSON CORRELATION

Moderate Positive There is a moderate positive

PH 0.40
Correlation correlation between PI and PH.

Moderate Positive There is a moderate positive

EC 0.34
Correlation correlation between PI and EC.
COEFFICIENT

There is a strong positive

T 0.65 Strong Positive Correlation
correlation between PI and T.

There is a strong positive

PK 0.65 Strong Positive Correlation
correlation between PI and PK.

There is a weak negative

FN -0.15 Weak Negative Correlation
correlation between PI and FN.

MA -0.34
Moderate Negative
Correlation
There is a moderate negative
correlation between PI and MA. 9
 LIMITATIONS
Limited age range
Only focuses on the
More concentrated which narrows the health
correlation of PH, EC,
on the 18 to 24 age concerns and product
T, PK, FN, and M with
group awareness of older age
Purchase Intention
groups

RECOMMENDATIONS
Focus on a more Explore the relationship
Conduct sensory
representative data between demographics and
testing in field
set that studies older other attitudes (ex.
observations
demographics price/affordability)

10
 THE ALMEATY GROUP

THANK YOU
It was nice meat-ing you!