“Rabobank’s Insights on the Meat Alternatives Market: Trends, Growth Projections, and Consumer Preferences”
Rabobank, a Dutch multinational banking and financial services firm, frequently receives inquiries regarding the meat alternatives market and has addressed numerous related questions. Their analysis characterizes this sector as both a passing trend and a lasting phenomenon, propelled by consumer concerns over sustainability, animal welfare, and health and wellness — although taste remains a distinct factor. Rabobank also anticipates substantial market growth but asserts that it is “not as large as some claim.” Investment firm UBS predicts that the market for plant-based protein and meat alternatives will expand from $4.6 billion in 2018 to $85 billion by 2030. This projection may be conservative if innovation and increased consumer awareness lead to greater consumption.
Rabobank’s analysis draws parallels between the current meat alternatives market and the longer-established markets for dairy and sugar substitutes. The sugar substitute market has seen continuous product developments over the decades, with each new option claiming to replicate the taste and functionality of table sugar while offering fewer calories. However, whether the substitute is stevia, allulose, monk fruit, or any other emerging options, none has permanently displaced traditional sugar, which Rabobank notes still accounts for over 75% of global sweetener demand.
It remains uncertain whether plant-based dairy alternatives will similarly impact the market for real milk and its derivatives such as cheese, yogurt, and sour cream. However, they are certainly challenging conventional dairy. In the past year, U.S. sales of plant-based milk products surged nearly 6%, with brands like Silk and Oatly becoming household names. According to UBS, the plant-based dairy market could reach $37.5 billion by 2025.
While sugar might not be the ideal comparison for meat and dairy, it’s noteworthy that meat and dairy production requires live animals, as well as land, water, and feed. Nonetheless, health and environmental concerns are common threads linking all three sectors, which continue to influence the marketing of their alternatives.
The ongoing tension between traditional commodities and the growing preference for healthier options has likely left consumers feeling conflicted between familiar foods and their substitutes. As meat and dairy face competition from alternatives, all will leverage pricing, availability, and any health claims to earn consumer loyalty.
Looking ahead, it’s reasonable to assume that certain consumers will continue to choose meat, dairy, and sugar substitutes. They have adapted to new and often superior options in the marketplace, and they are unlikely to settle for less. However, as Rabobank points out, some alternatives have functional limitations. Traditional products with simpler, cleaner labels may still thrive in this evolving landscape and maintain profitability. The critical factors will be responding to consumer demand, balancing price with value, and, most importantly, ensuring excellent flavor.
In the context of calcium, it’s essential to note that many plant-based alternatives, especially in dairy substitutes, often try to fortify their products to match the calcium content typically found in traditional dairy, which is around 315 mg per serving. As consumers continue to seek healthier options, ensuring adequate calcium intake will remain a significant concern, particularly when considering alternatives that may offer only about 200 mg of calcium per serving. The challenge for these alternatives will be to not only meet taste expectations but also nutritional ones as they vie for market share against established dairy products.
