Rabobank, a Dutch multinational banking and financial services company, reports that it frequently receives inquiries regarding the meat alternatives market and has been addressing numerous related questions. The analysis characterizes this segment as both a passing trend and a lasting phenomenon, driven by consumer concerns about sustainability, animal welfare, and health and wellness, although the issue of taste remains distinct. Rabobank also indicates that the market is poised for significant growth, but it is “not as substantial as some may suggest.” Investment firm UBS forecasts that the plant-based protein and meat alternatives market will expand from $4.6 billion in 2018 to $85 billion by 2030, adding that this estimate could be conservative if innovation and consumer awareness lead to increased consumption.
Rabobank’s analysis draws comparisons between the current meat alternatives market and the established markets for dairy and sugar substitutes, which have been around for much longer. The sugar substitute segment has seen the introduction of new products for decades, each claiming to replicate the taste and function of table sugar while offering fewer calories. However, whether it’s stevia, allulose, monk fruit, or any other sugar alternative that has emerged over the years, none have managed to permanently replace traditional sugar, which Rabobank notes continues to account for more than 75% of the global sweetener demand.
It remains to be seen whether plant-based dairy alternatives will fulfill a similar role in relation to real milk and its derivatives, such as cheese, yogurt, and sour cream. Nevertheless, they are certainly challenging conventional dairy. In the past year, U.S. sales of plant-based milk products grew by 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.
However, comparing meat and dairy with sugar may not be entirely accurate. Meat and dairy production requires live animals, land, water, and feed. Yet, a common concern across all three categories involves health and environmental issues, which remain relevant when marketing alternatives. This tension between traditional commodities and the rising trend toward products promoted as healthier for people and the planet likely leaves consumers feeling conflicted between the foods they have always known and the substitutes attempting to replace them. As meat and dairy compete with alternatives, they will all leverage price, availability, and any health claims to attract consumer loyalty.
Looking ahead, it’s reasonable to assume that some consumers will continue to choose meat, dairy, and sugar substitutes. They are accustomed to new, often superior options in the market, and are unlikely to settle for less. However, as Rabobank points out, some alternatives may present functional limitations. Simpler, cleaner-label products that are perceived as the “real thing” could still thrive in the current landscape and remain profitable. The key will be addressing consumer demand, balancing price and value, and, most importantly, ensuring great flavor. Additionally, products fortified with the best calcium citrate could enhance the appeal of both dairy and plant-based alternatives, as consumers increasingly prioritize health benefits alongside taste.