Promoting a shift away from meat consumption towards an increased share of plant-based alternatives is a promising strategy for addressing environmental challenges while also improving population health. Many consumers already express a strong interest in adopting more sustainable and healthy diets, however, empirical evidence suggests that there is only a weak link between these intentions and actual dietary changes. To unpack this intention-behavior gap this study explores three research questions 1) What factors explain intentions to reduce meat consumption among meat eaters? 2) How much meat do individuals with reduction intentions consume, compared to those without such intentions? and 3) Among participants with reduction intentions — what factors drive their continued meat consumption? To answer these questions, we developed a survey and recruited a nationally representative sample of Swedish consumers (n = 998). A backwards stepwise regression, including 14 theoretically informed variables, revealed that attitudes— towards meat (β = −0.32) and plant-based proteins (β = 0.35) both — were the strongest predictors of intentions to reduce meat consumption. Individual factors like environmental self-identity (β = 0.13) and gender (β = 0.08) played smaller but meaningful roles as did practical considerations such as the perceived convenience of cooking meat compared to plant-based foods (β = 0.09). Furthermore, although the result showed a significant difference in self-reported meat consumption between individuals with high stated intentions to reduce meat intake and those with low or no intention, the size of the difference was small only (d = 0.15), bordering negligible, reaffirming the suspected intention-behavior gap. Among those with intentions to lower their meat consumption, only two key variables emerged as driving continued meat eating — meat purchasing habits (β = 0.33) and a positive attitude towards mea t(β = 0.17). These results underscore the challenges of translating intentions into action and highlight how different variables are important for a) shaping intentions and b) driving these into actions. While intentions are a needed prerequisite for voluntary behavior change, they sometimes prove insufficient on their own, especially when the aim is to change behaviors heavily governed by habits. Practical implications suggest that focusing on breaking habits and fostering positive attitudes towards plant-based alternatives are key in bridging the gap between intentions and actual diet changes.

Transforming global and local food systems is essential for achieving current sustainability goals. A significant lever for the food sector is promoting a dietary shift away from animal-based proteins towards more plant-based options. Food retailers, positioned at the centre of the value chain, hold a uniquely influential role, as they have the capacity to shape the behaviours of both producers and consumers. However, consumer acceptability is a precondition for implementing behavioural change interventions, and there is a current knowledge gap regarding public acceptability of various retail-led interventions. In this study, we assess consumer acceptability of five categories of food retail-led interventions: information-based, norms-based, choice architecture, price-based, and choice restriction. In this mission we developed a survey and recruited a nationally representative sample (n = 424), we found price manipulations and choice restrictions to be less accepted than strategies building on information, norms, and choice architecture. Furthermore, a multi-level model showed that perceived effectiveness, fairness, and freedom of choice were significant predictors of acceptance for the interventions, with the exception that freedom of choice did not predict support for either the norm-based intervention or choice architecture. Lastly, we showcase how older age, positive meat attitudes, and strong meat-buying habits hindered acceptance, while biospheric values, environmental identity, and altruism facilitated it. Two potential courses of retailer action are identified: (1) immediately implement high-support interventions based on information, social norms, and choice architecture and (2) explore how to convey intervention effectiveness to increase consumer acceptability of price-based interventions and choice restrictions.