PRELIMINARY DRAFT — Workshop in early planning. Reading list will expand as the participant list develops.
The Unjournal · Pivotal Questions Initiative

Readings & Resources

Background materials for the Plant-Based Alternatives Substitution Workshop

Why organized by method: unlike most reading lists, we group papers by methodological approach rather than topic. The central challenge is deciding which (if any) strategies yield credible causal estimates of substitution. Scanner data demand systems, hypothetical choice experiments, and field experiments each have distinct strengths and serious weaknesses — and currently produce conflicting results. Participants are encouraged to assess credibility across methods, not just absorb findings.
Focal & Synthesis

How Much Do Plant-Based Products Substitute for Animal Products?

Reinstein, Meader & Schmiess (2025) — EA Forum / Unjournal Pivotal Questions Initiative

Synthesis The primary framing document for this workshop. Operationalizes the pivotal question around a specific counterfactual (Impossible Burger price falls by X%; how does chicken consumption respond?), surveys ~15 empirical papers across methods, and shows that no two scanner-data studies agree on the sign of the PBA–meat relationship for the same product categories. Identifies the core methodological challenge (price endogeneity), discusses three unresolved meta-questions (can elasticities be reliably estimated here; what experiment would help; what substitution rate justifies continued PBA R&D), and includes a forest plot of cross-price elasticity estimates across studies. Written with AI assistance; human-verified. Notes two author COIs (Woolley and Peacock are Unjournal team members).

Price-, Taste-, and Convenience-Competitive Plant-Based Meat Would Not Currently Replace Meat

Peacock — EA Forum (related to ACE research priorities)

Synthesis A synthesis essay arguing that even under optimistic product-improvement assumptions, consumer composition data suggests substitution effects would be modest. Draws on Neuhofer & Lusk buyer data and broader literature. Note: authored by a member of the Unjournal team (documented COI). Read as a synthesis position paper rather than original empirical analysis.

PBM Market Penetration and Taste Comparability: A First-Pass Evidence Review

Unjournal / AI-assisted synthesis (exploratory, not peer vetted)

Synthesis Reviews evidence on PBA market share trajectory, who buys PBAs (buyer composition), and how taste comparability has evolved, drawing on GFI market data, Neuhofer & Lusk (2022), OECD/FAO projections, and price trend data. Covers the omnivore-buyer versus displacement logic and the price/substitution evidence at a descriptive level. Annotatable via Hypothes.is. Treat as background orientation rather than a vetted literature review.

Observational Demand Estimation Scanner/retail data · demand systems · cross-price elasticities
Common challenge across all scanner studies: price endogeneity. Retail prices are set strategically, not randomly — observational price-quantity relationships conflate demand-side behavior with supply-side pricing decisions. Instrumental variable approaches (Hausman instruments, cost shifters) are used, but the instruments are difficult to validate in thin PBA markets. The most striking fact: across four US scanner-data studies, no meat category has a consistent finding — some studies find PBAs complement a given meat, others find substitution for the same category.

Why Are Fewer Grocery Shoppers Buying Meat? Declining Grocery Sales, Prices, and Cultural Change

Meier, Freitas-Groff & Woolley (2024) — SSRN working paper

Scanner Data Highest relevance in our scoping survey (73%). Uses Nielsen grocery scanner data with multiple identification approaches: a binary choice model with Hausman instruments, an AIDS model (with and without instruments, yielding puzzling results), event studies around first PBA purchase (which the authors' own pre-trend tests cast doubt on), and matrix completion. Core argument: PBAs cannot account for much of the recent decline in grocery meat sales. The authors are themselves somewhat pessimistic about the prospects for causal inference in this context. Note: Trevor Woolley (co-author) is a member of the Unjournal team; COI documented.

Assessing Cross-Price Effects of Meat Alternatives on Beef, Pork, and Chicken Retail Demand in 2022

Tonsor & Bina (2023) — Purdue CFDAS report

Scanner Data Directly addresses the substitution question using a G-AIDS demand system. Main finding: PBM is a complement to chicken but a substitute for beef and pork — the opposite of what some other studies find for chicken. Cross-validated against Meat Demand Monitor choice experiment data (though the validation reasoning is contested). No explicit instrument for price endogeneity; the identification approach is less clearly articulated than in other papers.

Demand for Plant-Based Meat Alternatives and the Role of Habit Formation and Variety Seeking

Neuhofer, Ortez & Lusk — Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics (published); earlier job market paper estimated cross-price elasticities

Scanner Data Uses IRI scanner data. The published JAAE version refocused on structural habit-formation parameters rather than reduced-form cross-price elasticities (co-author Ortez was added). The earlier job market paper (linked) retained elasticity estimates. Both versions are potentially informative: the JMP for substitution estimates, the JAAE for understanding how long-run habit dynamics might amplify or dampen short-run price effects. Evaluators may focus on whichever version is more informative for the pivotal question.

Meet the Meatless: Demand for New Generation Plant-Based Meat Alternatives

Zhao, Wang, Hu & Zheng (2022)

Scanner Data Scanner data AIDS estimation. Finds PBM is a complement to beef and pork, but a substitute for chicken, turkey, and fish — directly conflicting with Tonsor & Bina (2023) on chicken and with other studies on beef. Identification strategy (a Durbin–Wu–Hausman test rather than a proper IV) is contested: the test diagnoses endogeneity but does not correct for it.

Price Elasticities of Meat, Fish and Plant-Based Meat Substitutes: Evidence from Dutch Supermarket Scanner Data

Liu & Ansink (2024) — EconStor discussion paper

Scanner Data Dutch context using QAIDS. Finds PBMs are complements for beef, poultry, and fish, but substitutes for pork; changes in PBM price have no effect on meat demand. Useful as an international comparison point, though Dutch market structure and PBM penetration differ meaningfully from the US.

Are Plant-Based Analogues Replacing Cow's Milk in the American Diet?

Stewart, Kuchler, Cessna & Hahn — Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics

Scanner Data Time-series / VAR analysis of plant-based milk substitution for dairy milk. Does not directly address PBM-for-meat, but the question is causally related: evidence of robust displacement in milk would support the hypothesis that the same mechanism operates in meat. Carefully done with robustness checks. Published in a decent journal.

Field & Natural Experiments Randomized trials · placement experiments · price randomization
Field experiments avoid the price endogeneity problem through random variation in prices or product availability. This is a major advantage. But they face their own limitations: short time windows (missing long-run habit formation), specific retail contexts limiting external validity, and very few randomized price trials involving PBA products specifically. The Bray et al. finding — that own-price elasticities from a randomized retail experiment are far smaller than IV estimates from comparable observational data — is one of the most important methodological facts for this workshop.

Retail Price Randomization and Own-Price Elasticities [Bray et al., 2024]

Bray et al. (2024) — full citation to be confirmed

Field Experiment Methodology Benchmark A key methodological reference for the workshop. A randomized retail pricing experiment found own-price elasticities substantially smaller than IV and difference-in-differences estimates from comparable observational data. This directly suggests commonly-used observational identification strategies overestimate demand responses — a result that casts doubt on whether any of the scanner-data cross-price estimates are credible. The mechanism (whether IV instruments violate the exclusion restriction, or whether the experiment has its own limitations) is unresolved and worth debating. Referenced in the EA Forum PQ post and the workshop About page; workshop participants are encouraged to locate the full citation.

Estimating the Effect of Moving Meat-Free Products to the Meat Aisle on Sales of Meat and Meat-Free Products

Piernas, Cook, Stevens, Stewart, Hollowell, Scarborough & Jebb (2021) — PLOS Medicine

Field Experiment Non-randomised controlled intervention in a large UK supermarket chain: moving meat-free products to the meat aisle. Does not find a significant impact on meat sales overall. Does not address pricing directly, but the null result on placement is tangentially relevant: if physical proximity to meat has no impact on meat sales, this may suggest that PBA availability alone has limited short-run displacement power — though it could also be a null result specific to the placement-not-price channel.

Hypothetical Choice Experiments Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) · stated preference
DCEs ask consumers to choose between product bundles at stated prices. Useful for evaluating price scenarios not yet observed in real markets, but stated choices systematically overstate real switching behavior. Caputo et al. (2025) and Tonsor et al. (2022) both use carefully designed DCEs and reach conflicting conclusions for the same product categories — suggesting that methodological care within this tradition does not resolve the disagreement.

Plant-Based versus Conventional Meat in Food Away From Home Settings: Substitution, Complementarity, and Market Impacts

Caputo, Lusk & Blaustein-Rejto (2025) — Agricultural Economics

Hypothetical Choice Basket-based DCE with EDM (exact demand model) extension, focused on food-away-from-home. Finds very small cross-price effects of PB burger prices on conventional meat, with mixed complementarity and substitution patterns. Potentially best-in-class for this method given author prestige and methodological rigor. Results conflict with observational scanner studies on the direction of effects for several categories.

Market Potential of New Plant-Based Protein Alternatives: Insights from Four US Consumer Experiments

Tonsor, Lusk & Schroeder (2022) — Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy

Hypothetical Choice Four hypothetical DCE designs. The final and most realistic experiment finds Impossible and Beyond are complements to each other and to ground beef, but substitutes for chicken — the opposite of what Caputo et al. (2025) find for PBA–beef. Useful for examining how design choices within the DCE tradition affect conclusions, quite aside from scanner vs. hypothetical differences.

Substitution Patterns and Price Response for Plant-Based Meat Alternatives

Jahn, Guhl & Erhard — PNAS

Hypothetical Choice Restaurant/survey hypothetical DCE published in PNAS. Authors describe a careful methodological approach. Published in a high-profile general science venue. External validity limited by the hypothetical restaurant framing and the specific price range examined.

Supplementary Descriptive & Complementary Evidence (click to expand)

These papers do not support strong causal inference about substitution, but provide relevant context: buyer composition, repeat purchasing rates, advertising effects, and cross-product dynamics that inform how to think about the question.

Most Plant-Based Meat Alternative Buyers Also Buy Meat

Neuhofer & Lusk (2022) — Scientific Reports

Descriptive Descriptive IRI scanner analysis. Central finding: the large majority of PBM buyers are omnivores who also purchase conventional meat. Important context for interpreting who is affected by PBA price changes — if most buyers are flexitarians rather than dedicated vegans, lower PBA prices could displace more animal consumption than a "vegan niche" story would suggest. Does not estimate causal substitution effects.

Consumer Spending Patterns for Plant-Based Meat Alternatives

Cuffey, Chenarides, Li & Zhao (2022)

Descriptive Event study around the date of a household's first PBM purchase. Finds no decrease in meat spending in the purchase month; spending on deli, dairy, and dry groceries does decline. Low repeat purchase rate; for repeat buyers, PBM spending grows significantly. The event-study identification assumes random timing of first PBM purchase — implausible in practice — but the descriptive patterns (especially the low repeat rate) are informative.

Does the Advertising of Plant-Based Burgers Attract Meat Consumers?

Wang, Li & Zheng — Agribusiness

Descriptive Advertising effectiveness: advertising increases PBM purchases primarily among existing vegan burger buyers; the effect is about 5x smaller for conventional meat buyers. Repeat purchasers make up roughly 30% of PBM purchasers. Relevant indirect evidence on market composition and the difficulty of reaching new consumer segments — though not a direct test of price-driven substitution.

Are All Meats Substitutes? A Basket- and Expenditure-Based Approach

Neill & Britton — Agribusiness

Hypothetical Choice Hypothetical basket-based DCE focused on inter-meat substitution (beef/pork/chicken/turkey), without PBM as an option. Useful background for understanding the within-meat substitution landscape that PBAs are entering — since a meat tax or PBA price change could shift demand across animal products in ways that matter for welfare.

Full Research Scoping Table

Approximately 15 papers compiled with relevance ratings (by DR and JS), method classifications, and internal discussion notes on identification quality. Suggestions for additional relevant work are welcome.

Research Scoping Table (Coda) Pivotal Questions & Beliefs Elicitation Metaculus Community Forecasts

Other Pivotal Questions Workshops

Wellbeing Measurement (Mar 2026) Cultivated Meat (May 2026) All Workshops →
About this page

Reading list compiled with AI assistance from the Unjournal research scoping table and the EA Forum PQ post. Descriptions draw on relevance ratings and discussion notes by DR and JS. Annotations and corrections welcome via Hypothes.is; suggest additions via the workshop survey.