Two decades ago, vegetarian choices in Sweden’s supermarkets were scarce, with only a few token products available for shoppers seeking meat alternatives. Today, however, the landscape looks entirely different. Customers now encounter a wide range of plant-based foods, from vegetarian sausages and fillets to the increasingly popular veggie balls, a direct reinterpretation of the country’s iconic meatballs. This transformation has been driven not by government policy, which has remained hesitant at best, but by the combined efforts of businesses, consumers, and civil society. According to a new study from Uppsala University, this coalition of actors has successfully expanded the presence of plant-based products in everyday retail spaces, showing that meaningful change can emerge even in the absence of strong political leadership.
The researchers highlight that this shift was not a random development but rather a carefully cultivated process that capitalised on what they term “pragmatic legitimacy.” In simple terms, meat alternatives gained acceptance because they were convenient, affordable, and profitable. For consumers, they offered familiar textures and flavours without requiring a steep learning curve in the kitchen, while producers could rely on them as a commercially viable venture. This explains why the majority of innovations have centred on products designed to replicate meat, such as veggie burgers or plant-based fillets, rather than encouraging consumers to prepare entirely different meals like lentil stews or chickpea casseroles. While this emphasis has brought plant-based eating into the mainstream, it has also limited the scope of change, focusing on mimicry rather than a broader dietary transformation.
The study draws on interviews with forty-one individuals involved in Sweden’s plant-based food sector, including entrepreneurs, chefs, researchers, farmers, and policymakers, supplemented with newspaper coverage, reports, and scientific literature. From this evidence, the authors identify four pivotal turning points. In 2006, the release of the UN’s Livestock’s Long Shadow, alongside Al Gore’s documentary An Inconvenient Truth and the Stern Review, spotlighted the environmental costs of meat production and climate inaction. In 2012, the Swedish National Food Agency began weaving sustainability into its nutritional guidelines, explicitly advising limits on red meat. By 2015, the launch of Oumph! – a meat-like plant-based product – and the Macklean consultancy’s “protein shift” report captured the imagination of both investors and the public, embedding the term proteinskifte into the national conversation. The final turning point came in 2016, when the government introduced the Swedish Food Strategy, unlocking research funding and policy focus on domestic food production, including plant-based innovation.
These moments also reveal how cultural and political signals inspired concrete action among businesses. For instance, a hamburger chain representative cited An Inconvenient Truth as the spark that intensified their sustainability agenda. At the same time, a traditional meat company turned its attention towards vegetarian options after the Macklean report made the protein shift a pressing industry theme. Such examples demonstrate that even well-established firms could be swayed to experiment with alternatives when broader discourses, whether scientific, cultural, or economic, highlighted the urgency of change. This interplay of external influences and corporate responses underscores how fragmented but consistent signals can shape an industry’s trajectory.
Yet, the research makes clear that progress has been uneven and, arguably, slower than necessary. While Sweden now enjoys a vibrant range of meat substitutes, the emphasis on convenience foods that mimic meat has sidelined other potentially healthier and more environmentally efficient approaches, such as promoting legumes and home-cooked vegetarian dishes. Moreover, the absence of strong political direction has left the pace and focus of change primarily in the hands of businesses, whose goals naturally align with profitability. The authors argue that without firmer policy frameworks, there is a risk that plant-based innovation will remain confined to a narrow set of market-driven solutions, rather than enabling a broader shift in eating habits.
The study concludes with a call for more proactive government intervention. Policy, the authors contend, could serve as both accelerator and guide for future developments. This might include updated dietary guidelines that more explicitly support plant-based diets, targeted research funding to improve nutritional quality, or fiscal measures such as taxes on meat and subsidies for sustainable alternatives. By pairing the dynamism of businesses and consumers with robust policy support, Sweden – and indeed other countries – could move beyond imitation meat products and foster a more diverse, nutritious, and sustainable food culture. In essence, the Swedish case demonstrates both the possibilities and the limitations of relying on non-political forces for systemic dietary change, offering valuable lessons for how the next stage of the protein transition might be shaped.
More information: Helena Fornstedt et al, How configurations of legitimacy shape directionality in technological innovation systems: The case of plant-based meat alternatives in Sweden, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124283
Journal information: Technological Forecasting and Social Change Provided by Uppsala University