**Background:** Africa's population is projected to reach approximately 2.5 billion by 2050, with about 80% of this increase occurring in cities. This demographic shift, combined with rising incomes, is expected to dramatically increase demand for animal-sourced foods. Currently, the average African consumes about 13 kg of meat per year, but this is projected to rise to 26 kg by 2050. African livestock systems face challenges including low productivity, climate change pressures, and environmental impacts—over 70% of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in Africa come from livestock. "Artificial meat" (cultured meat produced via in vitro tissue culture or 3D printing) has been proposed as a potential solution, but little is known about its acceptance among African consumers. This study aimed to investigate perceptions of artificial meat among the coming generation of African consumers—specifically urban, educated, and younger individuals.
**Methods:** Three cross-sectional surveys were conducted using the KASI Insight platform with computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI). Surveys 1 and 2 each had over 5,400 respondents from 12 African countries (Cameroon, Congo, DRC Congo, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Tanzania, and Tunisia). Survey 3 had 1,111 respondents from 5 countries (Cameroon, Ghana, Kenya, Morocco, South Africa). The target population was adults in major urban centers. The questionnaire covered socio-demographics, attitudes toward societal challenges (environmental and ethical issues), product characteristics, potential interest, and development strategies. Responses were collected on Likert scales (1–5). Statistical analyses included chi-2 tests, ANOVA with Tukey HSD post-hoc comparisons, effect size calculation (eta squared), and principal component analysis (PCA).
**Key Results:** Across surveys, 63.9% of respondents in Survey 1 and 55.3% in Survey 3 had heard of artificial meat. Only 8.9% of respondents in Survey 2 were definitely willing to try artificial meat (score of 5), while 39.2% were willing to try (definitely or probably). In Survey 3, 55.2% were willing to try. Most respondents (60.7% in Survey 2, 70.0% in Survey 3) were willing to pay less for artificial meat than for conventional meat, while only 12.7% (Survey 2) and 10.9% (Survey 3) were willing to pay more. Regarding regular consumption, 85.3% (Survey 2) and 87.22% (Survey 3) were willing to eat artificial meat regularly. Price was the most important purchasing criterion (18.8% in Survey 1, 20.1% in Survey 3). Ethical concerns were the strongest motivator to try (13.8% in Survey 1, 17.3% in Survey 3), while safety concerns (13.9% in Survey 1, 12.3% in Survey 3) and unnaturalness (12.7% in Survey 1, 20% in Survey 3) were key barriers. 31.2% of respondents in Survey 1 strongly agreed that artificial meat would negatively impact rural life. Willingness to try (WTT) differed significantly by country, age, income, and education (p<0.05). South Africa showed the highest WTT and willingness to pay (WTP), while Ghana showed the lowest. Respondents aged 31–50 were most willing to try. Gender had no significant effect on WTT or WTP. Effect sizes (eta squared) ranged from 0.01 to 0.02 (low to moderate). PCA revealed that WTT was positively correlated with perceiving artificial meat as a viable alternative, while WTP was positively correlated with concerns about ethical and environmental problems of conventional livestock production.
**Clinical Implications:** While this is not a clinical study, the findings have significant public health and nutritional implications for Africa. As meat consumption is projected to increase by 30% by 2030 and reach 26 kg per capita by 2050, understanding consumer acceptance of alternative protein sources is crucial for food security planning. The low willingness to pay more for artificial meat suggests that price competitiveness will be essential for market penetration in African countries. The finding that most respondents associate artificial meat with safety (14.0% in Survey 1, 18.1% in Survey 3) may reflect growing concerns about zoonotic diseases in regions with weak health systems. Policymakers face choices between investing in conventional livestock efficiency, insect-based proteins (already consumed in many African countries), plant-based alternatives, or artificial meat production. The study's limitations include its focus on urban, educated populations (61.5% were graduates in Survey 3), exclusion of rural residents, and the fact that 40% of Africa's population is under 15 years old and was not surveyed.