SURVEY

Consumers need context and explanation about aquafeed ingredients

Norway, 7 May 2026 | A study by NOFIMA reveals resistance to ingredients such as chicken or insects in salmon feed

Consumidor pescado cadena minorista

A study conducted by researchers at NOFIMA on consumer perception has found that many Europeans react negatively to sustainable ingredients used in salmon feed when these are presented without context or explanation.

The findings are particularly relevant at a time when aquaculture is seeking to reduce its dependence on fishmeal and fish oil through alternative protein and circular economy co-products.

The research, carried out in France and the United Kingdom – two of the largest European markets for Norwegian salmon – shows that most consumers do not really know what farmed salmon eat. Although around 70% of modern salmon feed already consists of plant-based ingredients, few participants identified plants as the main component of the salmon’s diet.

However, the most significant aspect of the study is not consumer’s lack of knowledge, but how perceptions change once feed ingredients are disclosed.

More transparency does not necessarily mean greater acceptance

When participants evaluated salmon without information about the feed, perceptions were clearly more positive. The product was considered healthier, more acceptable and generated a higher willingness to consume.

But when specific ingredients – especially chicken or insects – were introduced, negative reactions emerged.

Ingredients based on fish, algae and plants were perceived as “natural” and healthy for salmon. Insects triggered mixed reactions, while chicken-derived proteins were associated with something “unnatural”, unpleasant and of lower quality.

According to researchers, the result point more towards a communication and narrative problem than outright rejection of new protein sources.

“Transparency about feed does not necessarily improve consumer perception unless it is accompanied by context and education,” the study concludes.

The major challenge facing alternative proteins

The study comes at a key moment for the European aquaculture sector. Norway aims to increase the proportion of locally produced raw materials used in aquafeed from the current 8% to 25% by 2034 as part of its sustainability and food self-sufficient strategy.

In this context, poultry industry co-products are emerging as a relevant protein source for aquaculture. The project specifically examines the use of residual chicken raw materials as an ingredient in salmon feed.

The industry is now facing the challenge of becoming more sustainable and locally sourced without undermining the premium perception of farmed salmon.

The issue affects not only salmon, but also other aquaculture species that increasingly rely on alternative proteins, circular ingredients and innovation in animal nutrition.

The study also reflected cultural differences and misconceptions about aquaculture

The research identified significant differences between countries.

British consumers showed greater openness towards novel ingredients such as insects or poultry proteins, while French consumers considerably more sceptical.

According to the authors, this means communication and product development strategies will need to be adapted to each market and cultural sensitivity.

Another important finding is that many consumers still associate farmed salmon with antibiotics and chemicals, despite the fact that antibiotic use in Norwegian salmon farming is currently extremely low, below 0,1%.

This reinforces the idea that part of the public perception of aquaculture continues to be shaped by outdated or incomplete information.

A perception study, not a purchasing study

Although the results have important strategic implications for producers, feed manufacturers and retailers, the study itself has significant limitations.

The research measures perception and stated attitudes, but not actual purchasing behaviour, willingness to pay or changes following educational processes or information campaigns.

Nor does it demonstrate effective retail rejection of products fed with alternative ingredients.

The project is funded by the Norwegian Seafood Research Fund (FHF) and is being carried out in collaboration with industry companies such as Mowi and Nutrimar.

Related