Canadians’ Opinions and Preferences regarding Seafood, and the Factors That Contribute to Their Consumption and Purchasing Habits

Abstract

Seafood provides rich sources of nutrients and generates relatively minimal environmental impacts; however, it tends to be underrepresented in discussions around food security. The objective of this study was to determine Canadians’ preferences and opinions regarding seafood consumption. Of the 1000 Canadians that were surveyed, most consume seafood regularly (87%). Apart from preference, nutrition was the primary reason for eating seafood (64%), and not affordability (21%). Younger Canadians, including Millennials (57%) and Gen Z (58%), placed a higher emphasis on preparation and cooking methods when purchasing seafood. Frozen seafood was the most popular selection for home consumption. Most Canadians prefer wild seafood; however, nearly as many had no preference for wild or farmed seafood. Most Canadians indicated that farmed seafood is a sustainable method of harvesting (49%), and many were willing to pay more for certified sustainable seafood. The environment and climate change are important factors when making food choices (54%), and most Canadians prefer to buy seafood that was harvested in Canada (74%). These results provide valuable insight into the attributes that Canadians value in their seafood choices. Sustainable, nutritious seafood with minimal environmental impacts should remain key areas of consideration to grow the seafood sector in Canada.

1. Introduction

Food systems need to undergo transformation to meet the food security challenges that we are currently facing [1]. Food systems are responsible for one-quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions and are key drivers of biodiversity loss [1,2]. Blue foods—aquatic plants and animals harvested/caught from freshwater and marine environments—supply protein to over 3.3 billion people globally [3]. Despite their contribution to our food systems, blue foods tend to be underrepresented in discussions about how to feed the world’s population sustainably over the coming decades [3,4]. Considering their nutritional and environmental benefits, blue foods are an important part of a transformative and secure food system [5].

A recent study by Golden et al. [6] compiled data on the nutritional content of 3753 taxa of aquatic foods and showed that seven categories of aquatic food (including pelagic fish, shellfish, and salmonid), are more nutritious than beef, lamb, goat, chicken, or pork when averaging across the seven nutrients assessed (omega-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, vitamins A and B12, calcium, iodine, iron, and zinc).

Studies have also shown that ‘blue foods’ have superior environmental performance (i.e., low environmental stressors) compared to the most efficient land-based animal-sourced foods. Gephart et al. [4] assessed the environmental performance of 23 species groups of aquatic foods, representing 75% of global production. They provided standardized estimates of environmental stressors: greenhouse gas emissions, nitrogen and phosphorus pollution, and freshwater and land use. Farmed bivalves and seaweed performed best. Farmed bivalves (unfed) performed best for most of the environmental stressors. Farmed trout, salmon, catfish, and tilapia were comparable to chicken, the most efficient land-based animal-sourced food.

Considering such cross-sector analyses that explore synergies and tradeoffs, fish and shellfish provide rich sources of nutrients, generate relatively low levels of environmental impacts, and have huge potential to deliver benefits for both human health and the environment. Realizing the potential of blue foods will require including them in food-system decision making, protecting and developing the potential of blue foods, and supporting small-scale actors in fisheries and aquaculture [5]. Gaining knowledge of diverse consumer perceptions and preferences is one of the first steps in helping to support these goals while understanding the demand for blue food (seafood) products and the efficient distribution of market resources [7]. While several studies have been conducted to understand consumers’ purchasing behaviours towards fish and seafood products [8,9,10,11,12], a Canadian study has not been conducted that seeks to understand preferences with a focus on environmental impacts and climate change and a consideration of socio-demographic factors.

Consumers’ perception and preferences about blue food production and their understanding about the influence of food production on climate change is not well known. Therefore, the objective of the study was to determine Canadian consumers’ preferences for blue foods and their perceptions around blue food production. We hypothesized that consumers’ perceptions and preferences of blue foods would depend on socio-demographic factors. This study was designed as a survey to determine Canadians’ preferences and opinions regarding seafood consumption and purchase habits, and what factors determine their preferences and habits.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Questionnaire

A survey to measure Canadians’ opinions and preferences on seafood consumption and the factors that contribute to their purchasing habits was designed in both English and French using an online platform, Qualtrics. A marketing research firm was engaged to administer the survey to 1000 Canadians from 30 May to 2 June 2023. The sample was drawn from a proprietary panel hosted by Angus Reid (AR), representing a cross-section of Canadians from over 1.3 million self-selecting Canadian consumers. Participants joined the panel voluntarily (https://angusreid.org/how-we-poll-ari/, accessed on 10 January 2024). For this survey, participants were drawn from this sample panel of consumers in Canada who had lived there for at least 12 months at the time of the study and were 18 years of age or older. We asked AR to collect data randomly on a quota system, using the Qualtrics platform, which generally represents the Canadian population by age and gender within the region. AR would send an electronic message to their sample pool, inviting them to participate in the survey voluntarily. Once the quota had reached its capacity, as set up by the researchers, no further electronic invitations would be sent to that quota group. This study uses three adjustment variables: age, gender, and region. Canada is a large country geographically and its population density is uneven. The potential for bias in geographic location with a higher population may skew the results. Therefore, care was taken to collect data from participants in a stratified, representative manner in order to obtain a more accurate picture of the Canadian population. The researchers chose not to collect partial responses from the Qualtrics platform. Any participant that did not finish the survey, either by closing their browser during completion or ‘timing-out’ of the session, or by leaving the survey with no activity for more than one hour, were considered partial completions. Thus, partial responses were removed from the final data analysis. Researchers were only given the completion rate on the survey. The completion rate for this study was 86.8%, leaving a total of 987 responses. The precision of the Angus Reid Forum online polls was measured using a credibility interval. In this case, the poll is accurate to within +/−3.2 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, had all Canadians been polled. All sample surveys and polls may be subject to other sources of error, including, but not limited to, coverage error and measurement error.

The Research Ethics Board of Dalhousie University granted ethical approval for this study in accordance with Canada’s Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans. Informed consent was presented on the opening screen of the online survey; participants who did not consent were thanked for their time and removed from the survey platform before answering questions. In accordance with the standards of research conducted with minimal risk, all respondents were least 18 years of age and have lived in Canada for 12 months. Data were collected using a quota system based on Canadian Census data from 2020 according to age and gender within region. As this research is national in scope, quotas on the sample are a representation of the population across six regions: British Columbia, the Prairies, Ontario, Quebec, the Atlantic Provinces, and the North.

The survey was divided into four sections. The initial segment comprised questions pertaining to socio-demographic factors, such as gender, age, income, and geography. The subsequent section of the questionnaire focused on fundamental preferences to ascertain the probability and frequency at which respondents consume seafood, as well as the specific types of seafood they prefer. The third part of the survey focused on assessing decisions related to consumption preferences, while the fourth section of the survey addressed inquiries regarding the environmental impacts of seafood production and harvest.

2.2. Data Analysis

All statistical analyses were completed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 28, X2 tests of independence, and then multinomial regression. Reliability of the Likert scales was assessed by calculating internal consistency (Cronbach’s α). Our variables are categorical; therefore, binomial z tests for one proportion was used on a single category of data. For two populations, the Chi-squared goodness of fit and test of independence were used.

The selection of an appropriate statistical approach is contingent upon three key factors: the aim and purpose of the study, the kind and distribution of the data utilized, and the nature of the observations (whether they are paired or unpaired). As this is an exploratory study with categorical variables, we chose the Chi-squared test as a descriptive statistical test that is similar to a correlation analysis for variables with two or more categories. Since it is not a modelling approach, there is no variable that is influenced by or dependent on other variables. These tests are common and appropriate for survey data with demographic independent variables and allow readers to see the significance or relationships between Likert variables.

3. Results

The objective of this study was to determine Canadian consumers’ preferences for blue foods and their perceptions around blue food production. Consumers’ perceptions and preferences of blue foods likely depend on socio-demographic factors. The following results capture the impact of these factors on their seafood preferences and consumption habits.

3.1. Participant Characteristics

The participants’ characteristics are presented in

Table 1. Demographic description of participants.

Category	Count	Percentage
Gender
Male	477	48.3%
Female	510	51.7%
Age
18–29	79	8.0%
30–43	353	35.8%
44–58	215	21.8%
59–77	313	31.7%
75+	27	2.7%
Education
High School or Less	165	16.7%
College, CEGEP or Trades	300	30.4%
University Degree/Post Graduate Degree	522	52.9%
Income
<$35,000	90	9.1%
$35,000–$74,999	275	27.9%
$75,000–$149,000	440	44.6%
$150,000+	182	18.4%
Region
British Columbia	144	14.6%
Prairies	185	18.7%
Ontario	383	38.8%
Quebec	207	21.0%
Atlantic	67	6.8%
North	1	0.1%

. Of the total responses, 48.3% identify as male, and 51.7% identify as female. The respondents’ age brackets correspond to generational subgroups: 8.0% are 18–29 years old (Gen Z), 35.8% are 30–43 years old (Millennial), 21.8% are 44–58 years old (Gen X), 31.7% are 59–77 years old (Baby Boomer), and 2.7% are 75+ years old (Greatest Generation).

In terms of education, 16.7% of the respondents have a high school diploma or less; 30.7% have college education, CEGEP, or a trade; and 52.9% have a university degree or post graduate degree. A total of 9.1% of respondents earn less than CAD 35,000 per year, 27.9% earn between CAD 35,000 and 75,999 per year, 44.6% earn between CAD 75,000 and 149,999 per year, and 18.4% earn CAD 150,000 or more per year.

Regarding province, 14.6% of respondents are located in British Columbia, 18.7% are located in the Prairies (Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba), 38.8% are located in Ontario, 21.3% are located in Quebec, and 6.8% are located in the Atlantic provinces (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland). Only 0.1% of respondents are located in the Northern Regions and will therefore not be reported on in order to avoid any potential of identification.

3.2. Reliability

Likert scales were utilized in the questionnaire to assess the construct ‘motivation to purchase’, encompassing four questions (Q12 to Q15). The scale exhibited a high level of internal consistency, as indicated by a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.824, suggesting a strong correlation within the construct. Similarly, the questionnaire aimed to gauge the ‘importance of sustainability’ with five questions (Q28, Q29, Q31, Q32, and Q33). However, the scale demonstrated a moderate level of internal consistency, as evidenced by a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.524, indicating a weaker correlation within the construct.

3.3. Seafood Consumption Preferences

This study’s findings reveal that fish and seafood hold a prominent place in Canadian diets, with 86.7% of respondents indicating that they regularly include fish and seafood in their meals. This finding is statistically significant, with p < 0.001. A statistically significant (p < 0.001) number of respondents indicated that they could not eat seafood due to allergies. Most Canadians (94%) responded that they eat meat (excluding seafood).

There is a significant relationship between region and regular consumption of seafood as follows:

(X² (12, N = 857) = 27.714, p = 0.0061), a total of 45.8% of respondents from British Columbia consume fish and seafood on a weekly basis. In contrast, Quebec has the lowest weekly consumption at 27.2%. The report also highlights that the daily consumption of seafood is relatively rare, with only Ontario, at 2.4%, and British Columbia, at 2.3%, reporting daily fish and seafood consumption (Figure 1).

A statistically significant (p < 0.001) number of respondents (87.5%) eat fish, such as salmon, haddock, and trout. Although a smaller proportion of respondents (63.2%) eat bivalves, such as mussels, oysters, and scallops, this number is still statistically significant (p < 0.001). Most respondents (79.4%) also eat a statistically significant (p < 0.001) number of crustaceans, such as crab, shrimp, and lobster. Finally, 53.62% of respondents do not eat a significant number of aquatic plants.

A significant portion of respondents chose nutrition (64.2%), and not affordability (20.8%), as a motivating factor for seafood consumption. Indeed, there is a statistically significant difference in proportions between at least two motivating factors and the regular purchase of seafood (X² (312.91, N = 1812) = 3, p < 0.001) (

Table 2. Chi-squared goodness-of-fit test purchasing motivation.

	n	CI (95%)	Z	p
Preference	686 (0.38)	0.36, 0.40	12.64	<0.001
Availability	400 (0.22)	0.20, 0.24	−2.88	0.004
Nutition	548 (0.30)	0.28, 0.32	5.15	<0.001
Affordibility	178 (0.10)	0.08, 0.11	−14.92	<0.001

). While each motivating factor is significant, availability presents a lower significance level of p = 0.004.

Overall, the respondents reported that fish is considered the most nutritious (73.5%). However, a Chi-squared test did not find a significant relationship between education and seafood categories (X² (7.005, N = 856) = 6, p = 0.320). Similarly, gender differences were not significant with X² (0.623, N = 856) = 3 (p = 0.891), nor was age (X² (16.73, N = 856) = 12, p = 0.160).

Younger Canadians, including Millennials (56.9%) and Gen Z (58.4%), place a higher emphasis on preparation and cooking methods when deciding to purchase seafood for home cooking, though this is only significant for Gen Z (p = 0.001). In contrast, older generations, such as Gen X (47.6%), Boomers (45.7%), and the Greatest Generation (45.8%), consider these factors to a lesser extent, though none are statistically significant (Figure 2).

Many Gen Z respondents opt for frozen seafood (49.2%) compared to 39.1% of Gen X respondents, though the difference is not statistically significant. While fresh seafood remains popular, with 31.5% of Gen X preparing it at home, the percentage drops to 16.9% for Gen Z and 16.7% for the Greatest Generation. Significantly, more people eat seafood at home than in a restaurant, with X² (282.315, N = 1712) = 4, p < 0.0001).

3.4. Preference for Wild or Farmed Seafood

This research confirms an overwhelming statistically significant preference for wild seafood among Canadians (X² (24.974, N = 855) = 8, p = 0.001). Overall, 50.8% of Canadians prefer wild-caught seafood, 44% have no preference for wild or farmed seafood, and 5% prefer farmed seafood. British Columbians lead this preference with 67.9%, followed by the Atlantic provinces at 54.2%, the Prairies at 49.7%, Ontario at 47.8%, and finally, Quebec at 43.4%. Notably, Quebec was the only province where a higher percentage of the population expressed no preference for wild seafood at 52.0% (Figure 3).

3.5. Preference for Sustainable Seafood

When asking the respondents whether they would be willing to pay more for certified sustainable seafood, we found that 40.0% of the respondents expressed their willingness, compared to 24.2% who disagreed, though this is not statistically significant. Significantly, women were more inclined to pay a premium for certified sustainable seafood, with 47.2% of female respondents agreeing, as opposed to 32.6% of male respondents (X² (55.479, N = 856) = 4, p < 0.001). Education played a role in the respondents’ willingness to pay more for sustainable seafood, with the highest level of agreement in those that were university-educated (43.8%) compared to those who had college/trade education (38.1%) and high school education or less (30.7%). Similarly, those with the highest incomes (CAD 150,000+) were the most likely to agree with this statement (43.9%) compared to those earning between CAD 149,000 and <35,000 (39.5–37.5%, respectively) (Figure 4).

Most people (54.9%) consider the environment and climate change as important factors when making food choices, and this is higher among people aged 18–29 (60.7%) than those aged 30–77, though this difference is not statistically significant. University-educated respondents were more in agreement with this statement (60.5%) compared to those with college/trade education (48%) and high school education or less (49.7%). Interestingly, those with the lowest reported incomes were more in agreement with this statement (57.8%) compared to those with the highest reported incomes (51.51%) (Figure 5).

Inherently linked with this, it was found that a statistically significant number of people (p < 0.001) would prefer to buy seafood that was caught or farmed in Canada (74.0%) as opposed to imported, which could also be linked with freshness.

3.6. Preference for Ethically Sourced Seafood

Half of the respondents said that they consider how their seafood was treated humanely since being captured from sea (i.e., how it was raised, caught, or handled) as important, and more females (58.5%) than males (42.8%) agreed with this statement, indicating a significant difference: X² (28.547, N = 854) = 4, p < 0.001.

4. Discussion

Blue food provides rich sources of nutrients and generates relatively low levels of environmental impacts, and this is generally recognized by Canadians in their food choices. We found that most Canadians (87%) regularly include fish and seafood in their meals, and that their primary reason to consume seafood was preference. Interestingly, followed by preference, the second leading reason for regular seafood consumption was nutrition (64%), and not affordability (21%). This is interesting because seafood prices, on average, increased by 7.6% from 2021 to 2022 and is forecasted to increase in price by another 4–6% in the next year [13]. Therefore, the prioritization of nutrition from seafood is notable, indicating that Canadians are aware that seafood provides nutrients, and that it is worth the increased cost. While another Canadian survey found that price was a leading factor in seafood purchasing, most Canadians stated that seafood was a healthful choice, which was an important consideration in their purchasing decisions [8]. However, it is worth noting that more Canadians eat meat (94%) than seafood (86.7%). While the results of this study showed clear consumer opinions and trends, the timing of the data collection was limited (30 May to 2 June 2023), and therefore represents a snapshot of perhaps a larger picture of Canadians’ views on blue food consumption and production, which may be influenced by seasonal variations and other external factors.

Canadians have preferences for different seafood species, which has also been found previously [8]. Most Canadians (88%) eat fish, such as salmon, trout, and haddock, as well as crustaceans, such as crab, shrimp, and lobster (79%). However, significantly fewer Canadians reported consuming bivalves, such as mussel, oyster, and scallop (63%), and most do not eat aquatic plants (e.g., seaweed) (54%).

Fish and crustaceans offer many nutritional benefits, and bivalves do as well [6]. In fact, humans have been consuming bivalves as a source of nutrition as far back as 165,000 years ago [14]. They are considered to have the lowest environmental footprint compared to other meat or seafood [4]. One of the reasons for this is because, as filter feeders and extractive species, bivalves do not require any feed inputs. There are several reasons that could explain why bivalves are not as regularly consumed as fish or crustaceans (e.g., preference, preparation, and price). Seaweed is also considered highly nutritious [15] and is considered a versatile, nature-based solution for climate change mitigation and adaptation and for counteracting eutrophication and the biodiversity crisis [16]. However, one reason why seaweed is not consumed is likely due to market availability in Canada. There is a small but emerging industry in Canada; however, it is still in its infancy [17].

4.1. Regional and Demographic Preferences

Canadians living in British Columbia were the top seafood consumers, with 46% of respondents eating seafood on a weekly basis, while those living in Quebec reported the lowest weekly consumption at 27%. The results showed that it is relatively rare for Canadians to consume seafood daily; only those in Ontario and British Columbia (at ~2%) reported daily seafood consumption. This may be the balance between preference, nutrition, and price. Interestingly, consumers living in the Atlantic provinces reported different seafood consumption preferences compared with those living in British Columbia, despite the fact that these locations are on the coasts of Canada. Presumably, access to fresh seafood would be a driving factor in regular seafood consumption; however, this does not appear to be the case, and there are likely other factors involved.

It was apparent that seafood preferences were different among demographics in the study. Seafood consumption increased with increasing income and age, with the exception of the Greatest Generation. Previous studies have also found that consumers with higher incomes were more likely to consume seafood [8,18]. Younger Canadians, including Millennials (57%) and Gen Z (58%), reported that preparation and cooking method were important factors they consider when purchasing seafood for at-home consumption. Older generations (Gen X, Boomers, and the Greatest Generation) considered these factors to a lesser extent (46–48%). Younger Canadians also selected frozen seafood to purchase more often. The fact that more younger people consider preparation and cooking method, as well as frozen seafood, suggests that convenience, availability, and lower prices are important to their cooking and consumption habits, since frozen seafood is considered to be more convenient to prepare [9]. In fact, the perceived inconvenience of seafood preparation was previously found to be higher amongst younger groups [8]. However, this disagrees with a previous survey of Canadians that found that most people preferred fresh over frozen seafood (70%) [8]. Regardless of the demographic, more people eat seafood at home than at a restaurant. This could reflect a change in habits and attitude compared to previous years [19]. A recent study showed that in comparison to the pre-COVID-19 period, restaurant visits significantly decreased, and food deliveries and home-cooked meals significantly increased [20]. While we did not explore preferences for cooking method, this would be interesting to investigate in a future study, since cooking treatment (e.g., boiling, steaming, baking, microwaving, sous-vide, frying, etc.) can affect the nutritional and sensory properties of salmon [21].

4.2. Preference for Wild or Farmed Seafood

It is clear that most Canadians prefer wild seafood, and this is particularly evident for British Columbia. However, it is worth noting that nearly as many Canadians indicated that they had no preference, with more people in Quebec having no preference compared to the rest of Canada. Very few Canadians prefer farmed seafood. Despite the strong preference for wild-caught seafood, most Canadians indicated that farmed seafood is perceived as a sustainable method of harvesting seafood. In a US survey, more participants indicated that farm-raised and sustainability-certified fish was safer to eat, better tasting, higher quality, more fairly traded, and more environmentally friendly [12]. Indeed, perceptions and preferences for different fish harvesting/production methods have been shifting. In the US, public knowledge and concerns over the exploitation of wild marine fish has led to farmed fish being perceived as being of higher quality and safer than wild fish because they were cultured in a more controlled environment [10]. However, this is juxtaposed with the perceived negative environmental impact of farm-raised fish [11].

4.3. Preference for Sustainably and Ethically Harvested Seafood

The fact that Canadians perceive fish farming as sustainable yet have concerns about its impacts on the environment may explain why 40% said they would be willing to pay more for certified sustainable seafood. Sustainability certifications indicate whether the fish was harvested/produced in a sustainable way for farm-raised or wild-caught fish. They incorporate sustainable methods that minimize negative environmental and social impacts. Sustainability certification is a voluntary and self-identified attribute for which fish producers and processors pay a fee [12]. This can impact the pricing of certified products. Income played a role in Canadians’ agreement with the statement that they would pay more for certified sustainable seafood, showing a higher agreement with higher earnings, with those earning >CAD 150 K being the most in agreement (44%). Also, more female respondents agreed with this statement compared to males.

Inherently related to sustainability, most Canadians consider the environment and climate change when making food choices. Most people prefer to buy Canadian seafood rather than imported seafood, which could be due to environmental considerations or could be related to freshness and quality. This is in agreement with previous studies that found that domestic seafood production was a preferred attribute compared to imported products [11,22]. However, a previous survey distributed to Canadians found that few respondents ranked features related to seafood harvesting as being important to them (e.g., local or domestic origin, sustainability, and economic benefits to harvesters) [8]. Overall, there seems to be ambiguity in the literature among consumers’ preferences around sustainably and ethically sourced seafood. Some research has suggested strong consumer preferences towards harvest-related seafood features [9], while others have not [8].

Half of the respondents said that they consider how their seafood was treated humanely since being captured from sea (i.e., how it was raised, caught, or handled) as important, and more females (59%) than males (43%) agreed with this statement. Consumers are becoming increasingly aware of issues surrounding food production and animal welfare, and the food supply has increased the demand for transparency and commitments to address concerns related to the welfare of animals, including seafood [23]. Previous studies have examined consumer attitudes and concerns for animal welfare and labelling on food packaging in the US and globally [24]. Many US consumers across all demographics were reportedly willing to seek out and pay more for animal products with higher welfare both in supermarkets and in restaurants if claims made about animal treatment are trustworthy [24]. While humane harvesting methods are clearly important to consumers, there must also be financial incentives for fishers and producers to invest in humane slaughter equipment and products with clear labelling and transparent validation [23]. In turn, consumers also need assurance that their purchase is meaningfully better compared to the regular product [25]. This could take the form of new certifications, standards, or ratings that are specifically focused on animal welfare/ethics that recognize the humane treatment of the animals that were raised or caught, for example, humane capture and slaughter methods, and the safety and well-being of farm-raised aquatic animals throughout their lives.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, this study sheds light on Canadians’ preferences and opinions regarding seafood consumption and purchase habits, as well as the factors influencing their choices. The findings reveal that seafood, despite being a rich source of nutrients with relatively low environmental impacts, tends to be underrepresented in discussions around food security.

Our research indicates that a significant majority of Canadians consume seafood regularly, particularly in British Columbia, and nutrition is the primary motivator behind seafood consumption. Notably, affordability does not appear to be a significant barrier to seafood consumption among respondents. Younger generations, such as Millennials and Gen Z, emphasize preparation and cooking methods when purchasing seafood, with frozen seafood being a popular choice for home consumption, especially among Gen Z.

Preference for wild seafood is prevalent among Canadians, although a substantial proportion of Canadians have no clear preference for wild or farmed seafood. It is encouraging to note that many Canadians view farmed seafood as a sustainable method of harvesting, and a considerable number expressed a willingness to pay more for certified sustainable seafood. Additionally, environmental and climate considerations play a substantial role in food choices for a majority of participants, and a strong preference exists for seafood sourced from Canada. While generation demographic, education level, and salary all played roles in the consumers’ responses, gender was more often a statistically significant factor and, therefore, appeared to play a stronger role in the responses than other factors.

As we look towards the future, this research underscores the importance of promoting sustainable, nutritious seafood with minimal environmental impacts in Canada. Future studies can explore the specific factors driving the preference for wild or farmed seafood, investigate regional variations in seafood consumption and preferences, and delve deeper into the influence of environmental awareness on consumer choices. Further research may also examine the economic implications of supporting sustainable seafood practices and explore innovative ways to enhance seafood security while preserving our environment. Ultimately, these insights can inform policies and practices aimed at growing the seafood sector in Canada and ensuring food security for all Canadians.