食品・飲料市場調査

---

The gap between a launch that scales and one that stalls is rarely the product. It is the quality of evidence behind it.

Food and beverage market research has shifted from a validation exercise at the end of stage-gate development to a continuous intelligence function that shapes concept, formulation, packaging, and pricing in parallel. Category leaders now treat sensory, shopper, and competitive signals as a single connected feed rather than three sequential studies. That change alone explains why some launches hit velocity targets in the first eight weeks while others quietly get delisted.

食品・飲料業界は流動的な状態にあります。業界に変化をもたらしている要因はいくつかあります。これらの要因には、都市化、人口増加、消費者動向の変化などがあります。天然素材から作られた食品や飲料への傾向は世界中で高まっています。また、このレポートの焦点となるオンライン食品配達への傾向も高まっています。

Why Food and Beverage Market Research Now Sits Earlier in the Development Cycle

Historically, food and beverage market research entered late: concept screen, home use test, launch. The best-performing teams have inverted this. Sensory panels calibrate against competitive benchmarks before R&D locks a prototype. Concept-product fit testing runs against three formulation variants, not one. Shopper insight guides pack architecture before design agencies are briefed.

The reason is economic. Reformulation after tooling is expensive. Reformulation after distribution is catastrophic. Nestlé, Unilever, and PepsiCo have all publicly restructured innovation pipelines around earlier consumer input, and mid-market challengers like Chobani and Liquid Death have used the same discipline to compress launch timelines against larger competitors.

According to SIS International Research, brands that integrate sensory testing for food products with quantitative concept scoring at the prototype stage cut post-launch reformulation cycles by roughly half compared to sequential testing models. The signal that predicts commercial performance is not overall liking. It is the alignment between concept expectation and product delivery, measured on the same respondents.

食べ物の出前

消費者は、携帯電話を 1 回タップするだけで、幅広い飲食店から注文できるようになりました。オンライン食品配達プラットフォームは、アクセス性と選択肢を継続的に拡大しています。新しいオンライン プラットフォームは、消費者と新しい市場を獲得するために競い合っています。プラットフォームは、アジア、南北アメリカ、中東、ヨーロッパの各地に出現しています。レストランの食事を自宅に配達する業界は、急速な変化を経験しています。

オンラインフードデリバリーアプリ市場の分析

利便性は、世界のオンライン食品配達アプリ市場を牽引する主な要因です。南北アメリカは、オンラインオンデマンド食品配達サービス市場が最も拡大している地域です。この需要は、スマートフォンの普及率の高さによるものです。これらのサービスの市場は南米でも成長しています。この地域では、いくつかのスタートアップ企業が食品配達用のオンデマンドソリューションを成功させています。これらのスタートアップ企業は、南米のネットワークが豊富な人口を活用しています。

レストランに電話するのに比べると、フードデリバリーアプリは魅力的なソリューションです。レストランは消費者を長時間待たせます。消費者はクレジットカード情報を伝えるプロセスも面倒だと感じています。アプリは消費者に新しい食べ物やレストランを試す機会を与えます。欠点は、人と人との接触が減ることです。

Sensory Testing for Food Products: The Methodologies That Actually Predict Repeat Purchase

Overall liking scores are the most reported and least useful metric in sensory research. A product can score 7.2 on a nine-point hedonic scale and still fail. What predicts repeat purchase is the interaction between just-about-right (JAR) attribute alignment, penalty analysis on the drivers of dislike, and temporal dominance of sensations (TDS) across the eating experience.

Penalty analysis for JAR scale data isolates which attributes are costing you liking points and by how much. A sweetness JAR skew of 30% “too sweet” with a mean drop of 1.4 points is a formulation instruction, not a data point. Descriptive analysis panels calibrated to reference standards then translate that instruction into R&D language: reduce perceived sweetness intensity by two units on a 15-point line scale without shifting mouthfeel viscosity.

The methodological choice that most affects decision quality is central location test versus in-home use test. CLTs give controlled first-impression data and work for beverages, snacks, and confections consumed in a single sitting. IHUTs surface satiety, occasion fit, and household dynamics that CLTs miss entirely, which matters for meal components, frozen categories, and anything consumed over multiple sessions. Serious programs run both, sequenced.

Where CATA and Projective Mapping Add Signal

Check-all-that-apply (CATA) methodology and napping/projective mapping have moved from academic tools to standard practice in consumer taste test methodologies. CATA captures sensory and emotional attributes without forcing scale interpretation across cultures, which matters for global launches. Projective mapping reveals how consumers cluster your product against competitors in perceptual space, exposing white space that concept boards miss.

New Food Product Development Research: What Separates Launches That Scale

Three research inputs distinguish launches that hit second-year velocity from those that get rationalized. First, concept-product fit tested on the same respondents, not sequential samples. Second, shelf-life sensory benchmarking against accelerated shelf-life testing (ASLT) protocols that reflect actual distribution conditions, not laboratory ideals. Third, competitive triangle test discrimination against the incumbent the retailer will compare you to during the category review.

Private label taste parity testing is now a board-level topic. Kroger's Private Selection, Costco's Kirkland Signature, and Aldi's exclusive brands have shifted from price plays to sensory-competitive threats. Research firm engagements for private label taste parity testing typically use blind paired comparison and triangle tests against the branded reference, with penalty analysis identifying the specific attributes where the private label wins or loses.

SIS International's proprietary research across food and beverage manufacturers in North America and Europe indicates that in mature categories, roughly one in three private label products now achieves statistical taste parity with the branded leader in blind triangle testing. The strategic response is not defensive reformulation. It is repositioning brand equity around attributes that blind testing cannot capture: provenance, sustainability credentials, and occasion.

The Categories Where Concept Testing Delivers the Highest Return

Food concept testing services deliver disproportionate return in three areas: plant-based protein, functional beverages, and clean label reformulation. Each has a specific research design that outperforms generic concept testing.

Validating plant-based protein sensory gap analysis requires descriptive analysis against the animal reference on texture, flavor release, and aftertaste, paired with consumer hedonic testing on both plant-forward and flexitarian segments. Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods succeeded initially because they closed the sensory gap on specific attributes flexitarians prioritized. Categories where the gap remains open, particularly dairy analogs in cheese and yogurt, are where the next commercial wins sit.

Measuring clean label consumer perception requires separating stated preference from behavioral response. Consumers report they read ingredient labels. Eye-tracking and shelf-based observational research show most do not, which means clean label positioning works through front-of-pack signaling and brand trust, not ingredient literacy. Research designs that rely on stated preference alone systematically overstate clean label price elasticity.

Flavor and Texture Analysis in Global Rollouts

Flavor and texture analysis breaks down predictably by region. Sweetness thresholds, bitterness tolerance, umami expectation, and preferred mouthfeel viscosity vary across Asian, Latin American, European, and North American markets in ways that generic global concepts do not survive. Coca-Cola, Mondelez, and Danone maintain regional sensory calibration panels precisely because a formulation optimized in one market underperforms in another without adjustment.

The practical implication is that global concept scores are misleading without regional sensory validation. A concept scoring 75% purchase intent in the United States and 45% in Brazil is not a Brazilian problem. It is usually a sweetness or texture calibration issue that regional descriptive analysis would identify in a two-week study.

A Framework for Prioritizing Research Investment

The SIS Food & Beverage Evidence Stack organizes research spend against decision risk:

Decision Stage	Primary Method	What It Answers
Concept screen	Quantitative concept test with CATA	Which idea earns space on the roadmap
Formulation	Descriptive analysis + JAR with penalty analysis	Where R&D adjusts before tooling
Concept-product fit	Sequential monadic CLT with same respondents	Whether the product delivers the promise
Pre-launch	IHUT with competitive triangle test	How it performs in real occasions
Shelf-life	ASLT with trained panel	When sensory quality degrades in distribution
Post-launch	Velocity tracking + repeat purchase diagnostics	Why velocity is or is not building

ソース: SIS International Research

What C-Suite Leaders Are Buying When They Commission Food and Beverage Market Research

The strategic buyer of food and beverage market research is no longer the insights function alone. Category general managers, CMOs, and CFOs are co-sponsors because the decisions being informed, launch commitment, capital investment in production capacity, and retailer negotiation, sit at their level. This changes what the research needs to deliver. Not a report. A defensible position for a specific decision, with the sensory, competitive, and shopper evidence connected.

The firms winning share in food and beverage over the next cycle will be the ones that treat evidence as a competitive asset, not a compliance step. That is what modern food and beverage market research delivers when it is designed against the actual decision.

よくある質問

ニューヨークの施設所在地

11 E 22nd Street、2階、ニューヨーク、NY 10010 電話: +1(212) 505-6805

---

SISインターナショナルについて

SISインターナショナル 定量的、定性的、戦略的な調査を提供します。意思決定のためのデータ、ツール、戦略、レポート、洞察を提供します。また、インタビュー、アンケート、フォーカス グループ、その他の市場調査方法やアプローチも実施します。 お問い合わせ 次の市場調査プロジェクトにご利用ください。