Milk, burgers and steaks: what are plant-based alternatives called?

At the supermarket we can buy an oat drink, but not oat milk. We can find almond milk, even though it contains no milk. And in the same refrigerated aisle, a plant-based burger may appear, while calling a product made from plant proteins a steak is becoming much more complicated. This is not just a linguistic curiosity. The name of a food serves to explain what we have in front of us, but also how it might be cooked, what taste to expect and which other products to compare it with. This is why the words printed on packaging have become a field of debate between legislators, producers and consumers.

The phenomenon concerns a market that is now substantial. In Italy, in 2025, retail sales of the main plant-based categories alternative to meat and dairy products came close to 669 million euros. And as supply grows, so does the importance of a question that is only apparently simple: what can a plant-based food be called?

Plant-based milk? Not always: the words protected by law

For dairy products, European rules have been clear for many years. The designation “milk” is reserved for mammary secretion, while names such as cream, butter, cheese and yoghurt are intended for products derived from milk. Simply adding an adjective is not enough to get around the rule. The Court of Justice of the European Union reiterated this in a 2017 judgment that has become a point of reference: designations reserved for dairy products cannot be used for purely plant-based products, even when they are accompanied by indications clarifying their origin. This is why we find “soya drink” on shelves rather than soya milk.

But every rule has its exceptions. The European Union recognises some designations that had entered traditional use before the market for plant-based alternatives reached its current size. In Italian, the list includes, among others, “latte di mandorla”, “latte di cocco” and “burro di cacao”. This is not a contradiction: these are names whose nature is considered clear by custom.

With meat, the path has been less linear. Unlike the dairy sector, for a long time there was no equally broad system of reserved designations at European level. In 2023, Italy introduced a law that prohibits, for processed products composed solely of plant proteins, a series of references to meat, animal species and the terminology proper to butchery, charcuterie and fishmongering. The same law provides for a decree listing the designations concerned. In 2024, the Court of Justice intervened in a French case, establishing an important principle: in the absence of a specific legal designation, a Member State cannot generally prohibit the use of terms traditionally associated with products of animal origin to indicate foods containing plant proteins.

A new phase began in the summer of 2026. European Regulation 2026/1739 introduced a common list of designations reserved for meat and meat products. These include “meat”, references to species such as chicken, turkey and lamb, and names of cuts such as fillet, ribs, breast, wing, bacon and steak. The new rules on designations will apply from 19 August 2029. There is, however, an interesting detail: “burger” and “sausage” do not appear in the final list.

But why is steak treated one way and burger another? Here the issue stops being purely regulatory and becomes marketing. A name does not only indicate the ingredients. If we read “plant-based burger”, we already know what shape to expect, we imagine cooking it in a pan or on the grill and we know where to place it within a meal. A definition such as “preparation based on pea protein”, however precise, communicates something different. This is one of the reasons why companies have an interest in using familiar words. Not necessarily to make people believe that a plant-based food is meat or cheese, but to place it within a category the consumer already knows. The difference is especially important when a new product is trying to find space in the diet of people who do not follow a vegetarian or vegan diet.

New definitions for a growing market

Words matter, but on their own they do not turn an unpopular product into a commercial success. Taste, texture, price, familiarity and perceived quality remain central. Marketing can reduce the distance between a new food and one that is already known. But then the product itself must keep the promise created by its name. The issue of possible consumer confusion is also less simple than it seems. A European survey conducted for BEUC found that most respondents saw no problem in the use of names such as burger or sausage for plant-based products, provided that their vegetarian or vegan nature was clearly indicated. In this reading, the name mainly describes a shape and a gastronomic use.

The debate would probably be less heated if it concerned only a few niche products. The numbers, however, tell a different story. According to Circana data analysed by the Good Food Institute Europe, in 2025 Italian sales of the five main plant-based categories alternative to meat, milk, cheese, yoghurts and creams reached 668.8 million euros, with growth of 4.5% in one year. Volumes also increased, by 5.8%. The largest category is that of milk alternatives, with almost 342 million euros. This is followed by plant-based meat alternatives, worth around 234 million. And it is significant that almost 60% of volumes in this second category are represented precisely by plant-based burgers. Tofu, tempeh and seitan are growing rapidly, but products that reproduce the forms and consumption patterns of meat continue to sell much higher volumes. Plant-based cheese alternatives also remain a small category, but in 2025 they recorded a 15.6 percent increase in volumes. In short, the market is no longer limited to a few soya drinks or to products aimed exclusively at a vegan audience. It has broadened, differentiated and is looking for its own language.

And this is precisely the point. Calling a product a “burger”, a “plant-based drink”, a “cheese alternative” or finding an entirely new name for it means deciding how it will be interpreted before it is even tasted. The rules set the boundaries within which it is possible to move. Marketing chooses the words within those boundaries. In the end, the consumer decides whether those words were clear enough to help them understand what they are buying and convincing enough to make them try it.