research papers on food technology

• A-Z Publications

Annual Review of Food Science and Technology

• Navigate this Journal
• Early Publication
• Previous Volumes
• Editorial Committee

AIMS AND SCOPE OF JOURNAL: The Annual Review of Food Science and Technology covers current and significant developments in the multidisciplinary field of food science and technology. Topics include: food microbiology, food-borne pathogens, and fermentation; food engineering, chemistry, biochemistry, rheology, and sensory properties; novel ingredients and nutrigenomics; emerging technologies in food processing and preservation; biotechnology applications and nanomaterials in food systems.  

Latest Articles Lasest articles RSS feed

Status and perspective on green pesticide utilizations and food security, sample processing and concentration methods for viruses from foods and the environment prior to detection, potential of milk-derived extracellular vesicles as carriers for oral delivery of active phytoconstituents, nonconventional technologies in lipid modifications, medium- and long-chain triacylglycerol: preparation, health benefits, and food utilization, recent advances in lipid crystallization in the food industry, strategies to reduce fossil fuel use in food manufacturing, unleashing the potential of digitalization in the agri-food chain for integrated food systems, how diet and lifestyle can fine-tune gut microbiomes for healthy aging, wheat sourdough breadmaking: a scoping review, most read this month, most cited most cited rss feed, anthocyanins: natural colorants with health-promoting properties, omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and their health benefits, pickering emulsions for food applications: background, trends, and challenges, myoglobin chemistry and meat color, cold plasma decontamination of foods *, the structure of the casein micelle of milk and its changes during processing, public health impacts of foodborne mycotoxins, natural colorants: food colorants from natural sources, emulsion design to improve the delivery of functional lipophilic components, collagen and gelatin.

Journals, books & databases

• Our journals

Sustainable Food Technology

Cultivating sustainable solutions to food processing and engineering

What would you like to know about Sustainable Food Technology ?

Impact factor: n/a

Time to first decision (all decisions): 33.0 days**

Time to first decision (peer-reviewed only): 49.0 days***

Editor-in-Chief: Jorge Barros Velázquez

Gold open access, APCs waived until mid-2025

Indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and Scopus

Read this journal

Submit an article

Sign up for regular email alerts

View all journal metrics

Open. Impactful. Multidisciplinary.

An open access forum for new food technologies.

What can we do to ensure food security around the globe? How do we end world hunger? Where can we find the solutions to produce food more sustainably?

Sustainable Food Technology seeks the answers to these big questions. While our companion journal, Food & Function , focuses on the purpose of food and its relation to health and nutrition, this new journal publishes high-quality sustainable research on food engineering and technologies. Key topics include food preservation methods, shelf life and the creation of greener packaging.

Hear from our Editor-in-Chief

Read and publish in our themed collections

Sustainable Food Technology publishes a number of themed collections every year, guest edited by members of the community on timely and important topics.

Interested in contributing your work? Explore the latest open calls for papers in Sustainable Food Technology

Journal scope

Sustainable Food Technology is a gold open access journal focused on cutting-edge strategies for food production, that aim to provide quality and safe foods in an environmentally conscious and sustainable way.

We welcome novel green strategies applied to both crops and animal foods from every step of the food chain, “from farm to fork”. Circular economy strategies and life cycle analysis are particularly welcomed, from those adding value to food by-products to those focused on the appropriate reuse of food waste.

Manuscripts submitted to Sustainable Food Technology  should focus on either applied or fundamental science and cover the development and optimisation of technologies aimed at improving post-harvest supply-chain of food. All manuscripts must address environmental, economic and/or health challenges associated with food sustainability.

The quantitative and/or qualitative aspect of sustainability e.g. water usage, energy efficiency, process intensification, by-product extraction, or benchmarking of proposed sustainable packaging against conventional should be demonstrated and discussed.

Topics of interest include but are not limited to:

• Novel and sustainable food resources and food ingredients
• Food fortification
• Food production systems requiring less energy and water consumption
• Nanotechnology and biosensors in food processing, packaging and safety
• Data harmonisation, digitalisation and artificial intelligence to assist food production and control
• Omics-based food traceability tools to prevent economic and sanitary threats
• Biotechnology and bioengineering approaches to increase food production, quality and safety
• Emerging food preservation techniques: non-thermal processes, bioactive compounds
• Green active and intelligent packaging and storage systems
• Circular strategies for adding value to food by-products and food waste (recovery and valorisation)
• Life cycle analysis and sustainability metrics in food production
• Sustainable intensification of food production and processing

Manuscripts without a foundation in sustainability, or studies that are purely descriptive in nature are not suitable for publication in this journal.

Manuscripts must show significant novelty and exhibit cutting-edge technologies or engineering advances. Sufficient chemical, microbiological and/or nutritional analysis must be provided to justify claims of novelty, interest and applicability of the research presented.

The following fields of study are not included in the scope of Sustainable Food Technology :

• Nutritional studies – these can be published in Food & Function
• Routine applications of well-established processing and preservation techniques
• Compositional analyses of conventional foods not representing novel food resources
• In-vitro characterization of microorganisms not performed in food models or food systems
• Incremental advances or application of agricultural practices

Outstanding Early Career Researcher Award

We are delighted to introduce the Outstanding Early Career Research Award 2023. This award aims to acknowledge and celebrate exceptional contributions made by early career researchers within the Sustainable Food Technology field. It serves as a means of recognition for their dedication, innovation, and impactful research endeavours. 

Find out more about the award and meet the winners

Submissions.

Submissions are initially assessed and taken through peer-review by our high-profile, internationally-recognised  Associate Editors . The journal operates a single-anonymised peer review model, and a minimum of two reviewer reports are required.

See who's on the team

Meet Sustainable Food Technology  Editor-in-Chief and board members.

Editor-in-Chief University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain

Associate Editor RMIT University, Australia

Associate Editor Institute of Chemical Technology, India

Associate Editor University of Maryland, USA

Editorial Board Member University College Dublin, Ireland

Cristóbal N. Aguilar, Universidad Autónoma de Coahuila, Mexico

Rafael Auras ,  Michigan State University, USA

Maria G. Corradini, University of Guelph, Canada

Sakamon Devahastin, King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT), Bangkok, Thailand

Tian Ding, Zhejiang University, China

Hao Feng, North Carolina A&T State University, USA

Elena Ibañez , CIAL-CSIC, Spain

Joe P. Kerry, University College Cork, Ireland

Olga Martín-Belloso, University of Lleida, Catalonia, Spain

Maria Angela A Meireles , Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Brazil

Manjusri Misra , University of Guelph, Canada

Solange I. Mussatto, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark

Indrawati Oey, University of Otago, New Zealand

Umezuruike Linus Opara, Stellenbosch University, South Africa

Federico Pallottino , CREA-IT, Italy

Marco Poiana, Mediterranean University of Reggio Calabria, Italy

Anet Režek Jambrak, University of Zagreb, Croatia

Victor Rodov , Agricultural Research Organization - The Volcani Institute, Israel

Andreas Schieber, University of Bonn, Institute of Nutritional and Food Sciences, Germany

Juming Tang , Washington State University, USA

Paula Teixeira, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Portugal

Long Yu , South China University of Technology, Institute of Chemistry, Henan Academy of Sciences, China

Min Zhang , Jiangnan University, China

Bhesh Bhandari , University of Queensland, Australia 

Anna Rulka , Executive Editor, ORCID: 0000-0002-3236-9801

Audra Taylor , Deputy Editor

Viktoria Titmus , Editorial Production Manager

Angelica-Jane Kechinyere Onyekwere , Assistant Editor

Shwetha Krishna , Assistant Editor

Michael Whitelaw , Assistant Editor

Alexander Whiteside , Assistant Editor ORCID:  0000-0002-1743-1531

Samantha Campos , Editorial Assistant 

Brittany Hanlon , Publishing Assistant

Neil Hammond , Publisher, ORCID: 0000-0001-6390-8874

Open access

We want the research published here to be easily accessible and beneficial to people globally. That’s why Sustainable Food Technology is gold open access with all article processing charges (APCs) paid by us until mid-2025 – so initially you can publish for free. We’re committed to increasing the visibility of your articles and making a difference around the world. As part of the submission process, authors will be asked to agree to the Sustainable Food Technology open access terms & conditions.

We offer Sustainable Food Technology authors a choice of two Creative Commons licences: CC BY or CC BY NC. Publication under these licences means that authors retain the copyright of their article, but users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. Read our open access statement for further information. All published articles are deposited with LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, Portico and the British Library for archiving.

Dive into the benefits of open access publishing

Find out more about open access publishing routes

Explore Royal Society of Chemistry open access journals

Read our Researchers’ voice report in response to Plan S

Transparent peer review policy

To support increased transparency, we offer authors the option to publish the peer review history alongside their article. Reviewers are anonymous unless they choose to sign their reports.

Find out more about our transparent peer review policy .

Article Types

Sustainable Food Technology publishes:

Communications

Full papers.

Our Communication format is ideally suited to short studies - which can be preliminary in nature - that are of such importance that they require accelerated publication.

Communications must contain original and highly significant work whose interest to the Sustainable Food Technology readership and high novelty warrants rapid publication. Authors should supply with their submission a justification of why the work merits urgent publication as a Communication. Referees will be asked to judge the work on these grounds.

Communications are given high visibility within the journal as they are published at the front of an issue. Communications will not normally exceed the length of five printed journal pages.

These must demonstrate an advance in strategies for sustainable food production and are judged according to originality, quality of scientific content and contribution to existing knowledge.

Although there is no page limit for Full papers, appropriateness of length to content of new science will be taken into consideration.

Reviews should be definitive, comprehensive and provide a critical evaluation of the chosen topic area. These are normally commissioned by the editorial board and editorial office, although suggestions from readers for topics and authors are most welcome and should be directed to the editorial office.

Reviews must be high-quality, authoritative and state-of-the-art accounts of the selected research field. They should be timely and add to the existing literature, rather than duplicate existing articles, and should be of general interest to the journal's readership.

All review content should consist of original text and interpretation, avoiding any direct reproduction. If a significant amount of other people's material is to be used, either textual or image-based, permission must be sought by the author in accordance with copyright law and must be made clear in the manuscript. We recommend that systematic reviews and meta-analyses should follow the PRISMA guidelines for the transparent reporting of these studies.

All reviews undergo a rigorous and full peer review procedure in the same way as regular research papers.

Comments and Replies are a medium for the discussion and exchange of scientific opinions between authors and readers concerning material published in Sustainable Food Technology .

For publication, a Comment should present an alternative analysis of and/or a new insight into the previously published material. Any Reply should further the discussion presented in the original article and the Comment. Comments and Replies that contain any form of personal attack are not suitable for publication.

Comments that are acceptable for publication will be forwarded to the authors of the work being discussed, and these authors will be given the opportunity to submit a Reply. The Comment and Reply will both be subject to rigorous peer review in consultation with the journal’s Editorial Board where appropriate. The Comment and Reply will be published together.

Author Guidelines

General author guidelines.

For general guidance on preparing an article please visit our Prepare your article page , the content of which is relevant to all our journals.

To learn more about the Royal Society of Chemistry's policies and processes, including licensing, publishing ethics, peer review, and formatting, please refer to our Resources for authors page .

All submitted papers must include a cover letter that should specify the novelty of the work and give a justification for the publication of the paper.

Sustainability Spotlight Statement

All submitted manuscripts must include a Sustainability Spotlight Statement (120 words maximum) that should categorically state the sustainable advance of the work and how it aligns with the  UN’s Sustainable Development Goals . This statement should be different from the abstract and set the work in a broader context regarding sustainability. It should aim to answer the following questions.

• What is the situation and why is it important to address/understand this?
• What is the sustainable advancement of the work?
• How the work aligns with the  UN SDG(s) ?

This statement will be seen by the reviewers and will help ascertain the relevance of the article for a broad but technical audience and authors should use it to show that they have given serious consideration to problems that are sustainable in nature. If the paper is accepted this statement will also be published. Manuscripts cannot be reviewed without this statement.

Peer review and editorial process

All articles published in  Sustainable Food Technology are subject to external peer review by anonymised experts in the field and all manuscripts submitted are handled by a team of internationally recognised  Associate Editors , who are all practicing scientists in the field.

The peer review for all articles submitted to the journal consists of the following stages:

• Phase 1 : Your manuscript is  initially assessed  by an associate editor to determine its suitability for peer review
• Phase 2 : If the manuscript passes the initial assessment process, the associate editor solicits recommendations from at least two anonymous reviewers who are experts in the field. They will provide a report along with their recommendation.
• Phase 3 : The associate editor handling your manuscript makes a decision based on the reviewer reports received. In the event that no clear decision can be made, another reviewer will be consulted.

Sustainable Food Technology is committed to a rigorous peer review process and expert editorial oversight for all published content. Please refer to  our processes and policies  for full details including our appeals procedure.

All submissions to our Open Calls will undergo an initial assessment by the journal Editors and subsequent peer review as per the usual standards of RSC journals .

Publication frequency

Articles accepted for publication in Sustainable Food Technology are published online with citeable DOIs as Advance Articles after they are edited and typeset. Articles are then assigned page numbers and published in an issue. Issues of Sustainable Food Technology are published every other month. Please find our most recent issue here .

Ethical Requirements

Sustainable Food Technology authors, editors, reviewers and published works are required to uphold the Royal Society of Chemistry’s  ethical standards . The Royal Society of Chemistry is a member of  Committee on Publication Ethics  (COPE) and our ethical standards follow COPE’s  core practices  and  best practice guidelines . In cases where these guidelines are breached or appear to be so, the Royal Society of Chemistry will consult with COPE.

When a study involves the use of live animals or human subjects, authors must include in the 'methods/experimental' section of the manuscript a statement that all experiments were performed in compliance with the author’s institute’s policy on animal use and ethics; where possible, details of compliance with national or international laws or guidelines should be included. The statement must name the institutional/local ethics committee which has approved the study; where possible, the approval or case number should be provided. A statement that informed consent was obtained for any experimentation with human subjects is required. Reviewers may be asked to comment specifically on any cases in which concerns arise.

For further guidance on author responsibilities and code of conduct, which apply to  Sustainable Food Technology and to all manuscripts submitted to Royal Society of Chemistry journals, please visit  our author hub .

Themed Collections

Sustainable Food Technology  publishes a number of themed collections every year on timely and important topics, guest edited by members of the community. All submissions to our themed collections undergo an initial assessment by the journal's associate editors and subsequent peer review as per the usual standards of RSC journals.

Subscription Information

Sustainable Food Technology is fully gold open access – articles can be downloaded free from the website with no barriers to access.

Online only: ISSN 2753-8095

Copyright is retained by authors when an open access licence is accepted, as with our standard licence to publish agreement. Full and accurate attribution to the original author is required for any re-use of the work. Find out more about copyright, licences and re-use permission .

Get email alerts about Sustainable Food Technology

For the latest editorial board news, scope details and announcements, sign up for news and issue alerts by using the form below. For any other queries, please get in touch using the contact us form on this page.

Please update your browser to a newer version to use this form.

Terms and conditions

Please tick this box to acknowledge that:

• You have read, understood and accept the terms and conditions .
• We need to collect and manage your personal data in order to provide this service. Our privacy statement explains how we do this.

Edit your RSC contact preferences .

**The median time from submission to first decision including manuscripts rejected without peer review from the previous calendar year

***The median time from submission to first decision for peer-reviewed manuscripts from the previous calendar year

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 13 January 2024

Emerging challenges and opportunities in innovating food science technology and engineering education

• I. S. Saguy   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1570-8808 1 ,
• C. L. M. Silva   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0495-3955 2 &
• E. Cohen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2342-5418 3  

npj Science of Food volume  8 , Article number:  5 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

3573 Accesses

1 Citations

Metrics details

• Agriculture

An Author Correction to this article was published on 13 February 2024

This article has been updated

Progress in science, technology, innovation, and digital capabilities call for reassessing food science, technology, and engineering (FST&E) education and research programs. This survey targeted global professionals and students across food disciplines and nutrition. Its main objectives included assessing the status of FST&E higher education, identifying challenges and opportunities, and furnishing recommendations. Seven topics affecting the future of the FST&E curricula were evaluated by the panel as ‘High’ to ‘Very high’, namely: ‘Critical thinking’, followed by ‘Problem-solving projects’, ‘Teamwork/collaboration’, ‘Innovation/Open innovation’ and ‘Multidisciplinary’. The importance of academic partnership/collaboration with the Food Industry and Nutrition Sciences was demonstrated. Significant positive roles of the food industry in collaboration and partnerships were found. Other essential food industry attributes were related to internships, education, strategy, and vision. Collaboration between FST&E and nutrition sciences indicated the high standing of this direction. The need to integrate or converge nutrition sciences and FST&E is emphasized, especially with the growing consumer awareness of health and wellness. The study provides insights into new education and learning opportunities and new topics for future curricula.

Similar content being viewed by others

Computer-aided food engineering

Dietary and policy priorities to reduce the global crises of obesity and diabetes

Exploring the impact of web-based inquiry on elementary school students’ science identity development in a STEM learning unit

Introduction.

The unabated progress in science, technology, and innovation, combined with the exponential rate of change facilitated by the proliferation of computerized capabilities and artificial intelligence (AI), calls for reassessing the food science, technology, and engineering (FST&E) education. The fourth industrial revolution (i.e., Industry 4.0) highlights significant progress in numerous fields, including robotics, smart sensors, AI, the Internet of Things (IoT), big data, cloud computing, safety, and production efficiency 1 . Climate change, global population growth, high levels of food loss and food waste, and the risk of new disease or pandemic outbreaks are examples of numerous challenges that are potential threats to future food sustainability and the security of the planet that urgently need to be addressed 2 .

The projected global population growth reaching 10 billion people by 2050 highlights the acute need for new evaluations of FST&E education system background to address mounting challenges and opportunities. The complexity and predicted immense size of future tasks call for new paradigms, an open innovation mentality, and a novel mindset promoting multidisciplinary collaborations and partnerships 3 .

Disruptions such as digital agriculture, the fourth industrial revolution (industry 4.0), food agility, big data, and AI have been utilized to characterize the changes in the way agro-food systems evolve and function, as well as in the approach they have been analyzed, measured, and monitored 4 . For instance, Wageningen University, one of the leading influential universities, has also taken an active strategy to align with the developments in IT and AI. Apart from the content-wise shift, skills such as critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving are addressed by applying project-based evaluations 5 . The industrial revolution (industry 4.0) and moving to industry 5.0 include new enabling technologies (e.g., big data, IoT, cloud computing) besides AI, digital twins, machine learning, virtualization, and others 6 .

Food science and technology (FST) and especially food engineering (FE) in academia face diminishing funding for research, dwindling critical masses in faculties (particularly at universities in the USA), decreasing student enrollment 7 and impacting future cooperative extension education and research needs 8 . This leads to the observation by some food-related education programs to be at a crossroads and the need to reassess their vision and expand the scope to grand societal drivers such as health and wellness (H&W), the mutual host and the microbiome considerations, food security and safety, population growth, aging, water and land scarcity, and environmental concerns 9 . Other reasons for integrating stakeholders outside the food manufacturing industry have been proposed 10 , 11 . Members of the FST&E professions request a broader and more applied education that offers better opportunities for entrepreneurship 12 .

FST&E professions are witnessing significant challenges as well as changes imposed by the accelerated rate of change and digital transformation. The expected changes will most probably affect FST&E education as already projected previously 7 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 . This forward-looking, combined with the radical changes witnessed during and post-COVID-19, calls for a change in traditional education and curricula paradigms. For instance, the new vision deploys concepts of FST&E in the context of sustainable food processes, products for changing lifestyles and beliefs, innovation for H&W, and novel methodologies that suit audiences of the digital age. Courses on entrepreneurship and innovation, novel education methods, and enforcing quality standards and certification have been also proposed for Europe 14 .

Engineering education is also experiencing dramatic changes. The traditional teaching model, where students are passive in the lecture room, gives way to more active, student-centered, and participatory approaches. Different modern education and learning techniques, such as blended and flip-classroom, active learning, use of technology in teaching, universal design, and student-centered education approach, among others, were previously reported 10 . For instance, active learning utilizing a teaching app called TopHat ( https://tophat.com/ ) to administer a daily quiz, encouraged group work and discussion, and peer evaluation was also reported 16 .

Active engineering learning promotes the acquisition of knowledge and essential soft skills such as teamwork, problem-solving abilities, and entrepreneurial mindsets 17 . It also encourages the utilization of digital technologies such as simulation software and virtual laboratories 17 . It is worth noting the pioneering virtual experiments and laboratories in food science, technology processing, and engineering area 18 .

Among novel methodologies suggested for engineering education are project-based learning, hybrid learning, the flipped classroom, and design thinking 10 , 19 , 20 , 21 .

The role of the food industry and other related sectors in contributing to and assisting educational institutions in designing curricula that provide the skills demanded by the job market was highlighted recently. It emphasized that current Bachelor´s and Master´s degrees follow programs that attempt to offer a practical perspective but still focus on the academic point of view. To bridge the gap between academia and industry, the University Extension Diploma in Food Technology (DEUTA) deepens into the food sector, seeking professional qualifications for participants. This is achieved by both first-hand know-how of food sector professionals and academics, along with an internship period in a food company. Collaborative courses strengthen academia-industry bonds, and employability is boosted thanks to internships and the network created 22 .

Innovation and entrepreneurship are key factors to provide added value for food systems. Based on the findings of the Erasmus+ Strategic Partnership BoostEdu ( https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/ assessed May 16, 2023), three knowledge gaps were reported: (1) identify the needs for innovation and entrepreneurship (I&E) in the food sector; (2) understanding the best way to organize learning; (3) providing flexibility in turbulent times. The results of the project, in particular during the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighted the need for flexible access to modules that are complementary to other sources and based on a mix of theoretical concepts and practical experiences. The main lessons learned concern the need for co-creation and co-learning processes to identify suitable practices for the use of innovative digital technologies 23 . However, there are experts objecting to entrepreneurship courses being a subject of FST&E curricula or that the curricula should be supported with outside presentations or invited talks on this topic. This contrary position could be probably explained by the contrast between academia and more applied and industrial occupations. As the vast majority of the FST&E graduates are employed in various businesses where innovation and startup activities are becoming essential, entrepreneurship aspects should be considered in future education.

New platforms, such as massive open online courses (MOOCs), webinars, blogs, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, have opened up new spaces for disseminating ideas, experiences, and training in food-related matters 24 . Online and open learning permits access anytime and anywhere to formal classes, education modules on specific topics, and informal discussion sites 24 . Thus effectively democratizing learning, disseminating knowledge to vast audiences, and coping with the educational demands during the COVID-19 pandemic 25 .

The overall objectives of this study were: 1. Assessing the current status of FST&E education by using a computerized global survey; 2. Identifying current challenges and opportunities; and 3. Suggest recommendations (if needed) for additional directions and topics for future curricula.

Results and discussion

Respondents.

The total number of respondents that started the questionnaire was 1022. Of these, 703 (68.8%) respondents (the panel) completed the survey. Data from respondents who failed to address all questions and had several missing values were omitted, as they ignored or preferred not to answer some of the questions. The relatively high number of excluded respondents was probably due to the language barrier. Although not explicitly asked, based on respondents’ IP addresses, 88 countries participated in the survey. The overall time for completing the survey was approximately 10–12 min.

Demographics and geographic distribution

Demographic data are presented in Table 1 . The panel was evenly distributed: gender (female/male 1.15:1.00), age (excluding the 18–25 years group, 7.5%). Age distribution indicates good participation of the various groups and experiences.

The geographical location of the respondents indicates a global representation, although some regions were more prevalent by the panel. Respondents from China, the Far East (excluding China), and Oceania also participated, but their overall percentage was relatively low (combined value of 4.4%). However, combining Asia and the Middle East respondents resulted in a significant representation (16.5%). The surprising outcome was the high number of African respondents (14.8), probably due to the good network of IUFoST contacts in Africa. Although participation was quite impressive in terms of global feedback (88 countries), the number of respondents in a specific region was quite low in some cases, and consolidation was necessary for further analysis. Nevertheless, the widespread number of respondents from a wide spectrum of countries demonstrated that the survey had a global distribution, offering a significant improvement compared with a previous study 15 .

Main professional activities and education

The panel (703 respondents) professions consisted of food scientists and technologists (FSTs) 398 (56.6%), food engineers (FEs) 120 (17.1%), microbiologists (HMs) 25 (3.6%), nutritionists (HNs) 35 (5.0%), chemical engineers (CEs) 19 (2.7%), bioengineering/biotechnology (BBs) 7 (1.0%), business/marketing (BMs) 14 (2.0%), consultants (COs) 41 (5.8%), and others (food trade company, regulators, etc.) 41 (5.8%). As 73.7% of the respondents were FSTs and FEs, students, and graduates, the data reflect professional positions within FST&E disciplines, as was also previously shown 15 .

The respondents were also asked to fill in all their degrees in the various education categories using up to 4 options (student, BSc/1st Degree, MSc/equivalent, and Ph.D./DSc). Fig. 1 highlights the panel degrees distribution. The relatively high number of doctoral (Ph.D./DSc, 464, 29.9%) is not surprising considering the academic affiliation of most of the respondents (see Section “Affiliation”). It should be noted that many of the respondents hold more than one degree, explaining the high number of overall degrees of the panel (1550), as also depicted in Fig. 1 .

Overall degrees distribution (small insert).

Affiliation

The combined high majority of the respondents affiliated with educational and private research institutes (71.7%) provides a possible explanation for the extra number of doctoral degrees in the panel. Conversely, based on the respondents in the age group 41–55 and above 55 (37.8 and 28.7%, respectively) and the fact that a high percentage of the majority of the respondents hold a doctoral degree, the data are likely to reflect professional middle to high management levels and leadership positions within educational, institutions and possibly in the food industry. It should be noted that the number of respondents from industrial affiliation (food industry, food service, startups/FoodTech, and consultants, excluding government) was quite high (18.2%), probably projecting that although academia and industry are not equally represented, industrial affiliations are well represented (i.e., 128 responders).

Topics affecting the future of the professional domain curricula

The importance of 10 topics to be included in developing future curricula using the Likert-type scale 26 was evaluated. The topics listed included post-COVID-2019 considerations and several other new concepts. Table 2 shows that 7 topics were evaluated above 4.0 (‘High’) based on the calculated Likert-type scores average. The highest average scores were: ‘Critical thinking’ (4.50), followed by ‘Problem-solving projects’ (4.44), ‘Teamwork/collaboration’ (4.31), ´Innovation/Open innovation’ (4.29), and ‘Multidisciplinary’ (4.24). These data highlight possible changes that the FST&E domains anticipate in the post-COVID-19 and remote or hybrid education/learning, as well as the further proliferation of innovation and OI.

It is important to note that business-related topics were evaluated as less important, with Likert-type scores averaging below 4.0. These included: ‘Soft skills’ (3.90), followed by ‘Entrepreneurship’ (3.77), and ‘Business creation/networking’ (3.70). ‘Entrepreneurship’ and ‘Business creation/network’ could bring many benefits, such as fostering innovation, productivity, competitiveness, new business, OI, and socioeconomic development. Yet, these topics were considered among those of less importance, probably indicating that the panel was less oriented to business-related topics.

The search for professionals with different skills to overcome the current and foreseen challenges relevant to the agri-food sector was previously studied 25 . It was shown that problem-based learning (PBL), described as an instructional approach, promotes interdisciplinary and critical thinking with the potential to meet current challenges. PBL, aligned with an innovation program and contest, integrated into a master’s degree in FE to promote academic entrepreneurship, allowed the development of innovative products intending to solve problems faced by the agri-food sector 27 . The latter information supports the current survey data that show that the highest perceived topics were ‘Critical thinking’ (4.50) and ‘Problem-solving projects’ (4.44). On the other hand, the relatively low perceived importance of entrepreneurship (3.77 ranked #9) could indicate that FSs, FTs, or FEs are currently considering business-related topics as a lower priority. Nevertheless, their Likert average scores were approaching ‘High’. It is important to note that promoting project-based learning by students on developing eco-designed business models and eco-innovated food products seems to be an essential lever for the sustainability transition 10 . Although this is just one example, it highlights the importance of project-based learning 27 , 28 , 29 .

Project-based learning is an integrated part of the flipped classroom (FC) model, based on active learning, and consequently attracts much interest. The FC is a form of blended learning (BL) that reorganizes the workload in and outside the classroom and requires the active participation of students in learning activities before and during face-to-face lessons with teachers 10 , 30 . The FC model has been applied since the 1990s to encourage student preparation before classes: team-based learning, peer or mentor instruction, and just-in-time education, where the teaching information is communicated via electronic means. This allows more class time to be devoted to active learning and formative assessment 31 . A recent study highlighted a case study where an elective FC course on engineering, science, and gastronomy was implemented for undergraduate students that included in-class demonstrations by chefs. New education methodologies call for expanded computational abilities, ample access to online content, active learning, and student-centered approaches 10 .

A comparison between traditional project-based learning and hybrid project-based learning indicated a significant increase in fundamental formative knowledge, enhanced problem-solving abilities, and production of better-performing artifacts regarding the set of design skills for students undergoing hybrid project-based learning 28 .

In light of the feedback by the panel indicating that ‘Critical thinking development’ and ‘Problem-solving projects’ were the highest outcome (#1 and #2, respectively), combined with recent reports on the FC importance, it could be concluded that seeking new directions in learning/facilitating strategies that complement existing methods in order to enrich the learning experience of students is recommended.

Academic partnership/collaboration

The respondents were instructed to rank (from 1 to 5, corresponding to high to low; each rank could appear only once) the importance of partnership(s) and/or collaboration(s) with: ‘Food Industry´, ‘Nutrition sciences’, ‘Government, policymakers and/or local authorities’, ‘Private sector’, and ‘Other academic disciplines’. The ranking distribution is depicted in Fig. 2 .

Ranking importance (‘Very high’, ‘High’, ‘Medium’, ‘Low’, ‘Very low’) distribution of ‘Academic partnerships/collaborations’.

Collaboration with the ‘Food industry’ was ranked the highest, while the collaboration with ‘Other academic programs’ was ranked lower. Furthermore, the top two rankings (‘Very high’ and ‘High’) were ‘Food industry’ (53%), ‘Nutrition’ (38%), ‘Government’ (36%), ‘Private institutes (35%) and ‘Other academic programs’ (33%).

Collaboration with the nutrition sector was highly ranked. This demonstrates that the panel considered collaboration between FST&E and nutrition highly important and is a direction that these domains should consider closely. The need to enhance and probably integrate or converge nutrition sciences and FST&E is underscored due to the lack of present collaboration and the growing consumers’ awareness of H&W and food processing.

The role of the food industry as a key player in academic partnership and collaboration should be considered, particularly due to the negative aspects suggested by the NOVA ultra-food processes food classification. For instance, “ By design, these products are highly palatable, cheap, ubiquitous, and contain preservatives that offer a long shelf life. These features, combined with aggressive industry marketing strategies, contribute to excessive consumption and make these products highly profitable for the food, beverage, and restaurant industry sectors that are dominant actors in the global food system ” 32 . This study demonstrates that the food industry plays significant positive roles in both collaboration and partnerships. It also plays a key part in internships described below (Section “Internships”).

Topics importance to FST&E

The importance of 11 topics for FST&E was assessed as listed in Table 3 .

The data exposed 5 top important topics to FST&E. The topic of highest interest was ‘Sustainability, circular economy, and food waste management,’ followed by ‘Innovation/open innovation’ and ‘New product development’ (no statistically significant difference between these topics), ‘Consumer perception & trust’ and ‘Nutrition sciences’ that were statistically different from the first two topics (one-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD test, p  <0.05), respectively. Worth noting the significant differences between FSTs and FEs in ‘Sustainability, circular economy, and food waste management’, ‘New product development’, ‘Consumer perception & trust’, and ‘Nutrition Sciences’, where FSTs significantly assigned higher importance to these topics in comparison with FEs. However, no significant difference was found for ‘Innovation/open innovation’.

‘Artificial Intelligence, machine learning’ was only ordered as #9 based on the Likert-type scores averages, and FEs considered it significantly higher than FSTs. It is safe to predict that the importance of AI will increase in the coming years once more and more applications and utilizations will emerge. Suffice to consider recent applications and the global AI market size growth from $65.48 billion in 2020, projected to reach $1581.70 billion by 2030, growing at a CAGR of 38.0% from 2021 to 2030 ( https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/artificial-intelligence-market ).

Importance to FST&E curricula to meet future challenges and learning opportunities

The importance of the curricula in meeting FST&E future challenges and learning opportunities (in descending order) is highlighted in Table 4 .

Table 4 shows five topics were considered to be of ‘Very high’ to ‘High’ importance: ‘Research project(s)’ (4.34), ‘Apprenticeships (e.g., industrial training)’ (4.28), ‘Adaptability (e.g., adjusting to change in real-time, managing biases, overcome challenges)’ (4.22), ‘Revision current programs’ (4.16), and ‘Employability’ (4.13). The other topics received lower scores.

The significant difference between FSTs and FEs on ‘Research project(s)’, ‘Enhanced integration with nutrition’, and ‘Soft (life) skills’ is worth noting. On these topics, except for ‘Enhanced integration with nutrition’, FSTs scores were significantly higher when compared with FEs. The ´Enhanced integration with nutrition´ by both FSTs and FEs was ‘High’ (4.00) and above, projecting the absolute need for FST&E to enhance its collaboration with nutrition, mainly due to the high importance of H&W and its significant role.

Adaptability is the potential to adjust and learn new skills in response to changing factors, conditions, cultures, and environments. It is a soft skill that both colleagues and superiors highly value. In the ever-changing needs and progress, businesses and employees must adapt quickly to unforeseen dynamic circumstances, innovation, and disruption. Adaptability means being flexible, innovative, open, and resilient, particularly under unforeseen conditions. Some key elements of being adaptable are confident but open to criticism, focusing on solutions rather than problems, collaborating with others, and learning from them ( https://www.walkme.com/glossary/adaptability/ ). For instance, the a daptability of FST developments implies a capacity to continuously change and improve its operations and food quality output in time and space 33 . This explains the #3 place the panel considered adaptability.

The panel perceived both ‘Revision of current programs’ and ‘Employability’ as high priority (#4 and #5, average of 4.16 and 4.13, respectively). These assessments should be considered carefully by academic programs in order to adapt to the fast changes driven by innovation, disruption, and digital progress.

‘Enhanced integration with nutrition’ came in #6. However, FSTs and FEs indicated this topic is highly important (average of 4.00 and 4.21, respectively). Hence, FST&E education programs should seek avenues to enhance integration with nutrition science. Possible collaborations should consider joint research programs and other partnerships and alliances.

‘Business-related activities (e.g., creation, network, partnerships, collaboration)’ and ‘Soft (life) skills’ were #7–8. Nevertheless, their Likert-type average values were close to ‘High’. Hybrid teaching was perceived as the last (3.78). Apparently, this type of education is not very appealing. Yet, this should be reassessed after the Covid-19 pandemic has passed.

Engineering education is also experiencing dramatic changes. The traditional teaching model, where students are passive in the lecture room, gives way to more active, student-centered, and participatory approaches. Different modern education and learning techniques, such as blended and flip-classroom, active learning, use of technology in teaching, universal design, and student-centered education approach, among others, were previously reported 9 . Hence, it is expected that Hybrid teaching and other advanced methods, including AI, will flourish soon and will become the norm.

Internships

The importance of internship to FST&E students was evaluated considering 5 possibilities: ‘Academic internship,’ ‘Food industry internship,’ ‘Start-up/FoodTech company internship,’ ‘Other domains/industries,’ and ‘Internship in other countries.’ The data are depicted in Fig. 3 .

Likert-type averages (1–5 scale) and one side (-) SD of internships importance for FST&E (values with different small letters indicate significant differences between groups; one-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD test, p  < 0.05).

The internship was categorized into three statistically different groups (one-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD test, p  < 0.05). The first group was internships in ‘Food Industry’ (4.60), followed by the second group: ‘Start-ups/Food Tech’ (4.04), ‘Other countries’ (3.98), and ‘Academia’ (3.96), and the third group ‘Others domains/industries’ (3.46). Comparing the difference between FSTs and FEs, respondents showed a significant difference (one-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD test, p  < 0.05) for internships in ‘Food Industry’ (4.65 and 4.52), ‘Start-ups/Food Tech’ (4.11 and 3.89) and ‘Other domains/industries’ (3.46 and 3.26), respectively. It is not surprising that FSTs have consistently assigned higher values to internships, probably due to the possibility that they are more complimentary to hands-on experiences.

Bridging the academia-industry gap in the food sector through collaborative courses and internships was recently studied. More than fifteen years of university extension diplomas in food technology Diplomas demonstrated how collaborative courses strengthen academia-industry bonds, and employability was boosted thanks to internships and the network created 22 . Internships could support students in developing their identity, which is achieved by close contact with their future working tasks 34 , enhancing familiarity with and nearness to their future profession 35 and industry-based projects and governance 36 . Also, student projects in collaboration with the industry make the students face a reality 37 . In light of these benefits, it is clear why the internship in the food industry received such a high Likert-type average. This very high importance given by the panel to industry internships coincides with their ranking, as aforementioned in the previous section, highlighting the core role of the food industry in students’ education.

Professional organization impact on FST&E education

The impact of professional organizations on food science/food technology/food engineering education, as well as strategy and vision data, are depicted in Fig. 4 .

Likert-type averages (1–5 scale) and one side (-) SD of organization/vision impact on FST&E education (values with different letters indicated significant differences between groups; one-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD test, p  < 0.05).

Data analysis ( t -test) of the impact of the various organizations or vision and strategy on education revealed that the statistically highest Likert-type average scores (one-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD test, p  < 0.05) were given to the ‘Food industry’ (3.86). ‘IFT (Institute of Food Technologists)’ was in the 2nd statistical group (3.70), followed by the 3rd statistical group that included ‘IUFoST (International Union of Food Science & Technology)’ (3.49), ‘Vision, strategy & leadership of the university’ (3.49), ‘IFST (Institute of Food Science+Technology)’ (3.44), and ‘Government, public interest & support’ (3.42). ‘EFFoST (The European Federation of Food Science and Technology)’ (3.40) was between the 3rd and the 4th group that included ‘ISEKI-Food (European Association for Integrating Food Science and Engineering Into the Food Chain),’(3.27). ‘SoFE (Society of Food Engineering)’ (2.96) was the next statistical group, and the last 6th group was ‘Others’ (2.65).

It is quite surprising that the food industry obtained such a high perceived impact on education, especially because the number of respondents in the panel affiliated with academic and educational institutes was high (69.6%). This could be explained by the fact that most curricula are designed to align with the industrial requirement and/or the need to provide students with the essential tools for the food industry. As no in-depth interviews were conducted, these findings warrant additional consideration.

IFT was in second place, significantly affecting FST&E education. In light of the quite low number of respondents from North America and Canada (13.1%), this finding clearly projects the significant role IFT has in impacting global education and proliferation. The 3rd group included IUFoST, IFST (international and mainly UK organizations, respectively), ‘Vision, strategy & leadership of the university’ and ‘Government, public interest & support´. These different groups and elements were perceived as very important and apparently have a significant role in contributing to the education program. EFFoST was categorized between the 3rd and 4th groups, including ISEKI-Food (3.27). These organizations were perceived as lower compared with the previous organizations. SoFE was classified only in the 5th significantly different group. As SoFE appeals mainly to FEs, many panelists were probably unfamiliar with its activities.

Education impact on professional expectations

The impact of the respondents’ education curricula on their professional success, satisfaction, and meeting expectations data is depicted in Fig. 5 .

Likert-type averages (1–5 scale) and one side (-) SD of ‘Success’, ‘Satisfaction’, and ‘Meeting expectations’ (values with different letters indicated significant differences between groups; one-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD test, p  < 0.05).

Education curricula showed two different statistical (one-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD test, p  < 0.05) groups. The first group included ‘Success’ (4.03) and ‘Satisfaction’ (3.95). The second statistical group that was quite lower evaluated was ‘Meeting expectations’ (3.76). This finding could open new avenues for education institutes to conduct in-depth assessments of their alumni and graduates, focusing on improving their performances in order to better meet their graduates’ future expectations. This study also provides insights into new education and learning opportunities and new topics to be included in future curricula.

When comparing FSTs with FEs, it was quite surprising that FSTs consistently rated all three attributes lower than FEs. In two cases, these differences were even significant: ‘Success’ (4.07 vs. 4.15, one-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD test, p  < 0.05), ‘Satisfaction’ (3.96 vs. 4.06), and ‘Meeting expectation’ (3.78 vs. 3.83, one-way ANOVA with post-hoc LSD test, p  < 0.05). This lower assessment by FSTs highlights that the potential for curriculum improvements is high, and an in-depth evaluation should open new avenues for significant improvements.

In conclusion, these main points are highlighted:

Seven topics affecting the future of the profession domain curricula were evaluated between ‘High’ to ‘Very high’. The highest scores were found for: ‘Critical thinking’, followed by ‘Problem-solving projects,’ ‘Teamwork/collaboration’, ‘Innovation/Open innovation’, and ‘Multidisciplinary’.

The importance of Academic partnership/collaboration showed that ‘Food industry’, and ‘Nutrition’ were ranked the highest.

Significant positive roles of the food industry in collaboration and partnerships with the FST&E domain were demonstrated. Significant findings were also related to internships, education, strategy, and vision effects of the food industry.

Collaboration between FST&E and nutrition sciences indicated its high importance. Integrating or converging nutrition science and FST&E is emphasized based on the lack of actual present collaborations.

Assessing the education curricula contribution showed two statistical groups. The first group included ‘Success’ and ‘Satisfaction’. ‘Meeting expectations’ was the second. New avenues to better meet future graduates’ and students’ expectations were identified.

Insights into novel education and learning opportunities and new topics to be included in future curricula have been identified.

The approach employed encompassed a structured questionnaire, adopting a methodology akin to the one described earlier 12 , 15 . The questionnaire is provided in the Supplementary information data file. The online questionnaire survey utilized the Qualtrics© software ( https://www.qualtrics.com/ ) and targeted global professionals (including students) across the food sector and nutrition. The key questions were formulated to capture the perspectives on professional values held by individuals in the studied fields. The initial questionnaire was pretested (these data were not utilized in the final analysis) using a pilot sample ( n  = 12) of selected food practitioners from academia and the food industry. This panel was selected based on previous personal and professional interactions. The pilot was employed to ensure the questionnaire’s consistency and to seek suggestions on additional topics that should be incorporated into the revised survey.

The link of the webpage of the questionnaire was distributed by e-mails of numerous organizations (e.g., IUFoST, ISEKI-Food Association, SoFE, IFT) and food practitioners globally. The survey was conducted in English, avoiding any possible language ambiguities. It was completely anonymous and was open from the end of May until the end of July 2022. Both mobile and computerized feedback was offered.

A 5-point Likert-type scale 26 was applied and consisted of 1 (‘Very low’), 2 (‘Low’), 3 (‘Medium’), 4 (‘High’), and 5 (‘Very high’). For comparisons, the Likert-type scale assessments were transformed into a calculated average. The Likert-type scale is widely employed as a fundamental and commonly utilized psychometric instrument in educational and social sciences research, marketing research, customer satisfaction studies, opinion surveys, and numerous other fields. One topic included ranking (from 1 to 5; each rank could appear only once).

Apart from the professional questions, the survey included demographic information such as gender, age group, location where the most advanced degree was obtained, or current place for study according to the following geographic categories: Western Europe, Eastern Europe, UK, North America including Canada, Mexico, South America, Asia/Middle East, China, Far East (excluding China), Oceania (Australia, New Zealand), and Africa. The questionnaire ended with an open-ended question asking for the interview’s possible suggestions for curriculum improvements. The data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel© spreadsheet (Redmont, Washington), JASP software (ver. 0.16.4, https://jasp-stats.org/ ), and IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 28; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York). For significant differences ( p  < 0.05) among groups, one-way ANOVA with a post-hoc least significant difference (LSD) test was performed. A two-sided t -test was utilized to identify significant differences ( p  < 0.05) between the averages of the two groups.

The survey was written according to the authorization from the Committee for the Use of Human Subjects in Research through The Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment of The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (file: AGHS/01.15) as outlined previously 12 . Before starting the study, the participants were informed that the responses were completely anonymous. Also, before starting the questionnaire, the consent of the participants was requested, and only those who agreed were able to start the study.

Reporting summary

Further information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article.

Data availability

The dataset obtained and analyzed during the current study is available from Prof. Eli Cohen upon request.

Change history

13 february 2024.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-024-00256-z

Hassoun, A. et al. Food processing 4.0: current and future developments spurred by the fourth industrial revolution. Food Control 145 , 109507 (2023).

Article   Google Scholar  

Hassoun, A. et al. The fourth industrial revolution in the food industry—Part I: industry 4.0 technologies. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr . https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2022.2034735 (2022).

Capozzi, F. et al. A multidisciplinary perspective of ultra-processed foods and associated food processing technologies: a view of the sustainable road ahead. Nutrients 13 , 1–19 (2021).

Chapman, J. et al. Challenges and opportunities of the fourth revolution: a brief insight into the future of food. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 62 , 2845–2853 (2022).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Catal, C. & Tekinerdogan, B. Aligning education for the life sciences domain to support digitalization and industry 4.0. in Proc. Comput. Sci. 158 99–106 (Elsevier B.V., 2019).

Erdogdu, F. Mathematical modelling of food thermal processing: current and future challenges. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 51 , 101042 (2023).

Saguy, I. S., Singh, R. P., Johnson, T., Fryer, P. J. & Sastry, S. K. Challenges facing food engineering. J. Food Eng. 119 , 332–342 (2013).

Donaldson, J. L., Graham, D. L., Arnold, S., Taylor, L. K. & Jayaratne, K. Extension education trends and research needs: Views from professionals and faculty. J. Agric Educ. 63 , 73–82 (2022).

Knorr, D. & Watzke, H. Food processing at a crossroad. Front Nutr. 6 , 1–8 (2019).

Aguilera, J. M. & Moreno, M. C. Teaching engineering and food: from traditional approaches to a flipped course on gastronomic engineering. Food Eng. Rev. 13 , 916–928 (2021).

Niranjan, K. A possible reconceptualization of food engineering discipline. Food Bioprod. Process. 99 , 78–89 (2016).

Saguy, I. S. & Cohen, E. Food engineering: attitudes and future outlook. J. Food Eng. 178 , 71–80 (2016).

Boom, R. M. & Janssen, A. E. M. Food Engineering. in Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems 154–166 (Elsevier, 2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-52512-3.00060-7 .

Roos, Y. H. et al. Food engineering at multiple scales: case studies, challenges and the future—a European perspective. Food Eng. Rev. 8 , 91–115 (2016).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Saguy, I. S., Roos, Y. H. & Cohen, E. Food engineering and food science and technology: forward-looking journey to future new horizons. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 47 , 326–334 (2018).

Adedeji, A. A. Challenges and discovery of best practices for teaching food engineering to food science majors—my experience over my first 5 years at the University of Kentucky. J. Food Sci. Educ. 19 , 7–9 (2020).

García-Peñalvo, F. J. & Colomo Palacios, R. Innovative teaching methods in Engineering. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 31 , 689–693 (2015).

Google Scholar  

Singh, R. P., & Erdogdu, F. Virtual Experiments in Food Processing . (Rar Press, Davis, CA, USA, 2004).

Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O., Frey, D. D. & Leifer, L. J. Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. J. Eng. Educ. 94 , 103–120 (2005).

Jamison, A., Kolmos, A. & Holgaard, J. E. Hybrid learning: an integrative approach to engineering education. J. Eng. Educ. 103 , 253–273 (2014).

Karabulut-Ilgu, A., Jaramillo Cherrez, N. & Jahren, C. T. A systematic review of research on the flipped learning method in engineering education. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 49 , 398–411 (2018).

Castelló, M. L., Barrera, C. & Seguí, L. Bridging the academia-industry gap in the food sector through collaborative courses and internships. Educ. Chem. Eng. 42 , 33–43 (2023).

Viaggi, D. et al. Education for innovation and entrepreneurship in the food system: the Erasmus+ BoostEdu approach and results. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 42 , 157–166 (2021).

Medina, F. X., Pinto de Moura, A., Vázquez-Medina, J. A., Frías, J. & Aguilar, A. Feeding the online: perspectives on food, nutrition and the online higher education. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 16 , 1–8 (2019).

Ali, W. Online and remote learning in higher education institutes: a necessity in light of COVID-19 pandemic. High. Educ. Stud. 10 , 16–25 (2020).

Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S. & Pal, D. Likert scale: explored and explained. Br. J. Appl. Sci. Technol. 7 , 396–403 (2015).

Oliveira, L. & Cardoso, E. L. A project-based learning approach to promote innovation and academic entrepreneurship in a master’s degree in food engineering. J. Food Sci. Educ. 20 , 120–129 (2021).

Chua, K. J. & Islam, M. R. The hybrid project-based learning–flipped classroom: a design project module redesigned to foster learning and engagement. Int. J. Mech. Eng. Educ. 49 , 289–315 (2021).

Serhan, H. & Yannou-Lebris, G. The engineering of food with sustainable development goals:policies, curriculums, business models, and practices. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2020.1722765 (2021).

Mshayisa, V. V. & Basitere, M. Flipped laboratory classes: student performance and perceptions in undergraduate food science and technology. J. Food Sci. Educ. 20 , 208–220 (2021).

Prieto Martín, A., Barbarroja, J., Álvarez, S. & Corell, A. Effectiveness of the flipped classroom model in university education: s synthesis of the best evidence. Rev. de. Educ. 2021 , 143–170 (2021).

Monteiro, C. A., Cannon, G., Lawrence, M., Laura Da Costa Louzada, M. & Machado, P. P. Ultra-processed foods, diet quality, and health using the NOVA classification system . 48 (Rome: FAO, 2019).

de Vries, H. The role of food science and technology in the future partnership sustainable food systems. Trends Food Sci. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2022.11.019 (2023).

Staberg, R. L., Jakobsen, A. N., Persson, J. R. & Mehli, L. Interest, identity and perceptions. What makes a food technologist? Br. Food J. 125 , 1488–1503 (2023).

Jackson, D. Developing pre-professional identity in undergraduates through work-integrated learning. High. Educ. 74 , 833–853 (2017).

Tomlinson, M. & Jackson, D. Professional identity formation in contemporary higher education students. Stud. High. Educ. 46 , 885–900 (2021).

Karlsen, H., Mehli, L., Wahl, E. & Staberg, R. L. Teaching outbreak investigation to undergraduate food technologists. Br. Food J. 117 , 766–778 (2015).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the contribution of IUFoST (International Union of Food Science & Technology), mainly to WG 1.2 ‘Emerging Issues, Key Focus Areas´ working group members, for pretesting, distributing, and spreading the survey. The author, C.L.M. Silva, would like to acknowledge the support by National Funds from FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia through project UIDB/50016/2020.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food & Environment, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot, Israel

I. S. Saguy

Universidade Católica Portuguesa, CBQF—Centro de Biotecnologia e Química Fina—Laboratório Associado, Escola Superior de Biotecnologia, Rua Diogo Botelho 1327, 4169-005, Porto, Portugal

C. L. M. Silva

Gilford Glazer Faculty of Business Administration, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Beer-Sheva, Be’er Sheva, Israel

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

I.S.S., C.L.M.S., and E.C. conceived and developed the questionnaire. E.C. data curation. E.C. and I.S.S. performed the validation and formal statistical analysis. I.S.S. and E.C. conducted the investigation and wrote the paper. C.L.M.S. provided expertize, feedback, and paper revision–supervision and project administration by I.S.S.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. S. Saguy .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Saguy, I.S., Silva, C.L.M. & Cohen, E. Emerging challenges and opportunities in innovating food science technology and engineering education. npj Sci Food 8 , 5 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-023-00243-w

Download citation

Received : 25 July 2023

Accepted : 08 December 2023

Published : 13 January 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-023-00243-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

REVIEW article

Insight on current advances in food science and technology for feeding the world population.

• 1 Department of Food and Nutrition, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
• 2 Helsinki Institute of Sustainability Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

While the world population is steadily increasing, the capacity of Earth to renew its resources is continuously declining. Consequently, the bioresources required for food production are diminishing and new approaches are needed to feed the current and future global population. In the last decades, scientists have developed novel strategies to reduce food loss and waste, improve food production, and find new ingredients, design and build new food structures, and introduce digitalization in the food system. In this work, we provide a general overview on circular economy, alternative technologies for food production such as cellular agriculture, and new sources of ingredients like microalgae, insects, and wood-derived fibers. We present a summary of the whole process of food design using creative problem-solving that fosters food innovation, and digitalization in the food sector such as artificial intelligence, augmented and virtual reality, and blockchain technology. Finally, we briefly discuss the effect of COVID-19 on the food system. This review has been written for a broad audience, covering a wide spectrum and giving insights on the most recent advances in the food science and technology area, presenting examples from both academic and industrial sides, in terms of concepts, technologies, and tools which will possibly help the world to achieve food security in the next 30 years.

Introduction

The capacity of Earth to regenerate its own resources is continuously and drastically reducing due to the exponential growth of the human population ( Ehrlich and Holdren, 1971 ; Henderson and Loreau, 2018 ). Over the last 50 years, the global human population has doubled, while the Earth overshoot day—the day on which humanity has exhausted the annual renewable bioresources of the Earth—has continuously become earlier, reaching its earliest date (July 29) in 2018 and 2019. Exceptionally, the Earth overshoot day was delayed to August 22 in 2020, due to the novel Coronavirus pandemic ( Global Footprint Network, 2020a ) ( Figure 1 ). However, this delay is the result of a pandemic disease and it is not the consequence of any long-term planned strategy, which is still required to improve the sustainability of our society. Bioresources are necessary to feed people. However, the production, including loss and waste of food account for 26% of the human ecological footprint ( Global Footprint Network, 2020b ). This is due to low efficiency in food production coupled with non-optimal waste management. By taking action and promoting sustainable behavior in the entire food chain and among consumers, the Earth overshoot day could be delayed, preserving Earth's regenerative capacity ( Moore et al., 2012 ).

Figure 1 . Earth overshoot day (blue) and global population (orange) evolution over the last 50 years.

By 2050, the population is expected to reach 9.7 billion and ensuring global food security will be a priority ( Berners-Lee et al., 2018 ). The first step toward food security is the reduction of waste and loss of food. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), ~1.3 billion tons of food are lost/wasted in the food chain from production to retail and by consumers annually ( Wieben, 2017 ), which highlights the importance of the circular economy and consumer education. In addition, economic barriers should be addressed to give access to healthier and sustainable food to low-income consumers ( Hirvonen et al., 2020 ). However, the reduction of waste and economic barriers is not enough to reach global food security. Indeed, to feed the world population of 2050, food production should increase by 70% ( Floros et al., 2010 ). Additionally, diets should change and rely less on animal products, including more plant-, insect-, and microalgae-based products ( van Huis and Oonincx, 2017 ; Caporgno and Mathys, 2018 ; Lynch et al., 2018 ). This change is necessary as animal-based diets are less sustainable comparatively due to their demand for more natural resources, resulting in more environmental degradation ( Sabaté and Soret, 2014 ). Unfortunately, changing food production and consumption habits is not a straightforward process; it has to be efficient, sustainable, and economically feasible. New food products have to be nutritionally adequate, culturally and socially acceptable, economically accessible, as well as palatable. Moreover, new food products should aim to maintain or improve the health of consumers. Food science and technology can help address these problems by improving food production processes, including novel ingredients from more sustainable sources, and designing new highly-accepted food products.

However, the benefits of consuming novel and upgraded food products is not sufficient to obtain an effect on consumers. Indeed, the acceptability of, and demand for food varies around the world, based on, for example, geographic location, society structure, economy, personal income, religious constraints, and available technology. Food safety and nutritionally adequate foods (in terms of both macro- and micronutrients) are most important in low-income countries ( Sasson, 2012 ; Bain et al., 2013 ), whereas medium- and high-income countries prioritize foods to reduce risk of chronic disease, and functional and environmentally friendly food ( Azais-Braesco et al., 2009 ; Cencic and Chingwaru, 2010 ; Govindaraj, 2015 ). The concept of food has evolved from the amount of nutrients needed by a person to survive on a daily basis ( Floros et al., 2010 ) to a tool to prevent nutrition-related diseases (e.g., non-communicable diseases: type 2 diabetes, coronary diseases, cancer, and obesity), and to improve human physical and mental well-being ( Siró et al., 2008 ), and to slow/control aging ( Rockenfeller and Madeo, 2010 ). Therefore, the development of new food products should consider the needs and demands of consumers. In spite of this, across countries, personal income can limit the access to sufficient food for survival, let alone new and improved food products that have extra benefits.

Coupled to this complex scenario, food demand is also constrained, and affected by human psychology ( Wang et al., 2019 ). The naturally-occurring conservative and neophobic behavior of humans toward new food can lead to nutrition-related diseases due to poor dietary patterns already established during childhood ( Perry et al., 2015 ) and can lead to acceptability problems related to food containing novel ingredients such as insects in Western countries ( La Barbera et al., 2018 ). Additionally, the introduction in our diets of new food products obtained by means of novel technologies and ingredients from food waste and by-products can be undermined by low acceptability caused by human psychology ( Bhatt et al., 2018 ; Cattaneo et al., 2018 ; Siegrist and Hartmann, 2020 ). Therefore, to increase the successful integration of the solutions discussed in this paper into the diet, consumer behavior has to be considered. Finally, it should not be forgotten that food consumption is also determined by pleasure rather than just being a merely mechanical process driven by the need for calories ( Mela, 2006 ; Lowe and Butryn, 2007 ). The latter concept is particularly important when consumers are expected to change their eating habits. New food products developed using sustainable ingredients and processes should be designed to take in consideration sensorial attributes and psychological considerations, which will allow a straightforward transition to more sustainable diets.

The actions needed in the area of food to develop a sustainable society allowing the regeneration of Earth's bio-resources are several. They include changing our eating habits and dietary choices, reducing food waste and loss, preserving biodiversity, reducing the prevalence of food-related diseases, and balancing the distribution of food worldwide. To promote these actions, new ingredients and technologies are necessary ( Table 1 ).

Table 1 . Challenges/solutions matrix for the development of the food of the future using the most recent advances in food science and technology.

This review discusses the most recent advances in food science and technology that aim to ensure food security for the growing human population by developing the food of the future. We discuss (i) the circular economy, where food waste is valorized and enters back into the food production chain improving the sustainability of the food system and reduces Earth's biodiversity and resources loss; (ii) alternative technologies and sources for food production like cellular agriculture, algae, microalgae, insects, and wood-derived fibers, which use Earth's bioresources more efficiently; (iii) the design of food in terms of creative problem-solving that fosters food innovation allowing transition to more sustainable and nutritionally adequate diets without undermining their consumer acceptability; and (iv) digitalization in which artificial intelligence (AI), virtual reality (VR), and blockchain technology are used to better control and manage the food chain, and assist the development of novel ingredients and food, boosting the technological shift in the whole food system; (v) we also briefly discuss the effect of COVID-19 on the food supply chain, showing the need to develop a resilient food system.

Food Science and Technology Solutions for Global Food Security

The circular economy.

The unsustainable practice of producing and consuming materials based on the linear (take-make-dispose) economic model calls for a shift toward innovative and sustainable approaches embodied in the principles of the circular economy ( Jørgensen and Pedersen, 2018 ). In contrast to a linear economic model, where materials are produced linearly from a presumably infinite source of raw materials, the circular economy is based on closing the loop of materials and substances in the supply chain. In this model, the value of products, materials, and resources is preserved in the economy for as long as possible ( Merli et al., 2018 ).

Integrated into the food system, the circular economy offers solutions to achieve global food sustainability by minimizing food loss and waste, promoting efficient use of natural resources and mitigating biodiversity loss ( Jurgilevich et al., 2016 ), by retaining the resources within a loop, i.e., the resources are used in a cyclic process, reducing the demand for fresh raw materials in food production. This efficient use of natural resources for food in a circular economy, in turn, helps to rebuild biodiversity by preventing further conversion of natural habitats to agricultural land, which is one of the greatest contributors to biodiversity loss ( Dudley and Alexander, 2017 ).

This measure is highlighted by the fact that an enormous amount of waste is generated at various stages of the food supply chain. Food loss and waste accounts for 30% of the food produced for human consumption globally, translating into an estimated economic loss of USD 1 trillion annually ( FAO, 2019 ). Food loss and waste also takes its toll on the environment in relation to the emission of greenhouse gases associated with disposal of food waste in landfills, as well as in activities associated with the production of food such as agriculture, processing, manufacturing, transportation, storage, refrigeration, distribution, and retail ( Papargyropoulou et al., 2014 ). The various steps in the food supply chain have an embedded greenhouse gas impact, which is exacerbated when food is wasted and lost.

Addressing the challenge of minimizing food loss and waste requires proper identification of what constitutes food loss and waste. The FAO defines food loss and waste as a decrease in the quantity or quality of food along the food supply chain ( FAO, 2019 ). Food loss occurs along the food supply chain from harvest, slaughter, and up to, but not including, the retail level. Food waste, on the other hand, occurs at the retail and consumption level. From the FAO's definition, food that is converted for other uses such as animal feed, and inedible parts of foods, for example, bones, feathers, and peel, are not considered food loss or waste. The Waste and Resources Action Programme ( Quested and Johnson, 2009 ), a charity based in the UK, has defined and categorized food waste as both avoidable and unavoidable. Avoidable food waste includes food that is still considered edible but was thrown away, such as vegetables or fruits that do not pass certain standards, leftover food, and damaged stock that has not been used. Unavoidable food waste arises from food preparation or production and includes those by-products that are not edible in normal circumstances, such as vegetable and fruit peels, bones, fat, and feathers. Despite the lack of consensus on the definition of food loss and waste, the reduction in food loss and waste points in one direction and that is securing global food sustainability.

In a circular food system, the strategies for reducing food waste vary with the type of waste ( Figure 2 ). The best measure to reduce avoidable food waste is prevention, which can be integrated in the various stages of the food supply chain. Preventing overproduction, improving packaging and storage facilities, reducing food surplus by ensuring balanced food distribution, and educating consumers about proper meal planning, better understanding of best before dates, and buying food that may not pass quality control standards based on aesthetics are some preventive measures to reduce avoidable food waste ( Papargyropoulou et al., 2014 ). For unavoidable food waste, reduction can be achieved by utilizing side-stream products as raw materials for the production of new food or non-food materials. The residual waste generated, both from the processing of avoidable and unavoidable food waste, can still be treated through composting, which returns nutrients back to the soil, and used for another cycle of food production ( Jurgilevich et al., 2016 ). Indeed, in a circular food system, waste is ideally non-existent because it is used as a feedstock for another cycle, creating a system that mimics natural regeneration ( Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2019 ).

Figure 2 . Strategies to reduce food waste in the food supply chain in a circular food system: prevention for avoidable food waste (yellow curve) and valorization for unavoidable food waste (orange curve).

The valorization of unavoidable food waste, which mostly includes by-products or side-stream materials from the food processing industries, has resulted in novel food technologies that harness the most out of food waste and add value to food waste. These novel food technologies serve as new routes to achieving a circular food system by converting food waste into new food ingredients or non-food materials. Several ongoing examples of side-stream valorization have been explored and some of the most recent technologies are presented herein and summarized in Table 2 .

Table 2 . Summary of potentially functional and nutritional food components from cheese production, meat processing, seafood processing, and plant-based food production by-products.

One of the most famous success stories of side-stream valorization is the processing of whey, the leftover liquid from cheese production. It is an environmental hazard when disposed of without treatment, having a high biological oxygen demand (BOD) value of >35,000 ppm as well as a high chemical oxygen demand (COD) value of >60,000 ppm ( Smithers, 2008 ). These high BOD and COD values can be detrimental to aquatic life where the untreated whey is disposed of, reducing the available dissolved oxygen for fish and other aquatic animals. However, whey is loaded with both lactose and proteins, and therefore in the early days cheese producers sent their whey for use as pig feed, as still occurs in some areas today. As dairy science advanced, it was discovered that lactose and whey protein have great nutritional and technological potential. Lactose and its derivatives can be separated by various filtration and crystallization methods, which can then be used in infant formula or as a feedstock for glucose and galactose production ( Smithers, 2008 ; de Souza et al., 2010 ). Whey protein has also gained popularity for use in sports performance nutrition and as an enhancer of the functional properties of food, and so has experienced a significant increase in demand, both as isolate and concentrate products ( Lagrange et al., 2015 ).

The meat-processing industry produces various by-products that can also be further processed to obtain food ingredients. The plasma fraction of animal blood, which can easily be obtained by centrifugation, contains various plasma proteins, some of which can stabilize colloidal food systems, just like whey proteins. Others, like fibrinogen and thrombin, can act as meat glue and are therefore useful to make restructured meat product. Leftover skin, bones, and connective tissues can be processed to produce gelatin, an important gelling agent, as well as short peptides that impart an umami taste and are used in flavor enhancers. However, the use of non-muscle tissue from farm animals, especially from cows, would require strict toxicology assessment to ensure safety. There is a risk of spreading transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, a deadly disease caused by prion proteins which might spread to humans through the consumption of materials derived from non-meat tissues ( Toldrá et al., 2012 ).

The by-products of the seafood industry also provide great opportunities for valorization, with several known products and many other yet to be discovered. Fish-derived gelatin from leftover fish skin and bones can be presented as a gelatin alternative for several religious groups, for whom cattle- and swine-derived gelatin products are unacceptable ( Karayannakidis and Zotos, 2016 ). Rich in carotenoid and chitin, shells of common seafood such as crabs, lobster, and prawns can be further processed to extract functional ingredients. The extracted chitin from the shells can be treated to produce chitosan, a well-known biopolymer with the potential to be used as food packaging. One can also extract the red carotenoids present in the shells, most prominently astaxanthin, which can then be used as a nutritional and technological food additive ( Kandra et al., 2012 ). The liquid side stream of the fish-canning industry also has potential as a source of bioactive lipids, such as polyunsaturated omega-3 fatty acids ( Monteiro et al., 2018 ).

The increasing demand for plant-derived functional ingredients to cater for the vegetarian and vegan market can also be complemented with ingredients isolated from plant food processing side streams. Nixtamalization, the alkaline processing of maize, produces wastewater that is highly alkaline with a high COD of 10 200–20,000 ppm but is rich in carbohydrates and polyphenols ( Gutiérrez-Uribe et al., 2010 ). Microfiltration and ultrafiltration methods are used to isolate enriched fractions of carbohydrates and polyphenols from nixtamalization wastewater, which can later be integrated into various subsequent processes ( Castro-Muñoz and Yáñez-Fernández, 2015 ). Waste from the cereal, fruit, and vegetable industry can also be fermented by microbial means to produce various pigments for food production ( Panesar et al., 2015 ). Pigment extraction can also be performed on the leftover waste of the fresh-cut salad industry, which includes leafy vegetables and fruits that are deemed to be too blemished to be sold to the customer. Aside from pigments, such waste can also be a source of natural gelling agents and bioactive compounds that can be refined for further use in the food industry ( Plazzotta et al., 2017 ). Extraction of carotenoids, flavonoids, and phenolic compounds from fruits and vegetables waste as well as from wastewater (e.g., from olive mill) can be achieved using green technologies such as supercritical carbon dioxide, ultrasound, microwave, pulsed electric fields, enzymes, membrane techniques, and resin adsorption ( Rahmanian et al., 2014 ; Saini et al., 2019 ). Additionally, waste from potato processing, such as potato peel and potato fruit juice (a by-product of potato starch production), can yield various polyphenols, alkaloids, and even protein extracts by using different refining methods ( Fritsch et al., 2017 ).

In addition to food waste, there are also other, often unexpected, sources of food ingredients. For example, while wood cannot be considered part of the food industry by itself, the extraction of emulsifier from sawdust can serve as an example of how the waste of one industrial cycle can be used as a feedstock for another industrial cycle and in effect reduce the overall wasted material ( Pitkänen et al., 2018 ). Straw from grain production, such as barley and wheat, can also be processed to extract oligosaccharides to be used as prebiotic additives into other food matrices ( Huang et al., 2017 ; Alvarez et al., 2020 ). While young bamboo shoots have been commonly used in various Asian cuisines, older bamboo leaves can also act as a source of polyphenolic antioxidants, which can be used to fortify food with bioactive compounds ( Ni et al., 2012 ; Nirmala et al., 2018 ).

Alternative Technologies and Sources for Food Production

To feed the growing population, the circular economy concept must be combined with increasing food production. However, food production has been impaired by depletion of resources, such as water and arable land, and by climate change. Projections indicate that 529,000 climate-related deaths will occur worldwide in 2050, corresponding with the predicted 3.2% reduction in global food availability (including fruits, vegetables, and red meat) caused by climate change ( Springmann et al., 2016 ). Strategies to overcome food production issues have been developed and implemented that aim to improve agricultural productivity and resource use (vertical farming and genetic modification), increase and/or tailor the nutritional value of food (genetic engineering), produce new alternatives to food and/or food ingredients (cellular cultures, insects, algae, and dietary fibers), and protect biodiversity. Such solutions have been designed to supply current and future food demand by sustainably optimizing the use of natural resources and boosting the restructuration of the food industry models ( Figure 3 ).

Figure 3 . A view of future food based on current prospects for optimizing the use of novel techniques, food sources, and nutritional ingredients.

Cellular agriculture is an emerging field with the potential to increase food productivity locally using fewer resources and optimizing the use of land. Cellular agriculture has the potential to produce various types of food with a high content of protein, lipids, and fibers. This technique can be performed with minimal or no animal involvement following two routes: tissue engineering and fermentation ( Stephens et al., 2018 ). In the tissue engineering process, cells collected from living animals are cultured using mechanical and enzymatic techniques to produce muscles to be consumed as food. In the case of the fermentation process, organic molecules are biofabricated by genetically modified bacteria, algae, or yeasts, eliminating the need for animal cells. The Solar Foods company uses the fermentation process to produce Solein, a single-cell pure protein ( https://solarfoods.fi/solein/ ). This bioprocess combines the use of water, vitamins, nutrients, carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) from air, and solar energy to grow microorganisms. After that, the protein is obtained in powder form and can be used as a food ingredient. Most of the production in cellular agriculture has been focused on animal-derived products such as beef, chicken, fish, lobster, and proteins for the production of milk and eggs ( Post, 2014 ; Stephens et al., 2018 ). Compared with traditional meat, the production of cultured meat can (i) reduce the demand for livestock products, (ii) create a novel nutrition variant for people with dietary restrictions, (iii) favor the control and design of the composition, quality, and flavor of the product, and (iv) reduce the need for land, transportation costs (it can be produced locally), waste production, and greenhouse gas emissions ( Bhat and Fayaz, 2011 ). Moreover, the controlled production of cultured meat can eliminate the presence of unwanted elements, such as saturated fat, microorganisms, hormones, and antibiotics ( Bhat and Fayaz, 2011 ). One of the most important events for cultured meat took place in a 2013 press conference in London, when cultured beef burger meat was tasted by the public for the first time ( O'Riordan et al., 2017 ). After this, cultured meat has inspired several start-ups around the world and some examples are presented in Table 3 ( Clean Meat News Australia, 2019 ).

Table 3 . Examples of start-ups producing different cultured products around the world.

However, cellular agriculture has the potential to produce more than only animal-derivative products. A recent study conducted by the VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland explored the growing of plant cell cultures from cloudberry, lingonberry, and stoneberry in a plant growth medium. The cells were described to be richer in protein, essential polyunsaturated fatty acids, sugars, and dietary fibers than berry fruits, and additionally to have a fresh odor and flavor ( Nordlund et al., 2018 ). Regarding their use, berry cells can be used to replace berry fruits in smoothies, yogurt, jam, etc. or be dried and incorporated as ingredients in several preparations (e.g., cakes, desserts, and toppings).

Insects are potentially an important source of essential nutrients such as proteins, fat (including unsaturated fatty acids), polysaccharides (including chitin), fiber, vitamins, and minerals. Edible insects are traditionally consumed in different forms (raw, steamed, roasted, smoked, fried, etc.) by populations in Africa, Central and South America, and Asia ( Duda et al., 2019 ; Melgar-Lalanne et al., 2019 ). The production of edible insects is highly efficient, yielding various generations during the year with low mortality rates and requiring only little space, such as vertical systems ( Ramos-Elorduy, 2009 ). Additionally, the cultivation of edible insects utilizes very cheap materials, usually easily found in the surrounding area. Indeed, insects can be fed by food waste and agricultural by-products not consumed by humans, which fits well in the circular bioeconomy models (section The circular economy). The introduction of insect proteins could diversify and create more sustainable dietary alternatives. However, the resistance of consumers to the ingestion of insects needs to be overcome ( La Barbera et al., 2018 ). The introduction of insects in the form of powder or flour can help solve consumer resistance ( Duda et al., 2019 ; Melgar-Lalanne et al., 2019 ). Several technologies are used to transform insect biomass into food ingredients, including drying processes (freeze-drying, oven-drying, fluidized bed drying, microwave-drying, etc.) and extraction methods (ultrasound-assisted extraction, cold atmospheric pressure plasma, and dry fractionation) ( Melgar-Lalanne et al., 2019 ). Recently, cricket powder was used for enriching pasta, resulting in a significant increase in protein, fat, and mineral content, and additionally improving its texture and appearance ( Duda et al., 2019 ). Chitin, extracted from the outer skeleton of insects, is a precursor for bioactive derivatives, such as chitosan, which presents potential to prevent and treat diseases ( Azuma et al., 2015 ; Kerch, 2015 ). Regenerated chitin has been recognized as a promising emulsifier ( Xiao et al., 2018 ), with potential applications including stabilizing yogurt, creams, ice cream, etc. Whole insects, insect powder, and food products from insects such as flavored snacks, energy bars and shakes, and candies are already commercialized around the world. However, food processing and technology is currently needed to help address consumer neophobia and meet sensory requirements ( Melgar-Lalanne et al., 2019 ).

Algae and microalgae are a source of nutrients in various Asian countries ( Priyadarshani and Rath, 2012 ; Wells et al., 2017 ; Sathasivam et al., 2019 ), that can be consumed as such (bulk material) or as an extract. The extracts consists of biomolecules that are synthesize more efficiently than plants ( Torres-Tiji et al., 2020 ). Some techniques used for improving algae and microalgae productivity and their nutritional quality are genotype selection, alteration, and improvement, and controlling growing conditions ( Torres-Tiji et al., 2020 ). Although their direct intake is more traditional (e.g., nori used in sushi preparation), in recent years the extraction of bioactive compounds from algae and microalgae for the preparation of functional food has attracted great interest. Spirulina and Chlorella are the most used microalgae species for this purpose, being recognized by the European Union for uses in food ( Zarbà et al., 2020 ). These microalgae are rich in proteins (i.e., phycocyanin), essential fatty acids (i.e., omega-3, docosahexaenoic acid, and eicosapentaenoic acid), β-glucan, vitamins from various groups (e.g., A, B, C, D2, E, and H), minerals like iodine, potassium, iron, magnesium, and calcium, antioxidants (i.e., ß-carotene), and pigments (i.e., astaxanthin) ( Priyadarshani and Rath, 2012 ; Vigani et al., 2015 ; Wells et al., 2017 ; Sathasivam et al., 2019 ). The latter molecules can be recovered using, for example, pulsed electric field, ultrasound, microwaves, and supercritical CO 2 ( Kadam et al., 2013 ; Buchmann et al., 2018 ).

Finally, in addition to proteins, lipids, and digestible carbohydrates, it is necessary to introduce fiber in to the diet. Dietary fibers include soluble (pectin and hydrocolloids) and insoluble (polysaccharides and lignin) fractions, which are usually obtained through the direct ingestion of fruits, vegetables, cereals, and grains ( McKee and Latner, 2000 ). Although appropriate dietary fiber intake leads to various health benefits, the proliferation of low fiber foods, especially in Western countries resulted in low dietary intake ( McKee and Latner, 2000 ; Anderson et al., 2009 ). This lack of consumed dietary fibers created the demand for fiber supplementation in functional foods ( McKee and Latner, 2000 ; Doyon and Labrecque, 2008 ). As additives, besides all benefits in health and well-being, dietary fibers contribute to food structure and texture formation ( Sakagami et al., 2010 ; Tolba et al., 2011 ; Jones, 2014 ; Aura and Lille, 2016 ).

Sources of dietary fibers include food crops (e.g., wheat, corn, oats, sorghum, oat, etc.), vegetables/fruits (e.g., apple and pear biomasses recovered after juicing process, orange peel and pulp, pineapple shells, etc.) ( McKee and Latner, 2000 ) and wood ( Pitkänen et al., 2018 ). The use of plant-based derivatives and waste aligns with the circular bioeconomy framework and contributes to the sustainability of the food chain.

It is worth mentioning that new and alternative sources of food and food ingredients require approval in the corresponding regulatory systems before commercialization. In Europe, safety assessment is carried out according to the novel food regulation of the European Union [Regulation (EU) 2015/2283]. Important aspects such as composition, stability, allergenicity, and toxicology should be evaluated for each new food or food ingredient ( Pitkänen et al., 2018 ). Such regulatory assessments are responsible for guaranteeing that new food and food ingredients are safe for human consumption.

Food Design

Humans are at the center of the food supply ecosystem, with diverse and dynamic expectations. To impart sustainability in food supply by utilizing novel materials and technologies discussed in the preceding chapters, the framework of food production and consumption should go beyond creating edible objects and integrate creativity to subvert neophobic characteristics of consumers and enhance acceptability of sustainable product innovations. These innovations should also consider changing consumer demographics, lifestyle and nutritional requirements. Food design is a newly practiced discipline to foster human-centric innovation in the food value chain by applying a design thinking process in every step of production to the disposal of food ( Olsen, 2015 ). The design concept utilizes the core ideas of consumer empathy, rapid prototyping, and mandate the collaboration of a multitude of sectors involved in designing food and the distribution of food to the space where we consume it ( Figure 4 ) ( Zampollo, 2020 ).

Figure 4 . Neural network graphical representation of the major disciplines (black dots) in the food design concept and their interconnections. Sub-disciplines arising through communion of ideas of some major disciplines indicated by gray dots.

The sub-discipline of food product design relates to the curation of food products from a technological perspective utilizing innovative process and structured engineering methodologies to translate consumer wishes into product properties. In the future, food producers need to shift their focus from the current conventional approach of mass production, to engineering of food products that emphasizes food structure-property-taste. Through food product design, it is possible to influence the health of consumers by regulating nutrient bioavailability, satiety, gut health, and developing feelings of well-being, as well as encompass consumer choice by modulating consumers sensorial experience. These aspects become important with the introduction of new materials and healthy alternatives where the neophobic characteristic of humans can lead to poor food choices and eating habits due to consumer prejudices or inferior sensorial experience. For example, environmental concerns related to meat substitutes were less relevant for consumers, and sensorial properties were the decisive factor ( Hoek et al., 2011 ; Weinrich, 2019 ). In this regard, food designers and chefs will have an important role in influencing sustainable and healthy eating choices by increasing the acceptability of food products, using molecular gastronomy principles. Innogusto ( www.innogusto.com ), a start-up founded in 2018, aims to develop gastronomic dishes based on meat substitutes to increase their acceptability.

To stimulate taste sensations, electric and thermal energy have been studied, referred to as “digital taste” ( Green and Nachtigal, 2015 ; Ranasinghe et al., 2019 ). For example, reducing the temperature of sweet food products can increase sweet taste adaptation and reduce sweetness intensity ( Green and Nachtigal, 2015 ). On the other hand, electric taste augmentation can modulate the perception of saltiness and sourness in unsalted and diluted food products leading to a possible reduction of salt ( Ranasinghe et al., 2019 ). Another external stimulus that can modify the sensorial experience during food consumption, is social context. In this case, interaction with other people leads to a resonance “mirror” mechanism, that allow people to tune in to the emotions of others. Indeed, positive emotions such as happiness increase the desirability and acceptability of food, contrarily to neutral and negative emotions (angriness) ( Rizzato et al., 2016 ). Also, auditory responses such as that to background music, referred to as “sonic seasoning” ( Reinoso Carvalho et al., 2016 ) have been studied in the context of desirability and overall perception of food. Noise is able to reduce the perception of sweetness and enhance the perception of an umami taste ( Yan and Dando, 2015 ). Bridging the interior design concepts with the sensory perception in a holistic food space design is an interesting opportunity to influence healthy habits and accommodate unconventional food in our daily lives.

Food packaging which falls under the Design for food sub-discipline is expected to play an integral role to tackle issues of food waste/loss. Potential solutions to food waste/loss at the consumers level can be realized by the design of resealable packages, consideration of portion size, clear labeling of “best by” and expiration dates, for example. Although a clear understanding on the interdependency of food waste and packaging design in the circular economy has not yet been established, the design of smart packaging to prolong shelf life and quality of highly perishable food like fresh vegetables, fruits, dairy, and meat products has been considered the most efficient option ( Halloran et al., 2014 ). Packaging is a strong non-verbal medium of communication between product designers and consumers which can potentially be used to favor the consumption of healthier and sustainable options ( Plasek et al., 2020 ). Packaging linguistics has shown differential effect on taste and quality perceptions ( Khan and Lee, 2020 ), whereas designs have shown to create emotional attachment to the product surpassing the effect of taste ( Gunaratne et al., 2019 ). Visual stimuli such as weight, color, size, and shape of the food containers have been linked to the overall liking of the food ( Piqueras-Fiszman and Spence, 2011 ; Harrar and Spence, 2013 ). Food was perceived to be dense with higher satiety when presented in heavy containers compared with light-weighted containers ( Piqueras-Fiszman and Spence, 2011 ).

In light of emerging techniques in food production, it is envisioned that technologies like 3D printing, at both the industrial and household level, will be widely used to design food and recycle food waste ( Gholamipour-Shirazi et al., 2020 ). Upprinting Food ( https://upprintingfood.com/ ), a start-up company, has initiated the production of snacks from waste bread using 3D printing. These initiatives will also encourage the inclusion of industrial side streams (discussed in section the circular economy) in the mainstream using novel technologies. In addition to the increasing need for healthy food, it is envisioned that the food industry will see innovation regarding personalized solutions ( Poutanen et al., 2017 ). In the latter, consumers will be at the center of the food production system, where they can choose food that supports their personal physical and mental well-being, and ethical values. Techniques such as 3D printers can be applied in smart groceries and in the home, where one can print personalized food ( Sun et al., 2015 ) inclusive of molecular gastronomy methods ( D'Angelo et al., 2016 ). A challenge will be to incorporate the food structure-property-taste factor in such systems. In a highly futuristic vision, concepts of personalized medicine are borrowed to address the diverse demands of food through personalized or “smart” food, possibly solving food-related diseases, while reducing human ecological footprint.

Digitalization

Many major challenges faced by global food production, as discussed previously and presented in Table 1 (eating habits and dietary choices, food waste and loss, biodiversity, diseases, and resource availability), can be addressed by food system digitalization. The most recent research advances aim to overcome these challenges using digitalization (summarized in Table 4 and Figure 5 ). The rapidly advancing information and communication technology (ICT) sector has enabled innovative technologies to be applied along the agri-food chain to meet the demands for safe and sustainable food production (i.e., traceability) ( Demartini et al., 2018 ; Raheem et al., 2019 ).

Table 4 . Recent research advances in digitalization solutions to overcome challenges in global food production.

Figure 5 . Digitalization solutions for the development of future food. Red area represents digitalization-enabled targets. IoT, Internet of Things; ML, Machine Learning; RFID, Radio Frequency Identification; AI, Artificial Intelligence.

An interesting part of ICT is artificial intelligence (AI). The latter is a field of computer science that allows machines, especially computer systems, to have cognitive functions like humans. These machines can learn, infer, adapt, and make decisions based on collected data ( Salah et al., 2019 ). Over the past decade, AI has changed the food industry in extensive ways by aiding crop sustainability, marketing strategies, food sales, eating habits and preferences, food design and new product development, maintaining health and safety systems, managing food waste, and predicting health problems associated with food.

Digitalization can be used to modify our perception of food and help solve unsustainable eating behaviors. It is hoped that a better insight into how the neural network in the human brain works upon seeing food can be discovered using AI in the future and can thus direct consumer preference toward healthier diets. Additionally, it can be used to assist the development of new food structures and molecules such as modeling food gelling agents (e.g., using fuzzy modeling to predict the influence of different gum-protein emulsifier concentration on mayonnaise), and the design of liquid-crystalline food (by predicting the most stable liquid crystalline phases using predictive computer simulation tool based on field theory) ( Mezzenga et al., 2006 ; Ghoush et al., 2008 ; Dalkas and Euston, 2020 ). In addition, the development of aroma profiles can be explored using AI. Electronic eyes, noses, and tongues can analyze food similarly to sensory panelists and help in the optimization of quality control in food production ( Loutfi et al., 2015 ; Nicolotti et al., 2019 ; Xu et al., 2019 ). Companies like Gastrograph AI ( https://gastrograph.com/ ) and Whisk ( https://whisk.com/ ) are using AI and natural language processing to model consumer sensory perception, predict their preferences toward food and beverage products, map the world's food ingredients, and provide specific advertisements based on consumer personalization and preferences.

With the advancement of augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR), in the future, digitalization can offer obesity-related solutions, where consumers can eat healthy food while simultaneously seeing unhealthy desirable food. This possibility has been studied by Okajima et al. (2013) using an AR system to change visual food appearance in real time. In their study, the visual appearance of food can highly influence food perception in terms of taste and perceived texture.

AI also provides a major solution to food waste problems by estimating food demand quantity, predicting waste volumes, and supporting effective cleaning methods by smart waste management ( Adeogba et al., 2019 ; Calp, 2019 ; Gupta et al., 2019 ).

AI-enabled agents, Internet of Things (IoT) sensors, and blockchain technology can be combined to maximize the supply network and increase the revenue of all parties involved along the agri-food value chain ( Salah et al., 2019 ). Blockchain is a technology that can record multiple transactions from multiple parties across a complex network. Changing the records inside the blockchain requires the consensus of all parties involved, thus giving a high level of confidence in the data ( Olsen et al., 2019 ). Blockchain technology can support the traceability and transparency of the food supply chain, possibly increasing the trust of consumers, and in combination with AI, intelligent precision farming can be achieved, as illustrated in Figure 6 .

Figure 6 . Digitalization in the food supply chain: intelligent precision farming with artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain. IoT, Internet of Things; ML, Machine Learning. Modified from Salah et al. (2019) and reproduced with permission from IEEE.

The physical flow of the food supply chain is supported by the digital flow, consisting of different interconnected digital tools. As each block is approved, it can be added to the chain of transactions, and it becomes a permanent record of the entire process. Each blockchain contains specific information about the process where it describes the crops used, equipment, process methods, batch number, conditions, shelf-time, expiration date, etc. ( Kamath, 2018 ; Kamilaris et al., 2019 ).

Traceability and transparency of the complex food supply network are continuously increasing their importance in food manufacturing management. Not only are they an effective way to control the quality and safety of food production, but they can also be effective tools to monitor the flow of resources from raw materials to the end consumer. In the future, it will be essential to recognize the bottlenecks of the entire food supply chain and redirect the food resource allocation accordingly to minimize food waste.

The digital tools reviewed here can be combined with all the solutions proposed before, enabling fast achievement of the necessary conditions for feeding the increasing world population while maintaining our natural resources.

The Effect of Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Pandemic on the Food System

Although the strategies examined in this review can possibly help reaching food security in 2050, the entire food system has been facing a new challenge because of COVID-19 pandemic. Since December 2019, a new severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) caused by a novel Coronavirus started spreading worldwide from China. To contain the diffusion of the novel Coronavirus and avoid the collapse of national sanitary systems, several governments locked down entire nations. These actions had severe consequences on global economy, including the food system.

As first consequence, the lockdown changed consumer purchasing behavior. At the initial stage of the lockdown, panic-buying behavior was dominant, in which consumers were buying canned foods and stockpiling them, leading to shortage of food in several supermarkets ( Nicola et al., 2020 ). However, as the lockdown proceeded, this behavior become more moderate ( Bakalis et al., 2020 ). The problems faced by the food supply chain in assuring food availability for the entire population have risen concerns about its architecture. Indeed, as discussed by Bakalis et al. (2020) , the western world food supply chain has an architecture with a bottleneck at the supermarkets/suppliers interface where most of the food is controlled by a small number of organizations. Additionally, as noted by these authors, problems with timely packaging of basic foods (such as flour) led to their shortage. Bakalis et al. (2020) suggest that the architecture of the food system should be more local, decentralized, sustainable, and efficient. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the vulnerability of the food system, indicating that the aid of future automation (robotics) and AI would help to maintain an operational supply chain. Therefore, the entire food system should be rethought with a resilient and sustainable perspective, which can assure adequate, safe, and health-promoting food to all despite of unpredictable events such as COVID-19, by balancing the roles of local and global producers and involving policymakers ( Bakalis et al., 2020 ; Galanakis, 2020 ).

Another problem caused by the lockdown was food waste. Indeed, restaurants, catering services, and food producers increased their food waste due to forced closure and rupture of the food chain ( Bakalis et al., 2020 ). On the other hand, consumers become more aware of food waste and strived to reduce household food waste. Unfortunately, the positive behavior of consumers toward reducing food waste has been more driven by the COVID-19 lockdown situation rather than an awareness ( Jribi et al., 2020 ).

COVID-19 has also showed the importance of designing food products that can help boosting our immune system and avoid the diffusion of virions through the entire food chain ( Galanakis, 2020 ; Roos, 2020 ). Virions can enter the food chain during food production, handling, packing, storage, and transportation and be transmitted to consumers. This possibility is increased with minimally processed foods and animal products. Therefore, packaging and handling of minimally processed foods should be considered to reduce viral transfer while avoiding increasing waste. The survival of virions in food products can be reduced by better designing and engineering foods taking into consideration for example not only thermal inactivation of virions but also the interaction between temperature of inactivation, water activity of food, and food matrix effects ( Roos, 2020 ).

Therefore, to reach food security by 2050, besides the solutions highlighted in section (Food science and technology solutions for global food security), it is of foremost important to implement actions in the entire food system that can counteract exceptional circumstances such as the global pandemic caused by the novel Coronavirus.

Conclusions and Outlook

To achieve food security in the next 30 years while maintaining our natural bioresources, a transition from the current food system to a more efficient, healthier, equal, and consumer- and environment-centered food system is necessary. This transition, however, is complex and not straightforward. First, we need to fully transition from a linear to a circular economy where side streams and waste are valorized as new sources of food materials/ingredients, leading to more efficient use of the available bioresources. Secondly, food production has to increase. For this, vertical farming, genetic engineering, cellular agriculture, and unconventional sources of ingredients such as microalgae, insects, and wood-derived fibers can make a valid contribution by leading to a more efficient use of land, an increase in food and ingredient productivity, a shift from global to local production which reduces transportation, and the transformation of non-reusable and inedible waste into ingredients with novel functionalities. However, to obtain acceptable sustainable food using novel ingredients and technologies, the aid of food design is necessary in which conceptualization, development, and engineering in terms of food structure, appearance, functionality, and service result in food with higher appeal for consumers. To complement these solutions, digital technology offers an additional potential boost. Indeed, AI, blockchain, and VR and AR are tools which can better manage the whole food chain to guarantee quality and sustainability, assist in the development of new ingredients and structures, and change the perception of food improving acceptability, which can lead to a reduction of food-related diseases.

By cooperating on a global scale, we can envision that in the future it may be common to, for example, 3D print a steak at home using cells or plant-based proteins. The understanding of the interaction between our gastrointestinal tract and the food ingredients/structures aided by AI and biosensors might allow the 3D printed steak to be tailored in terms of nutritional value and individual preferences. The food developed in the future can possibly also self-regulate its digestibility and bioavailability of nutrients. In this context, the same foodstuff consumed by two different people would be absorbed according to the individuals' needs. In this futuristic example, the food of the future would be able to solve food-related diseases such as obesity and type 2 diabetes, while maintaining the ability of the Earth to renew its bioresources.

However, the strategies and solutions proposed here can possibly only help to achieve sustainable food supply by 2050 if they are supported and encouraged globally by common policies. Innovations in food science and technology can ensure the availability of acceptable, adequate, and nutritious food, and can help shape the behavior of consumers toward a more sustainable diet. Finally, the recent COVID-19 global pandemic has highlighted the importance of developing a resilient food system, which can cope with exceptional and unexpected situations. All these actions can possibly help in achieving food security by 2050.

Author Contributions

FV wrote abstract, sections introduction, the effect of novel Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic on the food system, and conclusions and outlook, and coordinated the writing process. MA and FA wrote section the circular economy. DM and JS wrote section alternative technologies and sources for food production. MB and JV wrote section food design. AA and EP wrote section digitalization. FV and KM revised and edited the whole manuscript. All authors have approved the final version before submission and contributed to planning the contents of the manuscript.

FV, MA, FA, and KM acknowledge the Academy of Finland for funding (FV: Project No. 316244, MA: Project No. 330617, FA: Project No. 322514, KM: Project No. 311244). DM acknowledges Tandem Forest Values for funding (TFV 2018-0016).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Acknowledgments

We thank JV for drawing Figures 2 – 6 , and Mr. Troy Faithfull for revising and editing the manuscript.

Adeogba, E., Barty, P., O'Dwyer, E., and Guo, M. (2019). Waste-to-resource transformation: gradient boosting modeling for organic fraction municipal solid waste projection. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 7, 10460–10466. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b00821

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ahlswede, S., Asam, S., and Röder, A. (2021). Hedgerow object detection in very high-resolution satellite images using convolutional neural networks. J. Appl. Remote Sens. 15:018501. doi: 10.1117/1.JRS.15.018501

Alfian, G., Syafrudin, M., Farooq, U., Ma'arif, M. R., Syaekhoni, M. A., Fitriyani, N. L., et al. (2020). Improving efficiency of rfid-based traceability system for perishable food by utilizing iot sensors and machine learning model. Food Control 110:107016. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.107016

Alvarez, C., Gonzalez, A., Alonso, J. L., Saez, F., Negro, M. J., and Gullon, B. (2020). Xylooligosaccharides from steam-exploded barley straw: structural features and assessment of bifidogenic properties. Food Bioproducts Process. 124, 131–142. doi: 10.1016/j.fbp.2020.08.014

Anderson, J. W., Baird, P., Davis, R. H. Jr., Ferreri, S., Knudtson, M., Koraym, A., et al. (2009). Health benefits of dietary fiber. Nutr. Rev. 67, 188–205. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2009.00189.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Aura, A. M., and Lille, M. (2016). Wood Components to Boost the Quality of Food Products . VTT – Technical Research Center of Finland Ltd. Available online at: https://news.cision.com/vtt-info/r/wood-components-to-boost-the-quality-of-food-products.c2020810

Azais-Braesco, V., Brighenti, F., Paoletti, R., Peracino, A., Scarborough, P., Visioli, F., et al. (2009). Healthy food and healthy choices: a new european profile approach. Atheroscler. Suppl. 10, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosissup.2009.09.001

Azuma, K., Nagae, T., Nagai, T., Izawa, H., Morimoto, M., Murahata, Y., et al. (2015). Effects of surface-deacetylated chitin nanofibers in an experimental model of hypercholesterolemia. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 16, 17445–17455. doi: 10.3390/ijms160817445

Bain, L. E., Awah, P. K., Geraldine, N., Kindong, N. P., Sigal, Y., Bernard, N., et al. (2013). Malnutrition in sub-saharan africa: burden, causes and prospects. Pan Afr. Med. J. 15:120. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2013.15.120.2535

Bakalis, S., Valdramidis, V. P., Argyropoulos, D., Ahrne, L., Chen, J., Cullen, P. J., et al. (2020). Perspectives from co+re: how covid-19 changed our food systems and food security paradigms. Curr. Res. Food Sci. 3, 166–172. doi: 10.1016/j.crfs.2020.05.003

Berners-Lee, M., Kennelly, C., Watson, R., and Hewitt, C. N. (2018). Current global food production is sufficient to meet human nutritional needs in 2050 provided there is radical societal adaptation. Elementa Sci. Anthropocene 6, 52–66. doi: 10.1525/elementa.310

Bhat, Z. F., and Fayaz, H. (2011). Prospectus of cultured meat—advancing meat alternatives. J. Food Sci. Technol. 48, 125–140. doi: 10.1007/s13197-010-0198-7

Bhatt, S., Lee, J., Deutsch, J., Ayaz, H., Fulton, B., and Suri, R. (2018). From food waste to value-added surplus products (vasp): consumer acceptance of a novel food product category. J. Consum. Behav. 17, 57–63. doi: 10.1002/cb.1689

Buchmann, L., Bocker, L., Frey, W., Haberkorn, I., Nyffeler, M., and Mathys, A. (2018). Energy input assessment for nanosecond pulsed electric field processing and its application in a case study with chlorella vulgaris. Innovative Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 47, 445–453. doi: 10.1016/j.ifset.2018.04.013

Calp, M. (2019). An estimation of personnel food demand quantity for businesses by using artificial neural networks. J. Polytech. 22, 675–686. doi: 10.2339/politeknik.444380

Caporgno, M. P., and Mathys, A. (2018). Trends in microalgae incorporation into innovative food products with potential health benefits. Front. Nutr. 5:58. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2018.00058

Castro-Muñoz, R., and Yáñez-Fernández, J. (2015). Valorization of nixtamalization wastewaters (nejayote) by integrated membrane process. Food Bioprod. Process. 95, 7–18. doi: 10.1016/j.fbp.2015.03.006

Cattaneo, C., Lavelli, V., Proserpio, C., Laureati, M., and Pagliarini, E. (2018). Consumers' attitude towards food by-products: the influence of food technology neophobia, education and information. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 54, 679–687. doi: 10.1111/ijfs.13978

Cencic, A., and Chingwaru, W. (2010). The role of functional foods, nutraceuticals, and food supplements in intestinal health. Nutrients 2, 611–625. doi: 10.3390/nu2060611

Clean Meat News Australia (2019). Clean Meat Startups: 10 Lab-Grown Meat Producers to Watch . Available online at: https://www.cleanmeats.com.au/2019/07/24/clean-meat-startups-10-lab-grown-meat-producers-to-watch/ (accessed: October 30, 2019).

Google Scholar

Dalkas, G., and Euston, S. R. (2020). “Modelling and computer simulation approaches to understand and predict food structure development: Structuring by gelation and self-association of biomolecules,” in Handbook of Food Structure Development , eds F. Spyropoulos, A. Lazidis and I. Norton, editors. (The Royal Society of Chemistry), 383–401. doi: 10.1039/9781788016155-00383

D'Angelo, G., Hansen, H. N., and Hart, A. J. (2016). Molecular gastronomy meets 3d printing: layered construction via reverse spherification. 3D Printing Addit. Manuf. 3, 153–159. doi: 10.1089/3dp.2016.0024

de Souza, R. R., Bergamasco, R., da Costa, S. C., Feng, X., Faria, S. H. B., and Gimenes, M. L. (2010). Recovery and purification of lactose from whey. Chem. Eng. Process. 49, 1137–1143. doi: 10.1016/j.cep.2010.08.015

Demartini, M., Pinna, C., Tonelli, F., Terzi, S., Sansone, C., and Testa, C. (2018). Food industry digitalization: from challenges and trends to opportunities and solutions. IFAC-PapersOnLine 51, 1371–1378. doi: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.337

Doyon, M., and Labrecque, J. (2008). Functional foods: a conceptual definition. Br. Food J. 110, 1133–1149. doi: 10.1108/00070700810918036

Duda, A., Adamczak, J., Chelminska, P., Juszkiewicz, J., and Kowalczewski, P. (2019). Quality and nutritional/textural properties of durum wheat pasta enriched with cricket powder. Foods 8:46. doi: 10.3390/foods8020046

Dudley, N., and Alexander, S. (2017). Agriculture and biodiversity: a review. Biodiversity 18, 45–49. doi: 10.1080/14888386.2017.1351892

Ehrlich, P. R., and Holdren, J. P. (1971). Impact of population growth. Science 171, 1212–1217. doi: 10.1126/science.171.3977.1212

Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2019). Cities and Circular Economy for Food . Available online at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/Cities-and-Circular-Economy-for-Food_280119.pdf (accessed: october 30, 2019).

FAO (2019). The State of Food and Agriculture 2019. Moving Forward on Food Loss and Waste Reduction . Available online at: http://www.fao.org/3/ca6030en/ca6030en.pdf

Feng, P. Y., Wang, B., Liu, D. L., and Yu, Q. (2019). Machine learning-based integration of remotely-sensed drought factors can improve the estimation of agricultural drought in south-eastern australia. Agric. Syst. 173, 303–316. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2019.03.015

Floros, J. D., Newsome, R., Fisher, W., Barbosa-Canovas, G. V., Chen, H. D., Dunne, C. P., et al. (2010). Feeding the world today and tomorrow: the importance of food science and technology an ift scientific review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 9, 572–599. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-4337.2010.00127.x

Fritsch, C., Staebler, A., Happel, A., Marquez, M. A. C., Aguilo-Aguayo, I., Abadias, M., et al. (2017). Processing, valorization and application of bio-waste derived compounds from potato, tomato, olive and cereals: a review. Sustainability 9:1492. doi: 10.3390/su9081492

Galanakis, C. M. (2020). The food systems in the era of the coronavirus (covid-19) pandemic crisis. Foods 9:523. doi: 10.3390/foods9040523

Gholamipour-Shirazi, A., Kamlow, M. -A. T., Norton, I., and Mills, T. (2020). How to formulate for structure and texture via medium of additive manufacturing-a review. Foods 9:497. doi: 10.3390/foods9040497

Ghoush, M. A., Samhouri, M., Al-Holy, M., and Herald, T. (2008). Formulation and fuzzy modeling of emulsion stability and viscosity of a gum–protein emulsifier in a model mayonnaise system. J. Food Eng. 84, 348–357. doi: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2007.05.025

Global Footprint Network (2020a). Earth Overshoot Day . Available online at: https://www.overshootday.org (accessed: June 20, 2020).

Global Footprint Network (2020b). Earth Overshoot Day, Food . Available online at: https://www.overshootday.org/solutions/food/ (accessed: June 6, 2020)

Govindaraj, M. (2015). Is fortification or bio fortification of staple food crops will offer a simple solution to complex nutritional disorder in developing countries? J. Nutr. Food Sci. 5:351. doi: 10.4172/2155-9600.1000351

Green, B. G., and Nachtigal, D. (2015). Temperature affects human sweet taste via at least two mechanisms. Chem. Senses 40, 391–399. doi: 10.1093/chemse/bjv021

Guirado, E., Blanco-Sacristan, J., Rodriguez-Caballero, E., Tabik, S., Alcaraz-Segura, D., Martinez-Valderrama, J., et al. (2021). Mask r-cnn and obia fusion improves the segmentation of scattered vegetation in very high-resolution optical sensors. Sensors 21:320. doi: 10.3390/s21010320

Gunaratne, N. M., Fuentes, S., Gunaratne, T. M., Torrico, D. D., Francis, C., Ashman, H., et al. (2019). Effects of packaging design on sensory liking and willingness to purchase: a study using novel chocolate packaging. Heliyon 5:e01696. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01696

Guo, Y. H., Fu, Y. S., Hao, F. H., Zhang, X., Wu, W. X., Jin, X. L., et al. (2021). Integrated phenology and climate in rice yields prediction using machine learning methods. Ecol. Indic. 120:106935. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106935

Gupta, P. K., Shree, V., Hiremath, L., and Rajendran, S. (2019). “The use of modern technology in smart waste management and recycling: artificial intelligence and machine learning,” in Recent Advances in Computational Intelligence , eds R. Kumar and U. K. Wiil (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 173–188. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-12500-4_11

Gutiérrez-Uribe, J. A., Rojas-Garcia, C., Garcia-Lara, S., and Serna-Saldivar, S. O. (2010). Phytochemical analysis of wastewater (nejayote) obtained after lime-cooking of different types of maize kernels processed into masa for tortillas. J. Cereal Sci. 52, 410–416. doi: 10.1016/j.jcs.2010.07.003

Halloran, A., Clement, J., Kornum, N., Bucatariu, C., and Magid, J. (2014). Addressing food waste reduction in denmark. Food Policy 49, 294–301. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.09.005

Harrar, V., and Spence, C. (2013). The taste of cutlery: how the taste of food is affected by the weight, size, shape, and colour of the cutlery used to eat it. Flavour 2:21. doi: 10.1186/2044-7248-2-21

Henderson, K., and Loreau, M. (2018). How ecological feedbacks between human population and land cover influence sustainability. PLoS Comput. Biol. 14:e1006389. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006389

Hirvonen, K., Bai, Y., Haedey, D., and Masters, W. A. (2020). Affordability of the eat– lancet reference diet: a global analysis. Lancet Glob Health 8:e59–e66. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30447-4

Hoek, A. C., Luning, P. A., Weijzen, P., Engels, W., Kok, F. J., and de Graaf, C. (2011). Replacement of meat by meat substitutes. a survey on person- and product-related factors in consumer acceptance. Appetite 56, 662–673. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2011.02.001

Huang, C., Lai, C., Wu, X., Huang, Y., He, J., Huang, C., et al. (2017). An integrated process to produce bio-ethanol and xylooligosaccharides rich in xylobiose and xylotriose from high ash content waste wheat straw. Bioresour. Technol. 241, 228–235. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2017.05.109

Jones, J. M. (2014). Codex-aligned dietary fiber definitions help to bridge the 'fiber gap'. Nutr. J. 13:34. doi: 10.1186/1475-2891-13-34

Jørgensen, S., and Pedersen, L. J. T. (2018). “The circular rather than the linear economy,” in Restart Sustainable Business Model Innovation , eds S. Jørgensen and L. J. T. Pedersen (London: Palgrave Macmillan), 103–120. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-91971-3_8

Jribi, S., Ben Ismail, H., Doggui, D., and Debbabi, H. (2020). Covid-19 virus outbreak lockdown: what impacts on household food wastage? Environ. Dev. Sustain. 22, 3939–3955. doi: 10.1007/s10668-020-00740-y

Jurgilevich, A., Birge, T., Kentala-Lehtonen, J., Korhonen-Kurki, K., Pietikainen, J., Saikku, L., et al. (2016). Transition towards circular economy in the food system. Sustainability 8:69. doi: 10.3390/su8010069

Kadam, S. U., Tiwari, B. K., and O'Donnell, C. P. (2013). Application of novel extraction technologies for bioactives from marine algae. J. Agric. Food Chem. 61, 4667–4675. doi: 10.1021/jf400819p

Kamath, R. (2018). Food traceability on blockchain: walmart's pork and mango pilots with ibm. J. Br. Blockchain Assoc. 1, 47–53. doi: 10.31585/jbba-1-1-(10)2018

Kamilaris, A., Fonts, A., and Prenafeta-Bold?, F. X. (2019). The rise of blockchain technology in agriculture and food supply chains. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 91 640–652. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2019.07.034

Kandra, P., Challa, M. M., and Jyothi, H. K. (2012). Efficient use of shrimp waste: present and future trends. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 93, 17–29. doi: 10.1007/s00253-011-3651-2

Karayannakidis, P. D., and Zotos, A. (2016). Fish processing by-products as a potential source of gelatin: a review. J. Aquat. Food Product Technol. 25, 65–92. doi: 10.1080/10498850.2013.827767

Kerch, G. (2015). The potential of chitosan and its derivatives in prevention and treatment of age-related diseases. Mar. Drugs 13, 2158–2182. doi: 10.3390/md13042158

Khan, H., and Lee, R. (2020). Does packaging influence taste and quality perceptions across varying consumer demographics? Food Qual. Prefer. 84:103932. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.103932

La Barbera, F., Verneau, F., Amato, M., and Grunert, K. (2018). Understanding westerners' disgust for the eating of insects: the role of food neophobia and implicit associations. Food Qual. Prefer. 64 120–125. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.10.002

Lagrange, V., Whitsett, D., and Burris, C. (2015). Global market for dairy proteins. J. Food Sci. 1, A16–22. doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.12801

Loutfi, A., Coradeschi, S., Mani, G. K., Shankar, P., and Rayappan, J. B. B. (2015). Electronic noses for food quality: a review. J. Food Eng. 144, 103–111. doi: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2014.07.019

Lowe, M. R., and Butryn, M. L. (2007). Hedonic hunger: a new dimension of appetite? Physiol. Behav. 91, 432–439. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.04.006

Lynch, H., Johnston, C., and Wharton, C. (2018). Plant-based diets: considerations for environmental impact, protein quality, and exercise performance. Nutrients 10:1841. doi: 10.3390/nu10121841

Mazloumian, A., Rosenthal, M., and Gelke, H. (2020). Deep Learning for Classifying Food Waste . arXiv preprint (Ithaca, NY).

McKee, L. H., and Latner, T. A. (2000). Underutilized sources of dietary fiber: a review. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 55, 285–304. doi: 10.1023/A:1008144310986

Mela, D. J. (2006). Eating for pleasure or just wanting to eat? Reconsidering sensory hedonic responses as a driver of obesity. Appetite 47, 10–17. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2006.02.006

Melgar-Lalanne, G., Hernández-Álvarez, A. J., and Salinas-Castro, A. (2019). Edible insects processing: traditional and innovative technologies. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 18, 1166–1191. doi: 10.1111/1541-4337.12463

Merli, R., Preziosi, M., and Acampora, A. (2018). How do scholars approach the circular economy? A systematic literature review. J. Cleaner Prod. 178, 703–722. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.112

Mezzenga, R., Bo Lee, W., and Fredrickson, G. H. (2006). Design of liquid-crystalline foods via field theoretic computer simulations. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 17, 220–226. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2005.11.009

Monteiro, A., Paquincha, D., Martins, F., Queiros, R. P., Saraiva, J. A., Svarc-Gajic, J., et al. (2018). Liquid by-products from fish canning industry as sustainable sources of omega3 lipids. J. Environ. Manage. 219, 9–17. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.04.102

Moore, D., Cranston, G., Reed, A., and Galli, A. (2012). Projecting future human demand on the earth's regenerative capacity. Ecol. Indic. 16, 3–10. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.03.013

Ni, Q., Xu, G., Wang, Z., Gao, Q., Wang, S., and Zhang, Y. (2012). Seasonal variations of the antioxidant composition in ground bamboo sasa argenteastriatus leaves. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 13, 2249–2262. doi: 10.3390/ijms13022249

Nicola, M., Alsafi, Z., Sohrabi, C., Kerwan, A., Al-Jabir, A., Iosifidis, C., et al. (2020). The socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (covid-19): a review. Int. J. Surg. 78, 185–193. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.04.018

Nicolotti, L., Mall, V., and Schieberle, P. (2019). Characterization of key aroma compounds in a commercial rum and an australian red wine by means of a new sensomics-based expert system (sebes)-an approach to use artificial intelligence in determining food odor codes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 67, 4011–4022. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.9b00708

Nirmala, C., Bisht, M. S., Bajwa, H. K., and Santosh, O. (2018). Bamboo: A rich source of natural antioxidants and its applications in the food and pharmaceutical industry. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 77, 91–99. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2018.05.003

Nordlund, E., Lille, M., Silventoinen, P., Nygren, H., Seppanen-Laakso, T., Mikkelson, A., et al. (2018). Plant cells as food - a concept taking shape. Food Res. Int. 107, 297–305. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2018.02.045

Okajima, K., Ueda, J., and Spence, C. (2013). Effects of visual texture on food perception. J. Vis. 13, 1078–1078. doi: 10.1167/13.9.1078

Olsen, N. V. (2015). Design thinking and food innovation. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 41, 182–187. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2014.10.001

Olsen, P., Borit, M., and Syed, S. (2019). Applications, Limitations, Costs, and Benefits Related to the Use of Blockchain Technology in the Food Industry . Nofima rapportserie. Available online at: http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2586121

O'Riordan, K., Fotopoulou, A., and Stephens, N. (2017). The first bite: imaginaries, promotional publics and the laboratory grown burger. Public Underst. Sci. 26, 148–163. doi: 10.1177/0963662516639001

Panesar, R., Kaur, S., and Panesar, P. S. (2015). Production of microbial pigments utilizing agro-industrial waste: a review. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 1, 70–76. doi: 10.1016/j.cofs.2014.12.002

Papargyropoulou, E., Lozano, R., Steinberger, J. K., Wright, N., and bin Ujang, Z. (2014). The food waste hierarchy as a framework for the management of food surplus and food waste. J. Clean. Prod. 76, 106–115. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.020

Pennanen, K., Närväinen, J., Vanhatalo, S., Raisamo, R., and Sozer, N. (2020). Effect of virtual eating environment on consumers' evaluations of healthy and unhealthy snacks. Food Qual. Prefer. 82:103871. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.103871

Pentikäinen, S., Tanner, H., Karhunen, L., Kolehmainen, M., Poutanen, K., and Pennanen, K. (2019). Mobile phone app for self-monitoring of eating rhythm: field experiment. JMIR mHealth uHealth 7:e11490. doi: 10.2196/11490

Perry, R. A., Mallan, K. M., Koo, J., Mauch, C. E., Daniels, L. A., and Magarey, A. M. (2015). Food neophobia and its association with diet quality and weight in children aged 24 months: a cross sectional study. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 12:13. doi: 10.1186/s12966-015-0184-6

Piqueras-Fiszman, B., and Spence, C. (2011). Do the material properties of cutlery affect the perception of the food you eat? An exploratory study. J. Sens. Stud. 26, 358–362. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2011.00351.x

Pitkänen, L., Heinonen, M., and Mikkonen, K. S. (2018). Safety considerations of phenolic-rich plant polysaccharides for food use: case study on softwood galactoglucomannan. Food Funct. 9, 1931–1943. doi: 10.1039/C7FO01425B

Plasek, B., Lakner, Z., and Temesi, A. (2020). Factors that influence the perceived healthiness of food-review. Nutrients 12:1881. doi: 10.3390/nu12061881

Plazzotta, S., Manzocco, L., and Nicoli, M. C. (2017). Fruit and vegetable waste management and the challenge of fresh-cut salad. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 63, 51–59. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2017.02.013

Post, M. J. (2014). Cultured beef: medical technology to produce food. J. Sci. Food Agric. 94, 1039–1041. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.6474

Poutanen, K., Nordlund, E., Paasi, J., Vehmas, K., and Åkerman, M. (2017). Food Economy 4.0. VTT - Technical Research Center of Finland Ltd . Available online at: https://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/visions/2017/V10.pdf

Priyadarshani, I., and Rath, B. (2012). Commercial and industrial applications of micro algae—a review. J. Algal Biomass Util. 3, 89–100.

Quested, T., and Johnson, H. (2009). Household Food and Drink Waste in the Uk . WRAP. Available online at: https://wrap.org.uk/resources/report/household-food-and-drink-waste-uk-2009

Raheem, D., Shishaev, M., and Dikovitsky, V. (2019). Food system digitalization as a means to promote food and nutrition security in the barents region. Agriculture 9:168. doi: 10.3390/agriculture9080168

Rahmanian, N., Jafari, S. M., and Galanakis, C. M. (2014). Recovery and removal of phenolic compounds from olive mill wastewater. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 91, 1–18. doi: 10.1007/s11746-013-2350-9

Ramos-Elorduy, J. (2009). Anthropo-entomophagy: cultures, evolution and sustainability. Entomol. Res. 39, 271–288. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-5967.2009.00238.x

Ranasinghe, N., Tolley, D., Nguyen, T. N. T., Yan, L., Chew, B., and Do, E. Y. (2019). Augmented flavours: modulation of flavour experiences through electric taste augmentation. Food Res. Int. 117, 60–68. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2018.05.030

Reinoso Carvalho, F., Velasco, C., van Ee, R., Leboeuf, Y., and Spence, C. (2016). Music influences hedonic and taste ratings in beer. Front. Psychol. 7:636. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00636

Rizzato, M., Di Dio, C., Fasano, F., Gilli, G., Marchetti, A., and Sensidoni, A. (2016). Is food desirability affected by social interaction? Food Qual. Prefer. 50, 109–116. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.02.005

Rockenfeller, P., and Madeo, F. (2010). Ageing and eating. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1803, 499–506. doi: 10.1016/j.bbamcr.2010.01.001

Roos, Y. H. (2020). Water and pathogenic viruses inactivation—food engineering perspectives. Food Eng. Rev. 12, 251–267. doi: 10.1007/s12393-020-09234-z

Ryan, C., Gúeret, C., Berry, D., Corcoran, M., Keane, M. T., and Mac Namee, B. (2021). Predicting Illness for a Sustainable Dairy Agriculture: Predicting and Explaining the Onset of Mastitis in Dairy Cows . arXiv preprint.

Sabaté, J., and Soret, S. (2014). Sustainability of plant-based diets: back to the future. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 100, 476S–482S. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.113.071522

Saini, A., Panesar, P. S., and Bera, M. B. (2019). Valorization of fruits and vegetables waste through green extraction of bioactive compounds and their nanoemulsions-based delivery system. Bioresour. Bioprocess. 6:26. doi: 10.1186/s40643-019-0261-9

Sakagami, H., Kushida, T., Oizumi, T., Nakashima, H., and Makino, T. (2010). Distribution of lignin-carbohydrate complex in plant kingdom and its functionality as alternative medicine. Pharmacol. Ther. 128, 91–105. doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2010.05.004

Salah, K., Rehman, M. H. U., Nizamuddin, N., and Al-Fuqaha, A. (2019). Blockchain for ai: review and open research challenges. IEEE Access 7, 10127–10149. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2890507

Sasson, A. (2012). Food security for africa: an urgent global challenge. Agric. Food Secur. 1:2. doi: 10.1186/2048-7010-1-2

Sathasivam, R., Radhakrishnan, R., Hashem, A., and Abd Allah, E. F. (2019). Microalgae metabolites: a rich source for food and medicine. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 26, 709–722. doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2017.11.003

Siegrist, M., and Hartmann, C. (2020). Consumer acceptance of novel food technologies. Nat. Food 1, 343–350. doi: 10.1038/s43016-020-0094-x

Siró, I., Kapolna, E., Kapolna, B., and Lugasi, A. (2008). Functional food. Product development, marketing and consumer acceptance-a review. Appetite 51, 456–467. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2008.05.060

Smithers, G. W. (2008). Whey and whey proteins—from ‘gutter-to-gold'. Int. Dairy J. 18, 695–704. doi: 10.1016/j.idairyj.2008.03.008

Springmann, M., Mason-D'Croz, D., Robinson, S., Garnett, T., Godfray, H. C., Gollin, D., et al. (2016). Global and regional health effects of future food production under climate change: a modelling study. Lancet 387, 1937–1946. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01156-3

Stephens, N., Di Silvio, L., Dunsford, I., Ellis, M., Glencross, A., and Sexton, A. (2018). Bringing cultured meat to market: technical, socio-political, and regulatory challenges in cellular agriculture. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 78, 155–166. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2018.04.010

Sun, J., Zhou, W. B., Huang, D. J., Fuh, J. Y. H., and Hong, G. S. (2015). An overview of 3d printing technologies for food fabrication. Food Bioprocess Technol. 8, 1605–1615. doi: 10.1007/s11947-015-1528-6

Tolba, R., Wu, G., and Chen, A. (2011). Adsorption of dietary oils onto lignin for promising pharameutical and nutritional applications. Bioresources 6, 1322–1335.

Toldrá, F., Aristoy, M. C., Mora, L., and Reig, M. (2012). Innovations in value-addition of edible meat by-products. Meat Sci. 92, 290–296. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.004

Torres-Tiji, Y., Fields, F. J., and Mayfield, S. P. (2020). Microalgae as a future food source. Biotechnol. Adv. 41:107536. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2020.107536

van Huis, A., and Oonincx, D. G. A. B. (2017). The environmental sustainability of insects as food and feed. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 37, 43. doi: 10.1007/s13593-017-0452-8

Vigani, M., Parisi, C., Rodriguez-Cerezo, E., Barbosa, M. J., Sijtsma, L., Ploeg, M., et al. (2015). Food and feed products from micro-algae: market opportunities and challenges for the eu. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 42, 81–92. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2014.12.004

Wang, Q. J., Mielby, L. A., Junge, J. Y., Bertelsen, A. S., Kidmose, U., Spence, C., et al. (2019). The role of intrinsic and extrinsic sensory factors in sweetness perception of food and beverages: a review. Foods 8:211. doi: 10.3390/foods8060211

Weinrich, R. (2019). Opportunities for the adoption of health-based sustainable dietary patterns: a review on consumer research of meat substitutes. Sustainability 11:4028. doi: 10.3390/su11154028

Wells, M. L., Potin, P., Craigie, J. S., Raven, J. A., Merchant, S. S., Helliwell, K. E., et al. (2017). Algae as nutritional and functional food sources: revisiting our understanding. J. Appl. Phycol. 29, 949–982. doi: 10.1007/s10811-016-0974-5

Wieben, E. (2017). Food loss and Waste and the Linkage to Global Ecosystems. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations . Available online at: http://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/7fed720c-18e6-4be4-83d2-385b05b79ace/

Xiao, J.-R., Chung, P.-C., Wu, H.-Y., Phan, Q.-H., Yeh, J.-L. A., and Hou, M. T.-K. (2021). Detection of strawberry diseases using a convolutional neural network. Plants 10:31. doi: 10.3390/plants10010031

Xiao, Y., Chen, C., Wang, B., Mao, Z., Xu, H., Zhong, Y., et al. (2018). In vitro digestion of oil-in-water emulsions stabilized by regenerated chitin. J. Agric. Food Chem. 66, 12344–12352. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.8b03873

Xu, M., Wang, J., and Zhu, L. (2019). The qualitative and quantitative assessment of tea quality based on e-nose, e-tongue and e-eye combined with chemometrics. Food Chem. 289, 482–489. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.03.080

Yan, K. S., and Dando, R. (2015). A crossmodal role for audition in taste perception. J. Exp. Psychol. 41, 590–596. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000044

Zampollo, F. (2020). Food Design and Food Design Thinking . Available online at: http://francesca-zampollo.com/category/uncategorized/

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Zarbà, C., La Via, G., Pappalardo, G., and Hamam, M. S. M. (2020). The sustainability of novel foods in the transition phase to the circular economy; the trade “algae fit for human consumption” in european union. AIMS Agric. Food 5, 54–75. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2020.1.54

CrossRef Full Text

Keywords: food loss and food waste, circular economy, food production and food security, food structure design, new ingredients, digitalization, food design

Citation: Valoppi F, Agustin M, Abik F, Morais de Carvalho D, Sithole J, Bhattarai M, Varis JJ, Arzami ANAB, Pulkkinen E and Mikkonen KS (2021) Insight on Current Advances in Food Science and Technology for Feeding the World Population. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 5:626227. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2021.626227

Received: 30 November 2020; Accepted: 23 September 2021; Published: 21 October 2021.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2021 Valoppi, Agustin, Abik, Morais de Carvalho, Sithole, Bhattarai, Varis, Arzami, Pulkkinen and Mikkonen. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Fabio Valoppi, fabio.valoppi@helsinki.fi

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Journal Menu

• Aims & Scope
• Editorial Board
• Reviewer Board
• Topical Advisory Panel
• Instructions for Authors
• Special Issues
• Sections & Collections
• Article Processing Charge
• Indexing & Archiving
• Editor’s Choice Articles
• Most Cited & Viewed
• Journal Statistics
• Journal History
• Journal Awards
• Society Collaborations
• Conferences
• Editorial Office

Journal Browser

• arrow_forward_ios Forthcoming issue arrow_forward_ios Current issue
• Vol. 13 (2024)
• Vol. 12 (2023)
• Vol. 11 (2022)
• Vol. 10 (2021)
• Vol. 9 (2020)
• Vol. 8 (2019)
• Vol. 7 (2018)
• Vol. 6 (2017)
• Vol. 5 (2016)
• Vol. 4 (2015)
• Vol. 3 (2014)
• Vol. 2 (2013)
• Vol. 1 (2012)

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

Plant-Based Foodstuff: Recent Advances and Innovations in Food Technology

Special issue editors, special issue information.

• Published Papers

A special issue of Foods (ISSN 2304-8158). This special issue belongs to the section " Plant Foods ".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (20 January 2022) | Viewed by 63669

Share This Special Issue

Dear Colleagues,

As a response to growing consumer demands, modern food science has focused on the application of advanced and innovative food processing technologies and methods aimed at ensuring and improving product quality, process efficiency, safety, sensory and functional properties, and health-promoting effects of food. Improvements in existing processes and numerous innovations exist in all segments of plant food processing, from conventional technologies (biotechnological processes, non-fermentative and fermentative processes, enzyme-assisted processes, etc.) to advanced technologies such as ultrasound, microwaves, high hydrostatic pressure, cold plasma, pulsed electric field, supercritical fluids, etc. Novel plant species also hold great potential for the development of a wide range of products in food and other industries. The ongoing development of plant-based foods also involves the use of encapsulation and, more recently, nanotechnology to modify and convert natural components into a more stable, active and bioavailable form. In addition, consumer interest is increasingly directed towards personalized nutrition, which is accompanied by the development of new approaches in food processing and food platforms to determine the real benefits and recommendations.

This Special Issue welcomes review articles and original research papers that address advanced and innovative solutions for the production of plant-based foods aimed at improving their nutritional, functional and sensory properties.

Prof. Dr. Verica Dragović-Uzelac Dr. Maja Repajić Guest Editors

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website . Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form . Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Foods is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2900 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

• Plant-derived food products
• Food processing
• Conventional technologies
• Advanced technologies
• Nutritional composition
• Functional food
• Sensory properties
• Phytochemicals
• Health-promoting food

Published Papers (11 papers)

Jump to: Review

Jump to: Research

Graphical abstract

Further Information

Mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

• Journal home
• Advance online publication
• Virtual issue
• About the journal
• J-STAGE home
• Food Science and Technology Re ...
• The fibrous network of cellulose nanofibers can be preserved by the freeze-drying in the presence of trehalose Nuntanut Popuang, Takenobu Ogawa, Takashi Kobayashi, Kentaro Matsumiya, Fumito Tani
• Effect of preheating temperature on vegetable hardening and extent of cell membrane damage based on the measurements of potassium ions eluted and electrical properties Michiyo Kumagai, Yuka Hosoda, Takako Koriyama, Midori Kasai
• Enhanced textural properties of plant-based patties treated using crosslinking-catalyzed enzymes compared with those of beef patties Kiyota Sakai, Masamichi Okada, Shotaro Yamaguchi
• Administration of cyclodextrin-ferulic acid complex significantly increases the plasma concentration of the intact form of ferulic acid in mice Sana Yamashita, Junpei Tanaka, Takanori Tsuda

Nutritional Values and Functional Properties of House Cricket ( Acheta domesticus ) and Field Cricket ( Gryllus bimaculatus )

Released on J-STAGE: September 26, 2019 | Volume 25 Issue 4 Pages 597-605

Natteewan Udomsil, Sumeth Imsoonthornruksa, Chotika Gosalawit, Mariena Ketudat-Cairns

Evaluation of the Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Activity of Rosemary Essential Oils as Gelatin Edible Film Component

Released on J-STAGE: April 26, 2019 | Volume 25 Issue 2 Pages 321-329

Walid Yeddes, Malgorzata Nowacka, Katarzyna Rybak, Islem Younes, Majdi Hammami, Moufida Saidani-Tounsi, Dorota Witrowa-Rajchert

Measurement of Water Absorption in Wheat Flour by Mixograph Test

Released on J-STAGE: December 28, 2016 | Volume 22 Issue 6 Pages 841-846

Reiko Okuda, Aya Tabara, Hideki Okusu, Masaharu Seguchi

Differences in Biological Response Modifier-like Activities According to the Strain and Maturity of Bananas

Released on J-STAGE: August 06, 2009 | Volume 15 Issue 3 Pages 275-282

Haruyo IWASAWA, Masatoshi YAMAZAKI

Accurate and Precise Viscosity Measurements of Gelatin Solutions Using a Rotational Rheometer

Released on J-STAGE: April 26, 2019 | Volume 25 Issue 2 Pages 217-226

Shunji Yunoki, Kiyoji Sugimoto, Yoshimi Ohyabu, Hiroyuki Ida, Yosuke Hiraoka

• Volume Vol 30 Vol 29 Vol 28 Vol 27 Vol 26 Vol 25 Vol 24 Vol 23 Vol 22 Vol 21 Vol 20 Vol 19 Vol 18 Vol 17 Vol 16 Vol 15 Vol 14 Vol 13 Vol 12 Vol 11 Vol 10 Vol 9 Vol 8 Vol 7 Vol 6 Vol 5
• Add to favorites
• Announcement alert
• New arrival alert
• X @jsfst_office

Food Science and Technology International, Tokyo

Register with J-STAGE for free!

Already have an account? Sign in here

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Plant-Based Meat Alternatives: Technological, Nutritional, Environmental, Market, and Social Challenges and Opportunities

Giulia andreani.

1 Department of Food and Drug, University of Parma, 43124 Parma, Italy

Giovanni Sogari

Alessandra marti.

2 Department of Food, Environmental and Nutritional Sciences (DeFENS), Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy

Federico Froldi

3 Department of Animal Science, Food and Nutrition (DiANA), Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 29122 Piacenza, Italy

Hans Dagevos

4 Wageningen Economic Research, Wageningen University and Research, 2595 BM The Hague, The Netherlands

Daniela Martini

Associated data.

Data will be available upon request.

There is a growing awareness that fostering the transition toward plant-based diets with reduced meat consumption levels is essential to alleviating the detrimental impacts of the food system on the planet and to improving human health and animal welfare. The reduction in average meat intake may be reached via many possible ways, one possibility being the increased consumption of plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs). For this reason, in recent years, hundreds of products have been launched on the market with sensory attributes (i.e., taste, texture, appearance, and smell) similar to their animal counterparts; however, these products have often a long list of ingredients and their nutritional values are very different from animal meat. The present review aims to highlight the main opportunities and challenges related to the production and consumption of PBMAs through an interdisciplinary approach. Aspects related to the production technology, nutritional profiles, potential impacts on health and the environment, and the current market and consumer acceptance of PBMAs are discussed. Focusing on the growing literature on this topic, this review will also highlight research gaps related to PBMAs that should be considered in the future, possibly through the collaboration of different stakeholders that can support the transition toward sustainable plant-based diets.

1. Introduction

It is broadly agreed that transitioning away from meat-intensive diets toward increasingly plant-based diets is essential to alleviating the adverse environmental sustainability impacts of the food system and to improving human health and animal welfare. However, our collective meat consumption is still increasing and is projected to keep rising in the coming decade [ 1 ]. To curb the projected global rise in meat consumption, it is argued that a substantial reduction in average meat consumption levels—starting in affluent societies—is critically important.

Meat reduction can be established in various ways: (i) reducing meat portion sizes, (ii) replacing parts of meat-based products with plant-based alternatives (so-called hybrid meats) or applying a “less but better” principle (less quantity, more quality, i.e., more environmentally and/or animal-friendly meat), (iii) leaving the meat out of the dish without a replacement, (iv) replacing meat with another protein source (ranging from animal-based foods, such as eggs or cheese, to plant-derived alternatives, such as legumes, mushrooms, or tofu—not to mention alternative sources of protein with a minimal, i.e., insects and seaweed, or still non-existent market share, i.e., cultured meat), and last but not least, (v) consuming plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs) [ 2 , 3 ]. These strategies imply that a flexitarian diet should not be narrowed down to the adoption of (processed) meat alternatives because it is also about substituting meat with other (unprocessed) alternative proteins, both animal- and plant-sourced. Having said this, the broad and varied dietary group of flexitarians is undeniably the key target group of PBMAs and the major group already consuming these products. From the perspective of a flexitarian diet characterized by abstaining from meat (whether this is occasionally, frequently, or often), it is obvious that flexitarians are searching for and interested in meat alternatives to practice their reduced meat foodstyle. Briefly put, there is logic in pointing to flexitarians as launching customers. From the perspective of PBMAs, the dominant market strategy hitherto is to mimic traditional meat as closely as possible in terms of flavor (meaty/savory), texture (mouthfeel), appearance (e.g., “the bleeding burger”), nutritional value (iron, vitamins, etc.), and even product names (using meat-related terms); incidentally, “PBMAs” may also be read as “plant-based meat analogs”. The food industry’s goal to develop meat-like plant-based foods unquestionably facilitates the meat-free choices of many flexitarians and vegetarians and vegans as well, who may feel an aversion to the association with meat surrounding PBMAs.

While food consumers’ adoption and acceptance of PBMAs are not self-evident, as will be shown in the remainder of this review, it seems safe to say that PBMAs facilitate the need of many of today’s food consumers in various high-income countries to be supplied with tasty, affordable, and accessible alternative protein products to satisfy their cravings to eat beyond meat.

Currently, many factors can testify that the field of PBMAs is vibrant and worth being further explored and critically assessed. Among these factors are the remarkable successes of efforts to improve the product qualities of PBMAs in the past few decades and the wide availability of PBMAs on supermarket shelves and in the food service sector (including McDonald’s, Burger King, and KFC, having released plant-based alternative versions of beef burgers and chicken nuggets). Furthermore, the substantial investments in the PBMA market, the significant growth figures it is experiencing in frontrunning countries (such as Germany, the UK, and the Netherlands), and its expected growth rates in global sales in the near future are additional elements that can attest to the key role of PBMAs.

This review aims at highlighting the main challenges and opportunities related to the production and consumption of PBMA products, taking into consideration all of the pivotal aspects of designing new food products. Indeed, after a brief excursus on the formulation and production technology of PBMAs (i), the review addresses their nutritional profiles and their potential impacts on health (ii) and the environment (iii), as well as consumers’ choices (iv) and the state of the market (v). Each of the five sections will provide a sketch of the state of affairs, and overall, this article aims to add to other recent reviews [ 4 , 5 ] by critically assessing recent studies from different disciplines in order to highlight the consensus and controversies on this topic from an interdisciplinary perspective.

2. Production Technology of Plant-Based Meat Alternatives

Among the earliest examples of meat alternatives, vegetable protein products are traditionally produced and consumed in Asian countries—i.e., tofu and tempeh from soy and seitan from gluten. Unfortunately, these products are not able to replicate the sensory attributes of meat products for Western consumers, who seek vegetable-based products that resemble meat in structure, flavor, and taste. Twenty-first-century meat alternatives have made use of the crosslinking capacity—under certain conditions—of soy proteins from the Asian tradition. Indeed, even today, soy is the main raw material for the production of meat alternatives [ 6 ]. This supremacy undoubtedly depends on the availability of the raw material and the techno-functional attributes of its proteins, including its solubility, its ability to absorb water and oil, and its gelling and emulsifying properties—all important aspects in defining the quality of the finished product [ 7 ]. However, scientific research (and the market) is shifting toward the use of raw materials other than soy because of issues concerning GMOs, allergies, unfavorable climate for soy cultivation, and the preservation and/or valorization of biodiversity. Thus, recent work explored the use of proteins from different raw materials, including peas, fava beans, rapeseeds, and hemp, alone or in combination with soybean [ 8 ]. Regardless of the botanical source, protein isolates—with protein content above 75% (usually close to 90%)—are the most used raw materials [ 9 ].

Protein isolates are produced using wet separation techniques that are often time-consuming, costly, inefficient, and unsustainable, given the high amounts of water, alkalis, acids, or enzymes employed [ 9 ]. Finally, since the functionality of proteins can widely vary depending on the process conditions adopted during protein isolation, the standardization of the technological properties of the isolates is challenging [ 8 ]. Thus, protein isolates are increasingly being replaced by protein concentrates (protein content between approx. 50 and 65%), without neglecting the structural properties required in the finished product [ 10 ]. These high-protein fractions are produced using dry separation processes. The latter type of process is considered more sustainable than wet techniques, as it requires no water or solvents, consumes less energy, and preserves the protein’s native structure instead of forming protein aggregates, thus retaining their technological functionality [ 8 ]. The principle behind the air classification is the different densities of the flour particles, which are richer in starch or proteins. This allows the separation of the flour into a fine protein-rich fraction and a coarse starch-rich fraction as a consequence of the centrifugal and gravitational forces applied during the operation. Therefore, the less-refined protein ingredients obtained with the air classification also contain other components, such as lipids and fibers, which are often included in the formulation of protein-isolate-based products [ 9 ]. Since the lipid and fiber contents in protein concentrates may vary based on the source and processing conditions, the set-up of the air-classification conditions needs to be optimized. So far, there are few examples—albeit with encouraging results—of the application of high-protein fractions obtained using air separation from legumes in the production of meat analogs [ 11 ], suggesting the need for further studies that also use different sources.

In order to expand the range of raw materials that are suitable to be used in the production of meat alternatives and that can maintain the high-quality characteristics of the finished product, various colorants (e.g., leghemoglobin, red beets, red cabbage, etc.) and flavorings (e.g., herbs and spices) have been proposed to reproduce the meat color and flavor profile, as well as to mask the beany off-flavors of some legume proteins. The juiciness, tenderness, and other sensory attributes of meat-like products are also obtained by using fats/oils (such as coconut oil/butter, sunflower oil, canola oil, sesame oil, etc.). However, it is increasingly common to use binding agents (e.g., oleogels, starches, hydrocolloids, or fibers) as fat replacers [ 10 ]. Indeed, high amounts of fat—acting as a lubricant—could interfere with the protein denaturation process, which is the first kind of modification proteins need to undergo in order to obtain a meat-like structure.

The meat-like structure is achieved when the native globular structure of pulse proteins is transformed into a fibrous structure in which proteins are elongated and highly ordered [ 8 ]. This structure can be created using different technologies (including extrusion, flow-induced structuring using a shear cell or a Couette cell, 3D printing, wet-spinning, and electrospinning), the advantages and disadvantages of which were recently summarized by Boukid [ 12 ].

The high productivity, low costs, versatility, energy efficiency, and scale-up potentials of extrusion have led it to be the most widely used technology to produce meat analogs. During this process, raw materials are hydrated and subjected to thermal and mechanical stresses applied during extrusion, and, finally, the product is cooled to room temperature [ 13 ]. As a result of the mechanical stress, the temperature, the pressure, and the final cooling step, proteins undergo a series of structural modifications, ranging from denaturation to unfolding, crosslinking, and alignment, resulting in a fibrous structure that mimics the characteristics of muscle tissues [ 14 ]. These modifications take place in a chamber containing one (i.e., single-screw extruder) or—more commonly—two (i.e., twin-screw extruder) corotating screws that convey the material toward a die that provides the final shape to the product. The extrusion chamber is subdivided into several zones, in which the peculiar profiles of the screws—and, thus, the applied shear—and temperatures cause the material to undergo (from the material inlet to the finished product outlet) mixing, hydration, shearing, homogenization, compression, deaeration, heating, shaping, and expansion. During these operations, proteins are hydrated, unfolded, aligned, and texturized.

Extrusion can be performed at a low moisture level (<30%) to obtain texturized vegetable proteins (TVPs) or at a high moisture level (>50%) to directly obtain meat analogs. When extrusion is carried out at low moisture, the sudden drop in pressure at the end of the extruder causes an immediate expansion of the product due to the rapid evaporation of water. TVPs have a spongy meat-like structure that mimics ground beef or chicken breast. TVPs can take different forms (flakes, chunks, or minced), and, after hydration (and final cooking), they are able to retain their structural integrity and acquire a chewy texture and elasticity, which is typical of meat.

In the case of high-moisture extrusion, a cooling die is connected at the end of the twin-screw extruder to cool the sample at 20 °C, which prevents the expansion and promotion of fiber alignment and stabilization, as is typical of the anisotropic structure desirable for these kinds of products.

Although the use of technologies other than extrusion has shown encouraging results (including high-temperature-induced shearing and 3D printing), some hurdles still need to be addressed before their widespread industrial deployment: cost reduction and/or applicability to a wide range of legume proteins.

3. Nutritional Profiles and Health Impacts of Plant-Based Meat Alternatives

Among the several reasons related to the growing demand for meat alternatives, a potential explanation is likely related to the increased knowledge about the negative impacts of diets high in red meat and, above all, processed meat on human health [ 15 ]. This, together with an increased concern for the environmental impacts of animal products compared to their plant-based counterparts, supports the transition toward sustainable healthy diets, which are based on a high intake of plant-based foods and the moderate consumption of animal products [ 16 ].

However, to investigate the potential role of PBMAs on human health, it is critical to analyze the nutritional characteristics of these products, also considering that meat is an essential source of high-quality proteins, iron, vitamins, minerals, and varying amounts of saturated fats depending on the type of meat [ 17 ]. A few studies analyzed the nutritional quality of meat alternatives present in different markets and compared meat alternatives and animal meat in terms of energy and nutrient contents [ 18 , 19 , 20 ].

In this regard, a recent study analyzed the nutritional quality of 269 commercial meat analogs currently sold on the Italian market by retrieving data reported on their food labels [ 19 ]. Large nutritional variability was observed among PBMAs, with plant-based steaks showing significantly higher protein and lower energy, fats, and salt contents compared to other plant-based food categories. Comparing the nutritional information with reference animal meat products, the results showed higher fiber content in all PBMAs. Moreover, plant-based burgers and meatballs had a lower protein content than their meat counterparts, while ready-sliced meat substitutes showed a lower salt content than cured meats.

Similar results were obtained in other studies performed in the US [ 18 ], Sweden [ 20 ], and other European markets [ 12 ]. These studies found lower energy and total and saturated fat contents and higher total carbohydrates, sugars, and fibers in PBMAs compared to meat-based products. On the other hand, salt content showed contrasting results. Furthermore, plant-based and meat-based products generally presented similar amounts of total proteins despite large differences in the contents of single amino acids. As a matter of fact, higher amounts of glutamic acid and cysteine and lower contents of alanine, glycine, and, above all, methionine were identified in PBMAs [ 21 ].

These results support the importance of further exploring the use of plant-based protein blends to reduce differences between plant-based and animal-based meats [ 22 ]. In addition, it is noteworthy that plant-based and animal products also differ in protein digestibility and the bioavailability of single amino acids. Indeed, animal meat showed higher protein digestibility than PBMAs, which, in turn, have a negative impact on amino acid bioavailability. These data suggest the possibility to use specific protein sources with high bioavailability (e.g., soy isolate) and stress the importance of considering the real bioavailability of amino acids when investigating the diet quality of dietary patterns that include these products.

Another interesting aspect to be considered regards micronutrients. Data are often limited on this topic, but previous studies highlighted that PBMAs are a good source of minerals, also reporting a higher iron content compared to meat [ 21 , 23 ]. However, it is important to underline that the absorption and bioavailability of iron from plant-based sources and vegetarian diets are lower compared to omnivorous diets, and this shall be considered in future investigations [ 24 ].

Altogether, these results highlight the importance of carefully evaluating the nutritional impacts of switching from animal meat to PBMAs in order to identify potential at-risk nutrients. With this intention, a recent study compared the omnivore diet with diets in which animal products were substituted with either traditional or novel plant-based foods by using NHANES 2017–2018 data. The risk of inadequacies of specific nutrients (e.g., vitamin B12) was highlighted, especially when novel PBMAs were used [ 25 ]. These results once again support the need to consider the nutritional quality of PBMAs when switching to plant-based diets that exclude the consumption of animal foods.

Another area that deserves further investigation is the evaluation of the impact of replacing animal meat on human health through well-designed human intervention studies. So far, different studies have compared the effects of vegetarian/vegan diets with those of omnivorous diets [ 26 ], but trials specifically focused on PBMAs are still lacking. Yet, due to the publication of study protocols in clinical trial registries (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov), it is reasonable to expect the implementation and publication of trials evaluating the impacts of PBMAs on nutritional and health aspects in the near future. A first attempt was recently made by Crimarco and colleagues [ 27 ], who assessed the effects of plant-based meats on biomarkers of inflammation through a secondary analysis of the Study With Appetizing Plant food—Meat Eating Alternatives Trial (SWAP-MEAT). Contrary to expectations, no improvements in biomarkers of inflammation following plant-based meat consumption were identified. However, further long-term studies focused on a large plethora of health markers are necessary before drawing any conclusions.

4. Environmental Impacts of Plant-Based Meat Alternatives

Meat is a protein food of high biological value; however, the conversion of feed and fodder into animal protein may not be sustainable due to inputs and the use of limited natural resources [ 28 ]. Currently, several farming systems of meat production exist, with the production efficiency per unit of a product depending mainly on feeding, breeds, management, and the technology employed [ 29 , 30 ]. Fewer resources per product unit are required for crop growth, which leads these products to represent an interesting opportunity for sustainable development while meeting the increasing demand for food [ 31 ]. Thus, in developed countries not relying on subsistence animal breeding, PBMAs could bring environmental benefits in terms of biodiversity, land and water use, and reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [ 32 , 33 ].

Nonetheless, the environmental impacts of PBMAs still need to be assessed. In this regard, the life cycle assessment (LCA) approach has been applied. It is a methodology used in various contexts to quantify the environmental impacts of a product based on the ISO 14040 [ 34 ] and ISO 14044 [ 35 ] standards to improve its environmental performance [ 36 ].

Several LCA studies were conducted on PBMAs to detect hotspots in the production process and to compare environmental performances with animal-based products. Indicators such as climate change, land, water, and energy use were considered.

In this regard, Bryant [ 37 ] analyzed 43 studies and concluded that the production of meat analogs is more sustainable when compared to animal products. At the same time, Detzel et al. [ 38 ] stated that PBMAs could help reduce the environmental impacts related to food consumption by overcoming the complexity of the processing stage of ingredients—which has a significant environmental impact—and by optimizing the inputs required to produce protein ingredients (i.e., legumes, trying to stabilize their yields, the main problem in their cultivation) [ 39 ]. Nevertheless, Smetana et al. [ 40 ] reported that the technology employed (i.e., machinery and process equipment) might be a valuable opportunity to improve the sustainability of alternative protein source production. A detailed LCA study by Mejia et al. [ 41 ] on three factories producing 57 different types of meat analogs achieved low GHG emissions, mainly due to the manufacturing process, followed by the agricultural production of food ingredients and their transportation. According to Goldstein et al. [ 42 ], the production stage accounts for 80% of the environmental impact due to the use of electricity from fossil sources; however, alternative energy solutions could mitigate this impact.

In-depth studies are needed since contrasting data are ascribed to energy consumption derived from the use of proxy processes for the implemented energy sources [ 37 ]. Within the meat supply chain, meat production and animal husbandry are the most impactful stages [ 43 ]. Nevertheless, manure production, subsequently applied to the soil, spares the need for chemical fertilizer, contributes to crop yield, and maintains soil fertility. On the other hand, legumes do not require nitrogen fertilization due to their ability to fix nitrogen from the atmosphere and at the root level [ 44 ]. This leads to lower N 2 O and NH 3 emissions due to the non-use of manure and/or synthetic fertilizers.

Several studies have considered the impact of meat and meat analogs on the water used and the effects on eutrophication and acidification. In a study comparing patties with and without meat, Smetana et al. [ 45 ] estimated lower acidification and subsequent aquatic eutrophication for PBMAs. Similar conclusions were obtained by Heller et al. [ 46 ], who showed lower water use for plant-based patties. However, guidelines for water modeling are needed to avoid misleading interpretations based on erroneous comparisons.

Lusk et al. [ 47 ] produced a model to study both the economic and environmental effects of the use of alternative plant products over meat in the US. The reforestation of cropland and pastureland, as well as the conversion of land for crops grown for livestock feeding to crops for plant-based products, would result in the sequestration of 0.43 megatons of CO 2 per year. The results imply an increase in crop yields to compensate for the reduction in available cropland. At the European level, Saget et al. [ 48 ] found a reduction in human–animal competition for land use for pea protein production and an 89% lower global warming potential. In more detail, in Germany, a 5% substitution of beef with pea proteins could lead to a 1% reduction in annual CO 2 emissions. However, it is important to assert that agricultural activities impact 9.9% of global greenhouse gas emissions [ 49 ]. There could be scenarios of increased arable land to fulfill the growth of alternative meat products, even when deforestation is limited through environmental policies. The extensification of palm plantations in humid tropical countries could be an example, with an increased demand for coconut oil as an ingredient in plant-based beef substitutes [ 42 ].

It can be concluded that, still, few LCA studies have quantified the environmental impacts of meat alternatives, and many limitations related to the application of the methodology need to be addressed. Relevant considerations are that (i) PBMAs are highly processed foods, and thus, impacts associated with the use of different forms of energy counteract the low environmental impact associated with the production of plant-based ingredients [ 41 ]; (ii) the building of databases for the productive process of complex (multi-ingredient) foods should be a relevant point to focus on; (iii) a functional unit that does not consider the mass of a product but integrates primary nutrients should be implemented, along with a feature required when comparing LCA results from different studies/products [ 48 , 50 ]; (iv) the sustainability of PBMA production must take into consideration good agricultural practices, such as crop rotation, fertilizer, plant protection, and water use [ 38 ].

5. Consumer Behavior of Plant-Based Meat Alternatives

In the realm of meat alternatives, despite technological innovations and efforts to design processed plant-based products from different sources, one of the main challenges in successfully replacing animal prom ducts with plant-based ingredients is the re-creation of similar meat sensory properties. Moreover, communication about these new products and individual attributes (e.g., attitude and demographics) should be taken into consideration during the marketing stage—especially in those countries where meat and meat-based products have a key role in consumers’ minds, in terms of habits, culinary traditions, and culture [ 5 , 51 ]. Therefore, both sensory and consumer science can play an important role in understanding how consumers perceive PBMAs, including drivers of and barriers to their acceptance.

First, past studies showed that perceived sensory attributes and consumer acceptance are strongly influenced by the choice of plant/protein sources [ 52 , 53 ]. Therefore, what ingredients to use as a replacement for meat is an important factor to consider in the development of meat alternatives [ 54 ]. Early product developments mimicking processed meat products, for example, those from mycoproteins, have low sensory acceptance in terms of taste and texture [ 55 ]. This results in a low willingness to include such products as a real meat substitute for meat eaters [ 56 ]. As mentioned above, until a few years ago, the first generation of these products was mostly designed for vegetarians and vegans [ 55 , 57 , 58 ]. To achieve acceptability by a wider audience of meat eaters, the new generation of PBMAs shall be developed in a way that texture, appearance, aroma, and taste resemble those of equivalent authentic meat products, before, during, and after cooking [ 5 , 57 ]. Yet, reproducing the complex and delicate sensory profile of farmed meat can be challenging [ 14 , 59 ]. For instance, the color of plant-based products may diminish due to light or oxygen exposure, or the taste could be affected by lipid oxidation and cause undesirable characteristics [ 52 ]. Considering that the appearance of a product is generally the first element to be assessed, it is a critical determinant in food acceptance. Another challenge for these PBMAs is to recall the flavor of real meat while avoiding unpleasant flavors (e.g., bitter, burnt, and earthy) caused by the high level of legume protein [ 5 ]. Therefore, the need to mimic meat characteristics requires the use of many additives in the development stage [ 5 ]. As a result, the product packaging of PBMAs often includes a long list of unfamiliar ingredients [ 19 ], which could convey a sense of processed and unhealthy food among consumers. In particular, PBMAs that are high/ultra-processed could be associated with a certain unnaturalness of the product [ 60 ]. Thus, while reducing the gap between the sensory profiles of PBMAs and their meat equivalents might be important for some companies, the concept of product acceptance goes beyond merely sensory appreciation, including consumers’ perceptions. For example, low product familiarity with PBMAs—including the preparation/cooking method—is one of the most important product-related factors associated with consumer acceptance. This could potentially limit the expansion to the mainstream consumer market. Therefore, fully understanding consumers’ acceptance of PBMAs should require individuals to have a direct experience [ 4 ].

The most investigated meat category in consumer studies, including sensory tests, is burgers [ 53 , 61 , 62 , 63 ]. The reason is that traditional burgers are one of the most popular meat forms due to their composition (e.g., rich in proteins and fats), market availability, convenience, affordability, and sensory qualities [ 64 , 65 ]. Results consistently indicate that respondents generally prefer traditional meat products over their plant-based alternatives. For example, Grasso et al. [ 62 ] showed that individuals had higher sensory expectations for a beef burger than for a plant-based or hybrid patty; however, in terms of acceptability and purchase intentions, the hybrid one (60% beef and 40% vegetables) was the most preferred after the tasting.

In general, product familiarity is also often associated with higher acceptance. For instance, another study by Caputo et al. [ 53 ], which included a choice experiment with a blind–informed sensory study, showed that the beef burger, which had the highest degree of familiarity, also received the highest willingness to pay (WTP) compared to two PBMAs and one hybrid burger. They also found that, in the informed group, the preference and WTP for the plant-based patty labeled as “made with animal-like protein” exceeded those for the hybrid burger (70% beef and 30% mushrooms) and the plant-based burger “made with pea protein”. As reported by several studies, low prices of non-meat protein sources may act as a driver to accept such products [ 66 ]; however, it will probably take some years to reach price parity with traditional meat [ 4 ].

Regarding demographics, habits, and attitudinal factors, being pro-health, pro-sustainability, and young leads to higher acceptability toward PBMAs compared to other consumer segments [ 5 ]. For these reasons, health and environmental sustainability benefits could be included among the main drivers to try such products [ 66 ]. For instance, in a study by Sogari et al. [ 51 ], motivations to process both sustainability and nutrition information were a strong determinant driving the likelihood to purchase a hybrid meat–mushroom burger among US students. Other impacting factors could be the attitude toward meat analogs [ 67 ] and, more generally, consumer attitude toward food innovation [ 51 ]. On the other hand, the main personal-related barriers to acceptability are related to food and food technology neophobia [ 4 , 5 ], attachment to meat, and lower situational appropriateness of consuming non-meat protein sources [ 66 ].

Several studies have shown that heavy meat eaters might be less willing to substitute meat products for plant-based alternatives than flexitarians [ 68 , 69 ]. However, other studies suggested that the greater the number of consumers who are already familiar with plant-based products, the fewer the individuals who will seek products that are similar to meat from a sensory point of view [ 5 ]. This could be explained by the fact that vegetarians and vegans are not seeking meat sensory properties in plant-based products [ 70 ].

Finally, more knowledge about consumer acceptance of PBMAs is also helpful for legislators. For instance, in the EU, policymakers support the production and promotion of alternative meat substitutes and hybrid products by funding research programs toward more sustainable and alternative proteins, such as the Farm to Fork Strategy in the European Union [ 71 ]. Thus, understanding how consumers perceive such products is challenging for the food system, and developing meat alternatives with high consumer appeal requires the full integration of sensory and consumer research.

6. Market Analysis of Plant-Based Meat Alternatives

Given that the latest market trends of plant-based meat alternatives have not been deeply investigated, we conducted market research to identify the current direction of these products. Retailers and industries could benefit from the data retrieved from this analysis to design new products (in terms of ingredients, claims, labeling, etc.) to better shape their market strategies.

To analyze market trends of PBMAs, we used Mintel’s Global New Product Database (GNPD) [ 72 ], an online database for new products launched in selected countries. The same database was previously used in other research. For instance, several authors employed Mintel’s GNPD to investigate front-of-package information, food labeling schemes, ingredient profiles, and new launches of alternative meat products in the global market [ 65 , 73 , 74 , 75 ].

The objective of our analysis was to use the Mintel database to extract and explore different information on the latest market trends of PBMAs. In order to have an overview of recent years, we searched for new meat alternative launches over the past three years (from January 2019 to December 2021). The dataset was extracted on 26 October 2022, and the search strategy is described in Appendix A ( Table A1 ).

The research returned 5155 results in the form of a spreadsheet, where each column reported different information, such as ingredients, claims, and nutritional values per 100 g. After cleaning the dataset to remove non-meat alternatives (e.g., fish or egg alternatives) using keywords (e.g., seafood, salmon, tuna, and egg) in the “Product” and “Description” columns, the final dataframe was analyzed using descriptive statistics.

During the past three years (2019–2021), the market of PBMAs has seen a remarkable spike in product launches, with 4965 products released worldwide. In more detail, Figure 1 shows the solid growth of PBMAs at the beginning of 2020—when the COVID-19 pandemic broke out—and a slight drop at the end of 2021. This change could be explained by common short-term reductions in meat intake during zoonotic outbreaks, as the same happened for SARS-CoV in 2003 and the African Swine Flu in 2019 (Attwood and Hajat, 2020). Thus, this meat intake reduction could have led consumers to look for new alternatives at the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak. Nevertheless, despite the modest negative trend during the third and fourth quarters of 2021, the overall direction of PBMA launches is positively growing, and this new dietary pattern could represent an opportunity to foster these products. More precisely, this positive market trend is mostly focused on the introduction of new products ( n = 1822; 36.7%) and new varieties ( n = 1910; 38.5%) of PBMAs. The remaining launches ( n = 1232; 24.8%) include new packaging, re-launches, and new formulations.

Number of PBMAs’ launches ( n = 4965—green bar), new varieties ( n = 1910—orange bar), new products ( n = 1822—gray bar), new packaging ( n = 1822—yellow bar), re-launches ( n = 386—blue bar), and new formulations ( n = 58—black bar) launched worldwide over the past three years (2019–2021). Abbreviations: PBMAs, plant-based meat alternatives.

It is also important to highlight that, despite the market for PBMA products experiencing increasing growth, the global market revenue of plant-based meat substitutes is forecast to be worth USD 33.99 billion in 2027 (Global: Meat Substitutes Market Revenue 2016–2027|Statista, 2022), while the meat sector is expected to be valued at USD 1354 billion by 2027 (Global Meat Industry Value Projection, 2021–2027|Statista, 2022). Thus, the market share of PBMAs is, and is estimated to remain, significantly lower than that of the meat market.

Considering the 2019–2021 period, new PBMA products were mostly launched in France, with 417 new launches (8.4%), followed by the UK ( n = 393; 7.9%) and Germany ( n = 391; 7.9%). The top twelve most active markets in this sector are represented in Figure 2 . This figure underlines that European and northern American countries, along with Brazil and Australia, have been more active in launching plant-based meat alternatives during the past few years, showing an increasing interest in meat substitutes in these countries.

Twelve most active countries in PBMA launches over the past three years (2019–2021). Note: Each bar represents the total number of PBMAs’ launches between January 2019 and December 2021. Abbreviations: PBMAs, plant-based meat alternatives.

In the global market, the most represented food categories were general plant-based proteins ( n = 1469; 29.6%)—meaning foods that do not intend to mimic an existing meat product (e.g., burgers, sausages, nuggets, or meatballs) but can still be considered meat substitutes, as they are protein-rich plant foods (e.g., “teriyaki tofu” and “fried gluten with peanuts”)—and patty/burger alternatives ( n = 1331; 26.8%). Every other food category alone—such as sausage, mince, or nugget alternatives—does not represent more than 9% of the total launches, as illustrated in Figure 3 .

Food category distribution of PBMAs launched over the past three years (2019–2021). Abbreviations: PBMAs, plant-based meat alternatives.

In terms of the highest sales value in EUR and the growth rate, according to a recent study of the Smart Protein project [ 76 ] using Nielsen Retail Scanning Data, the UK and Germany lead the sector of PBMAs, i.e., sausages, burger patties, and cold cuts. However, differences in the categories exist between countries; for example, plant-based sausages lead the market segment in the UK, whereas, in Germany, the top category is plant-based refrigerated meat (burger patties, nuggets, minced, etc.), followed by plant-based cold cuts and meat spreads and plant-based sausages.

Regarding the ingredients, we used the data from Mintel to identify which foods are most widely used as the first ingredient. When water was reported to be the first element in the list ( n = 1605; 32.3%), we considered the second one. Using this strategy, we identified 1914 products (38.6%) containing soy-based components —e.g., soybean curd, proteins, or flour—as the first ingredient. After soy , wheat ( n = 520; 10.5%) and other pulses ( n = 702; 14.1%), such as kidney beans, black beans, peas, chickpeas, and lentils, were predominantly used as the first ingredient, followed by mushrooms ( n = 134; 2.7%) and jackfruit ( n = 86; 1.7%).

In terms of information provided on the packaging, a total of 120 different claims were identified. Out of 4965 products, 2849 (57%) included the “Vegan/No Animal Ingredients” claim, and 2099 (42%) reported the “Plant Based” claim. In addition, in line with Cutroneo et al. [ 19 ], the most common nutrition claim was the “High/Added Protein” statement ( n = 1616; 33%). A graphic presentation of the claims is represented in Figure 4 .

Word cloud of the top 20 claims employed in PBMA products launched over the past three years (2019–2021). Abbreviations: PBMA, plant-based meat alternative. Note: A word cloud is a visual representation of word frequency and value. The “Social Media” claim indicates the presence on the packaging of a logo/claim to entice consumers to join the company’s social media community and follow its channel/website.

Finally, Mintel’s Global New Product Database has been a practical tool to obtain a global overview of PBMA market trends. The data retrieved and analyzed from the database showed that plant-based meat alternatives can widely differ in terms of the food category, ingredients, and/or claims. However, despite these several variations, the increasing trend in product launches—especially in Western countries—highlights a promising global trend to support the transition toward a plant-based diet. However, as previously highlighted in this section, market share differences between the meat and PBMA sectors are still notable, and meat revenue forecasts do not foresee any declining trends. These data underline that the growing market of meat substitutes does not significantly affect the meat market. Therefore, PBMAs are still weak substitutes for animal-based products, as they are often complementary to meat rather than meat replacers [ 77 ]. Previous studies also showed that regular meat consumers are less likely to choose plant-based items over beef than people declaring that they follow different diets (e.g., vegan, flexitarian, or vegetarian) [ 78 ]. Thus, in order to support a dietary shift toward meat reduction, it is critical to study and test strategies that could steer meat eaters’ choices toward plant-based diets and support the growing market of PBMAs.

7. Discussion and Conclusions

Plant-based foods that replace animal foods, such as meat, but also dairy, and even fish and eggs, are gaining increased attention as possible substitutes that can facilitate the transition toward sustainable healthy diets. The idea of processing plant-based ingredients to obtain protein-based foods is not a new concept for consumers since many products, such as tempeh, tofu, and seitan, have been available on the market for hundreds of years [ 4 ], especially in Asian countries. However, these products were not intended to be meat substitutes per se and have never become mainstream in Western countries. A possible explanation could be that these products have mostly been targeted at vegetarians or vegans without any explicit reference to their animal counterparts.

Nevertheless, the development of the so-called “meat alternatives” sector is gaining more and more attention due to growing concerns over the environmental impacts of the food system [ 5 ] and the increasing awareness of the detrimental impacts of high meat consumption on human health [ 79 ].

In the last several years, hundreds of meat-like substitutes, such as plant-based burgers, have been developed and launched globally on the market to imitate the traditional beef burger using either 100% plant-based ingredients or a mix of both meat and plant-based ingredients, i.e., “hybrid meat products”. Although this latter category is not suitable for vegetarians and vegans, these hybrid meat alternatives could exploit consumer barriers to PBMAs (e.g., low sensory quality) and lead to the first approach to reducing meat consumption.

The growing demand for PBMAs has driven the development of ground-breaking process technologies and novel ingredients that can help to obtain products with meat-like sensory attributes that have the potential to attract non-vegetarian consumers [ 52 ]. However, many of these new meat alternatives are highly complex products in terms of ingredients/formulations and require technological investments [ 80 ]. For instance, one limitation of using plant proteins as meat substitutes is the challenge of preserving the shape while dealing with the high risk of crumbling [ 56 ]. For this reason, as of now, most of these proteins have been employed either as a meat ingredient substitute (e.g., in the shape of mince) or as parts of food products (pizza, sauces, etc.) and have not been consumed on their own [ 55 ]. Currently, a new line of familiar alternatives to traditional meat products or dishes, such as imitation-meat burgers, has been launched in supermarkets and restaurants [ 81 ].

While targeting young flexitarians and omnivores is seen as the key to ensuring growing sales of plant-based meat alternatives in the future [ 82 , 83 ], there is still the need to investigate whether and how the sensory appeal will be a barrier for the second generation of plant-based meat alternatives among these consumers [ 5 ].

To achieve acceptability among non-vegetarian consumers, plant-based foods should resemble the texture, flavor, appearance, aroma, and taste of authentic meat products. However, the long list of unfamiliar ingredients used to mimic meat sensory properties leads to different nutrition values of these products compared to animal meats. As a result, even if PBMAs are similar to meat in terms of sensory experience, they cannot be considered a nutritional replacement for animal products [ 4 ]. Thus, further studies are needed not only to monitor the nutritional quality of new plant-based meat products on the market but also to investigate the impact of this substitution on human health markers. In addition, adequate nutritional education programs to improve consumers’ knowledge and awareness about the differences between animal- and plant-based products are required [ 19 ].

Moreover, the discussion on whether manufacturers should describe PBMA products using references to their animal counterparts (e.g., “tastes like meat”), which could create positive expectations for meat consumers [ 5 , 62 ], is still under debate. Specifically, after the recent commercial success of several PBMAs, a strong debate has started on how to label/name such products. For example, in the EU, a regulation clarifying whether “meat-sounding” labels for PBMAs should be allowed does not exist yet. This outcome will probably impact consumer preferences, as shown in a recent study by Demartini et al. [ 84 ], in which consumers’ perceptions of tastiness and healthiness and their willingness to buy plant-based meatballs were negatively affected by the vegan labeling.

As we reported, the sector of PBMAs is launching products on the market that mimic their animal counterparts, and the term “meat substitutes” seems to imply that people will stop eating meat [ 4 ]; however, it is more likely that individuals will consume both traditional and non-traditional meat alternatives. In this scenario, PBMAs may be a useful tool to reduce animal products, especially for populations that consume too much animal meat according to dietary recommendations. We might also expect PBMAs to be regarded as an intermediate phase on our way to (semi-)plant-based diets, in which unprocessed plant-based foods and recipes would take center stage. Achieving this kind of diet would mean that our food habits have really gone beyond meat.

Finally, future studies should consider calls for collaboration, particularly among stakeholders of the food supply chain (i.e., industries and food services) and the scientific community (i.e., nutritionists and dietitians, food technologists, and consumers scientists), to facilitate the transition toward healthier and more sustainable plant-based protein sources.

Search criteria considered in Mintel database.

Funding Statement

This research received no external funding.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.M. and G.S.; visualization, G.A.; writing—original draft preparation, G.A., F.F., H.D., A.M., D.M. and G.S.; writing—review and editing G.A., F.F., H.D., A.M., D.M. and G.S.; supervision, G.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Degree Level

FINANCIAL AID

STUDENT SERVICES

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

The Future of Food Tech: Cutting-Edge Technologies in the Culinary Landscape

August 1st, 2024 by JWU

Advances in food science and technology are revolutionizing how we produce, prepare and consume food, and emerging food science trends are proving that these rapid changes are not slowing anytime soon. Consumers are in search of healthy, nutritious food selections, yet they want the peace of mind that production is as sustainable as possible. While convenience remains a high priority, sustainability and personalized options are becoming increasingly important as well.

Gain a deeper understanding of the latest trends in food science and technology, plus how this can help you kickstart a career in this expanding and evolving industry.

What Is Food Science?

Food science is defined by the  Institute of Food Technologists  (IFT) as a multidisciplinary study that involves biology, chemical engineering and biochemistry and focuses on the physical, biological and chemical makeup of food. Food scientists rely on their advanced understanding of food processes to create healthier, safer and more nutritious foods in a way that prioritizes sustainability and environmental conservation.

What Is Food Technology?

Food technology is defined as the application of food science principles in order to preserve, process, package and distribute safe and nutritious food. Food scientists who effectively leverage food technology are able to develop innovative new food products, improve existing food products and develop packaging, processing and preservation techniques that can improve food quality and accessibility.

The Rise of Food Tech: A New Era in Culinary Innovation

Designed by the  U.S. Food and Drug Administration  as the new era of food safety, the food tech movement is revolutionizing the development and manufacturing of food products. As the fields of food science and technology merge to develop groundbreaking solutions for the food industry, new culinary innovations are on the rise. Changing consumer preferences, increased environmental concerns and the need for improved efficiency in food production are considered the driving forces behind this movement.

Key Trends in Food Science and Technology

The  National Institute of Standards and Technology  notes these as some of the most significant trends shaping the future of food:

• Digitization of food – The process of capturing raw data throughout the food production process and using it to improve the safety and quality of food products is poised to move the industry forward in the coming years.
• Automation and robotics in food production – Food manufacturers are learning how to leverage both AI and robotic technology to improve the food production process.
• Vertical farming – This innovative farming method—where crops are arranged on top of each other instead of horizontally—allows growers to maximize space and improve yields.
• 3D food printing – Advanced 3D printing technology is now being used to create food products in captivating and appealing designs.
• Cellular agriculture – Defined as the process of using cell cultures to produce animal-sourced foods, cell agriculture has the potential to make a substantial impact on the food manufacturing and processing industries.

Culinary Innovations: Transforming How We Eat

Today’s consumers are seeking food products that are not only nutritious and sustainable but also flavorful and beautiful. Food technology is revolutionizing the culinary landscape in endless ways, making now one of the most exciting times to launch a career in food tech.

Alternative Proteins: Beyond Meat and Beyond

In an effort to improve both sustainability and animal welfare, more consumers are searching for alternative protein food products.  StartUs Insights  notes that some of the most popular alternative protein options include plant-based nutrition, lab-grown meats, mycoprotein and edible insects.

Cultured Meat and Seafood: Lab-Grown Delicacies

Cultivating meat and seafood is a process that relies on animal cells to develop meat and seafood products in a laboratory setting. According to the  Good Food Institute , this can virtually eliminate the need to raise farm animals for food products, which can improve animal welfare, increase environmental sustainability efforts and enhance overall food safety.

However, it is worth noting the potential downsides of and controversy surrounding synthetic, lab-grown meat. For one, this method could mean hefty costs for both producers and consumers, not to mention a lack of necessary resources—biologically and otherwise—that would make it possible for this niche industry to scale quickly within the protein market. In addition, preliminary research has suggested that, if eventually produced on a mass scale, the potential negative environmental impact of cultured meat could be exponentially greater than that of retail beef.

3D Food Printing: Personalized Nutrition and Culinary Artistry

In the Instagram era, the demand for 3D food printing is on the rise. On the surface, this may seem like technology that creates fake and processed food. In reality, however, 3D food printing enables the creation of customized meals, many of which can be developed in appealing and creative shapes. At a time when personalized meals are essential to accommodating the dietary needs and preferences of a diverse range of consumers, 3D food printing is poised to revolutionize the food industry.

Edible Packaging: Reducing Waste and Improving Sustainability

To help reduce pollution and minimize the food industry’s dependence on single-use plastics, food scientists are working to develop edible packaging . Some of the most  innovative types of edible food packaging include:

• Edible rice straws
• Rice paper candy wrappers
• Cookie-based coffee cups
• Seaweed packaging for dry foods, such as cereal

Smart Kitchens: The Connected Culinary Experience

Leveraging smart technology in the kitchen can help simplify the process of cooking food while simultaneously reducing food waste and improving the quality of the culinary experience. Both in personal and commercial kitchens, smart refrigerators, ovens and other kitchen gadgets are streamlining the culinary experience.

Sustainability and Food Tech: A Recipe for the Future

As the impact of climate change becomes increasingly clear, food science and technology experts are uncovering the variety of ways food technology can improve sustainability efforts in food production and consumption. Below are some emerging food science and technology trends related to sustainability:

Vertical Farming: Cultivating Crops in Urban Spaces

Vertical farming is described by the  U.S. Department of Agriculture  as the farming method of the future. It utilizes indoor, stacked layers in order to grow crops in controlled environments. Compared to the traditional, horizontal farming approach that relies on vast expanses of fields, vertical farming uses less water and land, making it a more sustainable option for the years ahead.

Regenerative Agriculture: Nurturing the Soil for a Healthier Planet

According to the  Noble Research Institute , regenerative agriculture is a farming philosophy that encourages farmers to use strategic practices to create a healthier environment. Developed as a response to widespread soil erosion and decreased productivity in the land, regenerative agriculture practices work to restore the health of the soil, sequester carbon and increase biodiversity in the local area.

Reducing Food Waste Through Technology

Food waste accounts for nearly a third of all human-induced greenhouse gas emissions in the world, generating about 8% of these emissions annually and making it one of the most talked-about dilemmas related to climate change. Aside from food discarded by individuals at home and throughout their daily lives, finding strategies to reduce food waste in restaurants is also a critical mission—be it excess food from kitchens or from customers’ plates.

Food tech companies are working to develop innovative solutions that will minimize food waste at every stage of the process. Emerging technology to watch includes:

• Mobile apps that connect consumers with surplus food.
• Advanced technology that extends the shelf life of perishable food products

Challenges and Ethical Considerations in Food Tech

As with any advancing technology, there are ethical considerations to keep in mind in the food science and technology industry. These are some of the most pressing challenges and ethical considerations currently associated with food technology:

Safety and Regulation

Advancing technology and innovative approaches to food production are both exciting and enticing, particularly when these improvements offer the promise of increased production and improved sustainability. However, there are safety concerns when it comes to novel food products and ingredients. Implementing robust regulatory frameworks will not only help protect overall consumer safety but also help improve consumer confidence.

Consumer Acceptance and Perception

Although consumers are becoming more conscious of sustainability efforts related to their food consumption, many are wary of changing technology and advancing production processes. Food scientists and technology experts will need to address the challenge of gaining consumer acceptance and trust , particularly when consumers feel that the food products being created are unnatural or synthetic.

According to a recent  study published in the Food Quality and Preference journal , some effective strategies for improving consumer trust in food include:

• Raising awareness about new technologies and being transparent about the process being used to improve food.
• Highlighting partnerships with local vendors and suppliers.
• Sharing the real stories of people who are impacted by current technology.

Environmental Impact

Advanced food technology is often developed with sustainability in mind, but there may be drawbacks to consider. In some cases, improved methods may have a detrimental impact on the environment, such as:

• Increased energy consumption in indoor and vertical farming.
• Increased use of valuable resources in cultivated meat production.

Performing life-cycle assessments to evaluate the overall environmental impact can help weigh the costs and benefits of new and developing food technology.

Impact on Traditional Food Systems and Livelihoods

While rising food science and technology has the potential to revolutionize the food production and manufacturing industries, it also has the power to disrupt traditional agricultural practices that have been in place for hundreds of years. Thousands of lives are dependent on work in the agriculture industry, and food science and technology professionals should strive to create transitional programs that will protect farmers and food industry workers.

Learn About Innovation in the Food & Beverage Industry at Johnson & Wales University

Emerging trends in food science and technology will continue to shape the industry for years to come. At Johnson & Wales University, we proudly offer an innovative, skills-based  online bachelor’s in Food & Beverage Entrepreneurship — designed for those who already hold prior education in the culinary arts. This degree program allows students to develop an in-depth understanding of modern business management practices within the restaurant and culinary landscape.

For more information about completing your degree online, complete the  Request Info form , call 855-JWU-1881, or email  [email protected] .

By clicking Get Started below, I consent to receive recurring marketing/promotional e-mails, phone calls, and SMS/text messages from Johnson & Wales University (JWU) about any educational/programmatic purpose (which relates to my inquiry of JWU) at the e-mail/phone numbers (landline/mobile) provided, including calls or texts made using an automatic telephone dialing system and/or artificial/prerecorded voice messages. My consent applies regardless of my inclusion on any state, federal, or other do-not-call lists. Consent is not a condition for receipt of any good or service. Carrier charges may apply. Terms and conditions apply .

Request info

Now accepting applications

• Browse Works
• Natural & Applied Sciences

Food Science and Technology

Food science and technology research papers/topics, nutritional composition and sensory evaluation of biscuits fortified with sorghum (sorghum bicolor) and cricket powder (acheta domesticus) for improved food security.

Abstract/Overview This study aimed at generating knowledge on the nutritional composition and sensory evaluation of biscuits fortified with sorghum flour and cricket powder. Four biscuits samples were formulated by substituting wheat flour with sorghum flour and cricket powder at 0, 20, 40, and 60%. The results showed that, the fortification improved some nutrient contents of biscuits significantly (p

Socioeconomic Factors Influencing the Consumption Of Lake Flies Within The Lake Victoria Region

Abstract/Overview The motivation of consuming edible insects, particularly lake flies, has the potential of improving the problem that results from the inability to sustainably meet the rising demand for animal-based protein as a result of increased population growth and urbanization. The aim of this study was to identify the selected socio-economic factors influencing consumption of lake flies and how they individually and collectively affect the consumption. A sample size of 385 respond...

Technical Efficiency of Cricket (A. domesticus and G.bimaculatus) Production: A Cobb-Douglas Stochastic Frontier Approach

Abstract/Overview Technical efficiency measures the effectiveness of an enterprise given the available resources at disposal and how well it transforms these resources to get maximum output. This study therefore investigated the technical efficiency of cricket, A. domesticus and G. bimaculatus, production at JOOUST cricket farm using parametric approach. Stochastic frontier analysis was used to analyze the data collected from the farm between 2015-2017. Maximum likelihood estimates result...

A Comparative Analysis of Rural Household Food Security in the High Rainfall Zone of Murang’a, Semi– Arid Lands of Kitui and Arid Lands of Isiolo in Kenya

Abstract/Overview Food security is a major global concern. It has insidious effects on the health and development of young children and consequently, adults. The paper assesses the food security status and its key determinants for the rural households of the high rainfall zone (HRZ) of Murang’a, semi–arid lands (SALs) of Kitui and arid lands (ALs) of Isiolo in Kenya. A three stage sampling technique was used for respondents (384) selection. Data collected were: demographics, livelihoo...

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE NUTRITIONAL QUALITY OF FRESHLY EXTRACTED JUICES FROM ORGANIC VERSUS CONVENTIONAL ORANGE AND APPLE FRUITS

ABSTRACT Freshly extracted juices obtained from organically and conventionally produced orange and apple fruits were assayed in terms of their nutritional quality. Parameters used in the assessment were total soluble sugars, ascorbic acid content, folic acid concentration, acidity, glucose, fructose, maltose and sucrose contents, as well as the concentrations of sodium, potassium, calcium, iron, zinc and copper. Total and individual sugars were detected using HPLC while brix concentrations we...

The Significance of Innovation and Technology in Transforming Food Security in East Africa

Abstract: One of the major global concerns historically and in the twenty-first century is providing sufficient, safe and nutritious food to all people. New, existing and emerging technologies can help address the issue of food security in the East Africa region. This research examines the significance of innovation and technology in transforming the food systems in East Africa. Achieving hunger and improved food systems by 2030 according to the new sustainable development goals, will requir...

PHYSICOCHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION ANTIOXIDANT AND ANTIMICROBIAL ACTIVITIES OF PUMPKIN (Cucurbita pepo sp.) SEED AND FRUIT PULP OILS

Abstract: The consumption of pumpkin seeds in oil form or roasted pumpkin seeds has been is proved to exhibit several positive health effects. The aim of the present study was to examine the physicochemical properties, antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of pumpkin (Cucurbit sp.) Seed and pulp oils. The oil extraction was done in Soxhlet apparatus using hexane as a solvent. Then, physicochemical properties of the oil extracts were determined based on determination of oil content, specif...

SHELF-LIFE AND RHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES OF COTTAGE CHEESE MADE FROM CAMEL MILK

Abstract: This study was aimed to investigate the shelf-life and rheological properties of cottage cheese made from camel milk as physicochemical properties, microbial counts and texture. The experiment was laid out in completely randomized design (CRD) with eight treatments. The general chemical composition of milk including fat, solids-not-fat (SNF), protein, total solid, casein and lactose were determined using MilkoScan. Cheeses were made in the dairy technology laboratory of Haramaya Un...

BIOSYNTHESIS OF CITRIC ACID FROM AVOCADO (Persea americana) FRUIT PEELS USING Aspergillus niger

Abstract: Due to its extensive use in the food and pharmaceutical industries, citric acid is an essential organic acid that is in high demand around the world. To meet this increasing demand, an effort has been made to use inexpensive agro-industrial waste products as carbohydrate sources for the production of citric acid using Aspergillus niger. Therefore, the present study was performed to produce citric acid from avocado (Persea americana) peels as a novel substrate through solid state fe...

ASSESSING PARTICIPATION IN AND IMPACTS OF ADAPTATION PRACTICE TO CLIMATE CHANGE: IMPLICATION FOR FOOD SECURITY IN MISHA DISTRICT OF HADIYA ZONE, SOUTHERN ETHIOPIA

Abstract: Climate change has serious consequences for food production of smallholder farmers in poor countries including Ethiopia. Farmers exercise various adaptation strategies to counter the negative impacts of climate change, but the level of participation and impact of adoption of adaptation practices against climate change on food security has not been the focus of scientific studies. Therefore, the obj ective of this study was to assess farmers’ participation in climate change adapta...

COAGULATION AND PREPARATION OF SOFT UNRIPENED CHEESE FROM CAMEL MILK USING CAMEL CHYMOSIN (CHY-MAX® M)

Abstract: The present study was carried out at Haramaya University dairy laboratory with the intention of investigating (1) the effect of camel chymosin on milk coagulation properties of camel milk and (2) the effect of camel chymosin and cooking on soft unripened cheese characteristics. Two experiments were conducted. The first experiment was on milk coagulation with completely randomized design (CRD) and different chymosin concentrations (40, 70 and 100 IMCU/L) were tested for gelation tim...

EFFECT OF HEAT TREATMENT ON PROPERTIES OF PROTEIN AND RENNETABILITY OF CAMEL MILK

Abstract: The current study was conducted at Haramaya University Dairy laboratory with the main objective of investigating how heat treatment affects whey proteins and rennetability property of camel milk for cheese making. Completely randomized design (CRD)was used by evaluating effect temperature (heated at 400C,650C/30min,720C/30 sec, 750C/5 min, 850C/5 min and 900C/5 min).Unheated milk used for alternative reference during chemical and whey protein denaturation evaluation. Similar experi...

HYGIENIC PRODUCTION PRACTICES, MICROBIAL QUALITY AND MARKETING OF COW’S MILK IN CHEHA DISTRICT OF GURAGE ZONE, SOUTHERN ETHIOPIA

Abstract: The objective of the study was to assess hygienic production practices, microbial quality and marketing of raw cows’ milk and milk products. The study was conducted on survey work and laboratory analysis. The survey works involved interview of 180 smallholder milk producers from two agro ecologies in the district while 40 milk samples were collected in the morning from milk producers, small shops, cafes and consumers for laboratory analysis. Majority of the respondents (96.7%) di...

EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PROCESSING METHODS ON ANTI-NUTRITIONAL CONTENT OF FINGER MILLET (Eleusine coracana) GRAIN AND ITS REPLACEMENT VALUE FOR MAIZE IN BROILER AND LAYER DIETS

Abstract: This dissertation was composed of four experiments. In the first experiment, effects of different processing methods(roasting, boiling and germination) on proximate composition, some mineral and antinutrient contents of finger millet was evaluated. In the second and third experiments, the replacement effect of roasted finger millet grain for maize in starter and finisher broiler diets on feed intake, body weight, blood hematology, carcass parameters and meat chemical composition we...

DESCRIPTIVE SENSORY QUALITIES AND PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF YOGHURT MADE USING DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL STARTER CULTURE FROM BOVINE MILK

Abstract: Sensory quality and physicochemical properties are very important to determine yoghurt quality. Sensory attributes of yoghurt can be affected by starter cultures and pasteurization temperature in yoghurt manufacturing process. This study was aimed to investigate effect of three commercial starter cultures namely YoFlex Mild 1.0 and YF-L904 (thermophilic yoghurt cultures containing strains of Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophiles) and RST-743(Lac...

Food Science and Technology is a field of integrated study of basic sciences, Microbiology, Biochemistry, Nutrition, Biotechnology, Engineering Technology. Food Science and Technology deals with studying food compositions as well as looking for ways to refine them. Food scientists and technologists are versatile, interdisciplinary, and collaborative practitioners in a profession at the crossroads of scientific and technological developments. Find Food Science and Technology thesis, project topics, seminars, research papers, essays, study notes, exam questions and academic materials.

Popular Papers/Topics

Microbial examination of spoilt avocado fruit, additives and preservatives used in food processing and preservation and their health implication, food posioning, it’s causes, effect and control, the effect of food packaging material on the environment, margarine production using oil blends from palm kernel, coconut and melon, use of composite flour blends for biscuit making (peanut/cassava flour), chemical and sensory evaluation of peanut butter, the status of processing and preservation of cereals in nigeria, production of vitamin a from carrot, production and quality evaluation of cookies from cocoyam and plantain, production and acceptability studies of malted sorghum (sorghum bicolor) biscuit, students’ industrial work experience scheme (siwes) fde 400 undertaken at nigerian bottling company (nbc), economic assessment of some methods adopted in yoghurt production, the role of packaging in food processing, a thesis on chemical composition, functional properties, sensory evaluation and glycemic index of biscuits produced from flour blends of unripe plantain, soybeans and carrot.

Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Terms | Copyright | © 2024, Afribary Limited. All rights reserved.

TOPICS IN FOOD TECHNOLOGY

• August 2022

• University of Mysore

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Efficient Extraction and Characterization of Pectin from Pomelo Peel by Sequential Ultrasonic and Radio Frequency Treatment

• Published: 02 August 2024

Cite this article

• Jin Wang 1 ,
• Sicheng Du 1 ,
• Hongyue Li 1 ,
• Shaojin Wang 1 , 2 &
• Bo Ling 1  

41 Accesses

Explore all metrics

The aim of this study was to optimize sequential ultrasound-radio frequency–assisted extraction (URAE) of pectin from pomelo peel. Effects of sonication power and time, radio frequency (RF) heating temperature, and time on the pectin yield (PY) were evaluated. Based upon optimized URAE parameters, the yield, physicochemical, and structure properties of pectin recovered from sequential radio frequency-ultrasound–assisted extraction (RUAE), ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE), and RF-assisted extraction (RFAE) were also compared. A maximal PY of 28.36 ± 0.85% was attained at the optimized URAE conditions including solvent pH of 1.5 (citric acid), sonication at 183 W for 24 min, and RF heating at 87 °C for 23 min. Although all four samples had a high degree of esterification more than 50%, URAE was the lowest. No significant changes were observed in the types of monosaccharides among different samples. Furthermore, all four samples (6.6–10.3 mg GAE/g) showed significantly higher total phenolic content than those of commercial citrus pectin (1.2 mg GAE/g), and among them, RFAE was the highest with the best antioxidant capacity. The water and oil holding capacities of the four samples were between 3.5 to 4.0 and 2.6 to 3.0 g/g, respectively, but there was no significant difference ( p  > 0.05) between each other. Structure properties indicated that there were no significant differences in the main chemical structures among the four pectin samples. Morphology analysis of URAE showed a more compact, smoother, and flatter surface than that of RUAE and RFAE. The results observed in this paper suggest that sequential URAE is an efficient strategy for the recovery of high-quality pectins.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Ultrasound-assisted extraction of pectin from Spondias purpurea L. peels residues: optimization, characterization, and comparison with commercial pectin

Standardization of extraction of pectin from Assam lemon (Citrus limon Burm f.) peels using novel technologies and quality characterization

Continuous and pulsed ultrasound-assisted extraction of pectin from pomelo fruit peel using citric acid

Data availability.

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Abbreviations

Conventional extraction

Degree of esterification

Galacturonic acid

High methoxyl pectin

Microwave-assisted extraction

Physical field–assisted extraction

Pomelo peel

Pomelo peel pectin

Pomelo peel-acid solution mixture

Pectin yield

Radio frequency

Radio frequency–assisted extraction

Radio frequency-ultrasound–assisted extraction

Ultrasound-assisted extraction

Ultrasound-microwave–assisted extraction

Ultrasound-radio frequency–assisted extraction

Cilingir, S., Duran, G., Goekyildiz, B., Goksu, A., Sabanci, S., & Cevik, M. (2023). Optimization of pectin extraction from lemon peel powder by ohmic heating using full factorial design. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 17 (3), 650–660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-023-03272-1

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Cui, J., Zhao, C., Feng, L., Han, Y., Du, H., Xiao, H., & Zheng, J. (2021). Pectins from fruits: Relationships between extraction methods, structural characteristics, and functional properties. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 110 , 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.01.077

Dranca, F., Vargas, M., & Oroian, M. (2020). Physicochemical properties of pectin from Malus domestica ‘Fălticeni’ apple pomace as affected by non-conventional extraction techniques. Food Hydrocolloids, 100 , 105383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2019.105383

Gao, J., Wu, M., Du, S., Zhang, H., Wang, S., & Ling, B. (2023a). Recent advances in food processing by radio frequency heating techniques: A review of equipment aspects. Journal of Food Engineering, 357 , 111609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2023.111609

Gao, J., Zhang, H., Wang, S., & Ling, B. (2023b). Performance evaluation of an experimental radio frequency heating system designed for studying the solid-liquid extraction. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 90 , 103518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2023.103518

Article   Google Scholar  

Gerschenson, L., Fissore, E., Rojas, A., IdrovoEncalada, A., Zukowski, E., & Higuera Coelho, R. (2021). Pectins obtained by ultrasound from agroindustrial by-products. Food Hydrocolloids, 118 , 106799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2021.106799

Gharibzahedi, S., Smith, B., & Guo, Y. (2019a). Pectin extraction from common fig skin by different methods: The physicochemical, rheological, functional, and structural evaluations. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 136 , 275–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.06.040

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Gharibzahedi, S., Smith, B., & Guo, Y. (2019b). Ultrasound-microwave assisted extraction of pectin from fig ( Ficus carica L.) skin: Optimization, characterization and bioactivity. Carbohydrate Polymers, 222 , 114992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.114992

Hosseini, S., Khodaiyan, F., Kazemi, M., & Najari, Z. (2019). Optimization and characterization of pectin extracted from sour orange peel by ultrasound assisted method. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 125 , 621–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.12.096

Hu, W., Chen, S., Wu, D., Zhu, K., & Ye, X. (2021). Manosonication assisted extraction and characterization of pectin from different citrus peel wastes. Food Hydrocolloids, 121 , 106952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2021.106952

Jamshidi, E., Behzad, F., Adabi, M., & Esnaashari, S. (2024). Edible iron-pectin nanoparticles: Preparation, physicochemical characterization and release study. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 17 (3), 628–639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-023-03156-4

Kazemi, M., Khodaiyan, F., & Hosseini, S. (2019). Utilization of food processing wastes of eggplant as a high potential pectin source and characterization of extracted pectin. Food Chemistry, 294 , 339–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.05.063

Khedmat, L., Izadi, A., Mofid, V., & Mojtahedi, S. (2020). Recent advances in extracting pectin by single and combined ultrasound techniques: A review of techno-functional and bioactive health-promoting aspects. Carbohydrate Polymers, 229 , 115474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.115474

Kumari, M., Singh, S., & Chauhan, A. (2023). A comparative study of the extraction of pectin from Kinnow ( Citrus reticulata ) peel using different techniques. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 16 (10), 2272–2286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-023-03059-4

Lal, A., Prince, M., Kothakota, A., Pandiselvam, R., Thirumdas, R., Mahanti, N., & Sreeja, R. (2021). Pulsed electric field combined with microwave-assisted extraction of pectin polysaccharide from jackfruit waste. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 74 , 102844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2021.102844

Li, X., Bi, J., Jin, X., Li, X., Wu, X., & Lyu, J. (2020). Characterization of water binding properties of apple pectin modified by instant controlled pressure drop drying (DIC) by LF-NMR and DSC methods. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 13 (2), 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-019-02387-8

Li, H., Wang, J., Wang, S., & Ling, B. (2022). Performance evaluation of the double screw conveyor in radio frequency systems: Heating uniformity and quality of granular foods. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies., 77 , 102990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2022.102990

Liew, S., Ngoh, G., Yusoff, R., & Teoh, W. (2016). Sequential ultrasound-microwave assisted acid extraction (UMAE) of pectin from pomelo peels. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 93 , 426–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.08.065

Lin, Y., An, F., He, H., Geng, F., Song, H., & Huang, Q. (2021). Structural and rheological characterization of pectin from passion fruit ( Passiflora edulis f. flavicarpa ) peel extracted by high-speed shearing. Food Hydrocolloids, 114 , 106555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2020.106555

Ling, B., Ramaswamy, H., Lyng, J., Gao, J., & Wang, S. (2023). Roles of physical fields in the extraction of pectin from plant food wastes and byproducts: A systematic review. Food Research International, 164 , 112343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2022.112343

Liu, L., Guan, X., Jiao, Q., Xu, J., Li, R., Erdogdu, F., & Wang, S. (2023). Developing combined radio frequency with water bath treatments to improve gel properties of minced chicken breast. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 17 (1), 138–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-023-03127-9

Mahmood, N., Liu, Y., Saleemi, M., Munir, Z., Zhang, Y., & Saeed, R. (2023). Investigation of physicochemical and textural properties of brown rice by hot air assisted radio frequency drying. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 16 (7), 1555–1569. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-023-03001-8

Muñoz, I., de Sousa, D., Guardia, M., Rodriguez, C., Nunes, M., Oliveira, H., Cunha, S., Casal, S., Marques, A., & Cabado, A. (2022). Comparison of different technologies (Conventional thermal processing, radiofrequency heating and high-pressure processing) in combination with thermal solar energy for high quality and sustainable fish soup pasteurization. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 15 (4), 795–805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-022-02782-.8

Naik, M., Rawson, A., & Rangarajan, J. (2020). Radio frequency-assisted extraction of pectin from jackfruit ( Artocarpus heterophyllus ) peel and its characterization. Journal of Food Process Engineering, 43 (6), e13389. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpe.13389

Panwar, D., Panesar, P. S., & Chopra, H. K. (2023). Ultrasound-assisted extraction of pectin from Citrus limetta peels: Optimization, characterization, and its comparison with commercial pectin. Food Bioscience, 51 , 102231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbio.2022.102231

Rahmani, Z., Khodaiyan, F., Kazemi, M., & Sharifan, A. (2020). Optimization of microwave-assisted extraction and structural characterization of pectin from sweet lemon peel. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 147 , 1107–1115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.10.079

Rodsamran, P., & Sothornvit, R. (2019). Microwave heating extraction of pectin from lime peel: Characterization and properties compared with the conventional heating method. Food Chemistry, 278 , 364–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.11.067

Sengar, A., Rawson, A., Muthiah, M., & Kalakandan, S. (2020). Comparison of different ultrasound assisted extraction techniques for pectin from tomato processing waste. Ultrasonics Sonochemistry, 61 , 104812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2019.104812

Su, D., Li, P., Quek, S., Huang, Z., Yuan, Y., Li, G., & Shan, Y. (2019). Efficient extraction and characterization of pectin from orange peel by a combined surfactant and microwave assisted process. Food Chemistry, 286 , 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.01.200

Tao, Y., Li, D., Siong Chai, W., Show, P., Yang, X., Manickam, S., Xie, G., & Han, Y. (2021). Comparison between airborne ultrasound and contact ultrasound to intensify air drying of blackberry: Heat and mass transfer simulation, energy consumption and quality evaluation. Ultrasonics Sonochemistry, 72 , 105410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2020.105410

Tao, Y., Wu, P., Dai, Y., Luo, X., Manickam, S., Li, D., Han, Y., & Show, P. (2022). Bridge between mass transfer behavior and properties of bubbles under two-stage ultrasound-assisted physisorption of polyphenols using macroporous resin. Chemical Engineering Journal, 436 , 135158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2022.135158

Thu Dao, T. A., Webb, H. K., & Malherbe, F. (2021). Optimization of pectin extraction from fruit peels by response surface method: Conventional versus microwave-assisted heating. Food Hydrocolloids, 113 , 106475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2020.106475

Tien, N., Le, N., Khoi, T., & Richel, A. (2022). Optimization of microwave-ultrasound-assisted extraction (MUAE) of pectin from dragon fruit peels using natural deep eutectic solvents (NADES). Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 46 (1), e16117. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.16117

Tocmo, R., Pena-Fronteras, J., Calumba, K. F., Mendoza, M., & Johnson, J. J. (2020). Valorization of pomelo ( Citrus grandis Osbeck) peel: A review of current utilization, phytochemistry, bioactivities, and mechanisms of action. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 19 (4), 1969–2012. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12561

Tunç, M., & Odabaş, H. (2021). Single-step recovery of pectin and essential oil from lemon waste by ohmic heating assisted extraction/hydrodistillation: A multi-response optimization study. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 74 , 102850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2021.102850

Wandee, Y., Uttapap, D., & Mischnick, P. (2019). Yield and structural composition of pomelo peel pectins extracted under acidic and alkaline conditions. Food Hydrocolloids, 87 , 237–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2018.08.017

Wang, W., Ma, X., Xu, Y., Cao, Y., Jiang, Z., Ding, T., Ye, X., & Liu, D. (2015). Ultrasound-assisted heating extraction of pectin from grapefruit peel: Optimization and comparison with the conventional method. Food Chemistry, 178 , 106–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.01.080

Wang, W., Ma, X., Jiang, P., Hu, L., Zhi, Z., Chen, J., Ding, T., Ye, X., & Liu, D. (2016). Characterization of pectin from grapefruit peel: A comparison of ultrasound-assisted and conventional heating extractions. Food Hydrocolloids, 61 , 730–739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2016.06.019

Wang, W., Wu, X., Chantapakul, T., Wang, D., Zhang, S., Ma, X., Ding, T., Ye, X., & Liu, D. (2017). Acoustic cavitation assisted extraction of pectin from waste grapefruit peels: A green two-stage approach and its general mechanism. Food Research International, 102 , 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2017.09.087

Wang, C., Qiu, W., Chen, T., & Yan, J. (2021). Effects of structural and conformational characteristics of citrus pectin on its functional properties. Food Chemistry, 339 , 128064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128064

Xiao, L., Ye, F., Zhou, Y., & Zhao, G. (2021). Utilization of pomelo peels to manufacture value-added products: A review. Food Chemistry, 351 , 129247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.129247

Yang, J., Mu, T., & Ma, M. (2019). Optimization of ultrasound-microwave assisted acid extraction of pectin from potato pulp by response surface methodology and its characterization. Food Chemistry, 289 , 351–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.03.027

Yang, N., Jin, Y., Zhou, Y., & Zhou, X. (2024). Physicochemical characterization of pectin extracted from mandarin peels using novel electromagnetic heat. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 262 , 130212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.130212

Zheng, J., Li, H., Wang, D., Li, R., Wang, S., & Ling, B. (2021). Radio frequency assisted extraction of pectin from apple pomace: Process optimization and comparison with microwave and conventional methods. Food Hydrocolloids, 121 , 107031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2021.107031

Download references

This study was supported by the Key Research and Development Project in Shaanxi Province of China (2023YBNY-150) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31901825).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Mechanical and Electronic Engineering, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, 712100, Shaanxi, China

Jin Wang, Sicheng Du, Hongyue Li, Shaojin Wang & Bo Ling

Department of Biological Systems Engineering, Washington State University, 213 L.J. Smith Hall, Pullman, WA, 99164-6120, USA

Shaojin Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Jin Wang: writing original draft, methodology, formal analysis. Hongyue Li, Sicheng Du: methodology, investigation, visualization, data curation. Shaojin Wang: writing review and editing. Bo Ling: funding acquisition, supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bo Ling .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Wang, J., Du, S., Li, H. et al. Efficient Extraction and Characterization of Pectin from Pomelo Peel by Sequential Ultrasonic and Radio Frequency Treatment. Food Bioprocess Technol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-024-03538-2

Download citation

Received : 18 March 2024

Accepted : 23 July 2024

Published : 02 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-024-03538-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Radio Frequency Heating
• Physical Fields
• Ultrasound-radio Frequency–assisted Extraction
• Physicochemical Properties
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Health Tech
• Health Insurance
• Medical Devices
• Gene Therapy
• Neuroscience
• H5N1 Bird Flu
• Health Disparities
• Infectious Disease
• Mental Health
• Cardiovascular Disease
• Chronic Disease
• Alzheimer's
• Coercive Care
• The Obesity Revolution
• The War on Recovery
• Adam Feuerstein
• Matthew Herper
• Jennifer Adaeze Okwerekwu
• Ed Silverman
• CRISPR Tracker
• Breakthrough Device Tracker
• Generative AI Tracker
• Obesity Drug Tracker
• 2024 STAT Summit
• All Summits
• STATUS List
• STAT Madness
• STAT Brand Studio

Don't miss out

Subscribe to STAT+ today, for the best life sciences journalism in the industry

What I learned about ultra-processed foods from stuffing my face at the world’s leading food technology event

By Nicholas Florko July 31, 2024

C HICAGO — “Buttery Biscuits & Hot Honey Gravy,” mushroom jerky, soy chicken nuggets, strawberry champagne donuts, plant-based frozen yogurt and buñuelos, white cheddar cheese puffs, chocolatey cookie dippers, egg-free Spanish cheesecake, plant-based chorizo-style empanadas …

I was at the annual gathering of food technologists this month to learn about, well, food technology, and I had found myself in the exhibit hall, testing how much I could eat before needing to make an emergency trip back to my hotel room.

advertisement

It all started with a cookie bar. A perfect cookie bar. Crumbly like shortbread — but not sandy or dry — with crunchy pretzels and oats that were punctuated with flecks of caramel that glued the confection together but were virtually imperceptible to the eye. It was sweet but not saccharine — especially given the mini marshmallows studding its surface.

It was engineered to showcase the industrial creations — Jetpuffed White Cylinder Marbit marshmallows and Kraft Caramel Bits — from one of the world’s largest snack-food companies, Kraft Heinz.

Yes, there were booths featuring 100-liter reactors, flow wrappers, and sachet baggers, and even a robot making fried chicken. But, I realized, these ultra-processed treats were the real technology on display.

Going into the conference I knew that food companies designed their products to be hyperpalatable, that they were filled with ingredients I didn’t understand and couldn’t pronounce, and that roughly 60% of calories Americans consume these days come from so-called ultra-processed foods — industrial creations made up of ingredients you can’t find on any supermarket shelf. But I wasn’t prepared to hear about how companies were using AI to design the perfect food, or to watch as marketers outlined how today’s child-rearing techniques might impact what type of indulgent treats kids crave for snack time.

Sign up for Morning Rounds

Understand how science, health policy, and medicine shape the world every day

The IFT First conference, the “world’s leading food technology event” attended by some 17,000 people, demonstrated that the food industry is well aware of the health concerns about ultra-processed foods, but it is marching ahead with intentionally and strategically designing edible creations so craveable you might set aside your nutritional concerns — like I did — and begin skipping the PowerPoint presentations to try some mini chocolate lava cakes.

My bender — as deranged and delicious as it was — raised a number of tough questions. How much data about the health impact of ultra-processed foods do we need to amass before companies should be expected to start selling something healthier? Should they be praised for developing slightly healthier versions of ultra-processed foods, even if they are still ultra-processed? And when does a well-made, irresistible snack cross over from addictive in the colloquial sense to actually addictive?

“W e won’t be debating the definition of ultra-processed foods,” an official of the Institute of Food Technologists, which hosted the conference, warned attendees at the start of a panel discussion closing out the first official day of the confab.

The disclaimer underscored just how rudimentary much of the understanding about ultra-processed foods is, even among experts.

While overconsumption of these foods has been tied in observational studies to type 2 diabetes, hypertension, colorectal cancer, and even anxiety and depression, scientists cannot agree on an accepted definition for an ultra-processed food, let alone a coherent theory for why they might be so harmful.

Related: Top FDA officials weighing regulation of ultra-processed foods, internal documents show

The lack of a coherent definition or understanding of these foods’ health effects has splintered the industry.

Some have rejected the concern about ultra-processing as unscientific , and part of a larger tendency to malign certain diets as causing America’s expanding waistlines.

“This is the new demon food,” said Janet Helm, a food and nutrition consultant who delivered a fireside chat during the conference. “The health benefit of a product is not solely related to the level of processing.”

Others acknowledge the growing science around ultra-processed food, but argue that the research is too rudimentary to influence corporate strategy.

“I don’t think we know what to change right now,” said Anna Rosales, the IFT official who led the panel on ultra-processed foods, in an interview following the conference.

Trending Now: ‘Jerking families around’: Canceled Roche rare disease trial devastates parents, angers researchers

Many companies are responding in their own capitalist way: selling slightly healthier versions of ultra-processed foods to win over customers who have read the worrisome headlines. These fears present “opportunities for growth,” a marketer for Innova Market Insights, a firm that boasts of its ability to predict food trends, assured conference attendees.

The exhibit hall overflowed with slightly healthier versions of ultra-processed classics. The plant-based frozen yogurt I ate was spiked with pea protein, and contained less sugar than your typical frozen treat thanks to the low-calorie sweetener allulose.

“For consumers of plant-based frozen desserts, ‘added protein’ is one of the top health and nutritional benefits they seek when choosing a product,” the food’s manufacturer, Ingredion, advertised.

S cientists and public health officials only have educated guesses for why ultra-processed foods are so appealing.

Some think that they trigger chemical reactions in the brain similar to those triggered by addictive drugs , or that they scramble communication between the gut and the brain, prompting people to overeat. Others will note there’s also a slew of societal and economic factors that heighten UPFs’ popularity, including low cost and wide availability, especially for people who do not have the time or resources to cook meals at home.

And then there’s the simple fact that food companies, with their teams of scientists and unlimited tools to manipulate smell, color, texture, and taste, can design a food so tailored to a person’s individual preferences that it puts the likes of celebrity chefs Thomas Keller and René Redzepi to shame.

In reality, the strawberry champagne donuts didn’t have strawberries or champagne. It was all man-made flavoring meant to precisely mimic those flavors. The biscuits and hot honey gravy featured “lipolyzed cream and ghee flavors.”

Related: Medicaid is paying millions for salty, fat-laden ‘medically tailored’ cheeseburgers and sandwiches

The cookie dippers, made by Cargill, contain something called “PalmAgility compound shortening,” which the company advertises as “less likely to get brittle when stored at low temperatures or greasy at high temperatures.”

The plant-based frozen yogurt I ate had maltodextrin and a “frozen dessert stabilizer system,” both of which were used to make sure that the dairy-free concoction still had the mouth-feel of cream.

It was during a talk from the “market intelligence agency” Mintel that I realized it was the texture of the Kraft cookie bar that drew me in so immediately, and prompted my binge. The caramel and pretzel bits provided an exciting bit of crunchy contrast to the otherwise soft cookie.

As the Mintel marketer continued her talk, I learned that 80% of my millennial generation reported that texture influences their snack cravings. We are more into texture, it turns out, than any other generation.

I was immediately horrified. Food companies could guess what snacks I’d like before I even popped them in my mouth. But then I started to wonder: Was adding pretzels to a cookie really that different from what I’d do in my own kitchen?

The food policy world struggles with this exact question.

Some see teams of scientists working to create the most craveable cookie as something sinister, akin to Big Tobacco fine-tuning the amount of nicotine in a cigarette, and adding menthol to make the smoke less harsh on the throat.

“Do the food companies know what is going on? Absolutely they do,” said Todd Wagner, the billionaire founder of FoodFight USA, an organization advocating against ultra-processed foods. “They know it’s addictive, they know it’s got health consequences, this is very similar to cigarettes.”

Others simply see companies like much larger versions of the home cooks who might salt and roast carrots to concentrate their flavor, or who pan-fry gnocchi before dropping them in tomato sauce to improve their texture.

“The last time I checked, anybody who makes a recipe, most of us make it because we want it to taste good,” said Rosales, the IFT official. “Even when I’m thinking of healthy food, I want those to be craveable.”

Was a snack designed in a lab really the same as one cooked in my one-bedroom apartment?

T here’s no telling how many calories I consumed over the course of those two days in Chicago — let alone how much sugar and salt I subjected my body to. If I were to guess, I should probably stay away from Oreos, potato chips, and sodas for the next few months.

But I never truly felt full.

That’s the secret — and the risk — of ultra-processed foods. No matter how “indulgent,” they rarely sit in the stomach like a fibrous piece of celery. The one randomized controlled trial that tested their impact on weight gain found that subjects consumed more calories and gained more weight when they were fed ultra-processed foods than when they were fed a nutrient-matched, minimally processed diet.

“There’s dozens of hypotheses out there, and very strong opinions” on the reasons for the overconsumption and weight gain, said Kevin Hall, the National Institutes of Health researcher who directed the study.

That tendency to overeat could have something to do with the theory that ultra-processed foods mess with the body’s natural hunger hormones. Or it could be that the body digests processed foods faster than whole foods, potentially due to their low fiber content, which typically slows digestion.

By the middle of my first afternoon sampling the food industry’s wares, I did, I admit, feel a strong wave of nausea. I wondered if the 216,778-square-foot exhibit hall that had gobbled me up hours earlier was finally ready to spit me out.

But no, I was just hungry. It was time for another snack.

STAT’s coverage of chronic health issues is supported by a grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies . Our financial supporters are not involved in any decisions about our journalism.

About the Author Reprints

Nicholas florko.

Reporter, Commercial Determinants of Health

Nicholas Florko reports on the commercial determinants of health.

STAT encourages you to share your voice. We welcome your commentary, criticism, and expertise on our subscriber-only platform, STAT+ Connect

To submit a correction request, please visit our Contact Us page .

Recommended

Recommended Stories

STAT Plus: ‘Jerking families around’: Canceled Roche rare disease trial devastates parents, angers researchers

Congress is unprepared for the post-Chevron world. It needs help from subject matter experts

STAT Plus: Health Care's Colossus: How UnitedHealth harnesses its physician empire to squeeze profits out of patients

Mount Sinai mounted aggressive campaign to stifle debate over revelations about its controversial brain research

STAT Plus: Sarepta demanded Duchenne patient advocacy group censor video critical of the company

Sustainable intensification of smallholder maize production in northern Ghana: The case of cowpea living mulch technology

• Abdul Rahman, Nurudeen
• Larbi, Asamoah
• Kizito, Fred
• Kotu, Bekele Hundie
• Hoeschle-Zeledon, Irmgard

Several agricultural technologies have been promoted to intensify smallholder farming systems in Ghana, but there is limited literature on sustainability assessment of these technologies. A 2‑year (2017–2018) on‑farm study was conducted to evaluate the sustainability of using cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] living mulch (CPLM) technology to intensify smallholder maize (Zea mays L.) production in northern Ghana. Four treatments (control, CPLM planted with maize on the same day, CPLM planted 1 week after maize, and CPLM planted 2 weeks after maize) were laid in RCBD with four replications per treatment. We used Sustainable Intensification Assessment Framework (SIAF) to assess the sustainability of the above treatments based on five domains (productivity, economic, environment, human, and social). We conducted the assessment in the following three steps: (1) measured selected indicators from the five SIAF domains, which were useful to answering research question; (2) converted measured values of the indicators into scores using a scale of 0–1; and (3) calculated sustainability index using geometric rules considering each SIAF domain as an edge of a pentagon. The sustainability indices for the CPLM increased by 143%–300% compared with the control treatment. The sustainability indices for the CPLM were >1, indicating better sustainability relative to the control treatment, which recorded sustainability index of <1. This suggests that smallholder farmers in northern Ghana and similar agroecologies can intercrop cowpea 1–2 weeks after planting maize as living mulch for better sustainability of their maize production and well‑being through its effect on yield, income, food security, nutrition, and gender equity.Core Ideas The Sustainable Intensification Assessment Framework provides a systematic guide for assessing agricultural sustainability. Cowpea living mulch recorded higher sustainability scores relative to that of the control treatment. Cowpea living mulch sustainably has intensified smallholder maize production.