food engineering research topics

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
• My Account Login
• 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

1995 Accesses

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

Ashim Datta, Bart Nicolaï, … Chris Koh

Innovation can accelerate the transition towards a sustainable food system

Mario Herrero, Philip K. Thornton, … Paul C. West

Consumer acceptance of novel food technologies

Michael Siegrist & Christina Hartmann

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.

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

International Journal of Food Engineering

• Online ISSN: 1556-3758
• Type: Journal
• Language: English
• Publisher: De Gruyter
• First published: January 1, 2005
• Publication Frequency: 12 Issues per Year
• Audience: Researchers and practitioners (engineers) interested in food processing topics

• Frontiers in Nutrition
• Nutrition and Food Science Technology
• Research Topics

Food Engineering Technologies: Solutions to Build Sustainable and Resilient Food Systems, and Increase Food and Nutrition Security

Total Downloads

Total Views and Downloads

About this Research Topic

We are currently and we will continue to face major global challenges concerning food and nutrition security. In 30 years, food systems will need to supply safe, affordable and nutritious, socially and ethically accepted foods to 9 billion people around the world, according to general estimations. ...

Keywords : Resiliency, Sustainability, Nutrition security, Food engineering, Food systems

Important Note : All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.

Topic Editors

Topic coordinators, recent articles, submission deadlines.

Submission closed.

Participating Journals

Total views.

• Demographics

No records found

total views article views downloads topic views

Top countries

Top referring sites, about frontiers research topics.

With their unique mixes of varied contributions from Original Research to Review Articles, Research Topics unify the most influential researchers, the latest key findings and historical advances in a hot research area! Find out more on how to host your own Frontiers Research Topic or contribute to one as an author.

Food Engineering Interfaces pp 3–18 Cite as

The Beginning, Current, and Future of Food Engineering: A Perspective

• Dennis R. Heldman 6 &
• Daryl B. Lund 7  
• Conference paper
• First Online: 20 November 2010

3646 Accesses

2 Citations

3 Altmetric

Part of the book series: Food Engineering Series ((FSES))

Food engineering as a discipline is still evolving, and therefore, is developing in various ways in different parts of the world. Much of the documented evolution in both food engineering research and education has occurred in the past 50–75 years. Educational programs in food engineering have been developed at many institutions throughout the world. The origins of these programs can be traced to the 1950s and currently the curricula continue to evolve. Some programs are for degrees in food engineering, while others illustrate the increasing role of food engineering in undergraduate and graduate programs leading to degrees in food science.

Food engineering research has been developed at educational institutions and within the food industry. Initial focus had been to research specific food commodities such as fruits, vegetables, dairy products, meats, and similar raw food materials, but more recently the focus has shifted to applications of engineering principles, to the processes needed to convert raw food materials into safe food products for consumers. The evolution is continuing with an increased focus on new product development in the food industry and a shift in research to parameters impacting ingredients and formulation. This has resulted in a corresponding shift in research with emphasis on the physical properties of compositional components of foods and food ingredients. More recent trends in food engineering research have been in more basic areas, such as molecular biology and nanoscale science.

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

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Arrhenius S (1889) Z Phyzik Chem 4:226, Title not available

Google Scholar  

Ball CO, Olson FCW (1957) Sterilization in food technology. McGraw-Hill, New York

Birdseye C (1930) Production of quick-frozen fish. US Patent #1773070

Bruin S, Jongen RG (2001) Food process engineering: the past 25 years and challenges ahead. The Food Engineering Division Lecture. Institute of Food Technologists Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA

Carslaw HS, Jaeger JC (1946) Heat of conduction in solids. Oxford University Press, London

Charm SE (1963) The fundamentals of food engineering. The AVI Publishing Co., Westport, CT

Crank J (1956) The mathematics of diffusion. Oxford University Press, London

Earle RL (1966) Unit operations in food processing. Pergamon, London

Harper JC (1976) Elements of food engineering. The AVI Publishing Co., Westport, CT

Heldman DR (1975) Food process engineering. The AVI Publishing Co., Westport, CT

IFT Task Force Report (2000) Kinetics of microbial inactivation for alternative food processing technologies. JFS Special Supplement. pp 1–108

Knorr D (2006) Processing concepts for non-thermal modification of foods. 13th World Food Congress of Food Science & Technology. Nantes, France. Sept. 17–21

Labuza TP, Tannenbaum SR, Karel M (1970) Water content and stability of low moisture and intermediate moisture foods. Food Technol 24:543–550

Leninger HA, Beverloo WA (1975) Food process engineering. Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands

Book   Google Scholar  

Loncin M, Merson RL (1979) Food engineering. Principles and selected application. Academic, New York

Parker ME, Harvey EH, Stateler ES (1952) Elements of food engineering. Reinhold, New York

Rao MA, Rizvi SSH, Datta AK (2005) Engineering properties of foods, 3rd edn. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL

Roos YH, Karel M (1991) Applying state diagrams to food processing and development. Food Technol 45(12):68–71, 107

Singh RP, Heldman DR (1984) Introduction to food engineering. Academic, Orlando, FL

Toledo RT (1980) Fundamentals of food process engineering. The AVI Publishing Co., Westport, CT

Villota Ricardo, Hawkes James G (2007) Reaction kinetics in food systems. In: Heldman Dennis R, Lund Daryl B (eds) Handbook of food engineering, 2nd edn. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL

von Bockel MA (2008) Kinetic modeling of reactions in foods. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL

von Linde C (1896) Process and apparatus for liquefying gases or gaseous mixtures, and for producing cold, more particularly applicable for separating oxygen from atmospheric air. German Patent # GB189512528

von Loesecke HW (1943) Drying and dehydration of foods. Reinhold, New York

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Heldman Associates, 5224 Kings Mills Rd; #314, 45040, Mason, OH, USA

Dennis R. Heldman

Department of Food Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1605 Linden Dr., 53706, Madison, WI, USA

Daryl B. Lund

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dennis R. Heldman .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Dept. de Ingeniería Química y Bioproceso, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Vicuna Mackenna 4860, Santiago, Chile

José Miguel Aguilera

Depto. Procesos Químicos,, Biotecnológicos y Ambientales, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Av. España 1680, Vaparaiso, Chile

Ricardo Simpson

Dept. de Ingeneria Quimica y Alimentos, Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, Santa Catarina Matir 72820, Cholula, Puebla, Mexico

Jorge Welti-Chanes

Pullman, 99164, USA

Daniela Bermudez-Aguirre

, Department of Biological Systems Enginee, Washington State University, Pullman, 99164-6120, Washington, USA

Gustavo Barbosa-Canovas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer New York

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Heldman, D.R., Lund, D.B. (2010). The Beginning, Current, and Future of Food Engineering: A Perspective. In: Aguilera, J., Simpson, R., Welti-Chanes, J., Bermudez-Aguirre, D., Barbosa-Canovas, G. (eds) Food Engineering Interfaces. Food Engineering Series. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7475-4_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7475-4_1

Published : 20 November 2010

Publisher Name : Springer, New York, NY

Print ISBN : 978-1-4419-7474-7

Online ISBN : 978-1-4419-7475-4

eBook Packages : Chemistry and Materials Science Chemistry and Material Science (R0)

Share this paper

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Engineering R&D Subscribe

SAMBAZON Acquires SunOpta’s Açaí and Smoothie Bowls Business

The acquisition will double the company's manufacturing capacity for ready-to-eat bowls.

Nestlé Health Science Announces Startup Challenge Winners

The winners will receive mentorship, strategy guidance and technical support along with a one-year membership on the Friedman School's Food & Nutrition Innovation Council.

Vacuum Fundamentals: Utility Applications and Oil Sealed Technology

Defining the fundamentals of vacuum and discussing the utility applications of oil-sealed vacuum technology.

How Low-Temperature Absorption Chillers Can Optimize Food and Beverage Processing

As food and beverage manufacturers seek solutions to reduce operational costs and decarbonize, they may be surprised to find the answer in a solution that’s nearly a century old: absorption cooling.

Hamilton Process Analytics Unveils White Paper

The white paper addresses key challenges in cultivated meat production.

Eden Grow Systems Hires Innovation Advisor

Dr. D. Marshall Porterfield will serve in the new role.

Vacuum Thermodynamics in our Freeze-Dried Universe: A Christmas Study

The lessons learned from the principles and subsystems in play can and should be applied broadly to your own industrial vacuum system, whether freeze-drying is your game or not.

MicroHarvest Launches Pilot Plant

The company transformed a portion of its office space into a laboratory and pilot plant in six months.

Purdue University to Launch Trimble Technology Lab

The university is faciliting a learning environment for students of different majors and departments.

Heirloom Coffee Launches Regenerative Coffee Research Lab

The lab will be used for the research and development of regenerative coffee with 100% electric roasters.

Get our new eMagazine delivered to your inbox every month.

Stay in the know on the latest food and beverage manufacturing markets..

Copyright ©2024. All Rights Reserved BNP Media.

Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing

• Twitter (X)

Food engineering

The food and health program is a multidisciplinary team with complementary expertise spanning across the food supply chain from farmgate to plate. The team is actively engaged in research aimed at delivering safe, nutritious, and appealing foods to consumers.  The research activities of the program align closely with the Food Systems and Nutrition Patterns transformation target in the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Our world-class researchers drive innovations in health, processing, and sustainability to build a Sustainable Food System that has real-world impacts. We integrate research, teaching and industry collaboration in the program that attracts top PhD, MPhil, and Postdoctoral talents, shaping them into future generation food and health experts.

Our health research program expands into a wide range of themes and areas, primarily aimed at disease prevention through precision nutrition, targeted nutrient fortification and innovative delivery of bioactive ingredients. We have a multidisciplinary approach through collaboration with researchers across the food and pharmaceutical industry and other healthcare organisations. We combine modern chemistry, advanced medicine and nutrition, novel separation technologies and molecular encapsulation to transform bioactive food components into functional foods and therapeutics. 

Our research leads to public health policies, through assessments of population-wide nutrition status: identifying gaps in infant nutrition in Australia as well as ASEAN and Pacific nations. We address these gaps through evidence-based dietary approaches to guide policy development and improve the nutritional status of the target population. We advance knowledge in the fundamental understanding of bioavailability of nutrients and phytochemicals contributing to setting dietary guidelines and recommendations; develop cutting-edge technologies to efficiently fortify foods. In the food allergy area, we design and engineer nanoallergens with novel dietary adjuvants for immunotherapy that can effectively alleviate food allergies. We use molecular micro-array techniques and allergenomics to decipher the characteristics of food proteins, and their relationships with food processing and allergic sensitisation. 

Our innovations extend into exciting technologies related to health and food safety including novel bioaffinity molecules for in vitro diagnostic tests, colorimetric nanosensors for smart/active food packaging that allow real-time tracking of food quality and safety status, and swallowable devices that enable real-time analysis of the gut microbiome. 

Our innovations in food engineering and processing include the development of advanced and sophisticated technologies for producing functional food ingredients and encapsulated powders, and thermal and non-thermal food processing.

We are at the forefront of advanced particle engineering and drying technology development, applying these technologies in the industry to produce powdered products with improved quality and efficiency, at reduced costs and environmental impact. This area of research is complemented by our expertise in micro-rheology in the detection of low yield stress in biological fluids. The technology is used for the analysis of bubble dynamics in complex fluids and to study bubble expansion and shrinkage. We are also developing practical tools for food rheology applications to understand the effects of processing on food structure. 

With cutting-edge research in high-pressure, ultrasound, radiofrequency, and plasma technologies, we develop innovative engineering solutions that enhance product quality and safety while reducing energy and water consumption. These engineering and technological innovations enable preservation of heat-sensitive food products at low temperatures with enhanced organoleptic properties. Our interdisciplinary research in food engineering extends further to water detoxification, waste recovery and utilisation.

Our interdisciplinary team integrates molecular biochemistry, advanced material science and nanotechnology to engineer novel multifunctional and biocompatible materials for applications in bioactive delivery, and bio-catalysis. Our biomaterial research drives the creation of new generation functional bioplastics from sustainable resources, such as agricultural and food waste and/or by-products, with antimicrobial antioxidants and other biofunctions for application in active food packaging.

Sustainability

Sustainability is a major theme in our research program, and at UNSW we drive leading-edge research and innovations in agri-food technologies to meet the global needs for food security: safety, and nutrition in the 21st century. We are working on plant-based proteins, with the specific objective of fully integrating them into the Australian food system.

Our world-class food microbiologists are developing an in-depth understanding of the microbial ecology in the production of many foods and beverages including cocoa, coffee, tempeh, wine, and fermented dairy products. Based on this knowledge, we are developing microbial starter cultures that will enable the production of safer and better-quality foods and beverages with improved efficiency and sustainability. 

It is well recognised that the current land-based food production systems will not be able to provide sustainable food security to the ever-growing world population, and rigorous scientific investigation is needed to deliver new solutions for sustainable food production. With the goal to strengthen food security and alleviate the burden of agriculture on the environment, we're developing an active research program in cellular agriculture, aimed at producing meat from the lab and, ultimately for wider consumption. Our research also expands into growing and extracting proteins, food fibre and bioactive ingredients from marine algae and microorganisms.

Academic & research staff in this field

Jayashree Arcot

Johannes le Coutre

Cordelia Selomulya

Patrick Spicer

Francisco Trujillo

Zhaojun Han

Maria Skyllas-Kazacos

Related research centres & groups.

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Research Tools
• Food Safety Research Projects Database

Engineering for Food Safety and Quality

The mission of this multistate project is to advance technologies for the purpose of improving food safety, quality and security. This will be accomplished by virtue of collaboration and synergy among participating experiment stations and disciplines. The research accomplishments of this project will be used to enhance education and outreach programs for stakeholders. <P> The objectives are as follows: <OL> <LI> Advancing the fundamental science and application of technologies to ensure safety and improve quality of food products. 1a) Utilize innovative methods to characterize food materials. 1b) Develop new and improved processing technologies. 1c) Develop mathematical models to enhance understanding of, and, optimize food processes; <LI>Develop pedagogical methodologies for improved learning of food engineering principles; <LI> Develop outreach programs to disseminate best practices for enhancing food safety and quality to stakeholders. </ol> All three objectives of this multistate project will be addressed. The following outputs are expected from our work: Novel processing technologies with optimum process conditions; mathematical models describing various food process operations; learning modules to teach food process engineering to food science and food engineering students; web-site (wiki) with mathematical modeling approaches; and standard property evaluation methods. <P> The key milestones are as follows: <BR> (2011): Develop a rapid sensor technology for on-line process control and on-line quality evaluation for variety of food process operations with standard measurement techniques established. <BR>(2012): Update the searchable database with accurate and reliable property data (physical, chemical, microbiological, etc.) with standard methods of measurement and prediction for properties for which the data did not exist established by 2012. <BR>(2013): Develop mathematical models for analysis, design, and improvement of new and alternative processing of foods with non-existent data on quality of processed foods, microbial growth/death kinetics, and other property data. <BR>(2014): Optimize computational model development with the main transport mechanisms in porous media occurring in new and alternative food processes characterized by 2012. <BR>(2015): Effectively predict, control, and evaluate quality and safety of food products during processing and storage by 2014 with quantitative predictive tools for quality and microbial food safety and risk developed by 2015.

NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY: With an increasing demand for fresh-like, healthy, nutritious and safe food, the US food processing industry is challenged constantly. Furthermore, emerging new pathogenic microorganisms that are tolerant to conventional treatment methods create a demand for improved and new novel food process development. The industry must constantly redefine technology to assure food wholesomeness. Thus, new and existing process technologies must rise to the challenge and play a pivotal role in improving the quality of value-added food products. Without extensive research, it would be difficult for the industry to meet these demands. In addition to achieving global competence the US food industry requires the scientific knowledge, and well prepared personnel with appropriate skills, and constant dialog between academic research developments and industry needs. Collaboration among engineers, food scientists and other experts across the nation can effectively address these needs of the industry by advancing technologies through research, preparing our future work force through educating the students, and bridging the gap between research and implementation through outreach. The stakeholders impacted by this project include the food industry, federal regulatory agencies, and consumers. The expected outcomes of our research will include developing novel processing technologies with optimum process conditions, developing relevant mathematical models describing various food process operations, creating new learning modules to teach food process engineering to food science and food engineering students, developing web-site (wiki) with mathematical modeling approaches for use in the industry and develop standard food property evaluation methods to ensure consistency in research and development. We will share various developed technologies and science behind these technologies with food industry stakeholders, provide new teaching strategies/learning modules to teach food engineering (lecture materials, case studies, simulations, homework/in-class assignments). As a result of these studies, we expect that more people will be certified in better processing methods. The increased knowledge and expertise of government employees, inspectors, and trainers is vital to produce safe food for the US consumer and maintain competitiveness in overseas markets.

APPROACH: Food microstructure is increasingly recognized as a major influence in determining physical properties and behavior of foods. Food Materials Science is an emerging field where the theory and practice of classical materials science is being applied to food systems. The study of foods as polymeric and composite materials is expected to yield a wealth of knowledge and insight into food systems behavior. We will specifically address the following question. Is the technology providing significant quality benefits over traditional processing during extended storage Information on efficacy of the various technologies in preserving food quality attributes such as texture, color, and flavor are needed. These quality attributes will be measured for selected foods. The impact of processing in degradation of various nutrients and enzymes needs to be documented. Additional molecular level studies will be conducted to understand the impact of the processing treatments on food structure and quality. Modeling of the biochemical and physical transformations in foods can significantly speed-up the development of novel, high-quality products and processes. Modeling is also a mechanism to evaluate consequences of unintended microbial or chemical contamination, as well as sabotage. We will use mathematical modeling to provide insight into processes that are critical for developing new ones, which is often not possible through experiments alone. We will share teaching materials with the lead station in the appropriate areas. The materials will be compiled to create a common format or template. We will collaboratively develop new materials. We will implement new and/or existing teaching strategies/learning modules (modules could include lecture materials, case studies, simulations, and homework/in-class assignments). We will develop assessment methods to measure the effectiveness of new and/or current teaching approaches and learning modules and their impact on learning outcomes. The following list shows the proposed main areas of outreach, including collaborative endeavors. We will share information, and presentations with other collaborating stations of this multistate project. Workshops (1-5 days; topics such as food safety, introduction to food science, community/home food preservation for canning and freezing, nutraceuticals, food processing, etc.). Presentations to industry, community stakeholders, and extension agents on emerging and innovative processes.

• Access for employees
• Address book
• Useful links

Scientific & expert work

• Research topics

If we take identified scientific research potentials of the Faculty into consideration, along with the interest that the broader social community might have in scientific research in the fields of biotechnical and natural science, which is based on the most recent documents, strategies and guidelines, in the period of up to 2020, the scientific research and scientific expert projects, that the Faculty is going to be involved in, are going to be focused on the following research subjects:

1. Development of new technological procedures in food production

As a part of this scientific subject, the Faculty research groups are going to:

• · Explore and develop new technological procedures in order to increase safety and quality of food production, taking into consideration aspects of economy, ecology and energy efficiency;
• · Explore, develop and apply new procedures of bioactive elements extraction, which are of plant and animal origin;
• · Develop and valorize new food products of increased nutritive value(functional food);
• · Develop and valorize products for specific dietary needs and products  aimed at targeted groups of consumers;
• · Research chemical and biocatalytical synthesis of aromas and flavours.

2. Development of analytical methods in quality control and safety of food

• · Develop new analytical methods to identify food safety related microbiological and chemical hazards;
• · Develop new analytical methods for the processes of food production control, quality control and identification of targeted bioactive food components based on contemporary high-resolution separation techniques;
• · Develop simple and fast analytical methods which will determine targeted analytes in food and  monitor food alterations during production, processing and warehousing, and which are going to use selective chemical sensors and biosensors, i.e. statistical analysis of global (multidimensional) analytical signal received through a number of complementary sensors or by combining two or more analytical techniques.  

3. Nutrition and nutrigenomics

• · Apply dietary, in vivo and in vitro methods while researching the correlation between  intake of nutritive and protective non-nutritive food components, foods, diet patterns, which have nutritional and health status, in order to understand better the correlation between diet, health and improvement of food quality of specific population groups;
• · Contribute to the most recent research topics on both national and international level, such as researches on nutritive status and vitamin D intake, which is identified as a critical micronutrient that has not been sufficiently explored, and researches on mediterranean diet and traditionally eaten food;
• · Develop methods which assess quality of nutrition and nutritive status and methods which evaluate the effect that functional foods have on human health;
• · Apply bioinformatics, genomics, metabolomics and proteomics in the researches of various food science aspects;
• · Apply theories on databases and statistics in order to collect, store, interpret and analyse data and to apply computer tools as a mathematical processes aid for acquisition of new information.

4. Development and selection/ construction of biotechnologically important microorganism strains

• · Isolate, identify and characterize new autochtonous microorganism strains / starter cultures and their defined technological and / or functional features, along with the possibility of their application;
• · Explore the activity of new probiotic cultures and the possibility of their application
• · Apply the existing and develop new bioinformatic methods with the aim of targeted development and construction of industrially important strains;
• · Conduct researches in the fields of molecular biology and molecular genetics in order to construct new microorganism strains by genetic engineering methods;
• · Develop systems for the implementation of targeted genetic modifications and for studying of regulation mechanisms of microorganism gene expression, with the aim of constructing or improving the existing industrial strains in biotechnological processes.

5. Production of biofuels and biochemicals from renewable raw materials

• · improve the existing and develop new industrial biotechnological processes for the production of biofuels and biochemicals;
• · study kinetics of bioprocesses and develop mathematical models of bioprocesses for the production of biofuels and biochemicals;
• · develop integrated biotechnological processes which associate the production process with „ in situ “ extraction of biofuels and biochemicals while they are being produced;
• · develop new biotechnological processes for waste water treatment and various industrial byproducts in order to obtain different chemicals out of waste water and industrial byproducts;
• · define ecological, economic and energy sustainability of biotechnological processes for the production of biofuels and biochemicals.

6. Biotechnology in environment, water resources and sea protection

• · Develop ecologically acceptable biocatalytical process through green solvents;
• · Develop toxicological researches in environment protection by using plant, animal and human cellular cultures as well as other biological testing systems used in toxicology (of yeasts and bacteria);
• · Develop and apply integrated reactor and / or separation systems for various bioprocesses in environment protection;
• · Model mathematically contamination indicators of different city and industry ecosystems;
• · Develop modern procedures in potable and process water production;
• · Prepare low-molecular peptide gelators and examine their efficiency at geling of various organic contaminants in water.
• Researchers
• Centers of excellence
• Scientific and professional meetings
• European Charter for Researchers and Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers
• Doctoral study day
• Katalog usluga

To enable a better user experience, this site stores cookies to your computer. More information