ACM - FOOD INNOVATION

1. FOOD INNOVATION
Visperas, Norman
University of the Cordilleras
Upper Rock Quarry, City Camp
Baguio City
0995 391 8545
normandrei20@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Food is the global language, a primary commodity and an
expression of cultural existence with no boundaries and unites all
people, industries and countries. The human experience is deeply
rooted in food – in the cycle of human activity that includes food
production, distribution, and manufacturing, shopping and of
course eating. This cycle shapes our daily lives at work and at
home, in politics and in play, in our bodies and in our
imaginations..
The customers' need promotes the innovation of products,
function innovation essentially, so analyzing functions of product
first and recombining them can help us design new products.
Axiomatic design theory provides a method for the design of
products, it makes it possible to design structure and decompose
function at the same time. This paper proposes one method that
improves existing products based on axiomatic design, and takes
bicycle for example, verifies the feasibility of this method in
detail.
Keywords
Food; Innovation; Culture; Safety; Health; Consumer;
1. INTRODUCTION
In the food industry, just as any other industry, product and
process development is considered a vital part – indeed the
lifeblood – of smart business strategy. Failure to develop new and
improved products relegates firms to competing solely on price
which favours the players with access to the lowest cost inputs
(land, labour etc). Adopting a low cost strategy can have
unexpected consequences for the economy as a whole when
another country, which has a lower cost structure, enters the
market.
Consumers’ demands keep changing over time. These changes
range from basic considerations such as improving food safety,
shelf life, and reducing wastage, to demands for increasingly
sophisticated foods having special characteristics in terms of
nutritional value, palatability, and convenience. The actual
product development process is determined by the interaction
between consumer expectations and demand, the technical
capacity of the food producer, and emerging knowledge from
food science research.
Today, new lifestyles, higher incomes and consumer
awareness are creating consumer demand for a year-round supply
of high-quality, diverse and innovative food products. When it
comes to innovation, the food sector is less changeable when
compared to other sectors, such as high technology. Still, in the
past decades much and important developments have been
achieved in several areas related to foods and the food industry
[13]. The need for consumer involvement in innovation processes
has been recognised for four decades. Consumer involvement as
a part of open innovation is an important strategy in the food
sector, specifically for enhancing consumer acceptance and
promoting successful market introduction. The purpose of this
paper is to systematically analyse the concept of consumers’ role
and the level of consumer integration and interaction in recent
food innovation processes [14].
Patricia [28] stated that the concept of food innovation has been
tossed around food companies with growing regularity in recent
years. Most of the time, the term” innovation” is associated with
new product development, but innovation can be applied equally
well across corporate marketing, operations, quality assurance,
food safety disciplines. No matter where innovation is applied, it
always yields true value to the companies who embrace it
properly and apply it to various departmental functions
Innovation is the process of translating ideas into useful, and
used, new food products, processes or services. The word
innovation means different things to different people. It is
possible to categorise innovation under four general areas:
radically new innovation, a line extension to an existing product,
an adaptation of an existing product, and innovation imitations.
Innovation can be defined in many different ways. According to
Alberta [2] innovation is the process of transforming a
discovery into a goods or services that consumers or customers
are willing to purchase. Innovation undoubtedly involves
multiple aspects, such as science, technology, marketing and
organization, partnership, risk and social responsibility
According to Earle [11], Indigenous innovation model based
on Individual enterprise influences and constraints the overall
enhancement of regional indigenous innovation ability. In view
of this, on the basis of the comparison of the path of regional
indigenous innovation capabilities, this article come up with the
improvement path of regional innovation abilities on the basis of
indigenous innovation alliance. This article not only starts a study
for this path, but also explores the promotion strategy. A growing
number of formation and development of regional indigenous
innovation alliance must boost successive improvement of
regional innovation abilities. Discoveries must be translated into
products, services or processes that are diffused and integrated
from those discoveries. Having this in mind, it is important that
any idea or invention can be replicable at an economical cost and
satisfy a specific need to be called an innovation. So forth, the
innovations do not correspond directly to the ideas, but only to
those ideas that are suitable for implementation.
In addition Knorr [19] stated that for improving the
innovation performance for enterprises within clusters,
influencing factors of cluster have been investigated to intensify
the extent of networking during innovation process, as well as
accelerating the innovation speed within clusters. Recently,
however, industrial clusters in China are confronted with the

2. problems of incomprehensive external networking, inefficient
internal innovation process and shortage of technological
innovation capability, all of which impede the cultivation of the
innovative advantage of clusters. Product integrated innovation is
integrating the existing functions to create a new product that
satisfying the customers' multi-function needs. The method for
product integrated innovation is discussed. Its core is functional
combination.
The lack of innovation had led to our favorite brands turning
the discovery and creation of the products consumers want over
to others, while at the same time they try to find a new flavor for
an old product. This is not the type of innovation that made our
heritage food companies great
Food innovation and entrepreneurship are important topics in
graduate food studies. Students should be challenged to promote
an innovative attitude towards their future career in the food
industry sector, as professionals working in a small and medium-
sized enterprise, or in a large multinational company, or even as
entrepreneurs with their own working projects. The present case
study shows a curricular unit of a master course that intends to
integrate the knowledge on new and sustainable technologies and
products, based on seminars of experts on hot topics, on visits to
food industry enterprises and market expositions and on the
development of a state-of-the-art report about an emergent or
novel food technology or product with oral presentation [16].
Innovation is frequently driven by pressure from the external
environment so that the company adapts its behavior and
organization so as to maintain or improve its performance and
relative position. The external factors that most pressure the
company are competition, deregulation, scarcity of resources
and customer demand.
There is a definite demand for healthy food, and manufacturers
are responding to it. The food industry is now so competitive that
manufacturers have to be on the look-out for every opportunity to
stay one step ahead of the competition. And in healthy eating they
have spotted a real opportunity. Food product development is
highly dependent on the consumer perception and acceptance,
and hence it is of utmost importance to include the consumer in
the development process to minimize failure probabilities. The
sectors of the food industry where important developments and
innovation are registered include the processing technologies and
the packaging systems, where the latest progresses have produced
very significant outcomes. The assessment of consumer
perceptions towards foods is of paramount importance in the
development and marketing of products. Understanding how
consumers respond to information is important for developing
effective food marketing and communication strategies.
Although communication and information do not actually change
the attributes of the products, they can shape the attitudes of
consumers, and influence their choices and behavior [16].
When developing a new food product, the main objective is
to ensure that it will be accepted by consumers, being that
acceptance based on the intimate relationship between the
particular characteristics or attributes of the product and the
human perception and psychological response. When these new
ideas are slow or absent, economies tend to stagnant. For
established businesses the need for innovation poses a problem.
Innovation offers huge challenges and opportunities, but is by its
very nature a risky business. Often it is affected by factors beyond
the direct control of the company. Most food businesses fail
because they don’t see or recognize the need for change. They
tend to be inward looking and fail to take the time to see the bigger
picture. Innovation is a strategic resource. It can help the food
business get to where it wants to go. But it does not happen by
accident. It can be a complex process that carries significant risk
and requires robust and systematic management.
In the last decades consumer demands in the field of food
production has changed considerably. New food product
development involves a high degree of risk, and it was found that
product success is directly related to a number of aspects having:
a unique product idea, undertaken extensive pre-development
research, good knowledge of the market, and a cross-functional
team approach involving top management and effective
marketing and launch. Innovative food products will survive in
the market if consumers extract sufficient value from the
consumption. This value can be assessed on a set of 5 criteria
largely dominated by the hedonic component of the purchase, i.e.
the pleasure of the consumption. The other criteria (health,
energy, practicity, and ethics) are secondary benefits that can
complete the whole experience but will never surpass pleasure.
Innovation in the food sector faces higher challenges than
some other areas. Food neophobia, which is the fear of new foods,
is such an example. Although this is a phenomenon with
particular expression in children, for some people food neophobia
persists into adulthood, and thus forms one dimension of the
overall consumer population. While consumer research and
marketing have paid special attention to those interested in new
products, the neophobic consumers must not be neglected during
the new product development process and marketing studies [13].
The ultimate innovation is a new or improved consumer
product and service. Innovations can be focused in one area of
food technology, for example process engineering, product
formulation, food qualities or consumer needs; but ripples spread
causing changes in other parts of the food system, in consumer
eating patterns and in general social and cultural areas. Food
industry innovation strategies need to be based on the total
technology in the food system and concerned not only with the
technological changes but also with the social and environmental
changes, so as to produce food that satisfies the nutritional,
personal and social needs and wants of all communities [13].
Lastly, Mustafa and Ashfaq [25] stated that innovation in
the food industry combines technological innovation with
social and cultural innovation but the degree of innovation is still
low in the food industry. Radical or really new innovations are
not often introduced on the food market, although a number of
new technologies are already available or being further
investigated at present and could certainly be of interest.
Innovation is the lifeblood of the food industry and is essential for
ensuring profitability and survival. Consumer demands and
expectations are constantly evolving and retailers are seeking new
products to meet these needs. Companies who have a clear
understanding of the consumer and market place will emerge as
strong and sustainable businesses. To achieve, food companies
must have in place a formal, market focused innovation system to
actively manage all stages of the process.
Innovations are recognized as an important instrument for
companies belonging to the food industry in order to stand out
from competitors and to satisfy consumer expectations. In this
regard, functional foods play an outstanding role, as demonstrated
by their increasing demand derived from the increasing cost of
healthcare, the steady increase of life expectancy, and the desire
of older people for improved quality of their later years [25].
2. DISRUPTIVE FOOD INNOVATION
In recent years, disruptive innovations have proliferated
within the food industry. Nevertheless, the question of their
acceptability by consumers arises, especially given the previous

3. experience of genetically modified organisms. Companies are
now facing a societal risk. New players who do not necessarily
have economic links with companies, including NGO, radical
groups, and media can put pressure on them and even block a
project or an innovation. For an innovation to be accepted, its
promoter must, at all costs, clear the ground to avoid making it
the subject of public controversy. Food technology is all about
piling your plate with safer, cheaper, fresher, more nutritious and
environmentally friendly edibles. Continuing in the tradition of
older cousins such as decaffeination and freeze-drying, today’s
food-tech dabbles in tissue engineering, stem-cell research,
microbiology and nanotechnology. Given Israelis’ expertise in
these areas, it’s only natural that investors and industrialists in the
multibillion-dollar food-tech industry are paying attention to
food-tech trends in the startup nation.
According to Obizcoin [26], Disruptive innovations create a
new market, or transform one or several markets. In recent years,
such innovations have proliferated within the food industry, from
seed research to the distribution of food products, agricultural
production and the industrial processing of agricultural raw
materials. This includes genetically modified animals or animal
cloning aimed at food production, nanotechnologies applied to
food, personalized food, synthetic meat based on textured
vegetable proteins or stem cell culture, food products based on
edible insects or microalgae, 3D food printers, products from
vertical urban farms, food in the form of powder or pills, or even
connected diet. Some of these innovations are still at
developmental stage in laboratories. Others are awaiting
marketing authorization, financing or are about to be released or
already on sale.
3D food printers are bringing a new level of mechanical
precision and sophistication to the kitchen without the
corresponding labour cost or time spent on training staff.
Equipped with food-safe materials and accessories, these printers
are highly versatile, capable of producing fancy-looking treats
that appeal to a generation obsessed with social media. Another
population demographic that is served by 3D food printing is the
elderly, who may have difficulty chewing and swallowing. In this
case, a 3D food printer could be used to print a puree that mimics
the original shape and taste of a specific food item, making it
easier to eat and just as palatable.
Bart [4] stated that the food industry is going to be drastically
changed within the next ten years. Experts say that these
disruptive innovations will come in three separate waves. The
three different waves are the “uberisation” of food, smart
kitchens, and smart food.
The uberisation of food can be characterized as a
collaborative market that can be applied to food. Companies such
as Eatwith and Mealsharin allow customers to eat restaurant-style
food in the comfort of homes. Soon enough, people will be buying
more food from dining commodities rather than grocery stores
[4].
Smart kitchens rely on the Internet of Things. Smart utensils
will customize people’s portion size and prevent indigestion by
telling them to slow down while eating. Smart fridges will allow
users to view their fridge from anywhere, to see available recipes,
and the expiration dates of all goods. This will lead to less food
waste and healthier people [4].
Smart food is the last of the three waves. Nanotechnology will
they be crucial step that will get this last idea booming. Some
examples of this smart food include cultured meat from the lab,
nutrient dense algae powder, and salads grown with lighting other
than natural sunlight. Smart food may the most important wave
of them all. The UN’s Food and Agriculture stated that food
output must rise by over 75% in the next thirty-five years to feed
the growing population [4].
The potential impacts of such disruptive technologies are wide
ranging. Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies have the
potential to help revolutionize food systems, dramatically
changing the shape of demand, improving value-chain linkages
and creating more effective production systems. At the same time,
however, they are likely to introduce new challenges. They raise
concerns pertaining to health and safety, the environment, privacy
and ethics. They can create unintended consequences, which must
be considered and explored in advance. In addition, their positive
effects may be unevenly distributed, potentially deepening the
divide between rich and poor. Harnessing the positive impacts of
technology innovation and avoiding potential downfalls will
require deliberate and coordinated efforts by investors, innovators
and policy-makers.
While food systems have been slow to benefit from
innovative technologies, especially in developing countries, a
recent acceleration of innovation efforts make the future adoption
of technology feasible. This report provides a glimpse of the
novel technology applications companies are developing to
address food systems challenges. These innovations have
attracted more than $14 billion in investments in 1,000 start-ups
since 2010, mostly in developed countries. To compare,
healthcare has attracted $145 billion in investments in 18,000
start-ups over the same period of time.
This report aims to identify emerging technologies with the
potential for achieving global aspirations for food systems and to
start a discussion about enabling their use for constructive
outcomes, while underlining the challenges and unintended
consequences they may bring. The report focuses on
technological innovation in food systems – recognizing that it is
also essential to continue investments in low-tech interventions,
create new and bold policies, move towards full-cost accounting,
improve resource efficiency, influence consumer behaviours,
build trust and transparency, align towards common objectives
and collaborate across independent working groups. These
additional interventions may also be enabled by the underlying
Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies.
In 2017, the World Economic Forum developed a set of
scenarios for the future of global food systems, outlining four
distinct possible futures shaped by changes in consumer demand
and market connectivity. This work identified technological
innovations as one of the elements that will help to shape global
food systems.
It looks as if the food service has gone full circle, from eating at
home to eating at restaurants to eating at home again. This time,
though, food technology startups are disrupting our domestic
mealtimes. FoodTech isn’t just about making more or new
produce, it’s about distributing it, too. Using customer data,
startups and companies can tailor their product offerings to reach
a wider market. One of the reasons that food prep services like
Frichti are standing out from the crowd is their commitment to
healthy ingredients. Eating well has become a growing concern
for both health and ethics related reasons.
According to Laura [20], The birth of ubiquitous food delivery
services is disrupting our eating habits yet again. They are healthy
as well as convenient, and have a clear market in both the very
busy and the very lazy. The new breed of food delivery companies
are setting a new standard for ready prepared meals, challenging
takeaways, restaurants, and ingredients providers. They could
even disrupt grocery stores, drawing away at least a proportion of
sales. This disruptive potential is exactly why any business
involved in food production or provision needs to be aware of

4. what innovative food prep firms are doing. On the one hand, food
delivery services are easy to use and incredibly convenient.
However, on the other hand, they don’t come cheap. This sort of
service is definitely not something that most people can afford on
a daily basis [17].
The reasons why food delivery startups like Frichti are
attracting customers are clear. They are convenient, efficient,
nutritious, and their market includes just about everyone.
However, not everyone is going to jump on board the meal
delivery express. These companies are still notably more
expensive than buying ingredients and cooking them yourself.
Cost is likely to remain a key obstacle, until developments in
FoodTech drive down production costs. They’ll also need to
convince staunch home cooks that healthy meal deliveries are a
decent alternative, and that won’t be easy [20].
In addition Abigail [1] stated that food tech startups,
especially at the consumer level, have yet to prove themselves
profitable or permeating, despite the dire need for innovation in
our food system and despite the gargantuan market potential for
entrepreneurs (everyone eats, after all). There are several reasons
that investment in food technology is currently going to waste.
First and foremost, the rhetoric surrounding the so-called “food
movement” invokes a certain nostalgia for the days before
technology entered our food system, before GPS-enabled tractors,
before genetically engineered organisms, and before large scale
processing techniques. It’s difficult for companies with a good
product and a solid business plan to scale when “processed” food
is a bad word and “technology” has become the villain in this Neo
Luddism era of Slow Food.
3. SME INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS
No matter how far the marketplace advances, there will
always be problems that plague consumers and that no company
can seem to solve. Small businesses can experience great success
and expand their operations when they find innovative solutions
to common problems. Often, it can mean cultivating a loyal and
much-needed customer base, which any small business needs in
order to sustain itself and grow. Many countries are facing low
productivity growth, weak trade and investment, and rising or
persistently high inequality. In addition, major trends, including
the new industrial revolution, the changing nature of work and
demographic changes, call for innovative policy solutions.
Small and mid-size enterprises (SMEs) are businesses that
maintain revenues, assets or a number of employees below a
certain threshold. Each country has its own definition of what
constitutes a small and medium-sized enterprise. Certain size
criteria must be met and occasionally the industry in which the
company operates in is taken into account as well. Though small
in size, small and mid-size enterprises play an important role in
the economy. They outnumber large firms considerably, employ
vast numbers of people and are generally entrepreneurial in
nature, helping to shape innovation. Small and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of the Asian economy. They
make up more than 96% of all Asian businesses that provide 2 out
of 3 private sector jobs in the continent. It is vitally important for
the Asian economies’ economic success that they have fully
functioning support measures for SMEs. SMEs face major
challenges in accessing cheap finance, mainly because there is an
asymmetric information problem between suppliers and
demanders of funds, which hinders their growth [5].
According to Thomas, Christine & Fabio [31] Open
innovation is key to the success of many companies. It is based
on the intelligent use of all possible resources, including
collaborations with parties outside the firm. Although it is well
known that large companies foster and use startups as
experiments in their innovation process, little is known about
similar activities with small and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs). It reveals that most startups know that they must co-
operate with other companies from the very beginning of their
existence, and that both sides have difficulties in performing a
systematic search for possible partners. Hence, to encourage the
collaborative development of innovative solutions, we propose
building bridges between startups and SMEs, making the
identification of possible users of new technologies (SMEs) more
accessible to startups, as well as making startups more identifiable
by SMEs.
SMEs are key to strengthening productivity, delivering more
inclusive growth and adapting to megatrends. SMEs that grow
have a considerable positive impact on employment creation,
innovation, productivity growth and competitiveness. SMEs can
scale up and innovate at different stages of their life cycle.
Fostering innovation in established SMEs can enhance aggregate
productivity and narrow wage gaps. The population of SMEs is
very diverse in terms of age, size, business model and the profile
and aspirations of entrepreneurs. They vary in their characteristics
and performance, including across sectors, regions and countries.
These differences have implications for how policies are designed
and targeted.
Digital technologies enable SMEs to improve market
intelligence and access distant markets and knowledge networks
at relatively low cost, and stronger participation in international
activity can boost SME growth. However, SMEs are lagging
behind in the digital transition and are disproportionately affected
by trade barriers, deficient intellectual property protection, and
quality of infrastructure and institutions [10].
According to Jiang [18], A conducive business environment,
including institutional and regulatory settings, is essential to
incentivize risk-taking and experimentation by entrepreneurs, and
foster business growth potential. Despite wide-ranging reforms in
many countries, the complexity of regulation, high compliance
costs and inefficient insolvency regimes remain a major obstacle
to entrepreneurial activity. Micro firms, young, innovative and
high-growth SMEs, and certain categories of entrepreneurs,
including women business owners, face persistent challenges in
accessing finance in the appropriate forms and volumes. The
G20/OECD High Level Principles on SME Financing highlight
that broadening the range of financing instruments requires
comprehensive approaches to address both demand- and supply-
side barriers.
Access to entrepreneurship competencies, management and
workforce skills, technology, innovation, and networks, is also
critical to enable SME growth. A cross-cutting approach to SME
policy can enhance SME contributions to inclusive growth, as can
strengthening the monitoring and evaluation of policies [18].
For small-and medium-sized enterprises, to strengthen
independent innovation capacity is the best way out of dilemma
in the context of financial crisis. To improve independent
innovation capacity of small-and medium-sized enterprises and
realize sustainable development, it is also necessary to break
through three major bottlenecks as innovation motivation,
innovation risk and innovation capacity [22] .
SMEs face a number of size-induced market failures that
affect their survival and limit their growth. These failures occur

5. in the key areas that contribute to firm competitiveness: accessing
technology and engaging in innovation, accessing finance,
securing and training skilled workers, and accessing markets. We
explore these four areas below with reference to the chapters that
compose this book. The analysis focuses both on the existence
and nature of the particular market failure and on the solutions
that governments have devised to overcome them. SMEs also face
constraints from government regulation that are related to size.
These include barring enterprises below a certain size from
accessing a support program, setting flat fee charges for all firms,
and asking SMEs to comply with the same regulations as large
enterprises, making the cost of compliance proportionately
costlier for smaller firms. We do not address these size-induced
government failures.
Small and medium-sized enterprises are a driving force in
developed economies due to their multifunctional contributions
to employment, exports, and technological innovation. SMEs’
flexibility, adaptability, effective internal communication, and
quick decision making can provide them with a competitive edge
over large firms [23].
In addition Paul [29] stated that the overwhelming majority
of businesses in any economy are small and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs). While the definition of what constitutes an
SME varies greatly, in nearly all countries they account for over
95% of enterprises. Furthermore, they produce a substantial share
of economic output and normally employ the majority of the
workforce. With the expansion and deepening of regional and
global value chains, SMEs have become important as local parts
and component suppliers, as providers of logistics and other
services and, for some, as exporters and overseas investors. SMEs
are often viewed as being dynamic and innovative, and while
many are, as a group they are a highly variable lot. Along with
the highly productive and competitive enterprises, there are many
that remain small and rely on conventional technology to deliver
standard products and services. This type of enterprise may be
more in evidence in developing countries, where running an
enterprise is often a family survival or get-ahead strategy in the
context of limited employment opportunities or a need to
diversify from farm income [29].
3.1 Types of Technology and Innovation
Policies for SMEs
According to Paul & Naouyuki [29], Technology policies for
SMEs can be divided into three groups: supplyside technology
policies, demand-side technology policies, and systemic
technology policies
3.1.1 Supply-Side Technology Policy
The aim of supply-side policies for innovation in firms is to
increase incentives to invest in innovation by reducing costs.
Supply-side policies encourage investments that otherwise might
not be undertaken as liquidity constraints caused by capital
market imperfections can be substantial when it comes to
innovation. The most commonly employed supply-side
technology policy is subsidy in a broader sense for research and
development (R&D). The most commonly employed supply-side
technology policy is subsidy in a broader sense for research and
development. It includes tax incentives, grants and subsidies,
loans, and direct equity participation (direct government
investment as well as support through government-owned or -
linked venture capital) [29].
3.1.2 Demand-Side Technology Policy
Demand-side technology policy is not limited to policies to
create markets for products made by SMEs. The most crucial
demand side technology policy is public procurement. Central
and/or local governments might procure goods and services from
SMEs that meet certain conditions, such as clearing certain
technological thresholds or being able to deliver products or
services with better functions than existing ones; for example,
those that significantly reduce energy usage and carbon dioxide
generation, or increase speed and productivity. Importantly,
government can provide the first market for innovations that
might not be ready for acceptance by private markets due to high
risk and the highly uncertain nature of innovations. In essence,
public procurement can provide the first business opportunities
for firms with innovative products and services. This kind of
opportunity is sometimes even more meaningful for firms than
any financial support from government.
Governments can also help to create markets for the products
of SMEs, who do not have resources for marketing, by facilitating
the marketing of their products in other areas and countries.
Caution should be exercised as this system has the risk of
restricting competition and leading to corruption, and there are
World Trade Organization regulations on government
procurement [29].
3.1.3 Systemic Technology Policy
In addition to supply-side technology policy and demand-side
technology policy, there is a set of technology policies that aims
to improve the performance of innovation systems mainly by
promoting better coordination of their actors. SMEs’ performance
can be improved by working more closely with universities and
public research institutes. Various policy measures can be
employed to promote closer relationships. For example, a targeted
subsidy could be provided for collaboration between SMEs and
universities to develop a particular technology or product. Closer
ties between university researchers and engineers of SMEs are
encouraged through these collaborative projects, networking
events, consulting, contract research, and so on. These can be
promoted through subsidies and other policy measures.
These technology centers were usually established by local
governments. Therefore, the expertise of the people in local
government is important. They should be able to plan and execute
effective local industrial policy. They should be able to coordinate
local technology centers with local industry associations,
vocational schools, and/or universities. They should make all the
arrangements so that local technology centers become the hub of
the local innovation system. Another important way for SMEs to
learn is to learn from large firms (multinational and domestic)
who purchase their products as inputs. Large firms buying
intermediate goods, parts, materials, and various services benefit
from helping their suppliers, as better parts, materials, and
services help their operations.
Forcing the use of local contents is not a productive idea, as
large firms will choose other places with no such requirements.
Helping SMEs move closer to large buying firms’ plants may be
valuable, as geographic proximity is important for transfer of
uncodified knowledge. Alternatively, government agencies can
act as intermediaries to facilitate technology transfer and other
linkages between large firms and SMEs [29].

6. 4. CONCLUSION
Innovation through the creation, diffusion and use of
knowledge has been recognized as a key driver of economic
growth. Within the framework of ‘open innovation’, a number of
key issues related to the acquisition of external knowledge in food
technology must be taken into consideration. Different patterns
of knowledge acquisition are registered depending on several
factors, like sector or geographical location [11].
Food product development is highly dependent on the
consumer perception and acceptance, and hence it is of utmost
importance to include the consumer in the development process
to minimize failure probabilities. Sensorial analyses and market
studies are among the tools more suitable to address this
objective. In the food industry, like any other industry, product
and process development is considered a vital part of a smart
business strategy. Failure to develop new and improved products
relegates companies to competing solely on price which favors
the players with access to the lowest cost inputs. The sectors of
the food industry where important developments and
innovation are registered include the processing technologies
and the packaging systems, where the latest progresses have
produced very significant outcomes [13] .
Food systems are decades behind many other sectors in
adopting technology innovation, particularly in developing
countries. The fragmented nature of the production landscape in
emerging markets, consumers’ ability and willingness to pay,
operational complexities throughout food systems and
government interventions create significant barriers to the
adoption and scale of technologies.
The present work allowed verifying the latest improvements
and trend towards food product development from two
perspectives, the product itself and the industrial processing. This
sector is undoubtedly a major key for the success and
competitiveness nowadays in the food industry.
Disruptive technologies are of the essence to many
organizations. Disruptive technologies entail new technologies
that change the market or create a new way of doing things.
Disruptive technologies arise for product and service
developments that seek to create a new product or service. The
innovations are a complex process. Furthermore, it is difficult to
predict the impact of innovation. Initially, the innovation may not
be profitable. This can prevent many established organizations
from following up on the innovations. However, it will prove
beneficial in the end. Innovations such as the Microsoft and
Android OS have proven useful to many people, and they have
been popular all over the world [9].
Transforming food systems requires interventions beyond the
disruptive technological innovations. Continued investments in
low-tech interventions, creating new and bold policies, moving
towards full-cost accounting, improving resource efficiency,
influencing consumer behaviors, building trust and transparency,
aligning towards common objectives and collaborating across
siloes are all required to create the future we want.
SMEs make a substantial contribution to the growth and
development of economies throughout Asia. They create jobs,
invest in productive capacity, generate output, and in some cases
export to foreign markets and act as key links in regional and
global value chains. While their contributions in these areas may
differ by country, by firm size category, and by statistical
definition, there is little doubt as to their importance to economic
activity. Recognition of their contribution has generated interest
from policy makers at both the political and bureaucratic levels.
That interest has grown over time in Asia as it has in other
regions. Policy makers and the public have for many years
cheered the headline investments made by large firms, both
domestic and foreign-owned. There is now increasing praise, at
annual meetings of SME associations, conferences, and trade
fairs, of the collective importance of SMEs.
SMEs is only part of the reason—and may not be the most
important part—why policy makers should design programs and
policies of support. The main reason for policy intervention is that
SMEs face market failures that inhibit their survival and growth.
These “size-induced” failures should be the focus of government
policy, just as market failures faced by large firms (coordination
failures, public goods failures, information failures, and
innovation failures) are the rightful subjects of government
policy. Size-induced failures in the markets for finance,
technology, innovation, and human capital and in accessing
international markets are appropriate areas for government
involvement [24].
5. REFERENCES
[1] Abigail K., L. (2017). 14 disruptive food-tech startups
that will change how we eat.
https://www.israel21c.org/14-disruptive-food-tech-
startups-that-will-change-how-you-eat/
[2] Alberta, A., & Carla, B. (2015). Food Innovation and
entrepreneurship in higher education: A Case Study
https://www.iseki-food-ejournal.com/ojs/index.php/e-
journal/article/view/268
[3] Barbara, B., & Francisco, G. (2013). Innovation trends
in the food industry: The case of functional foods
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/
S0924224413000678
[4] Bart, P. (2016). Disruptive Food Innovation.
https://sites.psu.edu/ist110pursel/2016/09/28/disruptiv
e-food-innovations/
[5] Baumol, W., & Calvino, F. (2017). Strengthening
SMEs and entrepreneurship for productivity and
inclusive growth.
https://www.oecd.org/cfe/smes/ministerial/documents/
2018-SME-Ministerial-Conference-Key-Issues.pdf
[6] Bo, Y., & Wei, Y. (2010). Research on the
Collaborative Innovation-Oriented Path of Enhancing
Regional Innovation Capability
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5369772
[7] Brittany, S. (2019). Tomorrow’s Food, Today: 3
Opportunities for Disruption of the Food System
https://www.wired.com/insights/2013/09/tomorrows-
food-today-3-opportunities-for-disruption-of-the-food-
system/
[8] Busse, M., & Siebert, R. (2018). "The role of
consumers in food innovation processes"
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/
EJIM-03-2017-0023/full/html
[9] Cas, P. (2017). Top 5 Disruptive Food Tech Trends in
2017
https://www.disruptordaily.com/top-5-disruptive-food-
tech-trends-2017/

7. [10] Daniel, B. (2013). 10 of the Most Innovative Small
Business if 2013
https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/226940
[11] Earle, M. (2017). Innovation in the food industry
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/
S0924224497010261
[12] Eddy, F. (2017). The social acceptability of disruptive
food innovation.
http://parisinnovationreview.com/articles-en/social-
acceptability-disruptive-food-innovations
[13] Elsa, C., & Luisa, P. (2016). NEW FOODS, NEW
CONSUMERS: INNOVATION IN FOOD
PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306106510_
NEW_FOODS_NEW_CONSUMERS_INNOVATIO
N_IN_FOOD_PRODUCT_DEVELOPMENT_Runni
ng_title_Innovation_in_Food_Development
[14] Gavin, W., & Ray, W. (2016). Food Product
Innovation
http://www.fao.org/3/j7193e/j7193e.pdf
[15] Haiyan, Z., & Jiang, W. (2013). The Contribution of
Networking Innovation Process to Successful
Innovation within Industrial Clusters: Theory and its
Framework
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5369129
[16] Hongwu, B., & Xianjin, L. (2015). Food
nanotechnology and nano food safety
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7439261/
[17] Ipi, B. (2018). Delicious Disruption – Trends in Food
Innovation
https://www.asianscientist.com/2018/12/features/ipi-
singapore-trends-food-technology-innovation/
[18] Jiang, X. (2017). Innovative solutions helping SMEs
reach their full potential.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201801/02/WS5a4ad
c44a31008cf16da48fd.html
[19] Knorr, D. (2018). Innovative Food Science and
Emerging Technologies
https://www.journals.elsevier.com/innovative-food-
science-and-emerging-technologies
[20] Laura, C. (2017). Food Tech – Disrupting the Food
Industry
https://disruptionhub.com/disrupting-food-delivery/
[21] Laura, C. (2017). 10 FoodTech Companies Disrupting
What You Eat
https://disruptionhub.com/10-foodtech-companies-
disrupting-eat/
[22] Lin, L., & Zhang, F. (2013). Small- and medium-sized
enterprises need break through three bottlenecks in the
context of financial crisis to accomplish independent
innovation
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5234750
[23] Maria Manuela, C., & Joao, V. (2011). Innovations in
SMEs and Conducting E-business: Technologies,
Trend Solutions
https://www.igi-global.com/book/innovations-smes-
conducting-business/49574
[24] McKinsey, A. (2018). Focusing Age Strategies in
Policy Making SMEs Survey
http://www.debegesa.eus/es/empresas/fast-gestion-de-
la-edad/documentos-de-interes/5%20SMESurvey%20-
%20Results%20-%20Conclusions.pdf
[25] Mustafa, A., & Ashfaq, B. (2016). Collaboration and
Innovation in Food
Industry.http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=dow
nloadFile&recordOId=4587864&fileOId=4587865
[26] Obizcoin, I. (2017). Disruptive Technology in
Business Management
https://blog.goodaudience.com/disruptive-technology-
in-business-management-207ad40d0d1b
[27] Oliver, K., & Birgit, A. (2013). Potential and
Challenges of Insects as an innovative source for food
and feed production.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S14
66856412001452
[28] Patricia, S. (2013). Embrace a Food Innovation
Mindset!
http://www.the-kitchen-coop.com/embrace-a-food-
innovation-mindset/
[29] Paul, V., Pornpinun, C., & Naoyuki, Y. (2016). SMEs
in Developing Asia
https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/214
476/adbi-smes-developing-asia.pdf
[30] Pierre Nicolas, S. (2016). Food and drink innovation:
what are the success factors?
https://www.intotheminds.com/blog/en/food-and-
drink-innovation-what-are-the-success-factors/
[31] Thomas, S., Christine, L., & Fabio, M. (2017).
Innovation by Collaboration between Startups and
SMEs in Switzerland
https://timreview.ca/article/1125