Successfully reported this slideshow.

IFT 2019- Packaging and marketing the products with emerging processing technologies



Loading in …3
1 of 17
1 of 17

More Related Content

More from Packaging Technology and Research, LLC

Related Books

Free with a 14 day trial from Scribd

See all

IFT 2019- Packaging and marketing the products with emerging processing technologies

  1. 1. Marketing the Products with Emerging Processing Technologies Ziynet Boz, Ph.D. Packaging Technology and Research LLC. Created by:
  2. 2. Created by: Outline  History of processed foods  Consumer trends in food industry  Consumer perceptions on novel processing methods  Consumer perceptions on packaging  Opportunities in shelf-stable products  Sustainability benefits  Industry and research directions © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED2
  3. 3. Created by: History of Processing and Packaging © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED3  The need for food preservation is ancient  Fresh food was not always available • Nomadic lifestyle • Drying, fermenting, smoking, cooking etc.  A practical method for the “Army marches on its stomach”  The beginning of modern packaging is marked by the invention of thermal processing (1809)  When aseptic technology was discovered consumers saw it as a “new product” not an improvement over canned foods  Understanding consumer needs has always been the key for success Science Museum, England
  4. 4. Created by: Consumers Reasons for Food Purchases Fresh, 58% Taste, 51% Low cost, 45% Healthy, 39% Easy Preparation, 22% Familiar brand, 20% Natural Ingredients, 18% Organic, 10% Environmentally friendly, 8% Packaging, 6% 4 Mintel, Food Packaging Trends June 2018
  5. 5. Created by: Novel processing method criteria for adoption and acceptance  Improved physicochemical properties of foods  Providing process efficiencies while reducing the impact on organoleptic and nutritional quality  Clean label  Better nutrient retention and health benefits  Better texture and organoleptic quality –barrier to entry • Flavor profile improvements  Internationally competitive  Meeting the standards for environmental impact © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED5
  6. 6. Created by: 6 Consumer Perceptions: Novel processing methods  Education on food systems alone is not sufficient. • Risk-benefit perception, sociodemographic attributes, knowledge and information, trust in source • Taste(!) and convenience are the key • Price is less important for foods with novel processing methods  Potential perceived risks of the processing technology is a determining factor: “Unnatural, unsafe, unhealthy” • The highest: Irradiated, bioengineered, pesticides, laser- light sources, bacteriocins, microbially-contaminated foods, HPP • The lowest: Thermal treatment, pasteurization, freeze drying  Endorsement by government agencies (USDA, FDA, Surgeon General); Manufacturers, Green Peace, processor or researcher had negative utility factor Hu et al. 2012 Cardello et al. 2007
  7. 7. Created by: Consumer Perceptions: Novel processing methods  Lack of knowledge on novel food process: Major barrier  Improved knowledge on food processes: Higher WTP  WTP is higher in “national brands”; locally-produced, small family farms, state-wide, or well-identified source for processed foods.  “Minimally processed” “fewer preservatives” cues are problematic from consumer viewpoint  Organic products • Certification • Organic logo effects © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED7
  8. 8. Created by: Opportunities in Shelf-Stable Products  Variety and interesting contemporary products/recipes  Extended shelf life for humanitarian, space and military missions  Convenience  Less food waste  Additional nutrient and quality retention benefits with novel methods (E.g. Shaka® processing) © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED8
  9. 9. Created by: © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED9 Example: Consumers Viewpoint on Canned Fruit Cups  Lower added sugar  Sitting on the shelves long time  Minimal processing  BPA and other linings  Consumers are not aware innovations, benefits etc.  Reaching out to consumers through right channels • Cross-merchandizing • Sampling • Information
  10. 10. Created by: Sustainable Value Chains Food Waste Reduced impact • LCA studies for entire value chain • Decreased processing times • Energy-efficient processing • Labor requirements Nutrients: Both macro- and micro- Packaging waste Role of process/packaging combinations © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED10
  11. 11. Created by: © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED11 0 50 100 150 200 250 NutrientConcentration(per100g) Potassium (mg) Folate, DFE (µg) Calcium, Ca (mg) Magnesium (mg) Phosphorus (mg) Vitamin C, total ascorbic acid (mg) Antioxidant blend (mg) Freshat consumption Crushed- canned Freshat theendof shelflife Cooked 0 5 NutrientConcentration(per100g) Protein (g) Iron (mg) Vitamin E (mg) Niacin (mg) Zinc, Zn (mg) Vitamin B-6 (mg) Riboflavin (mg) Thiamin (mg) Lutein (µg) Lutein-digestible (µg) Beta carotene (µg) Freshat consumption Crushed- canned Freshat theendof shelflife Cooked Boz and Sand (2019), Submitted manuscript, JFS 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Antioxidant Blend Vitamin C Antioxidant Blend without Vitamin C Nutrientconcentration(mg/100g) Canned Cooked
  12. 12. Created by: Consumer Perceptions: Packaging  Label: Higher individual perceived control over consumption of new products  Sustainable packaging systems  Addressing public concerns: Regulatory compliance for building trust © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED12 62%“On-pack information is important” 35% “Reducing packaging waste is important”
  13. 13. Created by: 13 Industry Direction  Consumer education and communication on new technologies: • Stakeholders with focused groups: Tailored messages • Various media for dialogue • Risk mitigation strategies followed by industry  Taste: Aligning ethnic taste trends with relevant products, personalized recipes in combination with the product  Sustainability: LCA studies, Less waste, less impact  Focus on micro-nutrients and phytochemicals  “No additives/preservatives”: Specific and credible than ”All natural”
  14. 14. Created by: 14 Industry Direction  Focus on health benefits  Global markets: Culinary experience  Organic processed foods can provide a point of entry for processed foods market  Premium packaging for private-label products  Modified packaging formats for E-commerce  Certified traceable processed products  Demographics: Connect with young consumers in international foods as they are interested in tastes, but lack the skills to cook.
  15. 15. Created by: Research Direction  Consumer research in emerging processing methods  Consumer attitudes on improved thermal and non- thermal processing methods  Nutrient dynamics for varying processing methods: Macro- and Micro-nutrients  Organic and health-oriented products processed with emerging processing methods  Update on previous research on food processing methods  Research on consumer attitudes and behaviors for varying food products with the same method to identify product- specific attitudes  Affect of various education channels. E.g. printed, internet etc.  Post-consumption behaviors that can be matched with brand image © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED15
  16. 16. Created by: References  Batte, M. T., Hooker, N. H., Haab, T. C., & Beaverson, J. (2007). Putting their money where their mouths are: Consumer willingness to pay for multi-ingredient, processed organic food products. Food Policy, 32(2), 145–159.  Bruhn, C. M. (2007). Enhancing consumer acceptance of new processing technologies. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 8(4), 555–558.  Cardello, A. V., Schutz, H. G., & Lesher, L. L. (2007). Consumer perceptions of foods processed by innovative and emerging technologies: A conjoint analytic study. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 8(1), 73–83.  Chrysochou, P., Chryssochoidis, G., & Kehagia, O. (2009). Traceability information carriers. The technology backgrounds and consumers’ perceptions of the technological solutions. Appetite, 53(3), 322–331.  Cox, D. N., & Evans, G. (2008). Construction and validation of a psychometric scale to measure consumers’ fears of novel food technologies: The food technology neophobia scale. Food Quality and Preference, 19(8), 704–710.  Dean, M., Raats, M. M., & Shepherd, R. (2008). Moral Concerns and Consumer Choice of Fresh and Processed Organic Foods1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(8), 2088–2107.  Frewer, L. J., Bergmann, K., Brennan, M., Lion, R., Meertens, R., Rowe, G., … Vereijken, C. (2011). Consumer response to novel agri-food technologies: Implications for predicting consumer acceptance of emerging food technologies. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 22(8), 442–456.  Hu, W., Batte, M. T., Woods, T., & Ernst, S. (2012). Consumer preferences for local production and other value-added label claims for a processed food product. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 39(3), 489–510.  Lavilla, M., & Gayán, E. (2018). Consumer Acceptance and Marketing of Foods Processed Through Emerging Technologies. In Innovative Technologies for Food Preservation (pp. 233–253). 7.00007-8  Market Research US Food Market Outlook 2018  Mintel Reports Food Packaging Trends (June 2018), Private Label food and drink trends (January 2019), Food and Drink Shopper December 2018  Olsen, N. V., Grunert, K. G., & Sonne, A.-M. (2010). Consumer acceptance of high-pressure processing and pulsed-electric field: a review. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 21(9), 464–472.  Perrea, T., Grunert, K. G., & Krystallis, A. (2015). Consumer Value perceptions of food products from emerging processing technologies: A cross-cultural exploration. Food Quality and Preference, 39, 95–108.  Priyadarshini, A., Rajauria, G., O’Donnell, C. P., & Tiwari, B. K. (2018). Emerging food processing technologies and factors impacting their industrial adoption. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 0(0), 1–20.  Ragaert, P., Verbeke, W., Devlieghere, F., & Debevere, J. (2004). Consumer perception and choice of minimally processed vegetables and packaged fruits. Food Quality and Preference, 15(3), 259–270. 3293(03)00066-1  Rollin, F., Kennedy, J., & Wills, J. (2011). Consumers and new food technologies. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 22(2), 99–111.  Román, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 67, 44–57. © INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED16
  17. 17. Created by: Thank you! Let’s Connect

Editor's Notes

  • Shoppers also state that packaging label becomes too cluttered with information
  • While providing all these functions, also enables preservative removal
    Resources perspective: Food waste adjusted-data, lycopene, potassium, phenols, Vitamin A for tomatoes, Vitamin A, lutein, digestible lutein,riboflavin, B-carotene, folate, magnesium, prtein, iron, zinc, Vitamin E, kidney beans Vitamin C is considered, riboflavin, lutein, B6, E, folate, antioxidants – Ascorbic acid
  • People are inclined to accept the risk of consuming new food products, if it is under their own control. This may explain why they prefer clear labelling and increased regulation
  • Early development dialogue with stakeholders
    Messafe is consistent, concise and from trusted sources
  • Early development dialogue with stakeholders
    Messafe is consistent, concise and from trusted sources
    Consumers avoid certain packaging formats while shopping online (18%)
  • ×