The document discusses marketing foods processed with emerging technologies. It covers the history of food processing and packaging, current consumer trends favoring fresh and healthy options, and perceptions of novel processing methods. Consumer acceptance depends on improved quality, health benefits, and understanding of technologies. Opportunities exist for shelf-stable and sustainable products meeting consumer values like reduced packaging. The food industry should focus on education, global flavors, certifications, and premium private label options. Further research on consumer attitudes and nutrient impacts is recommended.

1. Marketing the Products with
Emerging Processing
Technologies
Ziynet Boz, Ph.D.
Packaging Technology and Research LLC.
Created by:

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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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
https://www.lovecannedfood.com/

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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.05.003
 Bruhn, C. M. (2007). Enhancing consumer acceptance of new processing technologies. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 8(4), 555–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2007.04.006
 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.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2006.07.002
 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.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2009.07.011
 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.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2008.04.005
 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00382.x
 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2011.05.005
 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.
https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbr039
 Lavilla, M., & Gayán, E. (2018). Consumer Acceptance and Marketing of Foods Processed Through Emerging Technologies. In Innovative Technologies for Food Preservation (pp. 233–253). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811031-
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2010.07.002
 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.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.06.009
 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.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2018.1483890
 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2010.09.001
 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2017.06.010
© INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED16

17. Created by:
Thank you! Let’s Connect
www.PackagingTechnologyAndResearch.com
Ziynet@PackagingTechnologyAndResearch.com