Upcycling in the context of biotechnology-based solutions for food quality, loss, and consumer perception
Abstract
Wasted food is the single biggest contributor to greenhouse gases. Globally, attempts are being made to both reduce surplus food and divert it into food-to-food operations. This opinion piece covers upcycling and biotechnology-mediated solutions on a technology continuum as a part of the bigger whole to solve this problem. Upcycling is an approach to divert foods that would otherwise be wasted into higher uses that would also have tangible benefits to the environment and society. Likewise, biotechnology can help farmers produce crops with longer shelf life and that satisfy cosmetic standards. Uncertainty, either in the form of food safety, technology, or neophobia in the case of upcycled foods or genes (cisgenic or transgenic) in the case of biotechnology, is a hurdle. Communication and consumer perception should be researched. Both upcycling and biotechnology can provide practical solutions, but their acceptance depends on communication strategies and consumer perception.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The answer to food waste problems seems to be upcycling.
“The answer to food waste problems seems to be upcycling [60,66,67].”
From Use of Waste from the Food Industry and Applications of the Fermentation Process to Create Sustainable Cosmetic Products: A Review (2024) · cites this paper as [67]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 71 · Cited by 26
- Authors
- Sharma, C., & Deutsch, J. M.
- Affiliations
- Drexel University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Deutsch, Jonathan M
- Venue
- Current Opinion in Biotechnology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-06
- Volume
- 81
- Pages
- 102920
- ISSN
- 0958-1669 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4361285111
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 71
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4
- FWCI
- 0.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Current Opinion in Biotechnology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Waste Reduction and Sustainability
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Supply Chain Traceability
- Keywords
- food waste upcycling, food waste, agricultural biotechnology, shelf life extension, food quality, consumer perception, genetically modified crops, food safety, neophobia, greenhouse gas emissions, communication strategies, technology acceptance
- MeSH terms
- Biotechnology, Perception, Crops, Agricultural, Plants, Genetically Modified, Food Safety
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review