food processing industry research paper

Advertisement

Food Industry and Processing Technology: On Time to Harmonize Technology and Social Drivers

• Review Article
• Published: 28 June 2017
• Volume 10 , pages 1–13, ( 2018 )

Cite this article

• Vivian Lara Silva   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9849-8043 1 ,
• Alberto M. Sereno 1 , 2 &
• Paulo José do Amaral Sobral 1  

1850 Accesses

26 Citations

Explore all metrics

Through an extensive literature review, including scientific publications and organizational reports of food processing companies, our main goal in this paper is to identify the trajectory of the food industry and processing technology from its birth in the nineteenth century to the present time. In this paper, the following questions are addressed: How have we got here? And where are we going? In essence, this review perceives three main paradigm shifts in the food industry, supported by four main knowledge development cycles of Food Science and Technology. Furthermore, this paper also surmises that we are now at the most challenging moment considering the two centuries of history of the food industry. Despite an unquestionable technological development, while ensuring the scale production of microbiologically safe, nutritious, and appealing foods, the industry has apparently not effectively engaged its stakeholders. Particularly, the industry needs to improve its approach towards the consumer. The contemporary challenging situation outside the box urges the development of new processes and technologies considering present-day consumption drivers associated with processed food. This is important for the industry to reinvent itself so as to understand that more than creating textures, the opportunity is also to preserve and enhance attributes derived from the raw material and from the relationships established throughout the value chain in which it operates.

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

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Innovative Processing: From Raw Material, Post Harvesting, Processing, and Applications

Basic Considerations for Food Processing

Forging New Frontiers in Sustainable Food Manufacturing

Other protagonists should not be forgotten, such as the government’s role in regulating the industry through public policies [ 38 ]. Furthermore, retailers, with their quality private policies, led to growth in the food system. Concerning this matter, Reardon et al. [ 54 ] discuss retailers’ role in the conduct of organizational, institutional, and technological modifications.

Aiming at the preservation of sensory characteristics inherent to raw material, advances relied on positive externalities from the development of the refrigeration industry that emerged. The dispute of two meatpacking industry forerunners (Arnold and Company, founded in 1867, and Swift) resulted in the development of the refrigeration industry (transportation and industrial equipment) in the late nineteenth century. The context from which the concept of domestic appliances was derived, such as the first refrigerator, was created in 1913. Details regarding the materialization of this invention can be found in Bruce-Wallace [ 11 ].

Once more, the role of other protagonists should not be forgotten. Institutions had—and still have—important roles due to their regulation. For instance, in June 2015, the agency that regulates foods and drugs in the USA, the FDA (Food and Drug Administration), banned the use of trans fats in the American market, stipulating 3 years for the adjustment of the processing sector, removing the substance completely from industrialized foods and beverages. In Brazil, although there is no specific regulation, the Ministry of Health and the ABIA (Brazilian Association of Food Industry) established a combined effort to reduce trans fats content in 2007. The arrangement limits trans fats to 5% of the total fat in processed foods and to 2% of the total fat in oils and margarines.

The dissemination of Information Technology applied to the business world fomented the search:“e-commerce will be applied to the hilt in order to achieve this optimum” [ 12 ].

The precept of fair trade aims to promote sustainable development through better trading conditions and through the guarantee of rights for producers and workers on the margin of the economic system.

Zylbersztajn and Farina [ 68 ] broaden the discussion, highlighting the fragility characteristic to the governance of complex production systems, such as in the case of organic foods and the information credibility associated with the product.

Halal and kosher, respectively, mean ready-to-consume food in accordance to Islamic and Jewish principles. More information can be obtained at: http://www.abiec.com.br/3_hek.asp> . In turn, vegan food denotes a plant-based diet, free from all animal-derived ingredients; see details at: < http://www.sejavegano.com.br/> and < https://www.vegansociety.com/> . Lastly, demeter is an international certification originated from the concept of biodynamic agriculture, which can be understood as an evolution of the organic principle. Additional information can be found at: < http://demeter.com.br/> .

Philip E. Nelson was honored in 2007 with the World Food Prize. Considered the Nobel Prize in Food and Agriculture, this distinction aims to recognize and inspire innovative achievements that ensure global food security. More information at: < http://www.worldfoodprize.org/> .

Regarding the daily values of the American diet, processed foods contribute 55% of fiber intake, 48% of calcium, 43% of potassium, 34% of vitamin D, 64% of iron, 65% of folic acid, and 46% of vitamin B 12 . In turn, efforts developed by the sector have also contributed to reducing the intake of nutrients harmful to health. In the USA, processed foods contribute 57% of calorie intake, 52% of saturated fat, 75% of added sugar, and 57% of sodium ([ 65 ], p. 1525). The conclusion of this study is that the decisive factor for health transcends the level of processed food intake, relating directly to food balance [ 65 ]. Indices are probably currently lower. The study was conducted prior to the initiative for reducing these ingredients. For more information, see International Food and Beverage Alliance ( https://ifballiance.org /).

Originally formulated by Bowen [ 10 ], corporate social responsability represents the purpose of aligning organizational activities with societal values in which organizations are inserted.

Inspired by the eponymous documentary that highlighted this discussion. Directed by Miki Mistrati and Roberto Romano, the documentary addresses the controversy regarding child labor and human trafficking in cocoa crops.

The complete documentary is available at: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Vfbv6hNeng> .

Afoakwa EO, Paterson A, Fowler M (2007) Factors influencing rheological and textural qualities in chocolate: a review. Trends Food Sci Technol 18(6):290–298

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Afoakwa EO, Paterson A, Fowler M, Ryan A (2008) Flavor formation and character in cocoa and chocolate: a critical review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 48(9):840–857

Aguilera JM (2006) Seligman lecture 2005 food product engineering: building the right structures. J Sci Food Agric. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.2468

Alwi SRW, Manan ZA, Klemes J, Huisingh D (2014) Sustainability engineering for the future. J Clean Prod 71:1–10

Article   Google Scholar  

Aprotosoaie AC, Luca SV, Miron A (2016) Flavor chemistry of cocoa and cocoa products—an overview. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 15(1):73–91

Barbier JP (1994) Nicolas Appert inventeur et humaniste. Royer, Paris

Google Scholar  

Barry Callebault 2005 Sustanability, Barry Callebault. https://www.barry-callebaut.com/sustainability . Accessed 20 Nov 2015

Berger KR 2002 A brief history of packaging. Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department Series–Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu . Accessed 16 Jan 2017

Besanko D, Dranove D, Shanley M, Schaefer S (2009) Economics of strategy, 5th edn. Wiley, New York

Bowen HRB (1953) Social responsibilities of the businessman. Harper, New York

Bruce-Wallace LG (1966) Biography James Harrison (1816–1893). Australian dictionary of biography. http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/harrison-james-2165 . Accessed 19 Jun 2015

Bruin S, Jongen TRG (2003) Food process engineering: the last 25 years and the ahead. Crit Rev Food Sci Food Saf. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-4337.2003.tb00015.x

Carruth A (2009) War rations and the food politics of late modernism. Modernism/Modernity. doi: 10.1353/mod.0.0139

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

Coe SD, Coe MD (2000) The true history of chocolate. Thames & Hudson, London

Copetti MV, Iamanaka BT, Pit JI, Taniwakib MH (2014) Fungi and mycotoxins in cocoa: from farm to chocolate. Int J Food Microbiol 178:13–20

Deora NS, Misra NN, Deswal A, Mishra HN, Cullen PJ, Tiwari BK (2013) Ultrasound for improved crystallisation in food processing. Food Eng Rev 5(1):36–44

Dimick P, Hoskin JM (1981) Chemico-physical aspects of chocolate processing: a review. Can Inst Food Sci Technol J 14(4):269–282

Earle R (1966) Unit operations in food processing. Pergamon Press, Oxford

Euromonitor (2015) Corporate strategies in health and wellness: part 2 focus emerging markets. Euromonitor, London

Floros JD, Newsome R, Fisher W, Barbosa-Canovas GV, Chen H, Dunne CP, German JB, Hall RL, Heldman DR, Karwe MV, Knabel SJ, Labuza TP, Lund DB, Newell-McGloughlin M, Robinson JL, Sebranek JG, Shewfelt RL, Tracy WF, Weaver CM, Ziegle GR (2010) Feeding the world today and tomorrow: the importance of food science and technology. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-4337.2010.00127.x

Food Engineering (2015) Hershey transitions to simple, easy-to-understand ingredients. Food Engineering. http://www.foodengineeringmag.com/articles/93551-hershey-transitions-to-simple-easy-to-understand-ingredients . Accessed 19 Jun 2015

Food Ingredients First (2015) Barry Callebaut to achieve reduced fat chocolate. http://www.foodingredientsfirst.com/news/Barry-Callebaut-to-Achieve-Reduced-Fat-Chocolate.html . Accessed 19 Jun 2015

Gendron C, Audet R (2011) In: Boye JI, Arcand Y (ed) Green technologies in food production and processing. Food Engineering Series. ISBN: 978–1–4614-1587-9 (Online)

Graham JC (1981) The French connection in the early history of canning. J R Soc Med 74:374–381

Goncalves EV, Lannes SCS (2010) Chocolate rheology. Food Sci Technol 30(4):845–851

Harper JM (1976) Elements of food engineering. AVI Publishing, Westport

Heldman DR, Lund DB (2006) Handbook of food engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton

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

Hershey Community Archives (2011) Hershey’s chocolate plays important part in war effort. The Hershey Story. http://www.hersheyarchives.org/essay/details.aspx?EssayId=26 . Accessed 20 Jun 20 2016

Imap (2010) Food and beverage industry global report 2010. Imap. http://www.proman.fi/sites/default/files/Food%20%26%20beverage%20global%20report%202010_0.pdf . Accessed 15 Dec 2014

Kasemodel MGC, Makishi F, Souza RC, Silva VL (2016) Following the trail of crumbs: a bibliometric study on consumer behavior in the food science and technology field. Int J Food Stud. doi: 10.7455/ijfs/5.1.2016.a7

Kaufman CW (1952) Food engineer’s place in the food industry. Food Engineering (25). McGraw Hill, Albany / NY

Kongor JE, Hinneh M, de Walle DV, Afoakwab EO, Boeckxc P, Dewettincka K (2016) Factors influencing quality variation in cocoa ( Theobroma cacao ) bean flavour profile—a review. Food Res Int 82:44–52

Kostaropoulos AE (2012) Food engineering within sciences of food. Int J Food 1:109–113

Latour B (1984) Les microbes: guerre et paix. Anne-Marie Métailié, Paris

Latour B (1988) The pasteurization of France. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

Law MT (2003) The origins of state pure food regulation. J Econ Hist. doi: 10.1017/S0022050703002547

Lawler FK (1953) Rewarding careers await technical men in food industry. Food Engineering (25). McGraw Hill, Albany/NY

Lazarides H (2012) Challenges and opportunities for the community of food sciences to contribute towards a society of healthier consumers and better world. Int J Food Stud. doi: 10.7455/ijfs/1.1.2012.a10

Lévi-Strauss C (1964) Mythologiques: le cru et le cuit. Plon, Paris

Lonchampt P, Hartel RW (2004) Fat bloom in chocolate and compound coatings. Eur J Lipid Sci Technol 106(4):241–274

Loncin M, Merson RL (1979) Food engineering, principles and selected applications. Academic Press, San Diego

Lopez J (2014) Changing role of business. Creating shared value forum 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOz5Qw1kc84 . Accessed 15 Jul 2015

Lund DB (2002) In: Welti-Chanes J, Barbosa-Cánovas GV, Aguilera JM (ed) Engineering and food for the 21st century. CRC Press: Boca Raton

Mars (2015) The history of Mars. Mars. http://www.mars.com/global/about-mars/mars-pia/our-approach-to-business/story-of-mars.aspx . Accessed 20 Nov 2015

Mintel (2016) Food and drink trends for 2016. Mintel. http://www.mintel.com/global-food-and-drink-trends-2016 . Accessed 21 Jun 2016

Mirrer L (2012) How World War II changed everything: even our taste for candy. Huff post New York. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/louise-mirrer/how-world-war-ii-changed-_b_2024730.html . Accessed 18 Jun 2015

Narine SS, Marangoni AG (1999) Relating structure of fat crystal networks to mechanical properties: a review. Food Res Int 32(4):227–248

Nestlé (2015) Nestlé USA commits to removing artificial flavors and fda-certified colors from all Nestlé chocolate candy by the end of 2015. Nestlé. http://www.nestleusa.com/media/pressreleases/nestl%C3%A9-usa-commits-to-removing-artificial-flavors-and-fda-certified-colors-from-all-nestl%C3%A9-chocolate-candy-by-the-end-of-20 . Accessed 03 Jul 2016

Nedović V, Raspor P, Lević J, Šaponjac VT, Barbosa-Cánovas GV (eds) 2016 Emerging and traditional technologies for safe, healthy and quality food. Food Engineering Series. ISBN: 978-3-319-24040-4 (Online)

Parker ME, Harvey EH, Stateler ES (1952) Elements of food engineering Vols 2, 3. Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York {not found in text}}

Pollan M (2009) In defense of food: an eater’s manifesto. Penguin Books, London

Reardon T, Timmer P, Berdegue J (2004) The rapid rise of supermarkets in developing countries: induced organizational, institutional, and technological change in agrifood systems. Electron J Agric Dev Econ. doi: 10.4324/9781849773331

Saguy S, Taoukis OS (2016) From open innovation to enginomics: paradigm shifts. Trends Food Sci Technol. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2016.08.008

Saguy S, Singh RP, Johnson T, Fryer PJ (2013) Challenges facing food engineering. J Food Eng. doi: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2013.05

Salvadó JS, García-Lorda P, Ripollés JMS (2005) La alimentation y la nutrition atraves de la historia. Glosa, Barcelona

Silva VLS, Leonelli FCV, Gomes TM (2014) In: Menard C, Saes MSM, Silva VL, Raynauld E (Orgs) Challenges to economic organization, 1th ed. Atlas, São Paulo

Singh RP (2012) Romancing with food engineering: a life-long second partner. Annual Meeting of the Institute of Food Technologists, Las Vegas. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23eqfw2aaI8 . Accessed 08 Jun 2015

Stevenson GW, Pirog R (2013) Values-based food supply chains: strategies for agri-food enterprises-of-the-middle. < http://www.cias.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/valuechainstrategiesfinal072513.pdf >. Accessed 29 Jul 2015

TCC (2012) Cocoa barometer. Tropical commodity coalition. http://www.cocoabarometer.org/Download_files/Cocoa%20Barometer%20Full%202012.pdf . Accessed 16 Jun 2015

The Guardian (2015) Nutella spat: French minister says sorry over call to stop eating spread. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/17/nutella-italian-minister-demands-apology-from-segolene-royal . Acessed 18 Nov 2015

Tulane University (2015) Survey research on child labor in West African cocoa growing areas. School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine Tulane University. http://www.childlaborcocoa.org/images/Payson_Reports/Tulane%20University%20-%20Survey%20Research%20on%20Child%20Labor%20in%20the%20Cocoa%20Sector%20-%2030%20July%202015.pdf . Accessed 21 Jun 2016

Wan S (2012) Evolution in the processed foods industry: exploring the impact of the health foods movement, Ph.D Thesis, University of Southern California. http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p15799coll3/id/8789 . Accessed 21 Jun 2016

Weaver CM, Dwyer J, Fulgoni VL 3rd, King JC, Leveille GA, MacDonald RS, Ordovas J, Schnakenberg D (2014) Processed foods: contributions to nutrition. Am J Clin Nutr. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.114.089284

Wilson PK, Hurst W J (eds) (2015) Chocolate and health: chemistry, nutrition and therapy. Royal Society of Chemistry, London eISBN: 978-1-78262-280-2 (Online)

Yanniotis S, Taoukis P, Stoforos NG, Karathanos VT (eds) (2013) Advances in food process engineering research and applications. Food Engineering Series. ISBN: 978-1-4614-7906-2 (Online)

Zylbersztajn D, Farina EMMQ (2005) Dynamics of network governance: a contribution to the study of complex forms. Soc Sci Res Netw. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.824964

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank our anonymous Referees for their care regarding our manuscript and for their valuable comments for improving the paper. Special thanks also to Carmen S. F. Trindade (Assoc. Prof., FZEA/USP), Miriam D. Hubinger (Full Prof., UNICAMP), Cynthia Ditchfield (Assist. Prof., FZEA/USP), as weel to Marcia G. Kasemodel (Graduate Student in Food Engineering, FZEA/USP) for their comments, suggestions, and technical assistance. Additionally, we would like to thank the Center for Organization Studies (CORS), as well as the Group of Studies and Research on Strategy and Vertical Coordination (GEPEC), for providing a rich environment for the development of this research. Finally, the authors acknowledge the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) for both their financial support (CEPID FoRC 13/07914-8) and the fellowship of visiting professor A.M. Sereno (13/19359-9), as well as the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) for the Research fellowship of Paulo J.A. Sobral.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Food Engineering Department, University of Sao Paulo (FZEA/USP), Av. Duque de Caxias Norte, 225, Pirassununga, SP, 13635-900, Brazil

Vivian Lara Silva, Alberto M. Sereno & Paulo José do Amaral Sobral

Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

Alberto M. Sereno

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vivian Lara Silva .

Additional information

Alberto M. Sereno died before publication of this work was completed.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Silva, V., Sereno, A.M. & do Amaral Sobral, P.J. Food Industry and Processing Technology: On Time to Harmonize Technology and Social Drivers. Food Eng Rev 10 , 1–13 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-017-9164-8

Download citation

Received : 06 February 2017

Accepted : 29 May 2017

Published : 28 June 2017

Issue Date : March 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-017-9164-8

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

• Paradigm shifts
• Value added
• Relationship
• Shared value
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Frontiers in Nutrition
• Food Chemistry
• Research Topics

The Effects of Food Processing on Food Components and Their Health Functions

Total Downloads

Total Views and Downloads

About this Research Topic

Food processing is ubiquitous and plays an important role in our daily diet. It includes a wide variety of treatments on food materials such as mechanical treatment, heating, cooling, drying, high pressure, acid and alkaline treatments, fermentation and more. These processes can significantly influence the ...

Keywords : Food Processing, Nutrients, Health Functions

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.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Investigating the barriers to growth in the Indian food processing sector

Gaurvendra singh.

1 Management Department, ABV- Indian Institute of Information Technology & Management Gwalior, Gwalior, 474015 India

Yash Daultani

2 Operations Management Group, Indian Institute of Management (IIM) Lucknow, Lucknow, 226013 India

Rajendra Sahu

Associated data.

Data was collected through surveys and expert interviews by the principal author. The data collection for this research is in concordance with disciplinary norms and expectations of the journal.

Not applicable for this study.

The Indian food processing sector (IFPS) has a tremendous capability for growth that can improve the socio-economic conditions of the rural masses. The performance of this sector is lagging behind substantially when compared to other developing nations. This study aims to identify growth barriers at different supply chain (SC) stages in the IFPS. Delphi analysis is performed to find out the barriers in the IFPS. Eighteen growth barriers have been found through expert opinion and extensive literature review spanning across three supply chain tiers: farm level, distribution level, and the consumer level. Further, to prioritize and identify the relative importance of various barriers, the analytic hierarchy process is employed. The results show that the top growth barriers in IFPS are— the lack of standardization and quality in the processed food, rain-dependent farming, and the high cost of cold chain facilities . The novel contribution of this study lies in capturing the intricacies of growth barriers in IFPS in an integrated manner across different SC tiers. Interactions between the identified drivers are important to both practitioners and researchers in understanding and driving process, quality, and technology improvements. Finally, the results also throw light on prioritized areas of concern that can be a game-changer for policymakers in India and other developing nations.

Introduction

India is ranked first in the production of milk, banana, papaya, mango, ginger, pulses, and buffalo meat globally. However, the overall processing level of perishable products stands just at 10% [ 10 ], which significantly limits the processing capability when compared to other nations such as the USA (80%), France (70%), and Thailand (30%). Despite having the advantage of favorable agri-climatic conditions, the Indian food processing sector (IFPS) lags compared to global food processing supply chains in terms of overall productivity. For instance, exports of processed food as a percentage of GDP stand at 2% for India [ 4 ], which is easily noticeable when compared to Brazil (4%), Argentina (7%), and Thailand (9%).

Moreover, the supply chain (SC) gaps and losses are perhaps the biggest challenges faced by the IFPS. Losses occur in the IFPS at multiple levels, such as farm, distribution, and consumer levels. According to Shankar et al. [ 42 ], this has emerged as a severe global challenge as around 40–50% of the world’s root crops, fruits, and vegetables are destroyed before consumption. The food processing industry can play a vital role by reducing food losses, productivity improvements, and increasing the shelf life of their products [ 31 ]. This can be accomplished by involving all supply chain stakeholders and optimizing the supply chain from beginning to end, resulting in a win–win outcome for all parties involved [ 13 , 14 ].

The food processing sector is generally divided into two broad areas: processed food and value-added processed food [ 36 , 52 ]. The first category deals with milk, flour, rice, spices, pulses, vegetables, fruits, and salt that are sold in either packed or unpacked condition. These products have short to medium shelf life depending upon the storage and weather conditions at different supply chain stages. There are multiple challenges, such as wastage and contamination in this category, especially with the sold products without packing. The second category contains processed food products such as jams, juices, pickles, processed vegetables and fruits, dairy, poultry, and chocolates. These food products are generally processed using natural and artificial food preservatives before packing and having a long shelf life.

IFPS in itself has a significant growth perspective and tremendous scope for socio-economic development in terms of value addition, trade boost, employment opportunities, and food wastage reduction [ 9 , 22 , 52 ]. The exports of the processed agriculture commodity provide a better return and increase the farmers' income and living standards. Due to its paramount importance, the IFPS has been identified as one of the vital sectors under the ‘Make in India’ initiative launched by India's Government in 2014. Although there is still a long way to capture untapped opportunities in IFPS, that is not possible without identifying and addressing the barriers to the growth of IFPS [ 5 , 30 ].

The motivation for this study is that the current state of research in IFPS is staggered and focused on individual SC tiers, as seen in the previous studies. This study identifies the growth barriers in IFPS across various SC tiers. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the novel contribution of this study lies in capturing the intricacies of growth barriers across different SC tiers, namely—farm level, distribution level, and the consumer level. The research questions of this study are as follows.

RQ1: What are the barriers to growth in the Indian Food Processing Sector (IFPS)? RQ2 : What is the relative priority and importance of the identified growth barriers?

Delphi analysis has been performed to find out the barriers in the IFPS. The Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is then deployed to prioritize these barriers in the IFPS. In the end, policy-level interventions and the interplay of important barriers for researchers and practitioners are analyzed. In summary, the major contributions of the research work are as follows:

• i. The present research work uncovers possible growth barriers in the Indian food processing sector through the Delphi technique.
• ii. The ranking and relative importance of the identified barriers is determined using the Analytic hierarchy process (AHP).
• iii. This research work presents significant insights for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers.

The rest of the article is organized as follows. Section  2 presents the literature review, and Sect.  3 presents the model development. Section  4 discusses the steps involved in applying the Delphi analysis and AHP. The results are summarized in Sect.  5 . The work is concluded, and future research directions are also presented in the last section.

Literature review

Some important literature related to the Indian food processing sector is discussed in this section. Murthy and Yogesh (2014) identified the challenges and opportunities in the IFPS. Earlier, Singh et al. [ 49 ] also identified the issues and challenges in the IFPS and examined the hurdle in the path of IFPS growth. Recently, Persis et al. [ 32 ] assessed the impact of circular economy in the food processing industries. As per the study's findings, ethical practices and the internet of things should be encouraged to increase sustainability in food processing. It improves the decision-making in the supply chain and enhances efficiency. Babu et al. [ 6 ] spread the awareness required for starting the food processing business and current initiatives and policies in the food processing sector by the Indian government. As per the findings, there is a need to provide training for developing the food processing industries. Das and Biswas [ 12 ] explored the role of the food processing sector in the Indian economy and presented the role of IFPS in the future.

Some authors discussed the current issue related to IFPS, like Thulasiraman et al. [ 50 ], raised the issues in the food processing sector in pandemic situations like COVID-19 and how to manage the short supply of food in case of a pandemic. The proper balance between food processing industries and the food supply chain can help in achieving sustainability. During lockdown in case of a pandemic situation, it is challenging to provide the raw material for the food processing industries. Similarly, chitrakar et al. [ 8 ] identified the role of information technologies in managing food processing industries during a pandemic situation.

Shelly and Kaur [ 43 ] assessed the role of IFPS in economic growth and employment. They also suggested that an increase in foreign direct investment, global competitiveness, and export promotion is required to develop the IFPS. Singh et al. [ 48 ] presented factors that affect dairy processing. Ali (2007) [ 3 ] has analyzed the barriers in the meat processing industry. Reddy and Bantilan [ 39 ] have discussed issues that decrease the efficiency of groundnut processing. Sharma et al. [ 41 ] examined the problems associated with the dairy green supply chain management industry. To capture the vast issues and contextual complexity in agricultural food supply chains, researchers also using various multiple-criteria decision modeling (MCDM) approaches.

Model development

The conceptual model for growth barriers in the IFPS is extracted from the existing research studies, added expert opinion, and expert validation. The barriers have been extracted by keeping the broader focus on increasing the productivity and product shelf life supported by efficient food processing that aims to minimize food wastage at various supply chain stages. In particular, short shelf-life agriculture/animal produce (perishable items like fruits, vegetables, dairy products, etc.) and long shelf-life produce (wheat, rice, pulses, etc.) are considered for the study.

The food processing sector is affected by various demand-side factors such as rapid urbanization, changing food habits, and rising demand for frozen food that should be healthy and nutritious. Cleanliness, freshness, flavor, ease of cooking, and taste are other essential product characteristics that play an important part in consumers’ purchase decisions [ 20 ]. On the supply side, the food industry has to address multiple challenges to minimize food wastage like proper traceability, packaging, cold chain, transportation, etc. Eco-innovation should be adopted to reduce food and packaging waste [ 46 ]. Proper traceability is required to monitor the live food condition along the supply chain, such as temperature, humidity, etc., to avoid food spoilage [ 11 ]. Studies in the logistics sector, such as Prajapati et al. [ 33 ], also throw light on this issue from a transportation perspective.

Upon closer inspection of the existing literature and expert opinion, the barriers are divided into the farm, distribution, and consumer levels. Key issues found at the farm level are low yield, inadequate quality of food produce, conventional farming methods, rain-dependent farming, lack of proper logistics and the handling facilities at the farm, insufficient cold storage facilities near the farm, unaffordable modernization, high advertising cost, and, improper grading. Next, at the distribution level, barriers in the food processing sector were found out to be the high cost of modern transportation facilities, high cost of the cold chain, inadequate information technology and communication support, high cost of packaging, limited market support, lack of government support and poor coordination between farmers and food processor . At the consumer level, the barriers found are lack of awareness, lack of standardization, and quality in processed food and conventional food habits . The complete list of the critical barriers, along with their descriptions, is shown in Table ​ Table1. 1 . The Delphi technique is a well-known and widely used technique. The steps of the Delphi technique has summarized in the next section in brief.

Growth barriers of the Indian food processing sector

The existing literature and experts’ opinion suggested that more research is needed in the Indian food processing sector. This work aims to fill some of the existing research gaps by finding critical barriers in the Indian food processing sector (IFPS). The Delphi technique is used to capture the expert opinion. The conceptual model is shown in Fig.  1 . Further, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) ranks and identifies the relative importance among various barriers.

The conceptual model for barriers in the Indian food processing sector

Research methodology

This research paper uses the Delphi analysis and the AHP technique to achieve the research objectives. Steps involved in the Delphi analysis and AHP are given below:

Delphi analysis

The RAND Corporation developed the Delphi analysis technique in 1950 [ 27 ]. It is a judgemental technique. In this technique group of experts discuss the problem and come with a common opinion for decision making. It is advantageous when there is inadequate theoretical development (Bouzon et al., 2016). Various researchers and practitioners widely use it for analyzing complex decision problems. In this method, decision-making depends upon human judgment. The steps involved in this paper for the Delphi technique are (see, Akkermans et al. [ 2 ]).

• i. Identification of the research problem and questionnaire design to analyse the problem.
• ii. Search for experts related to the research problem to be analyzed. The experts are approached and asked for information related to the issues in the questionnaire format.
• iii. Experts give some ideas and possible solutions about the barriers in the Indian food process sector.
• iv. Responses are collected from each expert. Received responses are reviewed and analyzed with the proper feedback.
• v. The expert is contacted again, and the process is repeated until the consent of all experts is reached. Finalize the barriers after the consent of all the experts’. Finalized growth barriers are shown in Table ​ Table1 1 .

Analytic hierarchy process (AHP)

It is a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) technique used for solving a complex problem. Saaty developed AHP in 1980, and AHP is used to model and rank factors in various fields like management, manufacturing, industry, government, engineering, etc. Managers, researchers, and practitioners use it by arranging a complex problem into a simple hierarchy. This method is simple, easy, and flexible to apply. The flowchart of the AHP method is shown in Fig.  2 . A survey has been conducted for the data collection. The responses have been collected from food processors and researchers working in the food processing supply chain domain. The questionnaire consists of three sections. The first section deals with the general information of the respondents and their respective affiliation backgrounds. Section two is designed to select the most suitable barriers and exploring their significance in the Indian food process industries. Section three helps in finding the priority of concern of the growth barriers chosen in the food processing sectors. The expert has validated the final results.

AHP flowchart

The steps involved in the AHP application are as follows [ 29 , 38 ].

Scales in pairwise comparisons [ 40 ]

Pairwise comparisons of barriers at the farm level

Pairwise comparisons of barriers at the distribution level

Pairwise comparisons of barriers at the consumer level

Final relative weights and ranking of factors and sub-factors in the Indian food processing sector

• Determination of consistency index (CI) for assessing the consistency in expert judgment by using the relation: CI = λ max - n n - 1

where, λ max is the maximum eigenvalue of the matrix, and n is the number of factors/barriers.

Random consistency indices (Alonso and Lamata, 2006)

• f. If the final value of CR is less than 0.1, then results are acceptable means judgments are consistent. If CR is more than 0.1, then repeat the procedure. CR value in the case of farm-level barriers is 0.062. Similarly, the CR value for the distribution and consumer levels was 0.02 and 0.01, respectively. Hence, our results are acceptable.

Results and discussions

The novel contribution of this paper is two-prong: first, identification of the barriers, and second, ranking of identified barriers. Eighteen barriers have been identified in the IFPS through extant literature and Delphi analysis. Out of these, eight are at the farm level, seven at the distribution level, and three at the consumer level. The ranking of these barriers is obtained by using the AHP method. The pairwise evaluation matrix for the identified main barriers and the specific factors is constructed to determine their priority or ranking. The final relative weights and ranking of all the factors and sub-factors in the IFPS are summarized in Table ​ Table7 7 .

Relative weights for all sub-factors have been calculated (see Table ​ Table7). 7 ). Further, for estimating the global weights, each main factor's relative weights are multiplied with its corresponding subfactor weight. For example, for calculating the global weight of subfactor (FL1), factor weight (FL) is multiplied by the corresponding sub factor's relative weight (0.493 × 0.056 = 0.0276). Local ranking of subfactors in the particular level (farm, distribution, consumer) based on the relative weights of the subfactors and global ranking has been done based on the sub-factors global weights. The global ranking is the ranking of all the sub-factors based on the global weights. This procedure is already explained in Sect.  4.2 in detail.

Among the main factors, the ranking identified in decreasing order of the relative weights is as follows: farm level (0.493), distribution level (0.311), and consumer level (0.196). This indicates that efforts towards addressing the challenges at the farm level should be the first priority, followed by distribution and consumer levels, respectively. The decreasing order of top five barriers at the farm level factors is rain-dependent farming (FL3 0.239), lack of proper cold storage facilities near the farm (FL5 0.188), lack of proper logistics and handling facilities near the farm (FL4 0.150), unaffordable modernization (FL6 0.141), and conventional methods of farming (FL2 0.131) (refer to Table ​ Table7 7 ).

From the above results, it is clear that farm factors are the influential critical factors and need urgent attention from the decision-makers and policymakers to reduce losses at the farm level supply chain. Farm-level is the initial level in the food supply chain. It is also called a post-harvest stage. If the supply chain reduces the losses at this stage, more raw materials would be available to the food process industries. It will further contribute towards increasing the productivity of processing industries. After the farming stage, farm produce goes to the distribution stage. The top five barriers in the decreasing order of the distribution process are high cost of cold chain facilities and low return (DL2 0.267), Poor coordination between farmer and food processing units (DL4 0.202), High cost of modern transportation facilities (DL1 0.201), Inadequate IT support and communication (DL3 0.130), lack of government support (DL7 0.088).

Around 10% of the perishable items are using cold storage facilities in India at the distribution stage. Cold storage and warehouse facilities are required to reduce wastage and maintain agricultural product quality [ 1 ]. Cold storage should be at the accessible route and ensure proper transportation facilities near the cold chain facility. It should also be a nearby processing unit to minimize lead time. Our results suggest that the direct linkage between them is still a major problem. Government and non-government organizations should spread information and help to establish the links between farmers and processing units. Once these links are established, the next step should be to make unorganized farmers join hands through cooperative societies (e.g., Amul) to harness the economies of scale. All players should exchange information for better decision-making [ 35 ]. Gardas et al. [ 18 ] suggested that if the food processing industries purchase raw material from the farmer directly, it will reduce the intermediaries. This will enhance farmers’ income as well as the profitability of the processor. The other two barriers in distribution are the high cost of packaging (DL5) and the limited domestic market (DL6).

The last stage in the IFPS is the consumer level. Ultimately, a food processor earns a profit when the consumer likes it. We find that critical barriers at this stage are lack of standardization and quality in processed food (CL2 0.634), lack of awareness (CL3 0.192), and conventional food habits (CL1 0.174). Traditionally Indian people buy fresh food as compared to packed/processed/preserved food. High processing cost makes processed food unaffordable to low-income people, and sometimes people are not getting value for money because of the poor quality of processed food. However, with the ever-increasing young population in metro cities, the demand for quality processed food is ever-increasing. The results suggest that the critical factor among all three barriers in this stage is the lack of standardization and quality in processed food. Once this is taken care of, the other two barriers will start to weaken down gradually. Hence, the study strongly suggests that food processors should focus their resources in this direction with urgency.

The top five barriers out of eighteen barriers as per global ranking in the Indian food processing sector are as follows (refer to Table ​ Table7 7 ):  Lack of standardization and quality in processed food (CL2), Rain dependent farming (FL3), Lack of proper cold storage facilities near the farm (FL5), High cost of cold chain facilities and low return (DL2), Lack of proper logistics and handling facilities near the farm (FL4). Three barriers out of the top five barriers belong to the farm-level factors. These factors are the influential critical factors and need urgent attention from the decision-makers and policymakers to reduce losses at the farm level in the Indian food supply chain. Some other reasons for the slow growth in the IFPS are that most people cannot afford processed food because of the low-income level, fresh produce preferences compared to packaged food, and most of the people are not yet visiting a supermarket. However, all of these barriers were not investigated together; hence their relative importance was unexplored so far, which is one of the key contributions of this paper.

Among the top ten barriers in the overall global ranking, the contribution of the farm-level barriers, distribution level barriers, and consumer level barriers is 50%, 40%, and 10%, respectively. While the contribution of the consumer-level barriers seems the lowest, it is to be noted that one of the factors in the consumer level—Lack of standardization and quality in processed food-is the top-most factor among all eighteen identified factors. Hence, we reiterate that food processors should give quality assurance prime importance. This can be successfully pursued by focusing efforts towards total quality management and lean practices, which produce significant improvements across different sectors [ 13 , 14 ]. Further, at the farm level, the government should support small farmers. This can be done by providing them subsidies, finance to purchase modern equipment, banking facility, and investments in installing small food processing units at the farm. Awareness about the benefits of the small food processing units of agriculture produces and provides back-end support to farmers should be prioritized in this segment. Recently, Lok Sabha (Parliament of India) passed The Farmers' Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020, and The Farmers' (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill, 2020 helps the IFPS by providing the direct link to the farmers and industries.

For enhancing food safety systems and standards in the food processing sector, industries should adopt good management practices and good hygienic practices. Also, there is a need to provide the skills and training in food technology on the social front. Land acquisition delays and complex government clearance procedures hamper the growth of the food processing sector. The government should provide single window clearance for the food processing projects and relax non-farming land use permits for the food industry. There is an urgent need to provide cheap credit to the food processing sector to create infrastructure like the cold chain infrastructure, logistics, storage facilities, etc., and constitute the task force to examine the working capital requirements.

The raw material of the food processing sector is seasonal and labor-intensive. There is a need to create a risk fund that mitigates the stress in the food processing sector. The research infrastructure, testing facilities, and traceability systems need to be improved, so that safe food reaches the consumers. The initiative should be taken to boost investment in plant and machinery and promote packaging of the product locally to reduce its overall production cost. There is a need to make a national food processing policy to avoid state and center policies' incompatibility. The urgent need to increase start-ups, testing technologies, and innovation in the Indian food processing sector are also evident for practitioners.

The Government of India (GoI) has taken many good initiatives for the development of IFPS. The government announced a start-up India scheme to enhance the credit through banks for start-up ventures to develop the food processing sector and job creation. SIDBI (small industries development bank of India) and NABARD (National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development) provide funds to the agro-industry, food processing sector, and rural development. These banks are also investing in the capital creation, technological innovation, development, and improvement of the product. Through the skill India mission, the government provides required skills and training to the people working in the food processing sector. The food processing sector is one of the vital thrust sectors among the chosen 25 thrust sectors under the Make in India scheme. The Indian government also created an investor portal to attract investment in the food processing sector. GoI established India's regulatory body, food safety, and standards authority of India (FSSAI) in 2008 to take care of the matters associated with food safety and standard practices in India's food sector. The recent farm bill is aimed to help increase trade by removing intermediaries and putting government taxes outside the Agricultural Produce Market Committees (APMC). It is expected to help in promoting interstate and intrastate business and increase the investment in infrastructure development. Our findings reveal that these policies are the need of the day to improve productivity in IFPS and the Indian agriculture sector. Their proper implementation and execution should be taken on priority by policymakers, researchers, and practitioners.

Conclusions and future research directions

India ranks second in the world in terms of the production of agricultural commodities. Still, India has not utilized its full potential and processes just 2% of fruits and vegetables globally. A few researchers have attempted to address this underlying problem by identifying the growth barriers of the IFPS; however, their results stand staggered at different levels. This study is a novel and recent attempt to capture the growth barriers to IFPS in an integrated manner by considering all prime factors together—farm level, distribution level, and consumer level. After the extensive literature review and expert opinion using Delphi analysis in the IFPS, a total of eighteen barriers have been found. Out of these, eight are at the farm level, seven at the distribution level, and three at the consumer level. The barriers are then ranked by using AHP. The results indicate that the top barrier at the farm level is rain-dependent farming (FL3 0.239), and the top barrier at the distribution level is the high cost of cold chain facilities and low return (DL2 0.267). The top critical barrier at the consumer level is the lack of standardization and quality in processed food (CL2 0.634) (Table ​ (Table7). 7 ). The study suggests that food processors should prioritize their efforts in this direction to make the supply chain more sustainable. The results are relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers. In the Indian context, more investments are needed in the food processing sector to make it globally competitive, and also, there is a significant gap between food production and processing. In the future, other MCDM techniques such as Decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL), interpretive structural modeling (ISM), structural equation modeling (SEM), etc., can also be explored by other researchers. Further, the world is ever-changing, hence after few years, these barriers might evolve with time, and therefore, the avenues of further research in this domain will always exist.

Abbreviations

Author contributions.

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by GS. Data validation and analysis were performed by GS and Dr. YD. The first draft of the manuscript was written by GS and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Data availability

Code availability, declarations.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.