Obesity represents an important public health concern because it substantially increases the risk of multiple chronic diseases and thereby contributing to a decline in both quality of life and life expectancy. Besides unhealthy diet, physical inactivity and genetic susceptibility, environmental pollutants also contribute to the rising prevalence of obesity epidemic.

The principal motivations for the worldwide trend towards reducing meat consumption are health, the environment and animal welfare. The present study investigated the willingness of omnivores to introduce mixed (beef-vegetable protein) and 100% vegetable protein products into their diet. The participants (n = 251) were young adult omnivores who consumed meat at least once a week. The stimuli were images of six different products representing two beef burgers, two mixed-protein burgers (50% beef and 50% seitan or soy) and two 100% vegetable protein burgers (seitan and soy).

Background: Cultured meat has emerged as a breakthrough technology for the global food industry, which was considered as a potential solution to mitigate serious environmental, sustainability, global public health, and animal welfare concerns in the near future. Although there is promise that cultured meat can supplement or even replace conventional meat, many challenges still need to be resolved in the early stages.

Entomophagy is increasingly seen as a potential solution to provide a sustainable source of protein. However, the attitude of Western consumers towards insect-based products is generally negative. This study was designed to evaluate the liking of four insect-based snacks among young Italian consumers through a tasting panel involving 62 participants. Two of the products showed the whole insects, while the other two contained insect flour as a main ingredient.

Research on the relationship between vegetarianism and subjective well-being (SWB) has produced inconsistent results, which may partly be due to small sample sizes and divergent operationalizations of well-being.

Background: In humanitarian contexts, ensuring access to safe, nutritious, good quality and culturally appropriate food in the right quantity at the right time and place during an emergency or a protracted crisis is an enormous challenge, which is likely to increase given uncertainties such as climate change, global political and economic instability and emerging pandemics like COVID-19. Several international organizations and non-government organizations have well established systems to respond to food security emergencies.

The consumption of meat contributes significantly to undesirable effects on the environment. In order to reduce the impact of animal husbandry, one approach is to decrease meat consumption by substituting plant-based meat alternatives. Because the consumption of such meat alternatives is currently rather low, the aim of this research was to identify the barriers that keep people from consuming meat alternatives and increase the probability of future consumption.

The dichotomous divide between vegetarians and omnivores seems clear: Omnivores eat meat, whereas vegetarians do not. Yet classifying people dichotomously as vegetarian or omnivorous overlooks a distinct group of people who limit their meat intake but still include some meat in their diets: a group of “mostly vegetarian” dieters called flexitarians (a term combining the words, “flexible” and “vegetarian”).

Improvements in the effectiveness of packaging materials can help to prevent foodborne pathogens and reduce environmental waste. Traditionally, food is packaged in plastic that is rarely recyclable, negatively impacting the environment. Biodegradable packaging materials play an important role in maintaining the health of ecosystems. However, there are limitations in the utilization of bio-based materials, including poor barrier and mechanical properties which frequently cause a shorter shelf life compared to conventional food packaging materials.