IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i2p938-d482389.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Potential Development of Sustainable 3D-Printed Meat Analogues: A Review

Author

Listed:
  • Karna Ramachandraiah

    (Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, College of Life Science, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Korea)

Abstract

To mitigate the threat of climate change driven by livestock meat production, a multifaceted approach that incorporates dietary changes, innovative product development, advances in technologies, and reductions in food wastes/losses is proposed. The emerging technology of 3D printing (3DP) has been recognized for its unprecedented capacity to fabricate food products with intricate structures and reduced material cost and energy. For sustainable 3DP of meat substitutes, the possible materials discussed are derived from in vitro cell culture, meat byproducts/waste, insects, and plants. These material-based approaches are analyzed from their potential environmental effects, technological viability, and consumer acceptance standpoints. Although skeletal muscles and skin are bioprinted for medical applications, they could be utilized as meat without the additional printing of vascular networks. The impediments to bioprinting of meat are lack of food-safe substrates/materials, cost-effectiveness, and scalability. The sustainability of bioprinting could be enhanced by the utilization of generic/universal components or scaffolds and optimization of cell sourcing and fabrication logistics. Despite the availability of several plants and their byproducts and some start-up ventures attempting to fabricate food products, 3D printing of meat analogues remains a challenge. From various insects, powders, proteins (soluble/insoluble), lipids, and fibers are produced, which—in different combinations and at optimal concentrations—can potentially result in superior meat substitutes. Valuable materials derived from meat byproducts/wastes using low energy methods could reduce waste production and offset some greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Apart from printer innovations (speed, precision, and productivity), rational structure of supply chain and optimization of material flow and logistic costs can improve the sustainability of 3D printing. Irrespective of the materials used, perception-related challenges exist for 3D-printed food products. Consumer acceptance could be a significant challenge that could hinder the success of 3D-printed meat analogs.

Suggested Citation

  • Karna Ramachandraiah, 2021. "Potential Development of Sustainable 3D-Printed Meat Analogues: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:938-:d:482389
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/938/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/2/938/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dominik Zimon & Peter Madzik & Pedro Domingues, 2020. "Development of Key Processes along the Supply Chain by Implementing the ISO 22000 Standard," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-22, July.
    2. Banning Garrett, 2014. "3D Printing: New Economic Paradigms and Strategic Shifts," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 5(1), pages 70-75, February.
    3. Ji Hyun Kim & Ickhee Kim & Young-Joon Seol & In Kap Ko & James J. Yoo & Anthony Atala & Sang Jin Lee, 2020. "Neural cell integration into 3D bioprinted skeletal muscle constructs accelerates restoration of muscle function," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Babatunde O. Alao & Andrew B. Falowo & Amanda Chulayo & Voster Muchenje, 2017. "The Potential of Animal By-Products in Food Systems: Production, Prospects and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Gebler, Malte & Schoot Uiterkamp, Anton J.M. & Visser, Cindy, 2014. "A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 158-167.
    6. Ramona Weinrich, 2019. "Opportunities for the Adoption of Health-Based Sustainable Dietary Patterns: A Review on Consumer Research of Meat Substitutes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-15, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ivica Faletar & Marija Cerjak, 2022. "Perception of Cultured Meat as a Basis for Market Segmentation: Empirical Findings from Croatian Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-16, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Florinda Matos & Radu Godina & Celeste Jacinto & Helena Carvalho & Inês Ribeiro & Paulo Peças, 2019. "Additive Manufacturing: Exploring the Social Changes and Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Naghshineh, Bardia & Ribeiro, André & Jacinto, Celeste & Carvalho, Helena, 2021. "Social impacts of additive manufacturing: A stakeholder-driven framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    3. Irene Blanco-Gutiérrez & Consuelo Varela-Ortega & Rhys Manners, 2020. "Evaluating Animal-Based Foods and Plant-Based Alternatives Using Multi-Criteria and SWOT Analyses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-26, October.
    4. Lai, Kee-hung & Feng, Yunting & Zhu, Qinghua, 2023. "Digital transformation for green supply chain innovation in manufacturing operations," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    5. Dmitriy Grigorievich Rodionov* & Evgenii Alexandrovich Konnikov & Olga Anatolievna Konnikova, 2018. "Approaches to Ensuring the Sustainability of Industrial Enterprises of Different Technological Levels," The Journal of Social Sciences Research, Academic Research Publishing Group, pages 277-282:3.
    6. Francesco Cappa & Fausto Del Sette & Darren Hayes & Federica Rosso, 2016. "How to Deliver Open Sustainable Innovation: An Integrated Approach for a Sustainable Marketable Product," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-14, December.
    7. Berns, John P. & Jia, Yankun & Gondo, Maria, 2022. "Crowdfunding success in sustainability-oriented projects: An exploratory examination of the crowdfunding of 3D printers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Xiaoli Zhao & Pavel Castka & Cory Searcy, 2020. "ISO Standards: A Platform for Achieving Sustainable Development Goal 2," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-19, November.
    9. Tilman Santarius & Johanna Pohl & Steffen Lange, 2020. "Digitalization and the Decoupling Debate: Can ICT Help to Reduce Environmental Impacts While the Economy Keeps Growing?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Mohammadreza Akbari & John L. Hopkins, 2022. "Digital technologies as enablers of supply chain sustainability in an emerging economy," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 689-710, December.
    11. Caviggioli, Federico & Ughetto, Elisa, 2019. "A bibliometric analysis of the research dealing with the impact of additive manufacturing on industry, business and society," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 254-268.
    12. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Lampi, Elina, 2022. "How much does it take? Willingness to switch to meat substitutes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    13. Jaya Priyadarshini & Rajesh Kr Singh & Ruchi Mishra & Surajit Bag, 2022. "Investigating the interaction of factors for implementing additive manufacturing to build an antifragile supply chain: TISM-MICMAC approach," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 567-588, June.
    14. Fang Qiu & Qifan Hu & Bing Xu, 2020. "Fresh Agricultural Products Supply Chain Coordination and Volume Loss Reduction Based on Strategic Consumer," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-25, October.
    15. Ghobadian, Abby & Talavera, Irene & Bhattacharya, Arijit & Kumar, Vikas & Garza-Reyes, Jose Arturo & O'Regan, Nicholas, 2020. "Examining legitimatisation of additive manufacturing in the interplay between innovation, lean manufacturing and sustainability," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 457-468.
    16. Annika Lonkila & Minna Kaljonen, 2021. "Promises of meat and milk alternatives: an integrative literature review on emergent research themes," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 625-639, September.
    17. Antonella Cammarelle & Mariarosaria Lombardi & Rosaria Viscecchia, 2021. "Packaging Innovations to Reduce Food Loss and Waste: Are Italian Manufacturers Willing to Invest?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    18. Holzmann, Patrick & Breitenecker, Robert J. & Schwarz, Erich J. & Gregori, Patrick, 2020. "Business model design for novel technologies in nascent industries: An investigation of 3D printing service providers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    19. Frédéric Thiesse & Marco Wirth & Hans-Georg Kemper & Michelle Moisa & Dominik Morar & Heiner Lasi & Frank Piller & Peter Buxmann & Letizia Mortara & Simon Ford & Tim Minshall, 2015. "Economic Implications of Additive Manufacturing and the Contribution of MIS," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 57(2), pages 139-148, April.
    20. David Guirguis & Conrad Tucker & Jack Beuth, 2024. "Accelerating process development for 3D printing of new metal alloys," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:2:p:938-:d:482389. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.