IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agfoec/v12y2024i1d10.1186_s40100-024-00336-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Toward a circular economy in Italian agri-food: upstream partners in insect biorefineries

Author

Listed:
  • Arianna Cattaneo

    (University of Trento
    BEF Biosystems S.R.L)

  • Cecilia Padula

    (BEF Biosystems S.R.L
    Department of Architecture and Design)

  • Marco Meneguz

    (BEF Biosystems S.R.L)

  • Carola Mileto

    (BEF Biosystems S.R.L)

  • Silvia Barbero

    (Department of Architecture and Design)

  • Sihem Dabbou

    (University of Trento)

Abstract

The insect biorefinery (IB) is central to recycling nutrients from food losses and waste (FLW) in an emerging circular bioeconomy approach. The sustainable leadership of the European insect industry and its integration into the bioeconomy depend on implementing symbiotic production models through site selection and partnerships. Only 8 studies, including 3 in the EU, have examined stakeholder acceptance. This pilot study is the first to focus on potential upstream symbiosis partners (USPs) in the EU, examining the factors that influence the willingness of potential USPs in suitable Italian locations to adopt IB. Preliminary analyses identified a final sample of 31 respondents who completed an online-survey divided into four sections. After data elaboration, a principal component analysis was conducted, considering 27 questions and their correlations with the first two principal components. The analysis revealed that the presence of internal research and development within the company, along with the company’s role in the supply chain and the seasonality of production, had a minor influence on explaining the variance of the data. Interestingly, company size was negatively correlated with the willingness to become part of the insect-rearing supply chain or receive information about this technology. On the contrary, interest in innovative production and self-management of by-products were strongly related. Finally, funding opportunities could positively influence both the Italian and EU contexts, encouraging innovative practices among small and medium-sized enterprises. In contrast, barriers to implementing insect farming include misinformation, anticipated negative media impacts on branding, and resistance to changing by-product management practices. This pilot study serves as a foundational exploration, providing insights into the acceptability of insect farming among potential USPs and offers valuable insights for future studies, thereby shaping the discourse on the acceptability and integration of insect farming within the circular bioeconomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Arianna Cattaneo & Cecilia Padula & Marco Meneguz & Carola Mileto & Silvia Barbero & Sihem Dabbou, 2024. "Toward a circular economy in Italian agri-food: upstream partners in insect biorefineries," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agfoec:v:12:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1186_s40100-024-00336-4
    DOI: 10.1186/s40100-024-00336-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s40100-024-00336-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s40100-024-00336-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Okello, Afrika & Nzuma, Jonathan & Otieno, David Jakinda & Kidoido, Michael & Tanga, Chrysantus, 2021. "Farmers’ Perceptions of Commercial Insect-Based Feed for Sustainable Livestock Production in Kenya," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315215, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Ouko, Kevin Okoth & Mukhebi, Adrian Wekulo & Obiero, Kevin Odhiambo & Opondo, Florence Achieng & Ngo’ng’a, Charles Adino & Ongor, Dennis Ouma, 2022. "Stakeholders’ perspectives on the use of black soldier fly larvae as an alternative sustainable feed ingredient in aquaculture, Kenya," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 17(1), December.
    3. Yari Vecchio & Giulio Paolo Agnusdei & Pier Paolo Miglietta & Fabian Capitanio, 2020. "Adoption of Precision Farming Tools: The Case of Italian Farmers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-16, January.
    4. Giacomo Boesso & Kamalesh Kumar, 2009. "An investigation of stakeholder prioritization and engagement: who or what really counts," Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(1), pages 62-80, March.
    5. Leocardia Ranga & Francesco Noci & Ana P. Vale & Maria Dermiki, 2023. "Insect-Based Feed Acceptance amongst Consumers and Farmers in Ireland: A Pilot Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-19, July.
    6. Zanxin Wang & Saqib Ali & Ahsan Akbar & Farhan Rasool, 2020. "Determining the Influencing Factors of Biogas Technology Adoption Intention in Pakistan: The Moderating Role of Social Media," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-20, March.
    7. Wei Yang & Le Wang, 2023. "Impact of farmer group participation on the adoption of sustainable farming practices—spatial analysis of New Zealand dairy farmers," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(3), pages 701-717, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hongpeng Guo & Yujie Xia & Chulin Pan & Qingyong Lei & Hong Pan, 2022. "Analysis in the Influencing Factors of Climate-Responsive Behaviors of Maize Growers: Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Sören Mohrmann & Verena Otter, 2022. "Categorisation of Biogas Plant Operators in Germany with Regards to Their Intention to Use Straw Pellets as Innovative and Sustainable Substrate Alternative," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-26, December.
    3. McCaig, Melanie & Rezania, Davar & Dara, Rozita, 2023. "Framing the response to IoT in agriculture: A discourse analysis," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    4. Silvia Solimene & Daniela Coluccia & Alessandro Bernardo, 2023. "Environmental Impact of Different Business Models: An LCA Study of Fresh Tomato Production in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Wang, Yi-Jia & Wang, Qi & Wang, Naihui, 2023. "The role of rationality and altruism in rural households' acceptance of straw energy utilization: Evidence from Northeast China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    6. Arnold L. Musungu & Beatrice W. Muriithi & Changeh J. Ghemoh & Dorothy Nakimbugwe & Chrysantus M. Tanga, 2023. "Production, consumption, and market supply of edible crickets: insights from East Africa," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-23, December.
    7. Nugra Irianta Denashurya & Nurliza & Eva Dolorosa & Dewi Kurniati & Denah Suswati, 2023. "Overcoming Barriers to ISPO Certification: Analyzing the Drivers of Sustainable Agricultural Adoption among Farmers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-25, December.
    8. Zengwei Xu & Jing Li & Jiliang Ma, 2022. "Impacts of Extension Contact on the Adoption of Formulated Fertilizers and Farm Performance among Large-Scale Farms in Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, November.
    9. Johannes Munz & Heinrich Schuele, 2022. "Influencing the Success of Precision Farming Technology Adoption—A Model-Based Investigation of Economic Success Factors in Small-Scale Agriculture," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-21, October.
    10. Vasiliki Vrana & Dimitrios Kydros & Iordanis Kotzaivazoglou & Ioanna Pechlivanaki, 2023. "EU Citizens’ Twitter Discussions of the 2022–23 Energy Crisis: A Content and Sentiment Analysis on the Verge of a Daunting Winter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-22, January.
    11. Shoumin Yue & Ying Xue & Jie Lyu & Kangkang Wang, 2023. "The Effect of Information Acquisition Ability on Farmers’ Agricultural Productive Service Behavior: An Empirical Analysis of Corn Farmers in Northeast China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-26, February.
    12. Osrof, Hazem Yusuf & Tan, Cheng Ling & Angappa, Gunasekaran & Yeo, Sook Fern & Tan, Kim Hua, 2023. "Adoption of smart farming technologies in field operations: A systematic review and future research agenda," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    13. Silvia Macchia, 2022. "Unbundling the information needs of new-generation agricultural companies," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2022(2 Suppl.), pages 117-141.
    14. Vecchio, Yari & Di Pasquale, Jorgelina & Del Giudice, Teresa & Pauselli, Gregorio & Masi, Margherita & Adinolfi, Felice, 2022. "Precision farming: what do Italian farmers really think? An application of the Q methodology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    15. Arfan Shahzad & Nurhana Zahrullail & Ahsan Akbar & Hana Mohelska & Arsalan Hussain, 2022. "COVID-19’s Impact on Fintech Adoption: Behavioral Intention to Use the Financial Portal," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, September.
    16. Muhammad Waqas Rana & Sufang Zhang & Shahid Ali & Iqra Hamid, 2022. "Investigating Green Financing Factors to Entice Private Sector Investment in Renewables via Digital Media: Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Development in the Post-COVID-19 Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-19, October.
    17. Monteiro Moretti, Débora & Baum, Chad M. & Ehlers, Melf-Hinrich & Finger, Robert & Bröring, Stefanie, 2023. "Exploring actors' perceptions of the precision agriculture innovation system – A Group Concept Mapping approach in Germany and Switzerland," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    18. Zakir Shah & Lu Wei & Usman Ghani, 2021. "The Use of Social Networking Sites and Pro-Environmental Behaviors: A Mediation and Moderation Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-21, February.
    19. Mario Fargnoli & Mara Lombardi, 2020. "NOSACQ-50 for Safety Climate Assessment in Agricultural Activities: A Case Study in Central Italy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-20, December.
    20. Hannah Briony Thorne & Jenna Axtens & Talitha Best, 2022. "Perceptual Factors Influencing the Adoption of Innovative Tissue Culture Technology by the Australian Avocado Industry," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-11, August.

    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:spr:agfoec:v:12:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1186_s40100-024-00336-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.