The food industry is going to be drastically changed within the next ten years. Experts say that these disruptive innovations will come in three separate waves. The three different waves are the “uberisation” of food, smart kitchens, and smart food.
The “uberisation” of food can be characterized as a collaborative market that can be applied to food. Companies such as Eatwith and Mealsharin allow customers to eat restaurant-style food in the comfort of homes. Soon enough, people will be buying more food from dining commodities rather than grocery stores.
Smart kitchens rely on the Internet of Things. Smart utensils will customize people’s portion size and prevent indigestion by telling them to slow down while eating. Smart fridges will allow users to view their fridge from anywhere, to see available recipes, and the expiration dates of all goods. This will lead to less food waste and healthier people.
Smart food is the last of the three waves. Nanotechnology will the be crucial step that will get this last idea booming. Some examples of this smart food include cultured meat from the lab, nutrient dense algae powder, and salads grown with lighting other than natural sunlight. Smart food may the most important wave of them all. The UN’s Food and Agriculture stated that food output must rise by over 75% in the next thirty-five years to feed the growing population
So is this all possible? Smart kitchens and smart food are very possible innovations. The technology and devices are present. It just depends on whether people want to accept this idea or it may be a little before its time. If the uberisation of food were to occur, it would be a completely different world. There would be very few grocery stores, but rather huge storage facilities that dispense food in the form of restaurant-style meals. This would be quite weird wouldn’t it?
Source: http://www.foodnavigator.com/Market-Trends/Is-your-firm-ready-for-3-waves-of-disruptive-food-innovation
I love the idea of “smart food” and all the benefits it would bring. I always hope to eat healthier but it is hard to do when I don’t know very much about my personal dietary needs. I think this would be a very popular concept if it is accomplished and would improve health nation-wide. However, I question the costs that it would come with, including monetary and environmental costs. It is almost always the case that newer and better technology means more money. For example each new model of the iPhone is more expensive than the last. So I question whether people would be able to afford all of these smart tools. But more importantly, I question whether all of this new technology would cost our environment too much.
Many articles have been released discussing the large use of fossil fuels in agriculture and food provisions, including the article “Energy-Smart Food at FAO” from Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The difference between “smart food” and “energy-smart food” is that the second is focused on controlling the use of fossil fuels and energy in the agriculture industry. According to this article, the food production system consumes 30% of all available energy. My concern is that, although these smart tools would bring many benefits, it may further increase the amount of energy used in food production. I don’t think our environment can withstand an increase of the use of energy for much longer. If these tools are not environmentally friendly in some way, I don’t think they will be suited for our environment.
http://reliefweb.int/report/world/energy-smart-food-fao-overview