F R A U N H O F E R I N S T I T U T E F O R S Y S T E M S A N D I N N O VAT I O N S R E S E A R C H I S I

Three scenarios for Europe’s

food sector in 2035
The FOX project

FOX is a unique collaboration between universities, research institutions, small to medium enterprises, in-
dustries and associations, who are extremely grateful for the financial support of seven million Euro from the
European Commission’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme. The project lasts for 4,5 years
(2019–2023).
FOX stimulates short food supply chains for fruit and vegetables by applying small innovative mild process-
ing technologies. The approach creates business opportunities for regional hubs and provides qualitative
processed foods to be indulged by the local community.

www.fox-foodprocessinginabox.eu

The FOX partners

Deutsches Institut für Lebensmitteltechnik / Stichting Wageningen Research / Katholieke Universiteit

Leuven / Fraunhofer ISI / Aarhus Universitet / Ainia / Vyzkumny Ustav Potravinarsky Praha / Szkola Glowna
Gospodarstwa Wiejskiego / Inštitut za nutricionistiko / Stichting EFFoST / Elea Vertriebs- und Vermarktungs-
gesellschaft mbH / European Food Information Council / Centre Technique De La Conservation Des Produits
Agricoles*CTCPA / Kompetenzzentrum Obstbau-Bodensee / Stichting Food Tech Park Brainport / Falkenstein
Projektmanagement GmbH / Linpac Packaging Pravia, S.A. / Terra I Xufa Sociedad Limitada / Ochsen, Tomáš
Ignác Fénix / Agrární komora České republiky / Cedrus spółka z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością spółka
komandytowa / Společnost mladých agrárníků České republiky, z. s. / Sady Tuchoraz spol.s.r.o. / vanRijsin-
geningredients B.V. / Hutten Catering B.V.spółka z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością spółka komandytowa /
Společnost mladých agrárníků České republiky, z. s. / Sady Tuchoraz spol.s.r.o. / vanRijsingeningredients
B.V. / Hutten Catering B.V.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Three scenarios for Europe’s
food sector in 2035

Authors
Björn Moller, Ariane Voglhuber-Slavinsky, Ewa Dönitz

2 | 3
Introduction

Vertical farming and urban gardening, artificial intelligence in food retail, burgers made
from insects as alternative proteins, or online grocery shopping – many social trends and
technologies are influencing the food system today and will shape how the European food
sector will look like in 2035. These trends are already apparent today, but which of them
could change the whole food system on the long term? Which trends are only hypes and
temporary? These and many other questions are part of the EU Horizon 2020 project FOX,
and are at the core of FOX’s foresight research component.

The recently published “Farm to Fork Strategy” of the European Commission shows the need for
action for the food sector. Sustainable food production, ensuring food security, reducing food losses
and waste and many other aspects are essential to reach a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly
food system. But how will these challenges be tackled? Who is driving the actions for sustainability?
And how do these measures look like?

The Competence Center Foresight of the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI
derives and conducts a foresight process for developing future scenarios that outline the framework
conditions of the European food innovation system of 2035. In a first step, scientists and experts
have identified and analysed a variety of trends influencing the food sector. The most compelling
were published in the brochure “50 trends influencing Europe’s food sector by 2035”. Taking
these trends as a starting point, we designed and conducted an online foresight scenario process
to draw three alternative pictures of the future, how the European food sector could look like in 15
years. Our aim is not to predict exactly how the food sector will develop because this is impossible.
However, we want to contribute to the discussion by reflecting and studying possible influencing
aspects and alternative futures, as a look into the future creates the possibility to develop together
ideas for improvement strategies to be better prepared.

FOX – Food processing in a Box – is a project in which more than 25 European partners aim to
transform large-scale technologies for the processing of fruits and vegetables, to small, flexible
and mobile units in your neighbourhood. FOX is all about health and sustainability – and how tech-
nologies can support and promote these goals. The innovative processing solutions are therefore
flexible, resource-efficient, and based on seasonality and demand. It considers the expectations
of farmers and small food businesses, looks at the technical and economic feasibility, and takes
into account the needs of consumers and the food chain. The latter will be actively involved in the
development of new products and new business options for sustainable consumption. This allows
for transparency and trust in the food chain. FOX stimulates short food supply chains; transitioning
from a more centralised industry, to local production hubs. So-called food-circles are the European
regions in which the FOX technologies will be demonstrated to be integrated into the entire food
production chain.

4 | 5
www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Content

page 8
Why different scenarios?
Alternative Futures instead of predictions

page 10
The three scenarios at a glance

page 12
Foresight and scenario methodology

page 14
Approach and key factors

page 20
Scenario 1: Policy secures sustainability
Welfare states centrally ensure national food security

page 30
Scenario 2: Society drives sustainability
Consumer enjoy a green and healthy lifestyle

page 40
Scenario 3: A CO2-currency and retailers dominate trade and consumption
Markets and technologies ensure prosperity for top performers

page 50
Literature

6 | 7
Why different scenarios?

Alternative Futures instead of predictions

How have we proceeded to project the development in the European food sector into the year
2035? We have developed detailed, consistent and pointed “pictures of the future”. The focus
was on alternative developments for the food sector along its entire value chain, from production
and processing to packaging and logistics as far as sales and consumption. The scenario method
applied here, enables a structured examination of conceivable alternative development paths. In
this way, we raise awareness of the fact that complex topics do not allow a simple distinction
between a best-case and a worst-case. Scenarios make the future tangible today and enable their
users to act in a future-oriented manner.

Starting from three core scenarios, described by six key factors, an online scenario-process was
conducted with participants from research and industry. During this, alternative developments
for different key factors were discussed. These future assumptions were then combined to form
consistent combinations of assumptions describing the future world. The scenarios are presented
here using a future funnel. This makes it clear that the uncertainty of the developments increases
the further one looks into the future. It is important to note that scenarios are not forecasts. They
shed light on different options and promote an understanding of what lies ahead. On this, options
for action can be discussed very concretely – to support decision-making. The three scenarios for
the European food sector 2035 presented here, outline three different development paths. None
of them is a simple continuation of current developments. There are relevant changes compared
to today, each of which is the result of the interaction of individual future assumptions.

Europe’s food sector

The focus of the scenarios presented here is on the European food sector and its policies, industries
and research. However, the high import and export rates in this sector on the one hand and the
close intertwining of raw material, trade of food and agricultural products and finally digitalisation
in global value-added networks on the other hand, also required consideration of the international
perspective, especially with regard to sustainability and food security. We first summarise the char-
acteristic features of the three developed future scenarios and then describe the scenarios in detail.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
 Scenario
Scenario11:
Policy
Policysecures
secures
sustainability
sustainability

Scenario 2
Society drives
sustainability

Scenario 3
A CO2-currency
and retailers
dominate trade
and consump-
tion

today 2035

Future funnel: Intersection in 2035 with possible consistent futures. Different characteristics of key factors have an impact on the future.
The further away the scenarios are from the centre in 2035, the more fundamental the changes are.

8 | 9
The three scenarios at a glance

Scenario 1 Scenario 2
Policy secures sustainability Society drives sustainability
Welfare states centrally ensure national food security Consumers enjoy a green and healthy lifestyle

This scenario drafts a future world where the states own agricul- In this future, people are driving developments forward through
tural land, produce food according to local conditions and care their search for a healthy lifestyle in harmony with nature. They
for the well-being of all their citizens. Consumers do not under- are aware of many interconnections and see the big picture.
stand the complexity of food production nor do they care about Sustainable behaviour is in the heart of society. Economic
how it influences the environment around them. They trust their growth is no longer the main paradigm to follow. Agricultural
government in providing nutritious food and ensuring accessi- land is in the hand of many, especially local biodiversity is of
bility for all citizens. The awareness for the necessity of environ- high value and many fresh foods are produced within a 1-mile
mentally friendly and sustainable food production is present and radius.
promoted by science. In this future, politicians have recognised
that sustainable agriculture is vital to national food security. In this future, the role of the national government is limited, but
More about how this future state is achieved will be presented there are well-organised governments at the local level. Con-
in the following pages. sumers‘ opinions are significantly determining a sustainable and
local production of food. This has an effect on the availability
However, the state not only owns and manages agricultural of certain products, but for other reasons than in scenario 1.
land, it also has data sovereignty and access to data along
the whole food value chain, e.g. to the purchase data of all Further important aspects, like which values the society thrives
e-commerce grocery stores. How this data is used and what for is further explained. The role of local communities in reaching
are the implications for citizens will be explained. high levels of self-sufficiency in food production and the con-
tribution of individuals in living a sustainable life is elaborated
Furthermore, it will be discussed how citizens‘ freedom of in the scenario description.
choice is influenced, what drives the buying criteria for food,
how important labels will be and what role indoor farming Why high food prices are accepted, whether consumers become
will play. producers, how the relationship between citizens and farmers
evolved, which role retailers play in logistics, and what other
properties food must fulfil is at the core of this future world.
Additionally, “Food as a Service” evolves as a distinctive concept
combining technological innovation with decentralisation and
resource savings.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Scenario 3
A CO2-currency and retailers
dominate trade and consump-
tion
In a globalised world, markets and technologies ensure
prosperity for top performers

High-specialised global markets rule the world. Dynamic tech-

nological progress, a competitive surrounding and unlimited
growth characterise this future scenario best. Retail and sales
have huge market power, e-commerce is mainly in the hands of
the big box retailers and the shift towards online consumption
of food is completed.

In this world, flexibility is highly valued by consumers. Willingly

provided transparency about consumer data gives retailers data
sovereignty. Foodservice platforms evolve and are in the large
part successful because of consumer profiling.

Agricultural production has to be efficient and economically

successful in the first place. The effects on land and biodiver-
sity are of minor importance. How agricultural and processing
technologies evolve in this environment is further explained in
the scenario description.

The role of global trade on the variety and prices of food as well as
on its security is as central in this future as CO2-prices, the large-
scale industrial processing of food and the use of side streams.
Other questions are how powerful national and local govern-
ments remain, how AI and new digital solutions are used to
help consumers, why circular economy is the new paradigm to
follow, and why natural resource and biodiversity protection,
as well as climate change mitigation, are still of importance.

10 | 11
Foresight and scenario methodology

Strategic decisions are mostly based on future expectations and visions. What the future actually
looks like is open. However, the development of alternative scenarios of the future helps, to be-
come capable of action. An active examination of possible, as well as desired future developments
strengthens the knowledge base of the decision-makers. The future scenarios developed within
the FOX project are characterised by the fact that they have been generated in a methodically
comprehensible manner, are based on transparent documentation of assumptions and relevant
actors have been involved in the entire process. The future scenarios were designed to discuss
implications for the FOX technologies, the FOX regions and the stakeholders involved and to de-
velop robust action strategies and business models. During the scenario process, existing future
studies as well as expert knowledge were taken as a starting point. The integration of different
perspectives ensured a “collective intelligence”. A precise alignment and customisation of the
selected scenario-approach was applied in order to address the object of research and the current
framework conditions.

The figure on the right shows the different steps we have taken. The resulting future scenarios do
not claim that one of them will happen in exactly the described way. Unlike forecasts, however,
the underlying assumptions are transparent. They can be questioned, changed and, if necessary,
adapted and are thus a means for all players to draw conclusions about their own business, develop
suitable strategies and thus be prepared for change.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
 Trend analysis
Step 1 • Identification of key factors influencing the food sector on the basis of
existing future studies

Development of core scenarios

Step 2 • Development of future assumptions for the six key factors with the highest impact
• Consistency matrix to develop core scenarios

Online scenario process

Step 3 • Enriching the core scenarios by future assumptions of 12 more key factors
• Online foresight scenario process with FOX consortium and external experts

Development of final scenarios

Step 4 • Combination of raw scenarios and additional factors
• Storytelling to illustrate the different pictures of the future

Communication
Step 5 • Communication of the scenarios to the community

Interpretation
Next
Steps • Evaluation and discussion of the impacts on different technologies, regions
and stakeholders

12 | 13
Approach and key factors

Trend analysis determined using a software algorithm. From these assumption

Our study “50 trends influencing Europe’s food sector by 2035” bundles, three bundles were selected as the basis for scenarios.
was the starting point for this scenario process. An environ- This way, so-called raw scenarios are created. The selected
mental analysis has identified and structured several issues that assumption bundles are not only consistent in themselves but
may influence the development of the European food sector should also differ significantly from one another.
and food value chains today and in the future. Based on the
analysis of future studies as well as an internal workshop, a
total number of 18 “key factors” were identified. In the process,
both the framework conditions that are already relevant today Online Scenario process
and those that could have an influence on the food system in In an online foresight scenario process, external experts and the
the future were identified. partners of the FOX consortium have been asked to develop
future assumptions for the remaining 12 key factors in the three
core scenarios. By doing so, the scenarios have been enriched by
more aspects and thus gain more detail. From a methodological
Development of core scenarios perspective, there are three main requirements for the quality of
Out of this 18, the most relevant six key factors have been future assumptions: First, clarity and comprehensibility, means
chosen. These are: “Appreciation of products promoting eco- the projections should be logical and understandable. Second,
system services”, “Degree of centralisation of food production”, plausibility, meaning that projections must first and foremost
“Purchasing behaviour related to food”, “Measures to reduce be plausible, not necessarily be probable. The human brain
climate change in the food sector”, “Public and private invest- tends to think linearly and to project trends from the recent
ment in food and agriculture”, and “AI in the value chain”. To past further into the future. Third, the freedom from overlap,
create future scenarios, alternative developments for these six which means the assumptions, must be disjunctive, i.e. there
key factors have been discussed. Based on a consistency check, must be no overlap between the assumption. In this online
conflicts and synergies between the future assumptions of dif- process, two more topics have been identified and chosen as
ferent key factors were analysed in pairs by the project team in additional key factors.
a consistency workshop and described by a consistency value.
The consistency value represents the extent to which the two
assumptions are mutually exclusive or compatible. The value
scale ran from “−2” (strong inconsistency) to “+2” (strong con- Development of final scenarios and storytelling
sistency). The pairwise combinations with a neutral correlation To create the final scenarios, the core scenarios and the future
between the considered assumptions are assigned a consis- assumptions of the additional factors were combined and de-
tency value of “0”. The consistency values of all combinations scribed in in a written form. This description included a possible
of assumptions of different key factors were compiled in a development of the relevant areas in the year 2035. This served
consistency matrix. The consistency analysis includes a check to illustrate the interconnection of the key factors in the form
of all possible assumption bundles for consistency. Thus, the of comprehensible “stories” and to show the connection to the
overall consistency for each combination of assumptions was future of the European food sector and its value chain.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
 Appreciation of Purchasing behaviour
products promoting related to food
ecosystem services

Degree of
centralisation of
food production

Measures to reduce Public and private

climate change in the investment in food
food sector and agriculture

AI in the
value chain

Sustainability in Food safety and

the food sector security

Growth paradigm Resource availability:

in transition land, water, energy

Food losses and Packaging of

waste food

Quality and quantity Online grocery

of labels shopping

Ownership of Society’s attitude

Data towards new
technologies

Balance of Platforms and

power within the "Product as a service"
value chain in the food sector

14 | 15
The 18 key factors

Factor: Appreciation of products Factor: Purchasing behaviour related

promoting ecosystem services to food

This factor shows to what extend products promoting This factor shows how consumer decisions concerning
ecosystem services will be appreciated. Agricultural nutrition could transform. Because of globalisation, the
production depends on the use of the natural resource base. range of food is becoming increasingly diverse. Decisions
More sustainable management techniques can support related to nutrition are dependent on income, degree of in-
biodiversity and the provision of ecosystem services. With a dustrialisation, cultural influence, knowledge and availability.
growing world population, the challenge of meeting food Packaging, food labelling, product information and price can
demand with less environmental degradation is urgent. How- play an important role in decisions. On the one hand, food
ever, products from sustainable farming have to be demanded is increasingly fulfilling other functions than the mere supply
by consumers and the additional expenditures to produce with nutrients, but on the other hand, the way in which food
them, have to be reflected for example in higher prices for is consumed is also changing.
consumers.

Factor: Measures to reduce climate

Factor: Degree of centralisation of change in the food sector
food production
This factor shows how measures to reduce climate
This factor shows where most of the food products change and lower CO2-emmisions could be realised in
will be produced in 2035, and how centralised this the food sector. Climate change is driving the food sector
food production is organised. Highly efficient production as an externality and as an internality: Increasing risks make
can be achieved by extremely high centralisation on the one new management and production systems necessary to
side and local and sustainable food production on the other ensure food supply. On the other hand, food production is a
side. In order to meet the demand for nutritious and safe main cause for climate change. Therefore, new approaches
food in sufficient quantity various ways can be followed with in the food sector are crucial for tackling climate change.
the specific advantages and disadvantages of global versus Combining adaptation and mitigation is the key challenge.
regional supply of food. Important developments in this Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) proposes one way of
context are the growing world population and urbanisation. addressing these challenges by a sustainable improvement of
Various trade-offs between logistics, natural preconditions, productivity, adapting to and mitigation of climate change, as
storage, diversity of supply etc. have to be considered. well as reducing greenhouse gas emissions where manageable.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
 Factor: Public and private investment
sive than conventional products, so they are not accessible
in food and agriculture
to everyone. Sometimes a lack of transparency and green-
washing is also possible. Consumers cannot retrace for all
This factor shows how public and private investment products if they are sustainable and some companies present
in food and agriculture could transform. More than themselves greener than they are. This leads to uncertainty
800 million people still suffer from hunger and malnutrition. among the consumers.
Investments in agriculture should boost the economy, fight
poverty and improve food security. In low- and middle-income
countries, the private sector is the largest investor in agricul-
ture. The private sector often focuses on maximising profits
Factor: Growth paradigm in transition
and asserting its own interests. States are increasingly tar-
geting public investment in the food sector to ensure a more
sustainable management taking in consideration environ- This factor shows how the growth paradigm could
mental and social aspects as well. transform the food sector. Growth is one of the main
objectives of the current economic model. A growing GDP is
still an indicator for a country’s success. Globalisation itself
continues and products are available anytime and anywhere
in the world. Growth is partly responsible for global social
Factor: Artificial intelligence in the
injustice as the negative environmental and social conse-
value chain
quences of production are in many cases outsourced to
other regions of the world. Consequences are environmental
This factor discusses how intensive and at which steps damage and social injustice in places far away from the actual
of the food value chain, artificial intelligence will be consumption, e.g. unfair working conditions and water
used in 2035. Even if food is an economic good that is very scarcity.
analogous – the industry behind it, is no longer. Digitalisa-
tion has fully captured the food industry. Whether as sorting
machines in logistics or as sales robots in supermarkets – the
use of artificial intelligence will influence the food industry in
Factor: Food safety and security
many ways. AI could also play a crucial role in the food sup-
ply sector. An example is technology that predicts in which
cities which goods will be in demand, when and how often. This factor shows how legal frameworks and regulations
The correct number of orders and the appropriate route could create and ensure food and nutrition security.
could then be automatically generated. The four dimensions of food security are physical availability
of food, economic and physical access to food, food utilisa-
tion and stability of the three dimensions over time. Food
insecurity exists if even one of these conditions is not met.
Food security policies have to address those conditions of
Factor: Sustainability in the food sector
food security that are not fulfilled. They can be designed to
increase food supplies (availability), improve access to food
This factor shows how sustainable food could become (poverty alleviation), improve utilisation, or ensure stability of
more accessible to everyone. Sustainable food becomes food supplies. Policy measures serving more than one food
more popular with an increasing product range. Sustainable security objective are called “twin-track-” or “multiple-
food markets are still niche markets. They are more expen- track-approaches”.

16 | 17
 Factor: Resource availability: Factor: Packaging of food
land, water, energy
This factor shows how food packaging could change
This factor shows how the availability of resources in the next years. In today’s society, packaging is pervasive
could evolve. Due to growing consumption and industri- and essential. It surrounds, enhances and protects the goods
al production, more and more resources are irretrievably we buy, from processing and manufacturing, through handling
consumed within a very short time. The growing world and storage, to the final consumer. Without packaging,
population demands more space for living and land for materials handling would be a messy, inefficient and costly
food cultivation. The excessive use of resources leads to soil exercise and modern consumer marketing would be virtually
degradation, water scarcity, acceleration of climate change impossible. When the public think about packaging, they
and other consequences. All different stages along the value equate it to waste in their garbage bin, litter in the streets
chain require input of energy; they contribute to environ- (waste in the wrong place) and excessive or deceptive pack-
mental pollution and to the greenhouse effect. aging; these dominate the public perceptions of packaging.

Factor: Food losses and waste Factor: Online grocery shopping

This factor shows how losses and waste of food could This factor shows how e-commerce could develop
develop. One-third (1.3 billion tonnes) of food for human in the food sector. Supermarkets and discounter have
consumption is lost or wasted every year. Already during replaced traditional retail trade to some extend. They also
production, storage and transport, but especially in house- offer easily perishable food anywhere at any time. Due to the
holds, many food products are lost. This leads to a wastage growing demands of consumers for online solutions, super-
of resources and has a negative impact on the environment. markets are under great pressure. Some large companies
A reduction in food waste would lead to less environmental have already established B2C e-commerce platforms that
pressure and further on to better production conditions in offer short delivery times for fresh food.
developing countries.

Factor: Ownership of data

Factor: Quality and quantity of labels

This factor deals with the question “who owns the

This factor shows how the quality of labels in the food data?”. To unleash the potential of new data-driven opportu-
sector could transform. Highly competitive and saturated nities, players in the data market need to have access to large
food markets require rapid response to consumer needs. and diverse datasets. Access in relation to data is therefore
Knowledge of the relationship between nutrition and health a crucial factor. However, the new data economy raises
and perception of quality characteristics is increasing. Quality unsolved issues. Where a multitude of actors interacts in the
is a competitive advantage and a subjective evaluation to be elaboration of data, it is often questioned: who owns the
considered in the cultural context. Quality labels are extrinsic data?
quality features that help consumers in their decision-making.
There is a great lack of transparency because there are many
confusing labels.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
 Factor: Balance of power within the
that bring providers together with customers on a digital
value chain
marketplace. Accordingly, digital platforms act as interme-
diaries. The network effect is a major driver of the platform
This factor shows power relations between the dif- economy: the more providers there are on the respective
ferent actors in the food value chain. Value chains that platform, the more interesting it is for the customer. Con-
include agricultural products are becoming increasingly versely, a large customer base attracts other providers. There
global and increasingly closely coordinated. Requirements are three groups that meet on platforms: There are portals
and standards of lead buyers have led to the restructuring that serve the exchange of companies (B2B), the networking
of value chains. Medium-sized companies, as well as large of customers and companies (B2C) and the better exchange
manufacturers and exporters, are the business partners of with the administration (B2G or C2G).
choice for the big retailers because they meet their require-
ments more easily. The focus has shifted from the suppliers’
offer to the buyer’s requirements. Farmers no longer produce
in order to find a market for their goods afterwards. Instead,
those who control the value chains decide what they think
consumers need and design the supply chains accordingly
for these products. However, there are tendencies towards
shorter and more regional value chains.

Factor: Society’s attitude towards new

technologies

This factor shows the openness and tolerance of

agricultural producers as well as consumers towards
emerging technologies. Critics raised concerns that ma-
chines will replace human labour in agricultural production,
while at the same time, to further intensify agriculture and
thus promote climate change. Supporters argue that artificial
intelligence can help combat climate change and improve the
efficiency of food supply. Artificial intelligence in agriculture
has exploded in recent years and enables “smart farming”
for example with self-learning automated machines.

Factor: Platforms and “Product as a

service” in the food sector

This factor describes the alternative developments

of platforms and service oriented business models.
Platform economy refers to internet-based business models

18 | 19
Scenario 1

Policy secures sustainability

Welfare states centrally ensure national food security

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
In this scenario, agriculture is increasingly being nationalised Consumers view aspects such as sustainable production, fair
and has to serve the common good. National states care for trade, traceability, nutritional value or regionality positively,
the well-being of all their citizens. Every country or every but they do not rate them as absolutely necessary. The price
bigger region aims to cover its own needs based on its own is the crucial criterion for consumers when choosing their
rules and natural conditions. Therefore, countries choose food. The focus and the fact that providing the population
adapted crop species or livestock breeds that can be cultivated with high-quality food is of great importance to govern-
and raised with high efficiency. ments, labels are less important in the food sector. As a
result, there will be very few labels.
The complexity of food production and its interlinkages to
the environment are not understood by consumers. Thus, The traditional importance of growth remains strong, but
they do not question restrictions or specifications but trust policy generally focuses on restricting growth to ensure lim-
completely in their government. The state ensures that sus- ited use of resources. As a result, all resources are managed
tainable and nutritious food is accessible to every citizen. It by the government. The state alone decides how land, water
promotes sustainability through tax relieves for fair and envi- and energy should be used. The globalisation tendencies
ronmentally friendly products, but also intervenes intensively resulting from economic growth are no longer relevant in
in agricultural production in the form of stricter regulations – the food sector. Ensuring food security will create global ten-
e.g. in relation to land and pesticide use, water consumption, sions, as various resources for production are scarce and not
soil treatment or fishing quotas. Politicians have recognised available in many parts of the world. High production and
that sustainable agriculture is vital to national food security. food standards are an additional trade barrier and further,
reduce the choice of food.
The state uses locally implemented e-commerce to promote
sustainable consumption. The government not only promotes Since global food trade is limited, food diversity depends
sustainable food trade, but it also incentivises its citizens on a great extend on the local climatic conditions. Techno-
to a healthy lifestyle. This is possible because the state has logical progress – such as indoor farming or the cultivation
data sovereignty and thus access to the purchase data of all of meat – can alleviate this problem. The state is therefore
e-commerce grocery stores. This makes it very easy to smartly basically open to new forms of food production, but only if
analyse people’s purchasing behaviour. Consumer profiling they can provide food in an efficient manner. The centralised
and instructions on food consumption based on state-mon- supply of basic foodstuffs is supported by highly efficient
itored e-health data are core elements of a state platform logistics. Digital technologies are used to better control the
dealing with food and health. For example, catering services entire complex value chain. Since consumers rely mainly on
are also offered via this platform. National retail companies their governments and people do not really understand the
are integrated into state-run e-commerce platforms. structure of food production and its effects, it is mainly the
state that decides whether to support a certain new technol-
State control does restrict citizens’ freedom of choice but ogy or not.
also tackles the big food waste problem effectively. Food
waste is prohibited by law in the entire value chain. It can be
proven exactly who is causing food waste and can therefore
be sanctioned. Plastic packaging is still available as this is the
best way to control the shelf life of food. However, the life
cycle of packaging is highly optimised.

20 | 21
Detail description of all factors and their
future assumptions in this scenario

Factor: Appreciation of products promoting Factor: Degree of centralisation of food pro-

ecosystem services | Assumption: No aware- duction | Assumption: Centralised agriculture
ness or intentional disregard of ecosystem in each country
services
Every country or every bigger region aims to cover its own
The effects the production of agricultural goods has on needs. Countries choose food products that can be cultivat-
the provision of ecosystem services (ESS) is very complex ed with high efficiency. This means, that different products
and thus not understood by consumers. There is a lack of are produced depending on geographical location and
information concerning the services provided by ecosystems. climate conditions. Central production hubs are in place and
Consumers make purchase decisions based on the price or meet a large part of the demand for food. Supply of staple
quality of products. The ecological footprint is not relevant foods is therefore subject to centralised structures and is
for the consumption decisions. Consumers cannot differen- supported by highly efficient logistics. The whole value chain
tiate between conventional products and those supporting is enabled by extensive digitalisation. Even fresh products are
the provision of ESS. Consumers are aware of the topic of produced and processed centralised, but not necessarily in
ESS but do not want to pay higher prices for ecosystem rural areas. Urban farming is used in the same way as in vitro
friendly products. The main focus of agriculture is to ensure meat production in urban surroundings.
accessibility of food.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Factor: Consumer decisions on food shopping | Factor: AI in the value chain | Assumption:
Assumption: Price driven purchasen Intelligent Value Chain

The price is the dominant driver for consumer decisions. Sensors are integrated in every part of the production chain
This is the case for stationary trade as well as for online and collect various kind of data. This includes machine data
shopping. Aspects like sustainable production, fair trade, during processing, real time customer shopping behaviour
organic production, traceability, nutrition value or regional (demand) or information directly from the field like for ex-
production are “nice to have” but are only secondary for ample the moisture of the earth. These information enables
the consumption decision. These arguments play only a role, the use of artificial intelligence at each and every stage of
when products have comparable prices. the value chain and also between these stages. The neces-
sary information flows seamlessly in both directions from
producer to consumer as well as from consumer to producer.
The intensive use of AI offers a wide range of possibilities.
Farms get information on the sales figures of the next weeks
Factor: Measures to reduce climate change in
and can adjust production planning accordingly. Retailers are
the food sector | Assumption: Internalisation
using production and processing data for intelligent pricing
of external effects
to steer customers demand according to the food availability.

CO2 intensive products are charged with high prices by appli-

cation of certain CO2-taxes. Consumers have then the choice
between CO2-intensive products or services at a higher price
or sustainably produced products at a lower price. Govern-
ments apply restrictions on food production and logistics to
decrease CO2-emission. These restrictions can affect the use
of water, transportation or restrict certain products like meat
or other products requiring higher amounts of resources. Food
waste is banned by regulations, at all steps of the food value
chain. There are different laws and regulations in each country.

Factor: Public and private investment in food

and agriculture | Assumption: Sustainable Factor: Sustainability in the food sector |
public investment Assumption: Sustainability through regulation

Agricultural fields are in the hand of the country and bound Politics have realised that a sustainable way of agriculture is
to the common good. A significant part of agricultural areas crucial to feeding the population in the long term. This results
belongs to the state again and cannot be owned or sold in more regulation especially regarding the use of land and
to private persons. The lease of land is exercised according water, treatment of soil, fishing quota and use of pesticides.
to economy for the common good. An innovative change There is a clear regulatory demand on national and EU level
of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has taken place: towards shorter value chains for certain products. Consum-
area-based reward of farmers are replaced almost entirely er trust more into the food they can buy, but they also pay
by payments promoting biodiversity, climate protection and higher prices because the government opts for taxes on less
ecosystem services. sustainable food, e.g. higher taxes on resource intensive meat.

22 | 23
The government decides on sustainability in relation to food not able to keep up with the standards. The choice of food
production, the fraction of land to be used for agriculture is reduced, as the high standards also function as a trade
(in relation to the fraction for e.g. houses, industry, nature) barrier. Global food chains become rare. Citizens have little
and the decision whether the production for export is based knowledge about the standards and trust the government.
on sustainability and not profit. Law ensures that sustainable Therefore, food safety is not a problem in in this scenario.
food will be available for everyone. Unsustainable operations
like inefficiency and waste are punished by a fine, which
will be reinvested in sustainability for water and land use,
CO2-sequestration and others. Governments have access to
Factor: Resource availability: land, water,
purchase data of every e-commerce food store. Purchase
energy | Assumption: Equitable distribution
behaviour of people is smartly analysed taken into account
of resources by the state
household size and other factors. The nutritional content
of the trolley is communicated with the health insurance of
people and consumer get a bonus back if their food choice is The government manages all resources and decides how
a healthy choice. Bonuses can be shopping vouchers for very land, water and energy is used. They decide on the space for
healthy food items with five per cent reduction on the next forest, grassland, environmental protection areas etc. and, in
food purchase. such a way, also stimulate or jeopardise biodiversity. Agri-
cultural land is in public hand and is leased to farmers. The
government takes care of soil health and this is as well part
of the leasing contract. Hence, the contract might be termi-
nated if the farmers leach soil. This has major consequences
Factor: Growth paradigm in transition |
for global biodiversity, climate change and food production.
Assumption: Economic green growth is aspired
Good governance in some countries can be counteracted
by bad governance in large countries, which do not address
Traditional meaning of growth is still strong, but policy gen- sustainability. Policy uses state of the art technologies to
erally focusses to limit growth to a sustainable level, in order make resources available: Depending on its climatic situation,
to ensure a restricted exploitation of resources. Advanced every country has another strategy to optimise their use of
technologies help to save some resources, but still support available resources as water, land and energy to meet the
the paradigm of growth. Economic growth and the global- demand for its own agriculture. Most countries in Europe
isation are not first and foremost driven by the food sector, suffer from long dry periods and heavy rainfalls: All kind of
but rather resulting from technological progress and business freshwater sources, even private wells, are monitored and
activities in other sectors. digitally controlled (IoT) by regional or national governments;
for drying periods governments control the availability of
water for private and public sector by a water management
plan. National water management plans are negotiated every
two years in the CAP. As agricultural land is rare in many
Factor: Food safety and security | Assumption:
regions, vertical farming industries for vegetables, herbs and
High level of policy regulation for food secu-
several fruits are standard. Energy supply is not an issue any
rity and safety
more. Nuclear power is considered the safest and greenest
energy since the aerospace sector got access to Mars. A
Ensuring food security will lead to global tensions because space shuttle brings once a year hazardous waste to Mars.
many resources for production are scarce and not available The waste is stored underground at the planet, because it
in many parts of the world. Policy sets high standards for has a very similar surface to the Earth.
all actors in the food chain, including farmers. This implies
that the total number of farmers will go down, as they are

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
 food again. Production is highly specialised and streamlined.
Factor: Food losses and waste | Assumption:
FLW in production (6–13% as we know it today) is nearly
Regulations to avoid food losses and waste
gone as the governments penalise any kind of spoiling food.
A Lean Management approach to streamline production is
Food loss and waste (FLW) are controlled through policies common in any production facility. Big warehouses are no
and governance on the level of the national government. longer required anymore. Unplanned machine downtimes,
FLW is a “non-topic” for the entire chain. It has never be- which also produce waste, are gone, due to predictive
come a major social concern since it surfaced in 2010–25, maintenance. Behind the scenes, initiatives by retailers (e.g.
as since then food is produced and delivered via short and through foundations) organise the re-use of FLW in food
regional value chains. The policy has introduced measures to banks or as input to biorefinerys just to avoid a potential hic-
reduce food losses. The actual amount of food losses shrunk cup of the media. Every household has an organic waste bin.
to 1/10 compared to 1/3 in 2020. Governments do not allow A fee is charged according to weight of food waste, normal
waste anymore: the EU regulation banning the use of food bins are checked with sensors to ensure that they are not
for feeding animals is withdrawn, appropriate technologies misused for food waste and cities and regions are running
guarantee that it is safe to be used as feed. A remaining chal- modern composting plants or biogas plants. In addition, the
lenge is the safety of food side streams to be used in human supply chains are changing, resulting in less food loss.

24 | 25
Factor: Quality and quantity of labels | Assump- Factor: Online grocery shopping | Assumption:
tion: Strict state regulation for fewer labels E-commerce on local or regional level imple-
mented
The policy decides to reduce food labels to a minimum as
only food quality and price is the decisive factor for pur- National retailers jump into the e-platforms. Supermarkets
chase decision. The main part of food comes from regional become meeting points and pick-up stations for food that
agriculture – organic production is a quality label as well. has been ordered before online. The policy use e-commerce
The government rules the food sector and sets the scene for to take care of sustainable food trade and consumer health.
the standards and the level of the quality and quantities. It The government imposes restrictions to global e-companies
decides what and when to produce. Food labels are strictly and promotes local and direct selling. Farmers receive incen-
controlled, specific quality schemes are in hands of govern- tives and cooperation in direct selling.
ment agencies. They are not prohibited, but have to pass an
official test. Policy will implement labels curated by the state.
Nameless currently existing labels will disappear from the
market. Therefore, labels outside the foreseen box are consid-
Factor: Ownership of Data | Assumption: Data
ered as marketing. The consumer will always find approved
owned by the state
labels in the same place on a product, in a highlighted box.
The main goal would be the increase of consumption of
healthier and local food products. Denomination of origin Governmental infrastructures provide a secured exchange
will be supported, more and more organic agriculture is and storage of all kinds of data. Therefore, the state owns
established, naturalness outperforms over globalisation or some of the data and uses it. Public awareness is high and
local labels. However, labels play only an important role for makes sure, that the data is not used in an unappropriated
the consumer, when the co mpeting products have compara- way. This means that the states are not using any data to
ble prices. observe people’s behaviour or for any kind of social scoring.

Factor: Packaging of food | Assumption: Food Factor: Balance of power within the value
packaging still in place chain | Assumption: Regulations ensure an
equal distribution of power
Most of the food products are still packaged in household
sizes. However, the policy has installed strict rules on which Community organisations such as farmers’ cooperatives,
materials for packaging are allowed. Hybrid materials like agricultural credit cooperatives and trade unions are well-es-
carton-polymer packs for drinks and liquids are more and tablished tools to promote a balance of power in agricultural
more prohibited. Plastic packaging however is still available, value chains, as long as they are protected against abuse of
as this is in this scenario the best way to control the shelf life power and unfair trading practices. In addition, there is a
of food, but all packaging have a deposit and are returned to high degree of price transparency, i.e. price threshold, below
supermarkets’ return stations. which the affordability of products and, more globally,
the sustainability of the entire value chain is at stake, are
disclosed. Identifying products and regions where these
costs are not recovered also provide useful information for
areas where buyer power is particularly high and helps to
take preventive measures against unfair trading practices.
European competition policy is also based on the principle of

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
neutrality, i.e. that excessive buyer power is regulated to the
same extent as excessive seller power, because of its expect-
ed negative effects on the general interest and consumer
interests in Europe.

Factor: Society’s attitude towards new tech-

nologies | Assumption: New government data
platform, little information about technologies

Since consumers generally trust in their government and

people do not really understand food production structures
and their effects, it is mainly the state that decides on the
question of whether a particular new technology is supported
or not. The quality and price of the product plays a role. If
the process can be used to reduce the production costs, it is
of high value.

Factor: Platforms and “Product as a service”

in the food sector | Assumption: Governmen-
tal platforms to serve information on food
and health

Citizens receive the instructions on their food consumption

from the government, based on e-health data, which are
also monitored by the government. This limits freedom in
terms of food choice, but on the other hand also reduces the
number of overweight citizens, which in turn has a positive
impact on welfare diseases such as diabetes type II. An
increased number of platforms offer food services, which are
monitored by the government. Food safety has priority with
an increasing number of inspections and data management.

26 | 27
 Future story

Strong regulation puts the brakes on entrepreneurship

Michael (31) has been a loyal employee of a grocery store in foods like potatoes and bread are tax-free. The taxation of
a small village for many years. In 2020, he had completed his food produced outside the state is also based on the criteria
vocational training as a retail salesman in the same store. Un- of healthy nutritional values and sustainability, but the
like many of his work colleagues, he recently felt the urge to criterion of distance also plays a major role. The minimum
realise himself. There was a great demand for other grocery tax rate for foreign food is 20%. This applies, for example,
stores in his home village. Therefore, he decided to open his to healthy foods from Europe, such as oranges from Spain.
own grocery store. He submitted the construction project The maximum tax rate of 50% applies to overseas food such
to the responsible state authority. The long audit process, as Avocados. Food that is also produced domestically – like
which included checking whether Michael had the profes- Argentinian, American or Brazilian beef – may no longer be
sional skills and the mental constitution for such a task, came offered.
to an end: Michael was officially allowed to start planning
the market. What he was not aware of before was the strict Ultimately, Michael‘s plans failed due to the complicated state
state requirements for operating a food market. requirements. His story is exemplary for a lot of entrepre-
neurs and start-ups. The extensive governmental regulation
For example, for reasons of food taxation in the market, makes it on the one hand very difficult for small enterprises
there must be a strict spatial separation of domestic and and self-employed entrepreneurs, on the other hand, it en-
foreign food: The taxation of domestic food is based on sures overall a certain degree of sustainability for example by
the criteria of healthy nutritional values and sustainability. an innovative change of the Common Agricultural Policy.
Unhealthy foods and foods with a high negative environ-
mental impact are taxed at a maximum of 30%, while staple

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Germany has done it again –
Recycling World Champion 2035
and setting the agenda for the
EU recycling initiative.
German government takes positive stock after five
years of deposit system for plastic packaging and
plastic traceability law

Due to the littering of the world’s oceans, plastic has been

badly discredited in the first two decades of this millen-
nium. Nevertheless, plastic is indispensable in the food
industry due to the excellent preservation of perishable
food and the protection against pathogens in supermar-
kets. Many European governments had tackled the envi-
ronmental problem and made great strides through strict
plastic use regulations. Germany is considered a pioneer:
on January 1, 2030, the German government introduced
a nationwide deposit system for plastic packaging. Each
plastic packaging was given a deposit of at least one euro
and a substantial weight-based surcharge. In addition, the
last owner of plastic packaging is clearly traceable through
state-controlled tracking systems. The illegal disposal of
plastic has serious criminal consequences. The European
Commission announced to implement a similar system on
an European level by the end of 2038.

Online News 2035

28 | 29
Scenario 2

Society drives sustainability

Consumers enjoy a green and healthy lifestyle

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
People intrinsically live in harmony with nature and the envi- not suffer from food production. A high amount of food,
ronment and value a healthy lifestyle. They see the big pic- especially fresh food, is produced within a 1-mile radius of
ture and have learned to waive luxury. Sustainable behaviour the final customer or place of consumption. Staple foods,
and movements like “Fridays for Future” become a part of that can be not produced locally are still imported and where
mainstream society. feasible replaced by regional alternatives.

Society has identified excessive economic growth as a key The intensive contact between farmers and consumers and
problem. The “post-growth society” is moving away from the local and decentralised production, which requires less
consumerism and prefers a sustainable and healthy lifestyle. storage and transport, leads to a minimal loss of food. As
Food consumption patterns correspond to the availability and consumers themselves become producers, the subjective
requirements of a sustainable food value chain, which has a value of food also increases. Food waste is frowned upon
particularly positive effect on food security and safety. The in society. Technologies make an additional contribution to
role of the national government is limited, but there is still a avoiding food waste. Methods that are used today in highly
well-organised government at the local level. The opinions efficient industries such as the automotive industry are
and views of consumers and producers are taken very seriously. now widely used in the food industry. Data availability and
Consumers prefer regional products. They rate global food AI technologies make it easy to predict demand. There are
trade very critically due to the negative environmental impact many innovative technologies and small devices that help
for many products and the lack of information about the people to optimally preserve their fresh food.
production conditions. Therefore, the import of exotic foods is
largely avoided. Food diversity suffers as a result. New digital technologies are used for smart decisions in
single parts of the value chain. People are particularly curious
Society is happy with activities that do not require many about technologies that enable them to optimise their health
resources because people are aware of their scarcity. Accord- or can pave the way for a considerate life. Therefore, new
ingly, local communities take good care of the use of natural sustainable forms of food production, such as urban farming
resources such as land, water and energy. Tax benefits lead or cultivated meat, are becoming increasingly important.
to an almost decentralised and privatised energy supply in “Food as a Service” is integrated into the food policy of local
the hands of municipalities, larger companies and private communities. These well-organised food service systems, in
households. Consumers accept windmills and solar panels which all citizens could play a role, can reduce the time spent
because most of them are shareholders. preparing food. Decentralisation and interconnectivity are
possible because data is publicly owned.
People accept high food prices if food is produced in a
sustainable and socially acceptable way. The demand for Through consistent sustainable consumption, society literally
regional organic products is accordingly very high. They are forces retailers to make their food assortment ever more
also happy to grow their own fruits and vegetables in their sustainable. This also affects food packaging. They are
own garden. Because of self-optimisation efforts, foods with reduced to a minimum, are largely biodegradable or even
healthy nutritional values are preferred. Thus, sustainability edible. Much of the food is bought in e-commerce stores
and health are crucial criteria for consumers when choosing or via e-commerce delivery. The prevailing opinion is that
their food. the food life cycle is most sustainable when all logistics are
organised from one provider. Accordingly, the entire food
Agricultural land is in the hand of many. Agriculture takes logistics is organised by retailers. Conventional supermarkets
place in the immediate vicinity of consumers and therefore no longer exist, they have become logistic centres. However,
enjoys great trust in society. It is important to consumers that farmers’ markets are very popular because consumers like to
not only global but also in particular local biodiversity does buy fresh local food.
30 | 31
Detail description of all factors and their
future assumptions in this scenario

Factor: Appreciation of products promoting Factor: Degree of centralisation of food pro-

ecosystem services | Assumption: Market for duction | Assumption: 1-mile-rule
products promoting ecosystem services exists
Almost all food is produced within a 1-mile radius of the final
Products promoting ecosystem services are in demand. customer or place of consumption. Vertical surfaces and roof
Therefore, the coupling of production and consumption is areas for urban gardening and farming enable cooperatives
working. The production of ESS friendly products follows a or neighbourhood associations to grow vegetables and fruits
systemic and comprehensive approach. Direct promotion of efficiently and locally. Consumers themselves are becoming
sustainable production and the support of ESS is widespread. producers, through 3D-printing and other new technologies;
Ecosystem friendly products are as common as organic it is also conceivable that artificial meat or food can be pro-
products. To ensure the reliability of these products, high duced in one’s own cellar according to the personal, individ-
traceability within the value chain is guaranteed. Ecosystem ual raw material composition. Staple foods that cannot be
services are differently addressed by various products, but produced locally are replaced by regional alternatives. One
to simplify the communication, ESS are bundled onto one example is rice, which is mostly substituted by grains (oat,
certification. wheat, rye, barley) in Europe.

Factor: Consumer decisions on food shopping |

Assumption: Health and self-optimisation

Health and self-optimisation is the key driver for consumer

decisions. For the food sector, it means that functional food
becomes more relevant. The food intake fulfils the purpose
of self-optimisation. The food, pharma and medicine sectors
are more and more merging. Nutritional supplements are in
a part of almost every food product. Food and other parts of
life, like sport or wellness are combined and aligned accord-
ing to medical information. The pleasure of food or fine
dining are no longer a selling point. Nutrigenomics, meaning
personalised food according to the specific needs of the
consumer have a huge market share.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Factor: Measures to reduce climate change in Factor: Public and private investment in food
the food sector | Assumption: Society triggers and agriculture | Assumption: Sustainable
production with low CO2-emission mainly private investment

Movements like “Friday for future” have risen awareness Investment in agriculture comes from diversified sources,
within society. More and more people have a demand for e.g. small investment volumes are possible (crowdfunding),
sustainable products. This customer demand for climate-neutral and various types of investors are active in the agricultural
food and food products is the main driving force for sustain- field. There is a high diversity of landowners and agricultural
able food production. Industry satisfies the market pull and land is in the hands of many. Land allocation is related to the
offers sustainable food as mass product. This is working concept of societal needs. Agroforestry is attractive for farm-
economically because customers are willing to pay a higher ers because they receive payments to guarantee economic
price for these products. The customer behaviour, however, viability.
strongly depended on income and overall welfare. Sustain-
able food products are therefore more in demand in highly
industrialised countries.

32 | 33
Factor: AI in the value chain | Assumption: Factor: Food safety and security | Assumption:
Use of AI at specific stages of the value chain High food safety and security through respon-
sible consumption
Effective sensors are available and used for specific parts of
the food value chain. The collected information is not shared The role of the government is limited in this scenario, this
along the different stages but remains within one-step of the holds especially at the national level. At the local level, there
value chain. Only this part (e.g. logistic) can make use of the is still a well-organised government, where the voice of con-
data. This means only parts of the value chain are smart. The sumers and producers plays a central role in deciding what
majority of farming processes are still analogue. Maybe there to produce. This assures a variety of foods that can be grown
is some intelligence within the production chain but no con- within one mile. Local governments also organise a kind of
nection in-between. This leads to some small smart islands safety plan to assure that sufficient food is available in the
within the entire production chain. community during critical years. Food security is overcome
because food consumption patterns follow the availability
and requirements of a sustainable food value chain. Food
safety is not a problem in this scenario.

Factor: Sustainability in the food sector |

Assumption: Sustainability through consumer
decision
Factor: Resource availability: land, water,
energy | Assumption: Resource use as individual
The consumers decide what is sustainable and what is not.
responsibility
The demand for organic products increases as there is a
growing acceptance for higher prices. Also, self-supply by
growing own fruits and vegetable increases. People are All communities are aware of the need to be self-sufficient in
intrinsically motivated to choose the most sustainable option. food production. They take good care of the use of natural
Policy starts to internalise external costs making sustainable resources like land, water and energy. Some regions are dis-
production as well as products more affordable in contrast to favoured in terms of water availability or quality of the land.
conventional ones. Solidarity between regions needs to be organised. Society
is aware of resource scarcity. Tax benefits lead to an almost
decentralised and privatised energy supply in the hands of
municipalities, larger companies and private households.
Consumers accept windmills and solar panels around as
Factor: Growth paradigm in transition |
most of them are shareowners. Modern technology, very
Assumption: Post-Growth Society
large supply networks and good policies ensure that water
is always available. If private households exceed the average
The paradigm of excessive growth of the economy was consumption, the unit price per litre increases considerably.
understood as one of the core problems. Humans are now Sustainability is more the main driver than resource efficiency.
living more for happiness. They are happy with activities that Therefore, a debate is on the use of land for food produc-
do not need many resources. There is no more maximisation tion, and for energy. The energy consumption decreases,
of money and goods. The result is a general change of soci- as we travel less, and industries using a lot of energy are
ety towards a sustainable and healthy lifestyle and a move banned.
away from consumerism.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Factor: Food losses and waste | Assumption: Factor: Quality and quantity of labels |
Less food waste by consumers’ conviction Assumption: Sustainability labels on the rise
and technological improvement
Given the increased importance of self-optimisation, health-
By intrinsic motivation, people will stop wasting food by related labels remain. NGOs implement labels curated such as
themselves. It becomes very popular to consume also food WWF label for some retailer brands. There are new green labels
that does not look perfect, such as twisted carrots or brown and quality goes in the direction of sustainability (social,
bananas. Food sharing becomes very popular. As a huge part economic and environmental). Life Cycle Assessment is com-
of food production happens locally and therefore requires pulsory for many products and the environmental footprint
less storage and transport, food losses and waste are mark- is part of the information on products. Each community may
edly reduced. As consumers are also becoming producers on have its own standards, depending on the local preferences
their own, the subjective value of food increased. Citizens and beliefs. This implies a lot of difference in food quality
monitor their own food consumption and energy use. This and quantities produced across regions. The consumers love
may have a positive impact on over-consumption and con- labels and prefer those showing the food is coming from
tributes to waste reduction. Raw materials are expensive and their neighbourhood or are produced in a very sustainable
valuable. Food loss and waste in production are gone, as the way. Farming and processing are under critical deep re-
consumers and society do not accept spoiling food anymore. view. Large food producers can apply for a zero-waste and
This pressure and the high price of raw materials makes the zero-emission logo that is awarded by an official body in
companies move: Methods used in highly efficient industries each country. Without at least one of these labels, it is very
such as the automotive sector are now also widely applied difficult for large food producers to survive. The majority of
in the food industry. A machine runs 100% during schedule the food is healthy and ecologically acceptable.
due to data analytics. TPM (Total Productive Maintenance)
assures the right level of care to have 100% availability.
The lifestyle of health and sustainability (LOHAS) and the
preference for highly personalised nutrition make FLW a
Factor: Packaging of food | Assumption: Bulk
topic of much bigger concern for the entire value chain and
stores on- and offline
society. Food waste is a sin. The consumer is again moving
very close to agriculture and production and identifies with
it. People experienced after Corona some pandemics that Consumer prefer to buy products with no or just few packag-
have even be much worse and they understood that food ing. Bulk stores are very common and sell almost every food
and nutrition are elementary to survive. Every apartment, item unpackaged. The sale of unwrapped goods e.g. large
houses, even rented flats have access to urban farming, land containers are an ecological and resource-saving alternative
shared with others or greenhouse-boxes in large cities. All to disposable packaging. Therefore, customers who want
children learn in school how to cook and preserve food, as to shop at bulk stores bring their own containers. Another
well as how valuable food is. Plenty of innovative small-scale available option is for the store to let customers borrow their
technologies and devices are around everywhere to help containers, which can be returned during the next trans-
people to preserve their food that is not consumed freshly. action. This option usually requires the customers to pay a
Ideally, local production (within 1 mile) with a lot of contact certain amount of deposit that will be reimbursed when the
between producer and consumer will result in minimum food containers return.
loss and waste. Due to AI and data availability, the prediction
of demand is quite simple. With digitalisation and tracking
systems being well established, FLW information from farm
to fork is readily available but is only used for efficiency man-
agement along the chain.

34 | 35
Factor: Online grocery shopping | Assumption: Factor: Ownership of Data | Assumption: Data
E-commerce stores dominate the sale owned by the public (open data)

Logistics innovate completely: LCA and footprint differenti- Public awareness for data allows the use and storage of big
ate e-commerce, e-companies, food products and farming data on the one hand and ensures a responsible use on the
systems. All food is purchased in e-commerce stores or by other hand. Data like new green parameters are collected by
e-commerce delivery or picked up as it has been figured satellites and drones. A high degree of interconnectivity along
out that food delivery is most sustainable if the logistic is the value chain enables the intensive use of AI. Blockchain
organised completely from point of production to the house- technology works by using a decentralised ledger system.
hold. This is especially interesting when combined with the
factor of less packaging and bulk stores. Total food logistic is
organised by the retailer, by the support of AI, by e-bikes and
e-cars to deliver the last mile, by food lockers cooled if needed
and accessible 24/7. Supermarkets do not exist anymore;
they became logistic centres. However, farmers’ markets are
very popular as consumer love to buy fresh local food. New
green labels managed by the e-companies are introduced.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Factor: Balance of power within the value Factor: Platforms and “Product as a service”
chain | Assumption: Digitalisation empowers in the food sector | Assumption: Platforms to
consumers support sustainable and efficient food

With their purchasing decisions, people contribute to Actors in the food chain are very well connected in order
respecting human rights, conserving resources or protect- to make optimal use of the benefit that can be created by
ing the climate. With their consumption and living habits, offering food services instead of just food products. Food
consumers can have a lasting influence on the range of actors also cooperate closely with local entrepreneurs for
goods on offer and thus on the market. Examples from e-commerce and logistics. Food as a service is integrated into
the past show how consumers can exercise power through the communities’ food policy. Citizens reduce the amount
their purchasing decisions. For example, organic foods have of time spent in preparing food by a well-organised food-ser-
made the leap from niche existence in health food stores to vice-system in which all citizens have a role to play. Exchanges
supermarkets and even discounters because of increasing de- of big and local data increase as well as mapping territorial
mand. On the one hand, sustainable shopping means taking green policies on reforestation. There are new green values
responsible care to ensure that ecologically and socially safe in supply.
products end up in the shopping trolley. On the other hand,
sustainable shopping also means buying from companies
that take their social responsibility seriously – companies that
treat their employees appropriately, pay attention to energy
efficiency or ensure that their products are manufactured
in an environmentally and socially responsible manner. At
this point, transparency and traceability of supply chains are
essential and are ensured by appropriate labels (see factor
Quality and quantity of labels).

Factor: Society’s attitude towards new tech-

nologies | Assumption: Technologies directly
serve social demand and are therefore widely
accepted

Consumers accept new technologies, but only if they meet

their demands, e.g. a sustainable production and allowing
for health- and self-optimisation. People are also willing to
pay more for food products manufactured with such tech-
nologies. The driver is the argument about energy saving. A
new technology becomes interesting the more energy it can
save. Transparency is the key here. The use of new plants and
new material for CO2-sequestration increases. Genetics is
only applied if it is in the interest of biodiversity. Farming and
processing controls are centralised.

36 | 37
 Future story

Local farmer brew meat

Emma (35) is a teacher at a primary school. Today, with her My son Peter (30) also wants to continue on the path cho-
fourth class, there is an excursion to farmer Willi (60) who sen. Together we plan to expand our business area. As you
runs a high-tech farm on the outskirts of the city. The tram may have seen on your arrival, there is a large construction
ride, which lasted only ten minutes, went smoothly. Willi site next to my brewery. A 30-meter-high building will be
welcomes the children to the heart of his farm, his meat built there to be used for vertical farming and aquaponics. In
brewery. The children look at four giant bioreactors and a the future, fish and vegetables from Willi and Peter will also
conveyor system that transports the freshly brewed meat be available at the “Neighbourgoods Market”, our weekly
from the farm’s hygiene area. They eagerly await what grocery market at the old slaughterhouse. We will successively
Farmer Willi has to tell: “Fortunately, ten years ago, I realised renature our huge arable land, which I still needed a few
very early that my cattle breeding, which was geared for years ago to produce animal feed. In a few years, we would
efficiency, had no future. The demand for meat from factory like to settle bison on these areas, which can live almost
farming had decreased massively – yes, I was even outlawed independently in the newly emerging mixed forests. By doing
for my work. So, I took a huge step forward at that time. so, our company could also be successful in the premium
I was the first farmer in Europe to invest in a meat brewery in meat segment. Then, when you are in my age, you can go
2025. Today, ten years later, I can supply my beef all over our for a walk in our forest or at our pasture and with a little luck
city. I am lucky to be able to make a hugely positive contribu- you can see our happy herd of bison.
tion to our environment. Many farmers across Europe have
taken me as an example.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Janne Korhonen Latest Tweet · August 25, 2035

Janne Korhonen · @Janne Korhonen · 1,4 Mio. Follower

Helsinki
Super happy – today I did the #HelsinkiMarathon in less than
92 yo Finn trying to
4:30h! I thank #science for the progress on the field of #nutrige-
become the oldest
person on earth nomics. Without the right #individualnutrition that would never
have been possible. Looking forward to some relaxing days now!
#followyourdreams
#healthyaging Take it easy, Janne
#foodenthusiasm

Social Media Post 2035

38 | 39
Scenario 3

A CO2-currency and retailers dominate trade and consumption

In a globalised world, markets and technologies ensure prosperity for top performance

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
High-specialised global markets rule the world. The social atti- it is not possible to guarantee safe food because global trade
tude is: People acting in their self-interest also advance the focuses on very cheap food. The price pressure is so high that
common welfare. The key to overcoming global challenges is there are low-quality products or even unsafe products in
not social change but dynamic technological progress. The the food chain. Food security is also a problem: global scarcity
growth paradigm, deeply rooted in society, and the focus on leads to trade conflicts. Some regions are being exploited.
new technologies lead to the very competitive surrounding. The power of national and local governments is limited and
In the economy, unlimited growth is the main driver and profit overruled by multinationals and supranational organisations.
maximisation is the overarching goal of most companies. They are also the ones who decide on the use of land, water
and energy. Politicians only set minimum standards that vary
Large retail and sales groups dominate the food industry. from state to state. Multinational companies are aware of
Retail and sales, therefore, have the largest profit margin. the need for biodiversity and know the consequences of
E-commerce, which is mainly in the hands of the big box global warming. Therefore, they also see the need to invest
retailers, also increases the sales share of retailers. Since in protected areas and to preserve natural habitats. Basically,
retailing via e-commerce has proven to be significantly less companies are interested in good and sustainable develop-
expensive than operating large supermarkets, the majority of ments as long as it serves the aim of guaranteeing profits.
groceries are sold online. The consumer’s purchase decision
is mostly made online anyway, because flexibility is the cru- Climate protection still takes place, but not out of intrinsic
cial criterion for consumers when choosing their food. conviction, but rather to prevent personal disadvantages. A
waiver does not matter to people – sustainability is priced
Retailers have sovereignty over information and can thus de- in for all products in the form of a CO2-price. Retailers use
sign the completely digitised value chains in their favour. The sustainability as a business model and have recognised that
data sovereignty of retailers makes the customer transparent. offering sustainable products can strengthen their core busi-
As a result, retailers understand general buying behaviour, ness. They, therefore, like to use the concept of sustainability
know all of their customers’ preferences and expectations, as an advertising purpose. Labels are gradually disappearing
and can make individual buying offers to each customer. from products as they become too complex and industry has
The profiling of consumers is a core element of foodservice found new digital solutions that help consumers choose the
platforms. Food services are a booming business. On a global product they want or need. Food packaging can therefore
level, actors who develop food services inspire everyone else. also be reduced to a minimum.

Agriculture has to become more and more efficient so that The large-scale industrial processing of food helps to reduce
it remains economical. The resulting profit-oriented land use food losses since processes for side streams can be applied
leads to soil degradation. Furthermore, biodiversity suffers very efficiently. Thus, food waste is also a valuable part of the
greatly from the farming of huge, highly efficient monocul- circular economy because the resources required to produce a
tures and is only preserved in designated areas worldwide. product are scarce and expensive. As a result, a circular econ-
There is general support for technologies that enable the ef- omy is the new paradigm to follow. New technologies also
ficient production of food. These technologies are validated by make it much easier to reduce food waste. Methods that are
global e-retailers. Agricultural and processing technologies used today in highly efficient industries such as the automotive
are therefore subject to global standardisation and harmon- industry are now widely used in the food industry. Regardless
isation, which is often not transparent to consumers and of what is produced, predicting demand is fairly simple due to
additionally, reduces the rate of innovation. Due to the global AI and data availability. Intelligent technologies in households
food trade, consumers can enjoy a wide variety of foods. and communities have replaced the previous waste system.
However, despite new technologies and high standards,

40 | 41
Detail description of all factors and their
future assumptions in this scenario

Factor: Appreciation of products promoting Factor: Degree of centralisation of food

ecosystem services | Assumption: Products production | Assumption: Centralisation and
promoting specific compensation payments specialisation of agriculture
preserving ESS
An international masterplan is organising and monitoring
The production of food and the provision of ecosystem ser- global food production. Every country is producing what it
vices does not occur at the same place. Although there is an does best, not only for itself. This leads to huge “agricultural
awareness that ecosystem services need to be supported and Mega-Factories” that fully exploit the specific cultivation
consumers have a willingness to pay more for ESS friendly conditions. Fresh goods (fruits, vegetables) are produced in
products, the production of food is not directly linked to highly efficient and highly specialised production sites. This
the provision of ESS. Rather, money is spent on measures worldwide division of production requires global trade and
to promote ESS in other places. An example of this spatial- sophisticated logistics. Countries coordinate who produces
ly decoupled approach is the willingness to pay more for which products at what time in order to be able to react to
certain products, which do not foster the provision of ESS on the changing global demand.
or close to production but spending the additional money on
the preservation of forest in South America (remote protec-
tion of ESS). There are many different labels, to promote all
different kinds of compensation payments.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Factor: Consumer decisions on food shopping | Factor: Public and private investment in food
Assumption: Food on the go and agriculture | Assumption: Profit driven
private investments
The traditional way of food consumption does not exist
any longer. Classical habits like three or four meals a day at There is a conflict of interest between consumer and pro-
regular times are replaced by more and smaller in-between ducer. There are no climate change mitigation measures in
meals. This development is described with the term “snack- place. Biodiversity measures are neither taken nor would
ification”. The rhythms of our everyday life are structuring they be rewarded. “Land grabbing” expands dramatically,
the mealtimes and our eating habits. This means more only a few players own the majority of agricultural areas.
flexibility, more mobility since work, education and spare The profit-driven land management leads to desolation of
time are increasingly merging. This influences where we eat the grounds (e.g. soils are not covered with vegetation layers
and when. App-based delivery services, which provide very for a significant time of the year); more and more products
fast and highly varied meals are replacing traditional food have to be imported. A significant amount of area is used for
retailers since viewer meals are prepared and eaten at home. the bioeconomy and related biorefineries rather than food
Health and price arguments are not, or very few influencing production. High yielding monocultures predominate, which
consumer decisions. leads to the loss of cultural landscape.

Factor: Measures to reduce climate change in Factor: AI in the value chain | Assumption:
the food sector | Assumption: CO2-emission is Retailer is information hub
new currency
Retailers act as information hubs, meaning they collect data
The governments of all UN-countries agreed on a CO2-emission from the whole value chain as well as from the consumers.
currency. This currency gives every product and every service They have the most information and are the players that can
a second price, additional to the price expressed in monetary use AI most efficiently. Sensors in every part of the pro-
terms. Both prices, the usual one and the emission price duction chain collect data about production, processing or
have to be paid when purchasing a product or service. This packaging. This information is transferred seamlessly towards
“CO2-price” is based on the CO2-emission and calculated by the retailer. In the other direction, however, no information
a Life Cycle Assessment approach. Every citizen has a certain is given (one-way flow of data). Retailers and sales become
amount of CO2-emission per year but can trade this con- smart because they can use big data for intelligent pricing,
tingent like money. Companies (seller) like food producers smart stocks and customised advertising. From the customer
receive not only the money but also the CO2-price from the perspective, there is access to most information throughout
customer and can spend it on food production. During food the production chain.
production, all resources like water, fertiliser or fuel, have
required the payment of money and CO2-price as well.

42 | 43
Factor: Sustainability in the food sector | Factor: Growth paradigm in transition |
Assumption: Sustainability as business model Assumption: Unlimited growth
for retailer
Growth is still one of the main drivers and objectives of the
Retailers have realised that offering sustainable products economy. Consumers still may enjoy a variety of food prod-
will strengthen their core business. They use their power in ucts, which is the result of an equilibrium of different forces.
pricing to promote sustainable products by making them There is a total focus on maximisation of profit and money,
affordable because they realised that destroying their basis therefore a strong paradigm of growth that leads to the
of success (a stable and secure agricultural system) will cause empowerment of the biggest. This results in a huge imparity
massive problems in future and will harm their business. among countries and humans in individual countries.
Some retailers see sustainability more as an advertisement
and as a by-product. Their focus is on optimisation of profit
and cheap food. Therefore, there is no real contribution to
sustainable food for all.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Factor: Food safety and security | Assumption: Factor: Food losses and waste | Assumption:
Low food safety and security No food losses due to specialisation and
reuse
Due to global exchange and focus on very cheap food –
despite new technologies and high standards – it is not The entire recycling industry has grown extremely fast, food
possible to ensure safe food. The reason for this is that waste has now a price and each major food producer has its
the price pressure is so huge, and the availability is low. own business unit dealing with food preservation and recy-
Therefore, low-quality products or even unsafe products cling. Smaller producers have outsourced this part. By this,
are in the food chain. Security is a problem as well. Global new business raise like re-food companies selling bioactive
scarcity leads to trade conflicts (or even worse), exploitation peptides or proteins extracted from food leftover. The large
in many regions has grown worse. The power of national industrial processing of food in this scenario contributes to
and local governments is limited and overruled by multi- the reduction of food loss and waste, as with central produc-
nationals and supranational organisations. Both suprana- tion, you can also develop processes for side streams. From
tional organisations (like the UN) and food multinationals a societal impact, the retailers reduce food waste, but also
set the scene for food production and food trade. see the importance of producers and consumers as other
actors in the chain. Smart technologies in households and in
communities replace the former waste system.

Factor: Resource availability: land, water,

energy | Assumption: Resources managed
by the industry Factor: Quality and quantity of labels |
Assumption: Labels made by retailers
The multinationals and supranational organisations decide
on the rules for the use of land, energy and water. Multi- Labels disappeared from products as they become too com-
nationals are aware of the need for biodiversity and know plex and the industry found new digital solutions to help the
the consequences of global warming. Hence, they also see consumer choose the product they want or need. Retailers
the need to invest in forestry and the need to stay away enforce their own sustainability labels. Especially for their
from natural habitats. They invest in clean water, precision own brands, there is increasing cooperation between retail-
farming and renewable energy. Retailers will push for ers and agricultural associations (like Lidl & Bioland, Kaufland
technological solutions, e.g. reuse of water when growing & Demeter). Labelling schemes go hand in hand with retail-
vegetables or generating energy from food waste. Com- ers and food producers, providing a competitive environment
panies are global players and the shares of their compa- and enabling presentation where they are better than other
nies are traded in the Global Eco Index, which is subject to companies. Consumers have limited information about the
special rules (e.g. forward contracts are not allowed, etc.). quality and background of foods. Actually, they do not need
In principle, the companies are interested in good and these, because food selection is based on the trust towards
sustainable developments, but profits are also important, the selected supplier of food.
and especially the population in countries with corrupt
governments suffers. Policy and governments only set the
minimum standard, which differs from state to state.

44 | 45
Factor: Packaging of food | Assumption: Pack- Factor: Ownership of Data | Assumption:
aging only where absolutely necessary Retailers own the data

Retailers have replaced materials such as plastic by more Retailers and e-commerce platform invest many resources in
sustainable alternatives and use more and more bulk assort- gaining, storing and analysing data. The data is not coming
ments. They increased their engagement in recycling, maybe only from consumer platforms but from all steps of the food
also by setting up their own business area such as Greencycle. value chain. Retailer have therefore the power to manage
the whole food systems by the end. There is little regulation
by policy, but industry associations impose certain rules on
themselves to prevent data misuse that would harm the
industry in the long term.
Factor: Online grocery shopping | Assumption:
Pervasive e-commerce in the hands of the big
box retailers

Factor: Balance of power within the value

The turnover of retailers grows by e-commerce. Retailers
chain | Assumption: Market power of retailers
understand the overall buying behaviour, know all the
preferences and expectations of their customers and can
make individual purchase offers to each customer. Since Large retail stores and discounters have mostly replaced the
distribution by e-commerce has proven to be much more traditional offer structure of small food retailers. This led
cost-efficient for retailers than running large supermarkets, to a shift in power from consumer goods manufacturers to
the majority of food is sold online. Thanks to the transparent retailers, as retailers control the main distribution channels.
customer, retailers can optimally present their products, e.g. This gatekeeper function enables them to influence prices,
offers for specific groups in specific regions on different days quality, range, and production conditions. The advent of
to optimise their supply chain. With the biggest profit mar- e-commerce in the food sector is putting retailers under
gins on their part, a very few remaining brands of big-box pressure to keep their power as new players like Amazon
retailers dominate the distribution of foodstuff. They control try to establish themselves in the food sector. E-commerce
the chains from field to fork by directly trading with the enables direct delivery to customers without retailers. While
food production level in the chains. Global e-companies are the rapid expansion has been temporarily halted, electronic
market leaders and drivers of consumer choices on e-retailers food retailing will continue to play an important role in the
branding and prices. The purchase decision is mainly done food supply. New players and start-ups emerge and form
online, and several apps are available from a big retailer but partnerships with established companies.
also from independent brokers helping the consumer to
make a choice; apps have sophisticated filter systems so that
almost any product can be found according to consumer
wishes. Depending on the consumer, some prefer retailers’
apps (best prices in most cases) or apps from an independent
broker (much broader product variety).

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Factor: Society’s attitude towards new tech- Factor: Platforms and “Product as a service”
nologies | Assumption: General support for in the food sector | Assumption: Food service
technologies managed by industry, but no platforms as a booming business
knowledge about the technologies
Food services is a booming business at the global level
There is general support for technologies allowing for effi- and actors, developing food services inspire each other. In
cient food and large-scale production in a particular country. addition, monitoring systems, such as biomarkers, become
Harmonisation and global standardisation of farming tech- popular. Global competition rules in data management.
nologies and processing technologies increases. However, Accessibility and interconnectivity are a priority.
there is less transparency as there is barely information on
food chain operators for consumers. Furthermore, there is
price competition on tech inputs and a reduced innovation
rate.

46 | 47
 Future story

Globalisation offers huge food variety

Joanna (55) is the successful CEO of Europe’s retail giant Eu- EuropeFood SE is aware that the logistics behind this
ropeFood SE and is one of Europe’s highest-paid managers. achievement are associated with climate and environmen-
Now she is making public what has been going on over the tal impacts. For this reason, the entire management team
past few weeks: The deal with the US-based EatMeat SE, the has spoken out in favour of setting up a climate protection
world’s largest producer of beef. From now on, five cargo program to replant the South American rainforest. In ad-
planes will land at Schiphol airport (Amsterdam) fully loaded dition, further investments are made in R&D of sustainable
with US beef every day. Her press statement: alternative forms of food production like vertical farming or
cultured meat technology.
“Today is an important day for all of Europe. Europe’s popu-
lation can now look forward to the world’s best beef quality This is a call to all European citizens: Look forward to our fresh
from the USA. Highly efficient logistics ensure that the meat “US-Burger2GO” for example on your next business trip! You
is available in all shops of EuropeFood SE less than 24 hours can get it freshly prepared in all major European train stations
after slaughter. in our fast food restaurants EatFix. And don’t worry: We still
guarantee the maximum waiting time of 3 minutes… because
nobody wants you to miss your train! Enjoy!”

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
To: [email protected] !!! Highly sensitive information !!!
CC: [email protected] SUN 5/24/2035 08:14 AM

Dear Francesca,

I received information from a subsidiary in Milano that the heat will have a firm grip on us
in the days to come. The temperatures can rise up to 40 degrees; in any case, they will jump
well above the 35-degree mark. Nevertheless, due to panic buying, our AI-based forecasting
tool already predicts an up to 200% increase in demand for pasta for the next few weeks.
People will fear repeated supply shortages. Please prepare your company urgently and make
sure that raw goods are ordered from your producers at an early stage. As Europe‘s best
retailer, we cannot afford the bottleneck on the supermarket shelves that we had 15 years
ago. Our customers trust in our reliability and we trust in your ability to deliver!

Best,
George

Head of Supply Chain Management · EuropeFoodAG · Europe‘s No.1

E-Mail 2035

48 | 49
Literature

Food and agriculture sector in general Degree of centralization of food production

European Commission (2020): Farm to Fork Strategy. For a fair, Jurgilevic, A.; Birge, T.; Kentala-Lethonen, J.; Korhonen-Kurki,
healthy and environmentally-friendly food system. Available K.; Pietikäinen, J.; Saikku, L.; Schösler, H. (2016): Transition
online at https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/safety/docs/ towards Circular Economy in the Food System. In Sustainability
f2f_action-plan_2020_strategy-info_en.pdf. 8 (1), 69. DOI: 10.3390/su8010069.

European Commission (2020): The European Green Deal. Available on- Martinez, S.; Hand, M.; Da Pra, M.; Pollack, S.; Ralston, K.; Smith,
line at https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/ T. et al. (2010): Local Food Systems. Concepts, Impacts, and
european-green-deal_de. Issues.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2012): McNamara, Brad (2016): Examining the Need for a Decentralized Food
100 days to Rio +20, 100 facts: Making the link between people, System. Medium. Available online at https://medium.com/@
food and the environment. CarFreeBrad/examining-the-need-for-a-decentralized-food-sys-
tem-fc06420ba9c7.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2013):
The State of Food and Agriculture. Food Systems for Better Purchasing behavior related to food
Nutrition.
Grand View Research (2019): Nutrigenomics Market Size, Share &
Fraunhofer ISI (2019): 50 trends influencing Europe’s food sector by Trends Analysis Report By Application (Obesity, Cardiovascular
2035. Available online at https://www.isi.fraunhofer.de/con- Diseases, Cancer Research), By Region (North America, Latin
tent/dam/isi/dokumente/ccv/2019/50-trends-influencing-Eu- America, Europe, MEA, APAC), And Segment Forecasts, 2019–
ropes-food-sector.pdf. 2025. Available online at https://www.grandviewresearch.com/
industry-analysis/nutrigenomics-market.
Appreciation of products promoting
ecosystem services Maclaren, O.; Mackay, L.; Schofield, G.; Zinn, C. (2017): Novel Nu-
trition Profiling of New Zealanders’ Varied Eating Patterns. In
Burrows, D. (2015): New demand driving sustainable food growth. Nutrients 10 (1), pp. 1–13.
Edited by Marketing Week. Available online at https://www.
marketingweek.com/new-demand-driving-sustainable-food- Marangon, F.; Tempesta, T.; Troiano, S.; Vecchiato, D. (2016):
growth. Toward a better understanding of market potentials for veg-
an food. A choice experiment for the analysis of breadsticks
Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and preferences. In Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia
Nuclear Safety (2019): Sustainable Consumption for Bio- (8), pp. 158–166.
diversity and Ecosystem Services. The cases of cotton, soy and
lithium. Available online at https://www.bfn.de/fileadmin/BfN/ Ministry for Primary Industries; Plant & Food Research (2018):
internationalernaturschutz/Dokumente/Sustainable_Consump- The evolution of plant protein – assessing consumer response.
tion_Biodiversity_bf.pdf. Available online at https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/
29141-the-evolution-of-plant-protein-assessing-consumer-re-
sponse-report, checked on 10/10/2019.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Ordovas, Jose M. et al. (2018): Personalised nutrition and health, Artificial Intelligence in the value chain
Bmj 361 (2018).
Berger, L.; Besenfelder, C.; Güller, M.: Optimierung von Beschaffungs-
Santeramo, F. G.; Carlucci, D.; Devitiis, B. de; Seccia, A.; Stasi, A.; entscheidungen unter Berücksichtigung der internen Logistik
Viscecchia, R.; Nardone, G. (2017): Emerging trends in Euro- mithilfe der Digitalisierung der Supply Chain. In Heike Proff
pean food, diets and food industry. Available online at https:// und Thomas Martin Fojcik (Hg.): Mobilität und Digitale Trans-
mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/82105/, checked on 23/09/2019. formation. Technische und Betriebswirtschaftliche Aspekte.,
pp. 533–549.
Measures to reduce climate change in the
food sector Ellen Macarthur Foundation (2019): Artificial Intelligene and the
Circular Economy. Available online at https://www.ellen-
Barclays (2019): Carving up the alternative meat market. Available on- macarthurfoundation.org/publications/artificial-intelli-
line at https://www.investmentbank.barclays.com/our-insights/ gence-and-the-circular-economy.
carving-up-the-alternative- meat-market.html.
Kondakci, T.; Zhou, W.: Recent Applications of Advanced Control
Cameron, B. et al. (2019): State of the industry report: Plantbased Techniques in Food Industry. In Food and Bioprocess Technology
meat, eggs, and dairy. 10 (3), pp. 522–542. DOI: 10.1007/s11947-016-1831-x.

Godfray, H. C. J. (2019): Meat: The Future Series – Alternative Pro- Liakos, K. G.; Busato, P.; Moshou, D.; Pearson, S.; Bochtis, D. (2018):
teins. Available online at http://www3.weforum.org/docs/ Machine Learning in Agriculture: A Review. In Sensors, pp. 1–29.
WEF_White_Paper_Alternative_Proteins.pdf. DOI: 10.3390/s18082674.

Lynch, J.; Meter, K.; Robles-Schrader, G.; Goldenberg, M. P.; Bassler, McCarthy, U.; Uysal, I.; Badia-Melis, R.; Mercier, S.; O’Donnell, C.;
E.; Chusid, S.; Jansen Austin, C. (2015): Exploring Economic Ktenioudaki, A. (2018): Global food security – Issues, chal-
and Health Impacts of Local Food Procurement. Available online lenges and technological solutions. In Trends in Food Science
at https://www.crcworks.org/EHimpacts.pdf. & Technology 77, pp. 11–20. DOI: 10.1016/j.tifs.2018.05.002.

Roe, S.; Streck, C.; Weiner, P.-H.; Obersteiner, M.; Frank, S. (2017): Mordor Intelligence (2019): Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Food & Bev-
How Improved Land Use Can Contribute to the 1.5°C Goal of erages Market. Growth, Trends, and Forecast (2019–2024).
the Paris Agreement. Working Paper prepared by Climate Focus Available online at https://www.mordorintelligence.com/indus-
and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. try-reports/artificial-intelligence-in-food-and-beverages-market.

Public and private investment in food and Soltani-Fesaghandis, Gholamreza; Pooya, Alireza (2018): Design
agriculture of an artificial intelligence system for predicting success of new
product development and selecting proper market-product
European Commission (2020): Circular Economy Action Plan. For a strategy in the food industry. In International Food and Agri-
cleaner and more competitive Europe. Available online at https:// business Management Review 21.7, pp. 847–864.
ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/new_circular_
economy_action_plan.pdf. Sustainability in the food sector

Vitón, Roberto (2018): 2018 Global Food & Agriculture Investment Baker, L.; Gemmill–Herren, B.; Leippert, F. (2019): Beacons of hope:
Outlook. Investing profitably whilst fostering a better agricul- Accelerating Transformations to Sustainable Food Systems. Ed-
ture. A 360° overview of the investment landscape across the ited by Biovision Foundation for Ecological Development and
asset class, with an up-to-date analysis of the major asset strate- Global Alliance for the Future of Food. Available online at https://
gies, and a special section on the South American opportunities. foodsystemstransformations.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/
BeaconsOfHope_Report_082019.pdf.
50 | 51
Burlingame, B.; Dernini, S. (2012): Sustainable Diets and Biodiver- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2012):
sity: Directions and Solutions for Policy, Research and Action. Sustainable nutrition security: Restoring the bridge between
International Scientific Symposium, Biodiversity and Sustainable agriculture and health.
Diets United Against Hunger. Edited by Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations. Available online at http:// Porter, John R., et al. (2017): Food security and food production
www.fao.org/3/i3004e/i3004e.pdf. systems.

Dudley, Nigel; Alexander, Sasha (2017): Agriculture and bio- Searchinger, T.; Waite, R.; Hanson, C.; Ranganathan, J. (2019):
diversity: a review. In Biodiversity 18 (2–3), pp. 45–49. DOI: World Resources Report: Creating a Sustainable Food Future.
10.1080/14888386.2017.1351892. A Menu of Solutions to Feed Nearly 10 Billion People by 2050.
Available online at https://wrr-food.wri.org/sites/default/files/
Genovese, A.; Acquaye, A.; Figueroa, A.; Koh, S. C. L. (2017): Sus- 2019-07/WRR_Food_Full_Report_0.pdf.
tainable supply chain management and the transition towards
a circular economy: Evidence and some applications. In Omega Resource availability: land, water, energy
66, Part B, pp. 344–357. DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2015.05.015.
Beacham, A. M.; Vickers, L. H.; Monaghan, J. M. (2018): Vertical
Harvey, M. (2018): Sustainable food systems and diets: A review farming. A summary of approaches to growing skywards. In The
of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Edited by WWF-UK. Available Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 94 (3), pp.
online at https://www.wwf.org.uk/sites/default/files/2018-10/ 277–283. DOI: 10.1080/14620316.2019.1574214.
59078%20Sustainable%20food%20systems%20report%20
-%20ONLINE.pdf. Eigenbrod, C.; Gruda, N. (2015): Urban vegetable for food security
in cities. A review. In Agron. Sustain. Dev. 35 (2), pp. 483–498.
Mol, A. P. J.; Oosterveer, P. (2015): Certification of Markets, Markets DOI: 10.1007/s13593-014-0273-y.
of Certificates: Tracing Sustainability in Global Agro-Food Value
Chains. In Sustainability 7 (9), pp. 12258–12278. DOI: 10.3390/ European Commission (2011): EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020.
su70912258. Available online at https://ec.europa.eu/environment/pubs/
pdf/factsheets/biodiversity_2020/2020%20Biodiversity%20
Growth paradigm in transition Factsheet_EN.pdf.

Saxer, Marc (2020): Weltwirtschaft nach Corona. Das Ende der Glo- Martellozzo, F.; Landry, J. S.; Plouffe, D.; Seufert, V.; Rowhani,
balisierung, wie wir sie kennen. SPIEGEL Wirtschaft. Available P.; Ramankutty, N. (2014): Urban agriculture: a global anal-
online at https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/corona-krise-das- ysis of the space constraint to meet urban vegetable demand.
ende-der-globalisierung-wie-wir-sie-kennen-a-af9f2dd4-f5ce- In Environmental Research Letters 9 (064025), pp. 1–8. DOI:
4402-903f-c6b4949bd562. 10.1088/1748-9326/9/6/064025.

The International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems Food losses and waste
(2020): COVID-19 and the crisis in food systems: Symptoms,
causes, and potential solutions. Available online at https://www. Campbell, B. M.; Vermeuten, S.; Aggarwall, P. K.; Corner-Doll-
ipes-food.org/_img/upload/files/COVID-19_CommuniqueEN.pdf. off, C. A. (2016): Reducing risks to food security from climate
change. In Global Food Security, pp. 1–11.
Food safety and security
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2013):
Bagchi, Debasis (2019): Nutraceutical and functional food regulations FAO Factsheet: Food wastage Footprints. Available online at
in the United States and around the world. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/nr/sustainability_

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
 pathways/docs/Factsheet_FOOD-WASTAGE.pdf, checked on Accuray Research (2019): Smart Packaging Market 2019: Worldwide
19/09/2019. Overview By Size, Share, Segments, Emerging Technologies,
Growth, Leading Players, Application and Regional Trends
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2019): By Global Forecast 2025. Available online at https://www.
Save Food: Global Initiative on Food Loss and Waste Regulation. marketwatch.com/press-release/smart-packaging-market-
Key facts on food loss and waste you should know. Available on- 2019-worldwide-overview-by-size-share-segments-emerging-
line at http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/. technologies-growth-leading-players-application-and-regional-
trends-by-global-forecast-2025-2019-08-14.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2019):
SDG Indicator 2.1.2 – Severity of food insecurity. Available online Dainelli, D.; Gontard, N.; Spyropoulos, D.; Zondervan-van den
at http://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/indica- Beuken, E.; Tobback, P. (2008): Active and intelligent food
tors/212/en/. packaging: legal aspects and safety concerns. In Trends in Food
Science & Technology, 19, pp. 103–112.
Thyberg, Krista L.; David J. Tonjes (2016): Drivers of food waste
and their implications for sustainable policy development. In John, J. (2019): Global Plastic Jar Packaging Market Will Reach
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 106, pp. 110–123. USD 28.3 Billion By 2025: Zion Market Research. Available online
at https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/08/29/
Zucchella, A.; Previtali, P. (2018): Circular business models for sus- 1908423/0/en/Global-Plastic-Jar-Packaging-Market-Will-Reach-
tainable development: A “waste is food” restorative ecosystem. USD-28-3-Billion-By-2025-Zion-Market-Research.html.
In Business Strategy and the Environment 28 (2), pp. 274–285.
DOI: 10.1002/bse.2216. Levy G. M. (2000): Packaging, Policy and the Environment.obertson,
G. L. (2016): Food packaging: principles and practice.
Quality and quantity of labels
Online grocery shopping
Edelman (2019): Edelman Trust Barometer Special Report: In Brands we
trust. Available online at https://www.edelman.com/sites/g/files/ Bogner, Eva; Voelklein, Thomas; Schroedel, Olaf; Franke, Joerg
aatuss191/files/2019-06/2019_edelman_trust_barometer_spe- (2016): Study Based Analysis on the Current Digitalization De-
cial_report_in_brands_we_trust.pdf. gree in the Manufacturing Industry in Germany. In Procedia CIRP
57, pp. 14–19. DOI: 10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.004.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020):
Food labelling. Available online at http://www.fao.org/food-la- Demartini, Melissa et al. (2018): Food industry digitalization: From
belling/en/. challenges and trends to opportunities and solutions. In IFAC-Pa-
persOnLine 51.11, pp. 1371–1378.
Worosz, M. R.; Wilson, N. L. W. (2012): A Cautionary Tale of Purity,
Labeling and Product Literacy in the Gluten-Free Market. In The Jouanjean, Marie-Agnes (2019): Digital Opportunities for Trade in
Journal of Consumer Affairs 46 (2), pp. 288–318. Available the Agriculture and Food Sectors.
online at 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2012.01230.x.
Lehmann, Sandra (2020): Coronavirus: E-Commerce bricht im März
Packaging of food um fast 20 Prozent ein. Lebensmittel, Drogerieartikel und

Accuray Research (2017): Global Smart Packaging Market Analysis & Tripoli, Mischa; Schmidhuber, Josef (2018): Emerging Opportunities
Trends – Industry Forecast to 2025. Available online at https:// for the Application of Blockchain in the Agri-food Industry.
www.reportlinker.com/p04653005/Global-Smart-Packag-
ing-Market-Analysis-Trends-Industry-Forecast-to.html.

52 | 53
Ownership of Data de/en/articles/dossiers/digitisation-in-agriculture-from-preci-
sion-farming-to-farming-40.
Banterle, F. (2020): Data ownership in the data economy: a European
dilemma. In EU Internet Law in the Digital Era, pp. 199–225. European Commission (2015): EIP-AGRI Focus Group on Precision
Farming: Final report. Available online at ttps://ec.europa.eu/
Loshin, D. (2002): Knowledge Integrity: Data Ownership (Online). eip/agriculture/sites/agri-eip/files/eip-agri_focus_group_on_pre-
cision_farming_final_report_2015.pdf.
van Rijmenam, Mark (2019): How Blockchain Will Give Consumers
Ownership of their Data. Available online at https://medium. Grand View Research (2019): Precision Farming/Agriculture Market
com/@markvanrijmenam/how-blockchain-will-give-consumers- Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report By Offering (Hardware,
ownership-of-their-data-3e90020107e6. Software, Services), By Application (Yield Monitoring, Irrigation
Management) And Segment Forecasts, 2019–2025. Available
Balance of power within the value chain online at https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/
precision-farming-market.
Bashi, Z.; McCullough, R.; Ong, L.; Ramirez, M. (2019): Alternative
proteins: The race for market share is on. Available online at Omnia Precision: Connecting Agronomy and Precision Farming. Avail-
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/agriculture/our-insights/ able online at https://www.omniaprecision.co.uk.
alternative-proteins-the-race-for-market-share-is-on, checked
on 10/10/2019. Schrijver, R. (2016): Precision agriculture and the future of farming in
Europe. Scientific foresight study.
Deloitte (2018): Global Power of Retailing 2018. Transformative
change, reinvigorated commerce. Available online at https:// Soto, I.; Balafoutis, A.; Barnes, A.; Beck, B.; Eory, V.; Fountas, S. et
www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/at/Documents/ al. (2019): The contribution of precision agriculture technolo-
about-deloitte/global-powers-of-retailing-2018.pdf. gies to farm productivity and the mitigation of greenhouse gas
emissions in the EU. In EUR, Scientific and technical research
Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (2017): The power series, 29320.
of retailers. In DIW Econ Economic Bulletin, 3. Available on-
line at https://diw-econ.de/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Bul- Plattforms and “Product as a service” in the
letin-No.3-Buying-Power-in-the-German-Retailing-Sector.pdf. food sector

European Commission (2020): Circular Economy Action Plan. For a Bitkom (2019): Digitale Plattformen. Available online at https://www.
cleaner and more competitive Europe. Available online at https:// bitkom.org/sites/default/files/2019-10/bitkom-charts-digi-
ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/new_circular_ tale-plattformen-24-10-2019.pdf.
economy_action_plan.pdf.
Foresight and Scenario Method
Franck, T. (2019): Alternative meat to become $140 billion industry in a
decade, Barclays predicts. Edited by CNBC LLC. Available online Dönitz, Ewa J. (2009): Effizientere Szenariotechnik durch teilautoma-
at https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/23/alternative-meat-to-be- tische Generierung von Konsistenzmatrizen. Empirie, Konzep-
come-140-billion-industry-barclays-says.html. tion, Fuzzy- und Neuro-Fuzzy-Ansätze.

Society’s attitude towards new technologies Dönitz, Ewa J.; Schirrmeister, Elna (2013): Foresight and Scenarios
at Fraunhofer ISI. Beschreibung der Methodik des Fraunhofer
Bioeconomy BW: Digitisation in agriculture – from precision farming to ISI im Foresight- und Szenarioprozess.
farming 4.0. Available online at https://www.biooekonomie-bw.

www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Fraunhofer ISI (2017): “OBSERVE”, Future and Emerging Technologies
(FET) Programme of the European Commission. Available online
at https://www.horizon-observatory.eu/radar-en/.

BMBF: Foresight-Zyklus II. Mit Foresight in die Zukunft schauen. Available

online at https://www.bmbf.de/de/mit-foresight-in-die-zukunft-
schauen-930.html.

Godet, Michel; Durance, Philippe (2011): Strategische Vorausschau

für Unternehmen und Regionen.

Kosow, Hannah; Gaßner, Robert (2008): Methoden der Zukunfts- und

Szenarioanalyse: Überblick, Bewertung und Auswahlkriterien.
In IZT WerkstattBericht Nr. 103.

54 | 55
www.isi.fraunhofer.de
External Experts

Assoc. Prof. (FH), DI, Dr.-Ing. Simon Berner Dr. Daniel Rossi
Sustainable food management, University of Applied Science Delegate in Research and Innovation, Confederation of
Graz Farmers (Confagricoltura), Rome; Chairman Copa Cogeca
Research & Innovation Working Party
Prof. Dr. Fabian Christandl
Dean of study program business psychology, Hochschule Prof. Dr. Stephan Rüschen
Fresenius – University of Applied Sciences Cologne Director of Studies of Business Administration – Retailing,
Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University Heilbronn
Dr. Mehmet Cicek
Managing Director, symvion Food Innovation Services GmbH Ass.Prof.i.R. Dipl.-Ing. Dr.nat.techn. Gerhard Schleining
Retired, University of Natural Resources and Life Science
Axel Davila Vienna
Pricipal, Staufen AG
Declan Troy
Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Markus Frank Assistant Director of Research, Teagasc Food Research
Professor for Plant Health Management, Nuertingen-Geislin- Centre Dublin
gen University
Prof. Chibuike Udenigwe
Prof. Dr. Vural Gökmen University Research Chair, School of Nutrition Sciences,
Head of Food Quality & Safety Research Group, Hacettepe University of Ottawa, Canada
University Ankara

Dr. Bruno Gransche

Research Associate, Institute of Advanced Studies FoKoS,
University Siegen

Prof. Dr. Tilo Hühn

Lead of the Centre for Food Composition and Process Design,
ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur

Prof. Dr. Carolyn Hutter

Professor for Business Administration Food Management,
Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University Heilbronn

56 | 57
www.isi.fraunhofer.de
Imprint

Contact
Dr. Björn Moller
Phone +49 721 6809-427
[email protected]

Fraunhofer Institute for

Systems and Innovation Research ISI
Breslauer Strasse 48 | 76139 Karlsruhe
Germany

www.isi.fraunhofer.de

Karlsruhe, September 2020

Authors
Björn Moller, Ariane Voglhuber-Slavinsky, Ewa Dönitz,
Fraunhofer Institute for
Systems and Innovation Research ISI

Coordination of the FOX-project

Kerstin Pasch, Project coordinator,
DIL Deutsches Institut für Lebensmitteltechnik e. V.

Ariette Matser, Scientific coordinator,

Wageningen University & Research

Future Stories
Supported by Christopher Hien

Graphic Design
Alice Rensland, Jeanette Braun

Handdrawn Illustrations
Heyko Stöber

Photo Credits
Pages 29, 39, 49
shutterstock.com / Irina Adamovich

58 | 59