Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129
Review
Innovation trends in
the food industry:
The case of
functional foods
Barbara Bigliardia,* and
Francesco Galatib
a
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of
Parma, Viale G.P. Usberti 181/A, Parma I-43124, Italy
(Tel.: D39 0521 905860; fax: D39 0521 905853;
e-mail: barbara.bigliardi@unipr.it)
b changed considerably: in fact, consumers increasingly
Department of Economy and Technology,
University of San Marino, Strada della Bandirola 44,
Montegiardino 47898, San Marino (e-mail: francesco.
galati@unirsm.sm)
The food industry is one of the most important branches of the
national economy in Italy and in the European Union in gen-
eral, playing a central role for the processing of agricultural
raw materials and food supply. This industry is traditionally
regarded as a sector with low research intensity; notwith-
standing, innovations are recognized as an important instru-
ment for companies belonging to the food industry in order
to stand out from competitors and to satisfy consumer expec-
tations. In this regard, functional foods play an outstanding
role, as demonstrated by their increasing demand derived
from the increasing cost of healthcare, the steady increase of
life expectancy, and the desire of older people for improved
quality of their later years. The main target of this paper is to
analyze the state of the art on functional foods. For this pur-
pose, a review of extant literature is presented. Specific
emphasis is laid on the definition and the main examples of
functional food. The paper concludes with comments on
future trends.
* Corresponding author.
0924-2244/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2013.03.006
Introduction
The food industry is one of the most important branches of
the national economy in Italy and in the European Union in
general, playing a central role for the processing of agricul-
tural raw materials and food supply. As a consequence,
many authors stressed its relevance for employment and
economic output (Menrad, 2004). In innovation literature,
the food industry is traditionally regarded as a sector
with low research intensity (Christensen, Rama, & Von
Tunzelmann, 1996; Garcia Martinez & Briz, 2000).
Notwithstanding, innovations understood as new products,
processes or services are recognized as an important instru-
ment for companies belonging to the food industry to stand
out from competitors and to satisfy consumer expectations
(Menrad, 2004). In particular during the last decade, con-
sumer requirements in the field of food production have
believe that food contribute directly to their health
(Mollet & Rowland, 2002; Young, 2000). Thus, foods are
no more intended to only satisfy hunger and to provide
the necessary nutrients, but also and especially to prevent
nutrition-related diseases and to improve physical and
mental well-being (Menrad, 2003; Robertfroid, 2000b).
Moreover, the food industry has been facing technical
and economic changes both in society and in the
manufacturing and food processing, that in turn had a sig-
nificant impact on the entire food supply chain, up to the
distribution of food to end consumers, and forced com-
panies to pay high attention in food products that meet
the consumers demand for a healthy lifestyle. As a conse-
quence, innovation has been widely investigated also within
this traditional industry.
Innovations introduced in the food industry in recent
years mainly refer to new scientific and technical
approaches in food processing, and to the introduction of
novel foods. In this regard, functional food plays an
outstanding role, as demonstrated by their increasing
demand derived from the increasing cost of healthcare,
the steady increase in life expectancy, and the desire of
older people for an improved quality of life in their later
years (Kotilainen, Rajalahti, Ragasa, & Pehu, 2006;
Robertfroid, 2000a, 2000b). As such, researchers agree in
stating that functional food represents one of the most inter-
esting areas of research and innovation in the food industry
(Annunziata & Vecchio, 2011; Jones & Jew, 2007; Sir
o,
K
apolna, K
apolna, & Lugasi, 2008).
 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129
Based on the premises above, the main target of this
paper is to analyze the state of the art on functional foods.
For this purpose, a review of the extant literature is pre-
sented where specific emphasis is laid on the definition
and the main examples of functional food. The article con-
cludes with comments on future trends.
Innovation in the food industry
In innovation literature, the food industry is typically
classified as a sector with low research intensity, accounting
to one of the lowest R&D-to-sales ratios of any industrial
sector. Moreover, the pace of technological change in this
industry, measured by the number of patented inventions,
appears to be less dynamic than other manufacturing sec-
tors (Christensen et al., 1996; Garcia Martinez & Briz,
2000). Fairly recently, Beckeman and Skjolkebrand
(2007) assessed the degree of innovation in the food indus-
try, stressing the fact that very little innovation is taking
place in the food industry. However, due to the fact that
technology moved from the production age to the informa-
tion age, toward the service age, the food sector kept
growing and still appears to be growing faster than past
years.
Food industry innovations are often aimed at developing
important replacement products, following nutritional di-
rections, or obeying food additive regulations. They are
generally new or improved consumer products and services,
and can be focused in one area of food technology, for
example process engineering, product formulation, food
qualities or consumer needs. Moreover, they have to
combine technological innovation with social and cultural
innovation in order to produce food that satisfies the nutri-
tional, personal and social needs of all communities. Inno-
vations may occur throughout all parts of the food chain
and a possible classification of the food innovations is the
following: (1) new food ingredients and materials, (2) inno-
vations in fresh foods, (3) new food process techniques, (4)
innovations in food quality, (5) new packaging methods,
and (6) new distribution or retailing methods.
Among all the innovations introduced in this industry,
researchers recognize functional food as one of the most
interesting areas of research and innovation (Annunziata
& Vecchio, 2011; Jones & Jew, 2007; Sir
o et al., 2008).
Their relevance is related to the increasing cost of health-
care, the steady increase in life expectancy, and the desire
of older people for an improved quality of life in their later
years (Kotilainen et al., 2006; Robertfroid, 2000a, 2000b).
Based on these premises, this study consists of a review of
scientific articles on the topic of functional food. We
considered both articles published in scholarly journals
and those published on books or proceedings based on in-
ternational conferences. In order to do that, we first carried
out a computerized search by using functional foods as
keywords in three different databases (ISI Web of Knowl-
edge, Google Scholar and Scopus). The identified articles
were then subjected to a double screening. First of all
119
they have been sorted based on their title and summary
and subsequently by analyzing the body of the remaining
articles. As results of this double screening, we obtained
a final sample of 114 papers to be included in the review
as discussed in the following sections.
Functional foods: an overview
The term functional food was first used in 1984 in
Japan as a result of a study on the relationships between
nutrition, sensory satisfaction, fortification and modulation
of physiological systems in order to define those food prod-
ucts fortified with special constituents that possess advanta-
geous physiological effects (Hardy, 2000; Kwak & Jukes,
2001). Functional foods objectives are manifold: they
improve the general conditions of the body (e.g., pre- and
probiotics), decrease the risk of some diseases (e.g.,
cholesterol-lowering products), and could be used for
curing some illnesses (Mark-Herbert, 2004; Menrad,
2003; Side, 2006).
Notwithstanding the increasing interest from both re-
searchers and the food industry toward functional foods,
it is not still clearly defined which foods are considered
as functional. As a consequence, it is difficult to estimate
the market of these products (Kotilainen et al., 2006).
Despite the mismatch of information on this market, in
particular in terms of total turnover and volume of func-
tional foods sold, it emerges as a business in rapid growth.
The rise of functional foods market is mainly due to a series
of critical awareness of personal health. According to a
Euromonitor survey, Japan is the worlds largest market,
followed by the US, while the European market still ap-
pears to be less developed. These three dominant markets
contribute to over 90% of the total sales (Benkouider,
2005). It is not surprising that in Japan this market is signif-
icant due to the fact that it is regarded as the birthplace of
functional food (Hilliam, 2000): only between 1988 and
1998, more than 1700 functional food products have been
launched in Japan. As far as the European countries are
concerned, the studies by Bech-Larsen and Scholderer
(2007) and Makinen-Aakula (2006) highlighted that the
major markets are the UK, Germany, France and Italy.
Van Trijp (2007) emphasized that the European market is
a heterogeneous one, characterized by large regional differ-
ences in use and acceptance of functional foods (e.g., the
interest of consumers in functional food in the Central
and Northern European countries is higher than in Mediter-
ranean countries). As for Italy, the most important segment
of the functional food market is the one of the so called
health yogurt: according to a research by IRI (2008),
only in Italy their growth rate was 6.3% per year, thus
reaching 560 million euros of sales, corresponding to
almost 4% of the whole Italian sector. Several authors
(e.g., Benkouider, 2005), according also to predictions
made periodically by Euromonitor, stressed the moderate
growing importance of newly emerging markets such as
Hungary, Poland and Russia: although these markets are
120 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129
still undeveloped, in fact, numerous new functional foods
have been introduced in the last few years.
Functional foods have been developed almost in all food
categories, even if they are not homogeneously distributed
over all segments of the food industry. As a consequence,
consumer preferences may vary between markets. Among
all the food markets, functional foods have been mainly
launched in the dairy-, confectionery, soft-drinks, bakery
and baby-food market (Kotilainen et al., 2006; Menrad,
2003). The extant literature proposes different classification
of functional foods. From a product point of view,
Kotilainen et al. (2006), Sloan (2000) and Spence (2006),
have proposed the following classification:
 food fortified with additional nutrients (labeled fortified
products), such as fruit juices fortified with vitamin C,
vitamin E, folic acid, zinc and calcium;
 food with additional new nutrients or components not
normally found in a particular food (labeled enriched
products), like probiotics or prebiotics;
 food from which a deleterious component has been
removed, reduced or replaced by another with beneficial
effects (labeled altered products), for example fibers as
fat releasers in meat or ice cream;
 food in which one of the components have been natu-
rally enhanced (labeled enhanced commodities), e.g.,
eggs with increased omega-3 content.
According to alternative classification based on the aim
of functional foods, they can be classified as follows (e.g.,
Makinen-Aakula, 2006):
 functional foods that add good to life or improve chil-
drens life, like prebiotics and probiotics;
 functional foods that reduce an existing health risk prob-
lem such as high cholesterol or high blood pressure;
 functional foods which makes life easier, such as
lactose-free or gluten-free products.
Regardless the classification adopted, it is possible to list
the main functional foods as in Table 1.
Recently, both in Japan and Europe the market of func-
tional foods is mainly dominated by probiotics with more
than 370 products launched worldwide in 2005
(Ouwehand, 2007). Within the probiotic field, Lactic acid
bacteria (LAB) and bifidobacteria are the most studied
and widely used ones (Kociubinski & Salminen, 2006).
As quite recently highlighted by Makinen-Aakula (2006),
the main markets of probiotics are Scandinavia, the
Netherlands, Switzerland, Croatia and Estonia followed
by emerging markets such as Greece, France and Spain.
Researchers agree in stating that their success among func-
tional foods is mainly due to their general positive image
among consumers (Makinen-Aakula, 2006; Szak
aly,
Szigeti, M
ath
e, & Szente, 2007), but also due to their
intrinsic characteristics (the products kept at cold
temperature, they have relatively short shelf life, etc.).
Their success is confirmed by the increasingly extensive
research and development concerning probiotics aiming
to introduce new dairy products (e.g., probiotic drinking
yogurt like Actimel and Activia, dairy products containing
Lactobacillus fermentum ME-3 like Hellus, etc.) (Sir
o
et al., 2008; Szak
aly, 2007). As for the prebiotics category,
inulin and oligofructose are amongst the most studied and
well established (Gibson, 2004). In addition to the objective
reported in Table 1, Bosscher, Van Loo, and Franck (2006)
have shown that prebiotics increase calcium absorption,
thus improving bone mineral content and density. Accord-
ing to L
opez-Molina et al. (2005), they also influence the
formation of blood glucose, thus reducing the levels of
cholesterol and serum lipids. Moreover, prebiotics might
enhance the growth and survival of the probiotic cultures
by influencing the growth and metabolites of both the pro-
biotic and the starter. As far as the functional drinks are
concerned, although they are available in a relatively high
number, their market is still small and fragmented, espe-
cially at a European level: only Germany, in fact, has a size-
able functional drink market, thanks to the success of ACE
drinks in this country.
How functional foods have been defined in literature
The analysis of the extant literature on functional food
highlighted that, although the term functional food has
already been defined several times (Robertfroid, 2002), so
far there is no unitary accepted definition for this group
of food (Alzamora et al., 2005). In most countries
there is no legislative definition of the term and drawing
a border line between conventional and functional foods
is challenging even for nutritionists and food experts
(Mark-Herbert, 2004; Niva, 2007). Moreover, the European
legislation does not consider functional food as specific
food categories, but rather as a concept (Coppens,
Fernandes Da Silva, & Pettman, 2006; Stanton, Ross,
Fitzgerald, & Van Sinderen, 2005). To date, a number of
national authorities, academic bodies and the industry
have proposed definitions for functional food. While
some definitions simply suggest that any food, if marketed
with the appropriate positioning, is a functional food
(Hollingsworth, 1999; Riemersma, 1996), others are more
complex and maintain that only fortified, enriched, or
enhanced food with a component having a health benefit
beyond basic nutrition can be considered functional foods
(Kleinschmidt, 2003).
After reviewing over 1 hundred definitions, 39 were
selected on the basis of their representation of functional
foods. The selected definitions are listed in Table 2.
The definitions listed in Table 2 encapsulate all or in part
the following three main concepts:
(1) the concept of health benefits: almost all definitions
(35 out of 39) mention the health benefits that a food
 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129 121

Table 1. The main type of functional foods available on the market.

Type of functional food and Objective Example Main references

definition
Probiotics
live microorganisms, as they are
consumed in adequate numbers
confer a health benefit on the host
Charalampopoulos, Pandiella, and
Webb (2003)
Prebiotics
non-digestible food ingredients
that beneficially affect the host by
stimulating the growth and/or
activity of one or a limited number
of bacteria in the colon
Charalampopoulos et al. (2003)
Functional drinks
non-alcoholic beverages fortified
with vitamins A, C and E or other
functional ingredients
Menrad (2003) and Side (2006)
Functional cereals
Cereals containing dietary fiber,
such as b-glucan and
arabinoxylan, oilgosaccharides,
such as galacto- and fructo-
oligosaccharides and resistant
starch
Oatles and Cagindi (2006)
Functional meat
meat modified by adding
ingredients considered beneficial
for health or by eliminating or
reducing components that are
considered harmful
Bhat and Bhat (2011)
Functional eggs
eggs with increased omega-3 fatty
acid content
Sir

o et al. (2008)
Influence on human health,
including influence on
gastrointestinal health,
immune function and
cancer (Jones & Jew, 2007).
To stimulate the growth
and/or activity of one or a
limited number of bacteria
in the colon, thus improving
host health (Stanton et al.,
2005).
To reduce the cholesterol
level, to stimulate the
antioxidant function and to
avoid the inhibition of
growth and the deformation
of the bones (Tammsaar,
2007).
Fermentable substrates for
the growth of probiotic
microorganisms, sources of
non-digestible
carbohydrates, stimulator of
the growth of lactobacilli
and bifidobacteria present
in the colon (Brennan &
Cleary, 2005;
Charalampopoulos, Wang,
Pandiella, & Webb, 2002).
To reformulate the fatty acid
profiles or inclusion of
antioxidants, dietary fiber or
probiotics (Sir

o et al.,
2008).
To reduce the possible
formation of blood clots and
for blood pressure control
(Sir

o et al., 2008).
Lactic acid bacteria (LAB)
and bifidobacteria.
Fructo-oligosaccharide
(FOS), inulin, isomalto-
oligosaccharides (IMO),
polydextrose, lactulose and
resistant starch.
ACE drinks, cholesterol-
lowering drinks, eye (2007).
health drinks or bone
health drinks.
Oat, barley, rye, spelt.
Meat with the control of the
composition of raw and
processed materials.
Egg enriched with omega-3
fatty acids simultaneously
with antioxidants and other
vitamins.
Alzamora et al. (2005), Jones and
Jew (2007) and Saarela,
Lahteenmaki, Crittenden,
Salminen, and
Mattila-Sandholm (2002).
Bosscher (2007), Bosscher et al.
(2006), Cani, Neyrinck, Maton,
and Delzenne (2005) and
Ouwehand (2007).
Keller (2006) and Tammsaar
Alldrick (2007), Benkouider
(2005), Mon
ar (2007) and
Poutanen (2006).
Jimenez-Colmenero, Carballo, and
Cofrades (2001), Kovacs,
Zsarnoczay, and Gasparik
Reichardt (2007), Mendoza,
Garc
a, Casas, and Selgas (2001)
and Ricondo and Ayo (2007).
Sir

o et al. (2008) and Surai and
Sparks (2001).

have to bring to its consumer in order to be labeled as Nutritional function

functional food. Thus, this concept appears to be cen-
tral in functional foods literature;
(2) the technological process at the basis of the functional
food: some definitions (18 out of 39) stress the fact that
the food must have been fortified, enriched or had an
ingredient added, while others mention the removal of
allergens or of components considered detrimental to
the health if over consumed (e.g., salt, sugar);
(3) the nutritional function: all food to be functional must
have some nutritional functions, as pointed out by 25
definitions out of the total.
What follows are the three detailed concepts according
to the articles reviewed.
The term nutritional functions refers to the role of nu-
trients in growth, development and maintaining the organs
and systems of the human body. Therefore, it is possible to
state that the basic functions of a food are to provide vita-
mins, minerals and energy derived from the proteins, carbo-
hydrates and lipids required for the well-being of the
human body. Today, as stressed by Ashwell (2003), the
focus of nutritional science is shifting toward the concept
of optimal nutrition. In other words, the objective of nutri-
tional science is to optimize the daily diet in terms of
nutrients and non-nutrients, as well as other food properties
that provide the maintenance health. The above
mentioned shift is mainly motivated by an increase in
lifestyle related diseases, combined with constantly rising
122 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129

Table 2. The main definition of functional foods.

No. Definition References Main concepts

Nutritional Health Technological
function benefits process
1 Foods which are expected to have certain health FOSHU, by the Japanese #
benefits, and have been licensed to bear a label Ministry of Health, Labor
claiming that a person using them for specified and Welfare (1991), cited in
health use may expect to obtain the health use Anon. (2003)
through the consumption thereof
2 Food that encompasses potentially helpful Food and Nutrition Board # #
products, including any modified food or food (1994)
ingredient that may provide a health benefit
beyond that of the traditional nutrient it contains
3 Food and drink products derived from naturally Hillian (1995), cited in # # #
occurring substances consumed as part of the Robertfroid (2002)
daily diet and possessing particular physiological
benefits when ingested
4 Foods that may provide health benefits beyond IFIC Foundation (1995, # #
basic nutrition 2006: p. 4)
5 Foods or food products marketed with the Riemersma (1996) #
message of the benefit to health
6 Food derived from naturally occurring Smith, Marcotte, and # #
substances, which can and should be consumed Harman (1996)
as part of the daily diet and which serves to
regulate or otherwise affect a particular body
process when ingested
7 Food similar in appearance to conventional Health Canada (1997) # #
food, which is consumed as part of the usual diet
and has demonstrated physiological benefit and/
or reduces the risk of chronic disease beyond
basic nutritional functions
8 Modified foods or food ingredients that provide Adelaja and Schilling # #
health benefits beyond their traditional nutrients (1999)
9 Foods with added ingredients that claim to Center for Science in the # #
provide a health benefit to consumers beyond the Public Interest (1999: p. 55)
benefits provided by ordinary foods themselves
10 A food product can only be considered Diplock et al. (1999) # # #
functional if together with the basic nutritional
impact it has beneficial effects on one or more
functions of the human organism thus either
improving the general and physical conditions or/
and decreasing the risk of the evolution of
diseases. The amount of intake and form of the
functional food should be as it is normally
expected for dietary purposes. Therefore, it could
not be in the form of pill or capsule just as normal
food form
11 Functional foods are products formulated with General Accounting Office # # #
naturally occurring chemicals (or combination of (2000: p. 47)
chemicals) e found in many fruits, vegetables,
grains, herbs and spices e to provide a health
benefit, to reduce the risk of certain diseases, or
to affect a particular body process. They go
beyond correcting diseases such as pellagra and
scurvy, caused by nutritional deficiencies.
Functional foods are akin to novel macro
ingredients in that their formulation is intended to
provide a health benefit to consumers. However,
functional foods are designed to reduce the risk
of specific diseases such as lung cancer by
removing certain ingredients, by adding or
combining ingredients not normally found in a
food product, or by concentrating substances in
higher than usual quantities
 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129 123

Table 2 (continued )
No. Definition References Main concepts
Nutritional Health Technological
function benefits process
12 Foods that, by virtue of physiologically active Hasler (2000) # # #
components, provide benefits beyond basic
nutrition and may prevent disease or promote
health
13 Food in which ingredients with an additional Hilliam (2000) #
health value have been added and this is
announced to the consumers
14 A food is functional if a health claim Iowa State University (2000: #
can be made p. 2)
15 Foods or food components that may have health National Institute of #
benefits that reduce the risk of specific diseases or Nutrition (2000: p. 4)
other health concerns
16 Food product that looks like conventional food Wilson (2001) # #
but that is demonstrated to have physiological
benefits and/or to reduce the risk of chronic
disease beyond basic nutritional functions
17 A food that is a food and not a drug, that is part Lajolo (2002) # #
of a normal diet and that can produce benefits
beyond basic nutrition
18 A natural food to which a component has been Robertfroid (2002) #
added and from which a component has been
removed, where the nature of one or more
components has been modified, in which the
bioavailability of one or more components have
been modified
19 Foods derived from naturally occurring Robertfroid (2002) # # #
substances, which can and should be consumed
as part of the daily diet and which serves to
regulate or otherwise affect a particular body
process when ingested
20 Any food for which a health claim can be made Weststrate, van Poppel, and #
is a functional food Verschuren (2002)
21 They are foods which can be part of our Agriculture, Food and Rural # #
everyday diet but which have properties that Development (2003: p. 2)
provide an additional health benefit
22 Functional foods help primarily for the supply of Anonymous (2003: p. 72) # # #
nutrients, but additionally they offer a special
advantage for the health
23 Food similar in appearance to conventional food Bech-Larsen and Grunert # #
that is intended to be consumed as part of a (2003)
normal diet, but has been modified to have
physiological roles beyond the provision of
simple nutrient requirements
24 Foodstuffs mostly similar in appearance to Jansen and Krijger (2003) # # #
conventional foods that fit daily in the diet and
consumption pattern but that, in addition to their
basic nutritional value, contain specific additives
or properties achieved by processing or otherwise
for which a physiological/health benefit beyond
basic nutrition is claimed
25 A whole food (as opposed to pills, powders, or Kleinschmidt (2003) # # #
supplements) that is fortified, enriched, or
enhanced with a component having a health
benefit beyond basic nutrition
26 Foods that encompass potentially healthful National Academy of # # #
products, including any modified food or food Sciences, USA (cited in
ingredient that may provide a health benefit Anonymous, 2003, p. 72)
beyond the traditional nutrients it contains
(continued on next page)
124 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129

Table 2 (continued)
No. Definition References Main concepts
Nutritional Health Technological
function benefits process
27 Foods that may be eaten regularly as part of a CSIRO Human Nutrition # #
normal diet, that have been designed specifically (2004)
to provide a physiological or medical benefit by
regulating body functions to protect against or
retard the progression of diseases such as
coronary heart disease, cancer, hypertension,
diabetes and osteoporosis
28 Foods that, in addition to supply known Egg Nutrition Center (2004) # #
nutrients, can provide other health benefits
as well
29 A food or a part of a food which provides Scholey (2004) #
medical or health benefits
30 A functional food is a conventional food or a Health Canada (2006) # #
food similar in appearance to a conventional
food, it is part of a regular diet, that has health-
related benefits and (or) reduces the risk of
specific chronic diseases above its basic
nutritional functions
31 Any food or food ingredient that might provide a Rakic, Povrenovic, Tesevic, # #
health benefit beyond the traditional nutrients it Simic, and Maletic (2006)
contains
32 Any substances that is a food or part of a food DeFelice (2007) #
that provides medical and/or health benefits,
including the prevention and treatment of
disease
33 A food that contains added, technologically Niva (2007) # #
developed ingredients with a specific health
benefit
34 A functional food is, or appears similar to, a Doyon and Labrecque # #
conventional food. It is part of a standard diet and (2008)
is consumed on a regular basis, in normal
quantities. It has proven health benefits that
reduce the risk of specific chronic diseases or
beneficially affect target functions beyond its
basic nutritional functions
35 A food can be regarded as functional if it is Doyon and Labrecque # #
satisfactorily demonstrated to affect beneficially (2008)
one or more target functions in the body, beyond
adequate nutritional effects, in a way that is
relevant to either improved state of health and
well-being and/or reduction of risk of disease
36 Food which has a demonstrated benefit for one Plaza, Cifuentes, and #
or more functions of the human organism, Ibanez (2008)
improving the state of health or well-being or
reducing the risk of disease
37 Food products fortified with special constituents Sir

o et al. (2008) # #
that possess advantageous physiological effects
38 Whole foods and fortified, enriched, or Hasler et al. (2009) # # #
enhanced foods that have a potentially beneficial
effect on health when consumed as part of a
varied diet on a regular basis, at effective levels
39 Foods that with their specific health effects Ballali and Lanciai (2012) # #
could, in the future, indicate a new mode of
thinking about the relationships between food
and health in everyday life
 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129
healthcare costs. Moreover, demographic changes, among
which the aging of the population in most developed coun-
tries, the higher life expectancy and the desire for an
improved quality of life, have stimulated research to iden-
tify or produce food with nutritional functions. People
can use functional foods to fill in certain nutritional gaps
left by intolerances, strict diets or personal preferences.
For example, those who are lactose intolerant can drink cal-
cium fortified orange juice, those who are vegetarians can
indulge in soy-based products for protein, and those who
dislike seafood can get omega-3s from enriched eggs or
pasta. According to Hasler, Brown and American Dietetic
Association (2009), examples of functional foods with
nutritional or dietary function are infant foods, hypoaller-
genic foods (such as gluten-free foods or lactose-free
foods), and weight-loss foods.
To better define the boundaries of functional food, it is
important to distinguish between nutritional deficiency and
other physiological effects such as disease risk reduction.
However, all food have some nutritional functions: accord-
ing to the definitions selected, what makes a food functional
is also the benefits beyond its basic nutritional functions.
Thus, a food that improves nutritional equilibrium should
not be considered, on that unique basis, a functional food.
Health benefits
A growing number of consumers are becoming aware of
functional foods with hopes of reaping additional health
benefits that may reduce certain disease risks or promote
optimal wellness. A number of health benefits are related
to functional food. According to the study of van Kleef,
van Trijp, and Luning (2005) and the classification of func-
tional foods proposed by Makinen-Aakula (2006), health
benefits may be grouped in three main classes: direct health
benefits, reduction of risk diseases and better life condi-
tions. Examples of health benefits are those reported in
Table 1 referred to the main types of functional foods avail-
able on the market. Some of the definitions listed in
Table 2, indicate that if a health claim can be made, a
food is functional. Health claims consist, traditionally, in
front-of-package information, which link the product with
specific health-related functions (Lahteenmaki, 2013).
Generally, it is illegal to give consumers misleading infor-
mation about products, thus in many countries the use of
this particular kind of claims is governed by additional spe-
cific legislation and regulations (Lalor & Wall, 2011). Con-
sumer responses to health claims have been analyzed in
several studies (Annunziata & Vecchio, 2013; Ares,
Gimenez, & Gambaro, 2009; Lahteenmaki, 2013;
Verbeke, Scholderer, & Lahteenmaki, 2009), all aiming to
measure the perceived healthiness or benefits, convincing-
ness or credibility of the claim and the consumer under-
standing of the claim itself.
Following the structure adopted by Lahteenmaki (2013),
it is possible to divide the topic of health claims in three
different level of analysis:
125
 claim related factors: Ares et al. (2009), Lynam,
McKevitt, and Gibney (2011) and Verbeke et al.
(2009), identified the type of the expected benefits and
the country of the respondents as the main factors that
enable a deeper impact on consumers choice of a func-
tional food. They also considered the length of the
claims, stating that consumers usually prefer short
claims, while Grunert et al. (2009) found two different
consumers behaviors toward health claims: those who
prefer a short set of information and those who preferred
a longer one. Another relevant factor that emerged from
the literature is familiarity: the use of a component that
is already widely marketed with health-related argu-
ments seems to create a better perception than a new
component (Lahteenmaki et al., 2010; van Trijp & van
der Lans, 2007).
 product related factors: the acceptation of health claims
is certainly higher when they are referred to products
that are already considered as having a healthy image
(Dean et al., 2007, 2012; Siegrist, Stampfli, &
Kastenholz, 2008). Consumers tend to prefer foods
that are perceived as natural (Rozin et al., 2004) and
any new ingredients may decrease the naturalness
perceived by customers (Lahteenmaki et al., 2010).
Moreover, several studies have demonstrated the unwill-
ingness of the consumers to compromise taste for health
benefits (Lyly, Roininen, Honkapaa, Poutanen, &
Lahteenmaki, 2007; Steptoe, Pollard, & Wardle, 1995;
Verbeke, 2005).
 consumer related factors: De Jong, Ocke, Branderhorst,
and Friele (2003) suggested that women tend to have a
higher preference for products with related health
claims, while Urala and Lahteenmaki (2007) found no
evidences of gender differences. Other authors (e.g.,
Ares & Gambaro, 2007), stated that the benefits that
are gender dependent are also perceived more positively
by the relevant gender. In demographic terms, the most
important factor seems to be the difference between
countries (Saba et al., 2010). Another important factor
affecting the effectiveness of health claims is lifestyle
(Szakaly, Szente, Kover, Polereczki, & Szigeti, 2012).
Technological process
In his work, Betoret, Betoret, Vidal, and Fito (2011),
reviewed the technologies trends of functional foods devel-
opment, identifying three different groups:
 technologies traditionally used in food processing.
Formulation and blending constitutes a simple, cheap
and adaptive technology to develop new functional
food and, its use in the development, has a long history
in the successful control of deficiencies of vitamins A
and D, several B vitamins (thiamine, riboflavin and
niacin), iodine and iron (Betoret et al., 2011). In more
recent years, the growing importance of dietary
126 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129
compounds and the related health benefits offered an
excellent opportunity to improve public health, and
thus this food products category received greater atten-
tion from the scientific community, consumers and
food manufacturers (Karaaslan, Ozden, Vardin, &
Turkoglu, 2011; Kim et al., 2010). Other possibilities
come from agriculture and livestock, which provide
the primary source of the nutrients required by humans
(Zhao & Shewry, 2011), as well as from biotechnology
and animal breeding, which offer the possibility to
obtain improved food products (Laible, 2009;
Matsushita et al., 2007; Zhu et al., 2008).
 technologies designed to prevent the deterioration of
physiologically active compounds. The most debated in
scientific literature are:
microencapsulation, that consists in the envelopment of
small solid particles, liquid droplets or gases in a
coating, based on the embedding effects of a polymeric
matrix (Betoret et al., 2011);
edible films and coatings that describe any type of ma-
terial used for enrobing various food to extend the shelf
life of the product that may be eaten with food (Pavlath
& Orts, 2009). This have the high potential to carry
active ingredients that can reduce the risk of pathogen
growth on the food surface and provide specific nutri-
ents (Betoret et al., 2011);
vacuum impregnation, considered a useful way to intro-
duce desirable solutes into the porous structure of
foods, modifying their original composition
(Watanabe, Yoshimoto, Okada, & Nomura, 2011).
 recent technologies aimed to design personalized func-
tional foods. Nutrigenomics considers the interaction be-
tween foods and an individuals genome, and the
consequent downstream effect on their phenotype,
recognizing that an appropriate dietary advice for one
individual may be inappropriate to another (Ferguson,
Philpott, & Barnett, 2010). This innovative science can
offer a wide window of opportunities in the area of func-
tional foods, but it is still in its infancy stage and there
are many aspects not well clarified yet (Penders,
Horstman, Saris, & Vos, 2007; Ronteltap, van Trijp,
Renes, & Frewer, 2007). Moreover, to date, there are
only sporadic examples of clinical trials utilizing these
technologies, thus there is a considerable number of is-
sues to be addressed before genomic approach can
become an acceptable method to guide food develop-
ment or nutritional recommendations (Betoret et al.,
2011; Kaput & Dawson, 2007).
Future trends and conclusion
The development of functional foods appears to be a
long-term trend with important market potential, where in-
formation flows generated by research are needed to sup-
port private investments, consumption decisions and
government regulations. According to the literature exam-
ined, various definitions exist, thus making it difficult to
provide industry partners with robust information on
market trends and potential. However, it is possible to stress
that development and changes in society as well as socio-
demographic trends are in favor of functional food. Conse-
quently it can be assumed that these products represent a
sustainable trend in the food market. In particular, the func-
tional food market is growing worldwide, as demonstrated
by the fact that new functional products are being launched
continuously. As a consequence, competition in this field is
becoming more and more intense. To survive such a
competition, a functional food product needs to be bought
repeatedly, and therefore it has to be developed considering
consumers needs. Therefore, we believe that consumer
research is crucial in the development of functional food
and requires further development and research.
From the review of the main definitions proposed in
literature, it is possible to link the key concepts proposed
(health, technology and nutrition) with the main players
that are involved in functional food research and develop-
ment process, namely: the food technologist, the nutri-
tionist and the specialist (Fig. 1). The combination of
skills owned by these different actors is essential for the
development of innovative products and particularly for
the development of functional food. This have to present
higher quality standards compared (by an organoleptic
point of view) to the corresponding conventional products
and aim at the maintenance of well-being.
The same concepts also reflect the developments and
changes of the scientific paradigm in nutritional sciences,
the relationship between nutritional factors and the occur-
rence and prevention of specific diseases, the increasing
SPECIALIST NUTRITIONIST
Health benefits, Nutritional functions
physiologic markers,
pathogenic
mechanisms
FOOD TECHNOLOGIST
Raw materials, ingredients
Technological process
Fig. 1. The three main actors involved in the research and development
process to obtain a functional food.
 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129
interest of consumers in health and nutrition aspects, as
well as the ageing of the society.
References
Adelaja, A., & Schilling, B. (1999). Nutraceuticals: blurring the line
between food and drugs in the twenty-first century. Choices,
14(4), 5.
Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. (2003). Functional foods.
Alberta: Agriculture, Food and Rural Development.
Alldrick, A. J. (2007). The bakery: a potential leader in functional food
applications. Functional Food News, http://www.functionalfoodnet.
eu/images/site/assets/5-bread.pdf.
Alzamora, S. M., Salvatori, D., Tapia, S., L
opez-Malo, M. A., Welti-
Chanes, J., & Fito, P. (2005). Novel functional foods from
vegetable matrices impregnated with biologically active
compounds. Journal of Food Engineering, 67, 205e214.
Annunziata, A., & Vecchio, R. (2011). Functional foods development
in the European market: a consumer perspective. Journal of
Functional Foods, 3(3), 223e228.
Annunziata, A., & Vecchio, R. (2013). Consumer perception of
functional foods: a conjoint analysis with probiotics. Food Quality
and Preference, 28, 348e355.
Anonymous. (2003). Functional foods project, agenda 2003. Federal
Report, Canada.
Ares, G., & G ambaro, A. (2007). Influence of gender, age and motives
underlying food choice on perceived healthiness and willingness
to try functional foods. Appetite, 49(1), 148e158.
Ares, G., Gim enez, A., & Gambaro, A. (2009). Consumer perceived
healthiness and willingness to try functional milk desserts.
Influence of ingredient, ingredient name and health claim. Food
Quality and Preference, 20(1), 50e56.
Ashwell, M. (2003). ILSI Europe concise monograph on concepts of
functional foods. Washington, DC: The International Life Sciences
Institute.
Ballali, S., & Lanciai, F. (2012). Functional food and diabetes: a
natural way in diabetes prevention? International Journal of Food
Sciences and Nutrition, 63(1), 51e61.
Bech-Larsen, T., & Grunert, K. G. (2003). The perceived healthiness of
functional foods: a conjoint study of Danish, Finnish and
American consumers perception of functional foods. Appetite, 40,
9e14.
Bech-Larsen, T., & Scholderer, J. (2007). Functional foods in Europe:
consumer research, market experiences and regulatory aspects.
Trends in Food Science & Technology, 18, 231e234.
Beckeman, M., & Skjolkebrand, C. (2007). Cluster/networks promote
food innovations. Journal of Food Engineering, 79, 1418e1425.
Benkouider, C. (2005). The worlds emerging markets. Functional
Foods and Nutraceuticals. Available at: http://www.ffnmag.com/
NH/ASP/strArticleID/770/strSite/FFNSite/articleDisplay.asp
Accessed 09.10.12.
Betoret, E., Betoret, N., Vidal, D., & Fito, P. (2011). Functional foods
development: trends and technologies. Trends in Food Science &
Technology, 22, 489e508.
Bhat, Z. F., & Bhat, H. (2011). Functional meat products: a review.
International Journal of Meat Science, 1(1), 1e14.
Bosscher, D. (2007). Slimming foods: latest evidence in the field of
non-digestible carbohydrates. Focus on oligosaccharides. In
Proceedings of the fourth international FFNet meeting on
functional foods.
Bosscher, D., Van Loo, J., & Franck, A. (2006). Inulin and oligofructose
as functional ingredients to improve bone mineralization.
International Dairy Journal, 16, 1092e1097.
Brennan, C. S., & Cleary, L. J. (2005). The potential use of cereal
(1 / 3, 1 / 4)-b-D-glucans as functional food ingredients.
Journal of Cereal Science, 42, 1e13.
127
Cani, P. D., Neyrinck, A. M., Maton, N., & Delzenne, N. M. (2005).
Oligofructose promotes satiety in rats fed a high-fat diet:
involvement of glucagon-like peptide-1. Obesity Research, 13,
1000e1007.
Center for Science in the Public Interest. (1999). Functional foods:
Public health boom or 21st century quackery?. Research report.
Charalampopoulos, D., Pandiella, S. S., & Webb, C. (2003).
Evaluation of the effect of malt, wheat and barley extracts on the
viability of potentially probiotic lactic acid bacteria under acidic
conditions. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 82,
133e141.
Charalampopoulos, D., Wang, R., Pandiella, S., & Webb, C. (2002).
Application of cereals and cereal components in functional foods:
a review. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 79,
131e141.
Christensen, J. L., Rama, R., & Von Tunzelmann, N. (1996). Study on
innovation in the European food products and beverages industry.
European Innovation Monitoring System, EIMS Publication, 35.
Luxembourg: European Commission, Directorate General XIII.
Coppens, P., Fernandes Da Silva, M., & Pettman, S. (2006). European
regulations on nutraceuticals, dietary supplements and functional
foods: a framework based on safety. Toxicology, 221, 59e74.
CSIRO Human Nutrition. (2004). Functional foods. Australia: CSIRO
Human Nutrition. Available at: www.foodscience.csiro.au/
functional-foods.htm Accessed June 2012.
De Jong, N., Ocke, M. C., Branderhorst, H. A. C., & Friele, R. (2003).
Demographic and lifestyle characteristics of functional food
consumers and dietary supplement users. British Journal of
Nutrition, 89(2), 273e281.
Dean, M., Lampila, P., Shepherd, R., Arvola, A., Saba, A., &
Vassallo, M. (2012). Perceived relevance and foods with health-
related claims. Food Quality and Preference, 24(1), 129e135.
Dean, M., Shepherd, R., Arvola, A., Vassallo, M., Winkelmann, M., &
Claupein, E. (2007). Consumer perceptions of healthy cereal
products and production methods. Journal of Cereal Science,
46(3), 188e196.
DeFelice, S. (2007). DSHEA versus NREA (The Nutraceutical
Research and Education Act) and the three nutraceutical
objectives. The Foundation for Innovation of Science in Medicine,
Commentaries.
Diplock, A. T., Aggett, P. J., Ashwell, M., Bornet, F., Fern, E. B., &
Roberfroid, M. B. (1999). Scientific concepts of functional foods in
Europe: consensus document. British Journal of Nutrition, 81(1),
S1eS27.
Doyon, M., & Labrecque, J. (2008). Functional foods: a conceptual
definition. British Food Journal, 110(11), 1133e1149.
Egg Nutrition Center. (2004). Functional foods fact sheets. Washington,
DC: Egg Nutrition Center. Available at: www.enc-online.org/
factsheets.htm Accessed May 2012.
Ferguson, L. R., Philpott, M., & Barnett, M. P. G. (2010).
Nutrigenomics: integrating genomic approaches into nutrition
research. Molecular Diagnostics, 347e363.
Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine, National Academy of
Sciences. (1994). In P. R. Thomas, & R. Earl (Eds.), Opportunities in
the nutrition and food sciences. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
Garcia Martinez, M., & Briz, J. (2000). Innovation in the Spanish food
& drink industry. International Food and Agribusiness
Management Review, 3, 155e176.
General Accounting Office. (2000). Improvements needed in
overseeing the safety of dietary supplements and functional foods.
Report to Congressional Committees. Washington DC: General
Accounting Office.
Gibson, G. R. (2004). From probiotics to prebiotics and a healthy
digestive system. Journal of Food Science, 69, M141eM143.
Grunert, K. G., Lahteenmaki, L., Boztug, Y., Martinsdottir, E.,
Ueland, .,  Astr
om, A., et al. (2009). Perception of health claims
128 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129
among Nordic consumers. Journal of Consumer Policy, 32,
269e287.
Hardy, G. (2000). Nutraceutical and functional foods: introduction
and meaning. Nutrition, 16, 688e698.
Hasler, C. (2000). The changing face of functional foods. Journal of the
American College of Nutrition, 19, 499Se506S.
Hasler, C. M., Brown, A. C., & American Dietetic Association. (2009).
Position of the American Dietetic Association: functional foods.
Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 109(4), 735e746.
Health Canada. (1997). Policy options analysis: Nutraceuticals/
functional foods. Ottawa, Ont., Canada: Health Canada, Health
Protection Branch, Therapeutic Products Programme and Food
Directorate.
Health Canada. (2006). What are functional food? Functional Foods
and Nutraceuticals, Key Terms, Health Canada, Section 2.2.
Hilliam, M. (2000). Fortified juice trends. The World of Food
Ingredients, 12, 17e19.
Hollingsworth, P. (1999). Retargeting candy as a functional food. Food
Technology, 53(12), 30.
IFIC Foundation. (1995). Functional foods: opening the door to better
health. Food Insight, November/December.
IFIC Foundation. (2006). Functional foods. Leaflet. IFIC Foundation.
Iowa State University. (2000). What you need to know about new food
words e phytochemicals functional foods and nutraceuticals.
Information leaflet. Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
IRI. (2008). Competing in a transforming economy. Webinar, Dec. 12.
Chicago, IL: Information Resources Inc.. www.infores.com.
Jansen, J. M., & Krijger, A. (2003). Beyond the boundaries of butter,
cheese and powder non-traditional dairy products: facts,
implications and challenges. International Dairy Federation,
Bulletin, 385.
Jimenez-Colmenero, F., Carballo, J., & Cofrades, S. (2001). Healthier
meat and meat products: their role as functional foods. Meat
Science, 59, 5e13.
Jones, P. J., & Jew, S. (2007). Functional food development: concept to
reality. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 18, 387e390.
Kaput, J., & Dawson, K. (2007). Complexity of type 2 diabetes mellitus
data sets emerging from nutrigenomic research: a case for
dimensionality reduction? Mutation Research, 622, 19e32.
Karaaslan, M., Ozden, M., Vardin, H., & Turkoglu, H. (2011).
Phenolic fortification of yogurt using grape and callus extracts.
LWT Food Science and Technology, 44, 1065e1072.
Keller, C. (2006). Trends in beverages and Measurable Health. In
Proceedings of the third functional food net meeting.
Kim, J., Ko, Y., Park, Y. K., Kim, N. I., Ha, W. K., & Cho, Y. (2010).
Dietary effect of lactoferrin-enriched fermented milk on skin
surface lipid and clinical improvement of acne vulgaris. Nutrition,
26, 902e909.
Kleinschmidt, A. (2003). When food isnt just food. Research Leaflet,
2.
Kociubinski, G., & Salminen, S. (2006). Probiotics: basis, state of the
art and future perspectives. In Functional food network general
meeting.
Kotilainen, L., Rajalahti, R., Ragasa, C., & Pehu, E. (2006). Health
enhancing foods: Opportunities for strengthening the sector in
developing countries. Discussion Paper 30. Washington, DC:
World Bank.
Kov  Zsarn
acs, A., oczay, G., & Gasparik Reichardt, J. (2007).
Development of new, functional meat products. In
Proceedings of the fourth international FFNet meeting on
functional foods.
Kwak, N. S., & Jukes, D. J. (2001). Functional foods. Part 1. The
development of a regulatory concept. Food Control, 13, 99e107.
Lahteenm aki, L. (2013). Claiming health in food products. Food
Quality and Preference, 27, 196e201.
Lahteenm aki, L., Lampila, P., Grunert, K., Boztug, Y., Ueland, ., &

Astr
om, A. (2010). Impact of health-related claims on the
perception of other product attributes. Food Policy, 35(3),
230e239.
Laible, G. (2009). Enhancing livestock through genetic engineering e
recent advances and future prospects. Comparative Immunology,
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 32, 123e137.
Lajolo, F. M. (2002). Functional foods: Latin American perspectives.
British Journal of Nutrition, 88(2), S145eS150.
Lalor, F., & Wall, P. G. (2011). Health claims regulations. Comparison
between USA, Japan and European Union. British Food Journal,
113(2), 298e313.
L

opez-Molina, D., Navarro-Mart
nez, M. D., Melgarejo, F. R.,
Hiner, A. N. P., Chazarra, S., & Rodr
guez-L
opez, J. N. (2005).
Molecular properties and prebiotic effect of inulin obtained from
artichoke (Cynara scolymus L.). Phytochemistry, 66, 1476e1484.
Lyly, M., Roininen, K., Honkapaa, K., Poutanen, K., & Lahteenmaki, L.
(2007). Factors influencing consumers willingness to use
beverages and ready-to-eat frozen soups containing oat b-glucan
in Finland, France and Sweden. Food Quality and Preference,
18(2), 242e255.
Lynam, A. M., McKevitt, A., & Gibney, M. J. (2011). Irish consumers
use and perception of nutrition and health claims. Public Health
Nutrition, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S136898001000723.
Makinen-Aakula, M. (2006). Trends in functional foods dairy market.
In Proceedings of the third functional food net meeting.
Mark-Herbert, C. (2004). Innovation of a new product category e
functional foods. Technovation, 24, 713e719.
Matsushita, M., Tazinafo, N. M., Padre, R. G., Oliveira, C. C.,
Souza, N. E., Visentainer, J. V., et al. (2007). Fatty acid profile of
milk from Saanen goats fed a diet enriched with three vegetable
oils. Small Ruminant Research, 72, 127e132.
Mendoza, E., Garc
a, M. L., Casas, C., & Selgas, M. D. (2001). Inulin
as fat substitute in low fat, dry fermented sausages. Meat Science,
57, 387e393.
Menrad, K. (2003). Market and marketing of functional food in
Europe. Journal of Food Engineering, 56, 181e188.
Menrad, K. (2004). Innovations in the food industry in Germany.
Research Policy, 33, 845e878.
Mollet, B., & Rowland, I. (2002). Functional foods: at the frontier
between food and pharma. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 13,
483e485.
Mon
ar, J. (2007). The Spanish functional food market: present and
future perspectives. In Functional FoodNet (FFNet) network
meeting. IATA-CSIC.
National Institute of Nutrition. (2000). Consumer awareness of and
attitudes towards functional foods, highlights and implications for
informing consumer. Leaflet.
Niva, M. (2007). All foods affect health: understandings of functional
foods and healthy eating among health-oriented Finns. Appetite,
48, 384e393.
Oatles, A., & Cagindi, O. (2006). Cereal based functional foods and
nutraceuticals. ACTA Scientiarum Polonorum Technologia
Alimentaria, 5(1), 107e112.
Ouwehand, A. (2007). Success in applying pro- and prebiotics in
dairy products. In Proceedings of the fourth international FFNet
meeting on functional foods.
Pavlath, A. E., & Orts, W. (2009). Edible films and coatings: why, what,
and how? In M. E. Embuscado, & K. C. Huber (Eds.), Edible films
and coatings for food applications (pp. 1e23). New York: Springer.
Penders, B., Horstman, K., Saris, W. H. M., & Vos, R. (2007). From
individuals to groups: a review of the meaning of personalized
in nutrigenomics. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 18,
333e338.
Plaza, M., Cifuentes, A., & Ibanez, E. (2008). In the search of new
functional food ingredients from algae. Trends in Food Science &
Technology, 19, 31e39.
Poutanen, K. (2006). Oat and beta-glucan e healthy solutions for
consumers. In Functional food network general meeting.
 B. Bigliardi, F. Galati / Trends in Food Science & Technology 31 (2013) 118e129
Rakic, S., Povrenovi c, D., Tesevic, V., Simic, M., & Maletic, R. (2006).
Oak acorn, polyphenols and antioxidant activity in functional
food. Journal of Food Engineering, 74(3), 416e423.
Ricondo, Z., & Ayo, J. (2007). Tomato fiber as a new source of
functional fibre for a meat application type sausage. In
Developments in science & health claims, ILSI international
symposium on functional foods in Europe.
Riemersma, R. A. (1996). A fat little earner. Lancet, 347, 775e776.
Robertfroid, M. B. (2000a). Concepts and strategy of functional
science: the European perspective. American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, 71, 1660e1664.
Robertfroid, M. B. (2000b). A European consensus of scientific
concepts of functional foods. Nutrition, 16, 689e691.
Robertfroid, M. B. (2002). Global view on functional foods: European
perspectives. British Journal of Nutrition, 88, S133eS138.
Ronteltap, A., van Trijp, J. C. M., Renes, R. J., & Frewer, L. J. (2007).
Consumer acceptance of technology-based food innovations:
lessons for the future of nutrigenomics. Appetite, 49, 1e17.
Rozin, P., Spranca, M., Krieger, Z., Neuhaus, R., Surillo, D.,
Swerdlin, A., et al. (2004). Preference for natural: instrumental and
ideational/moral motivations, and the contrast between foods and
medicines. Appetite, 43(2), 147e154.
Saarela, M., Lahteenmaki, L., Crittenden, R., Salminen, S., & Mattila-
Sandholm, T. (2002). Gut bacteria and health foods e the European
perspective. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 78, 99e117.
Saba, A., Vassallo, M., Shepherd, R., Lampila, P., Arvola, A.,
Dean, M., et al. (2010). Country-wise differences in perception of
health-related messages in cereal-based food products. Food
Quality and Preference, 21, 385e393.
Scholey, A. (2004). Chewing gum and cognitive performance: a case of a
functional food with function but no food? Appetite, 43, 215e216.
Side, C. (2006). Overview on marketing functional foods in Europe. In
Functional food network general meeting.
Siegrist, M., Stampfli, N., & Kastenholz, H. (2008). Consumers
willingness to buy functional foods. The influence of carrier,
benefit and trust. Appetite, 51(3), 526e529.
Sir

o, I., K

apolna, E., K
apolna, B., & Lugasi, A. (2008). Functional food.
Product development, marketing and consumer acceptance e a
review. Appetite, 51, 456e467.
Sloan, A. E. (2000). The top ten functional food trends. Food
Technology, 54, 33e62.
Smith, B. L., Marcotte, M., & Harman, G. (1996). A comparative
analysis of the regulatory framework affecting functional food
development and commercialization in Canada, Japan, the
European Union and the United States of America. Ottawa, Ont.,
Canada: Intersector Alliance Inc.
Spence, J. T. (2006). Challenges related to the composition of functional
foods. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 19, S4eS6.
Stanton, C., Ross, R. P., Fitzgerald, G. F., & Van Sinderen, D. (2005).
Fermented functional foods based on probiotics and their biogenic
metabolites. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 16, 198e203.
Steptoe, A., Pollard, T. M., & Wardle, J. (1995). Development of a
measure of the motives underlying the selection of food: the food
choice questionnaire. Appetite, 25(3), 267e284.
129
Surai, P. F., & Sparks, N. H. C. (2001). Designer eggs: from
improvement of egg composition to functional food. Trends in
Food Science & Technology, 12, 7e16.
Szakaly, Z., Szente, V., K
over, G., Polereczki, Z., & Szigeti, O. (2012).
The influence of lifestyle on health behavior and preference for
functional foods. Appetite, 58, 406e413.
Szak
aly, Z., Szigeti, O., M
ath
e, A., & Szente, V. (2007).
Nutrimarketing in the service of functional foods. In International
developments in science & health claims, ILSI international
symposium on functional foods in Europe.
Tammsaar, E. (2007). Estonian/Baltic functional food market. In
Proceedings of the fourth international FFNet meeting on
functional foods.
Urala, N., & Lahteenmaki, L. (2007). Consumers changing attitudes
towards functional foods. Food Quality and Preference, 18(1),
1e12.
van Kleef, E., van Trijp, H. C. M., & Luning, P. (2005). Functional
foods: health claim-food product compatibility and the impact of
health claim framing on consumer evaluation. Appetite, 44(5),
299e308.
Van Trijp, H. (2007). Consumer understanding and nutritional
communication. In International developments in science &
health claims, ILSI international symposium on functional foods in
Europe.
van Trijp, H. C. M., & van der Lans, I. A. (2007). Consumer
perceptions of nutrition and health claims. Appetite, 48(3),
305e324.
Verbeke, W. (2005). Consumer acceptance of functional foods: socio-
demographic, cognitive and attitudinal determinants. Food
Quality and Preference, 16(1), 45e57.
Verbeke, W., Scholderer, J., & Lahteenmaki, L. (2009). Consumer
appeal of nutrition and health claims in three existing product
concepts. Appetite, 52(3), 684e692.
Watanabe, Y., Yoshimoto, K., Okada, Y., & Nomura, M. (2011). Effect
of impregnation using sucrose solution on stability of anthocyanin
in strawberry jam. LWT Food Science and Technology, 44,
891e895.
Weststrate, J. A., van Poppel, G., & Verschuren, P. M. (2002).
Functional foods, trends and future. British Journal of Nutrition,
88(2), 233e235.
Wilson, T. (2001). Food and pharmaceuticals e industries on a
collision course. Pharmaceutical Technology Europe, 13(10),
56e60.
Young, Y. (2000). Functional foods and the European consumer. In
J. Buttriss, & M. Saltmarsh (Eds.), Functional foods. II. Claims and
evidence. London: The Royal Society of Chemistry.
Zhao, F. J., & Shewry, P. R. (2011). Recent developments in modifying
crops and agronomic practice to improve human health. Food
Policy, 36, S94eS101.
Zhu, C. F., Naqvi, S., Breitenbach, J., Sandmann, G., Christou, P., &
Capell, T. (2008). Combinatorial genetic transformation generates
a library of metabolic phenotypes for the carotenoid pathway in
maize. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, 105, 18232e18237.