Wageningen Academic Journal of Insects as Food and Feed, 2020; 6(3): 231-243 Publishers

Gatekeepers in the food industry: acceptability of edible insects

H.J. Hunts1, F.V. Dunkel2*, M.J. Thienes3 and N.B. Carnegie4

1Montana State University, Department of Health and Human Development, 222 Herrick Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA; 2Montana State University, Department of Plant Sciences and Plant Pathology, 119 Plant BioSciences, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA; 3Montana State University, Department of Ecology, 310 Lewis Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA; 4Montana State University, Department of Mathematics, 240 Wilson Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA; [email protected]

Received: 26 November 2018 / Accepted: 7 August 2019 © 2019 Wageningen Academic Publishers OPEN ACCESS RESEARCH ARTICLE Abstract

For billions of consumers around the world, insects are not only considered edible, they are considered delicious! Currently, in the United States, there is a distinct movement from ‘yuck’ to ‘yum’ in terms of insects as food. This movement towards acceptance can be seen in the market-demand for edible insects, but the pace of the demand is modified by the level to which key gatekeepers in education, research, and the food industry are providing supportive information to consumers. In this paper, we hypothesised that there would be differences in the perceptions of edible insect acceptability across three gatekeeper groups, entomologists (specifically, members of the North Central Branch of the Entomological Society of America), food technologists (specifically, members of the Southern California Institute for Food Technology), and secondary family and consumer sciences teachers (specifically, members of the Montana Association of Family and Consumer Sciences). Further, we hypothesised that nutrition and environmental information would be the most important among entomologists. We exposed each group to information and tasting opportunities. Our findings supported our hypotheses with statistically significant differences using the Fisher’s exact test across the three gatekeeper groups in terms of acceptability (P-values of less than 0.01 in all pairings; P=1.003e-12 overall). We found differences between entomologists and family and consumer sciences (FCS) teachers in the importance of nutrition as a factor (P=0.014) but not between other pairings. Environmental impact information was statistically different across the groups (P=0.024) and statistically significant in FCS teachers compared to the other groups but not food technologists versus entomologists (P=0.95). We offer theoretical reasons why differences exist and offer suggestions on how we can move towards more acceptance among gatekeepers leading to more support for consumer demand.

Keywords: preferences, food technologists, entomologists, family consumer sciences, adoption of innovations

1. Introduction food worldwide, nutritional benefits of insects, and low environmental impact of raising insects as a major protein Acceptability of insects as a food source is increasing in the source for humans. This paper explores the concept that United States (USA). In addition to the Native Americans/ significant differences in acceptability of insects as food Alaskan Natives, Asian-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, may exist across groups of gatekeeping professionals in African Americans, and Pacific and Hawaiian Islanders, education, research and the USA food industry and that Americans of European descent are also including insects this might affect these professionals’ sharing of information in their diets. However, the novelty of ready-to-eat insects, about food insects as part of an everyday diet. This concept expense of available products, and associated ‘yuck factor’ may explain similar situations in Canada, Australia, and are important barriers to mainstream adoption of insects Europe. as food in the USA. Consumers may be willing to change their mind about their personal acceptability of insects as Controlling, usually limiting, general access to something food if they are given information about uses of insects as is considered gatekeeping (https://en.oxforddictionaries.

ISSN 2352-4588 online, DOI 10.3920/JIFF2018.0045 231 H.J. Hunts et al.

com/definition/gatekeeping). Cultural gatekeeping is a insects which is a complete, high quality protein source, that function or system that ignores, controls access to, or places is superior to the maize, sorghum, and millet the locusts a negative value on practices of cultures other than one’s ate. It is not necessary that gatekeepers themselves choose own. In the case of food crops, specifically edible insects, to consume insects. It is necessary that gatekeepers accept this has had serious consequences worldwide, particularly the fact that over 2000 species of insects are deliberately in sub-Saharan Africa in the 20th century (Dunkel, 2017: included in the diets of one third of the world’s human p. 29-34). As early as the 1930’s members of the United population, that is, cultures in Asia, the Americas, Africa, Nations (UN) waged an ‘international war on locusts’ and Australia (Van Huis et al., 2013) and that a new industry (Nature, 1938). For almost 90 years the United Nations in the USA and Europe is trying to emerge based on these Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has focused on cultural practices. Meanwhile the edible insect industry solving malnutrition including stunting and kwashiorkor has entered an exponential growth phase from a worldwide (protein deficiency). A seemingly reasonable approach to value of $ 16 million in 2012, to $ 33 million in 2015, now preventing malnutrition was to try and maximise crop projected by market analysts to grow to $ 523 million in yields. To that end, entomologists from Germany, France, 2023 (GMI, 2017). Work by Meticulous Research (as cited UK, Belgium and the USA waged an ‘international war by Reuters, 2018) suggests that the global edible insect on locusts’ using chemical pesticides. This war cost the market will hit nearly 1.2 billion in 2023. Gatekeepers, international community 600 million USD (United States for example, hold the key to help start new businesses, dollars) for just one of the 3-year campaigns (DeVreyer et fund programs at the United Nations FAO, suggest food al., 2012). A price tag that, at the time, seemed like money legislation that paves the way for this nascent industry well spent. growing exponentially to expand, and make way for insects to be recognised as food in the design of elementary, The war on locusts ignored the fact that edible insects, secondary, and university curricula. primarily locusts, grasshoppers and other orthopterans were important sources of protein and traditional snacks for the Compatibility of an innovation, meaning how an innovation children of sub-Saharan Africa. Apparently unbeknownst fits in with what is normal or acceptable in a social system, to entomologists at the time, local edible insects are far is positively related to its rate of adoption (Rogers, 2003: p. superior in nutrition to the crops that entomologists were 266). In this case the innovation is ‘insect’ and we added trying so desperately to save. For example, more than 21% of an adjective ‘food.’ In traditional ecological knowledge the variegated grasshopper Zonocerus variegatus (Ademolu systems of Europeans and those of European derivation, et al., 2010) is protein whereas raw millet is comprised this is an oxymoron. To understand gatekeeping behaviour of just 11% protein (USDA, 2019). Additionally, there is regarding potential adopters which they influence, we must just 0.08 mg of calcium per gram of raw millet (USDA, understand perceptions of gatekeepers (Rogers, 2003: p. 2019) versus 1.8 mg of calcium per gram of Zonocerus 266). Their perceptions will determine the nature of the variegatus (Ademolu et al., 2010). Other insects, such as diffusion process of an innovation, in this case, food insects. caterpillars, are also effective at preventing stunting and anaemia according to a randomised trial conducted by Who are the gatekeepers? Bauserman et al. (2015) because they are a good source of iron and protein. It is not surprising that caterpillar protein A crucial choice in the entire innovation-development was superior given that raw millet has just 0.03 mg of iron process is the decision to begin diffusing an innovation to per gram (USDA, 2019). potential adopters (Rogers, 2003: p. 155), a decision lying in hands of gatekeepers. A 1995 study by the World Bank (Joffe, 1995) states ‘The rationale for control tends to be based as much on political The primary gatekeeper in the USA is the Food and Drug considerations and emotive arguments as any realistic Administration which regulates insects as food defects assessment of the risks to agricultural production and (contamination of food by insects), in terms of insect derived livelihoods.’ (p. ix). For almost a century, recessionary products (i.e. honey) and as insects as food and feed. Van and plagues larval bands and swarms of locusts have Huis et al. (2013) states ‘Regulatory frameworks governing been documented (Van Huis et al., 2007). Given the rapid food and feed chains have expanded tremendously in the local appearance of swarms and the high, well-balanced last 20 years; however, regulations governing insects as nutritional contents of this meat supply, it seems most food and feed sources are still largely absent. For developed reasonable to traditional mass gathering, drying, and countries, the absence of clear legislation and norms guiding storing techniques for this food and supply (Riley, 1873 as the use of insects as food and feed is among the major cited by Holt, 1885; Van Huis et al., 2013). In this case, the limiting factors hindering the industrial development of gatekeepers were entomologists who withheld nutritional farming insects to supply the food and feed sectors.’ A information from parents of these children (and their policy thorough review of regulation of insects as food in the USA makers) about their children’s traditional food source of is provided by Boyd (2019).

232 Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) Gatekeepers in the food industry

Another important gatekeeping group are educators. opportunities in what foods they chose to expose to The inclusion of edible insects in required curricula of the industry and feature in their Food Expos occurring culinary science or food technology programs has not yet quarterly (regionally) and once a year nationally in the USA. happened. An informal survey 2018 by Thomas Schowalter Application of knowledge and skills from the food scientists (entomology professor at Louisiana State University, Baton and technologists is done in part by those in the Academy Rouge, LA, USA) of syllabi from entry level entomology of Nutrition and Dietetics. A review of their websites, courses at US Land Grant Universities indicated some www.eatright.org, www.eatrightPRO.org, and www. recognition of food insects (T. Schowalter, personal eatrightSTORE.org (10 November 2018) for information communication, 2017). Generally, this is no more than a on edible insects revealed nothing about food insects. single lecture or participation by students in a food feast or insect festival. Gatekeepers, such as these, can curtail this process of adoption of innovation at any point in the process. Change Another, university related, gatekeeper is the U.S. agents, such as the edible insect entrepreneurs and first Cooperative Extension Service. The extension service is adopter consumers often ignore Indigenous Knowledge a national, publicly funded, non-formal learning network (IK), i.e. knowledge that can be tracked back millennia linking educational and research resources with activities. and is transferred from Elders to children (Purcell, 1998). This outreach component of Land Grant Institutions is Perceptions of insects as pests, i.e. bearers of disease and designed to reach every resident of each of the fifty USA competition with other food sources is also IK of primarily states and seven territories, giving it extraordinary potential Europeans and those of European derivation (Western influence in USA communities (Extension, 2018). As with cultures). It is essential to understand these differences in formal university courses in food science and entomology, IK to appreciate Western cultures’ progress in adopting though, there has been minor recognition throughout the innovation of food insects. the US Extension Service in responding to the surge in development of the food insect industry. Notable is To bridge the cultural gap, we turn to Ali’s suggestion information from and/or Extension programs at: University (2016) that it is a matter of words. Euro-Americans have of Kentucky (Unger, 2009); North Carolina State University tried several phrases to bridge this gap with words. ‘Tree (Leonard, 2017); Texas A&M (Brown, 2017); University lobster’ is an example of such a phrase, but in this case, of Maryland (Jadin, 2004); University of California Davis it is the common name of a stick insect not known to be (Garvey, 2015); and University of Georgia (Sosebee, 2018). edible (https://tinyurl.com/yxhnmvsc). ‘Bug Appetit!’ was Dr Sonny Ramaswamy, former Director of the National an oxymoron introduced by Dr Margaretha Wessel in 1996 Institute of Food and Agriculture, reminds us that public during the filming of a food insect gourmet dinner on-site awareness benefits the entire industry, ‘Take a page out in Bozeman, MT, USA, by Paramount Productions, Inc. of what has happened in the [US] organic [farming and ‘Land shrimp’ was coined by David Gracer (Walsh, 2008). consumer] community [that circumvented the Extension ‘Mini-livestock’ was introduced by Dr Gene DeFoliart in Service]’ (Ramaswamy, 2015). a peer-refereed article (DeFoliart, 1999). Semantics is a suggestion to move through the barriers to adoption. The American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences (AAFCS) is one of the oldest, continuous, USA Theory of diffusion of innovation professional organisations (http://hearth.library.cornell. edu/h/hearth/about.html). From its inception in 1908, We looked to Rogers (2003) for a deeper understanding family and consumer sciences (FCS) has been the major of ‘why not eat insects?’ Rogers’ theory of diffusion of source of food safety and food sciences education in innovation (TDI) originally published in 1962, now in its the USA. While some schools are more progressive and fifth edition (2003) is built on five elements: observability; rigorous than others, all FCS classrooms teach at least a trialability; compatibility; complexity; and relative basic course in food shopping/storage/preparation as well as advantage. When Shelomi (2015) applied Rogers’ five nutrition. Their role in sharing information and know-how elements to adoption of food insects in 2015, his conclusion with younger generations is key to widespread adoption of was that edible insects were a failed innovation for Western edible insects in the USA. cultures. Supply side developments and appropriate marketing were Shelomi’s suggestions to improve adoption Food sciences and technology draw from chemical of food insects. In today’s North American and European engineering, biology, and biochemistry to provide safe insects-as-human-and-other-animal-food/feed world, nutritious foods we consume daily. All these technologies basically the northern hemisphere, entrepreneurs are combine to mass produce the food we eat daily. The food developing nutritious human and other animal foods using industry is the largest manufacturing industry in the insects as the base protein. Since Shelomi’s publication, the USA. These scientists and engineers form the Institute of market has grown (Global Market Insight, 2017). Food Technology wielding its influence or gate keeping

Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) 233 H.J. Hunts et al.

Observability, or the presence in the marketplace means of cricket powder currently ranges from $ 32-45 a pound what opportunities are there for the consumer to find (https://tinyurl.com/yyponmpd), but most retail products ‘bugs on the menu’ literally or on grocers’ shelves. The film bars and chips in the USA are price competitive compared of Bradley and Toews (2016) by this name succeeded in to similar products that do not use insect ingredients in their creating an urge to find some insects to consume. Although marketing of products. With improvements in automation the market is stepping up to the plate rapidly, gatekeepers during the near future, low cost of production will drive who are still in a stage of cultural defence (Bennett, 2004) down insect farming costs and hence consumer price. Insect will block opportunities to see others tasting and cooking powder is a basic ingredient useful for baking and making with insect ingredients. health drinks. A surge is occurring now in creating insect hydrolysates with better techno-functionality than minimally Trialability is opportunity to try the product. Tastings in processed insect powder. How this will affect the market friends’ homes as an appetiser, in the food science or an is not yet known. Insects, however, can be reared locally, entomology food lab (this may not yet exist in the USA), and thereby reducing complex packaging and transportation at insect feasts are important opportunities for trialability. costs. Edible insects can also be used to process pre- consumer food waste. Food insects can, therefore, contribute Compatibility means the innovation is in synchrony to a circular economy when reared on organic side streams with one’s world view. Adoption is not a linear process, which is one-third of food produced for human consumption particularly in food and agriculture. Sushi (House, 2018; lost or wasted (FAO, 2011, 2013). Ruby and Rozin, 2019), pizza (Lee, 2018), legume production in USA wheat growing areas (Carlisle, 2015), and even Rogers (2003) further reminds us that relative advantage organic farming (Heckman, 2006) were at one time not covers more than economic, ecological, or health benefits, compatible with parts of USA culture and were not initially it also includes social benefits (prestige), convenience, and promoted by USA food and agricultural scientists or the satisfaction. We see additional aspects of relative advantage: Agricultural Extension Service. It can be said that if the the ethical concerns for non-humans and for humans. For gatekeepers who organise tasting events or who decide to animal rights advocates, particularly in the case of crickets give shelf space to edible insect products in their retail store and other orthopterans, insects have a relative advantage. or who design curricula are from a culture of European Cricket cool down in the insect farming process simulates derivation and have an ethnocentric world view (hence the approach of winter in the natural world which is a normal an incompatibility), they are likely to create a barrier to cycle for a cricket’s life after mating and egg laying, and observability and trialability. Over two billion people therefore, not an animal rights issue. Orthopterans are regularly consume insects quite often but these people are harvested at the end of the end of their normal life cycle. largely located in the southern hemisphere making cultural Mealworm larvae, however, are harvested as larvae before issues paramount. they become adults or even pupae and are a common farmed food for reptiles, fish, birds and livestock. Some consider Complexity is the ‘degree to which an innovation is perceived mealworms and similar species without developed nervous as relatively difficult to understand and use.’ Shelomi (2015) systems or behaviour patterns, however this is not consistent is clear in his criticism of the lack of availability of edible with the literature (Chiarodo et al., 1970). At the same time insect cooking programs and recipes on the Internet in these and other environmental sciences data are clearly 2015, but now in 2019 there are a plethora of YouTube building the case that insects are food that will allow 9 billion entries for how to cook edible insects (for example https:// people to live on earth by 2050 and be well fed (Nadeau et tinyurl.com/gtybrnw). Gatekeepers of the communication al., 2015). flow can easily continue to solve this barrier to adoption caused by complexity. We recognise, however, that a video Nutritional and other health advantages of these cooking techniques is not the same as learning this kind of specialty cooking and baking with your mom, Nutrition is a concern of many Americans. According to the dad, or grandmother at your side in the kitchen advising 2015-2020 dietary guidelines for Americans (US Department you to ‘ take the legs off before you sauté’ or ‘don’t use the of Health and Human Services and USDA, 2015) 117 million darkened larvae.’ American adults (roughly half of all the American adult population) suffers from one or more preventable, chronic To succeed, an innovation such as edible insects must be diseases related to diet and/or lack of physical activity. There ‘perceived as better than the idea it supersedes’ (Rogers, is, of course, the immeasurable cost of human suffering 2003). Of the five barriers to innovation from TDI, relative but there are also measurable economic consequences. advantage has the most complex positive and negative Medical costs related to obesity and diabetes alone are in aspects, and so remains a difficult barrier to break. Though the hundreds of billions of dollars. diminishing annually, cost is still a barrier to overcoming the providing of a relative advantage to edible insects. The cost

234 Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) Gatekeepers in the food industry

Nutrient contents vary in each of the at least 2,000 different that in 2017, nearly 151 million children under five have species of food insects. Properly fed insects provide: all the stunted growth, while the lives of over 50 million children essential amino acids (the nine for adults, ten for children); in the world continue to be threatened by wasting.’ (p. 7). both mono- and polyunsaturated fatty acids, (particularly Edible insects, already consumed deliberately by one third 20-carbon fatty acids needed by the human, but rare in food of the world’s population, seem to be a viable alternative to and not produced by the human body); a healthy ratio of our current protein production systems. Relatively small omega-6 to omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids; essential footprints of farmed insects especially in their land and micronutrients including calcium and zinc (Mwangi et al., water needs points again to edible insects. With at least 2018) and iron (Bauserman et al., 2015; DeFoliart, 1992); 2,000 insect species consumed worldwide, farmed insects and vitamins, including vitamin B12 which is not available in are a local mini livestock that can be grown and consumed unfermented plants (Rumpold and Schlüter, 2013; Schabel, wherever humans are living. 2010). Tenebrio molitor for example is 49.1% protein by dry weight (Van Huis et al., 2013). Verkerk et al. (2007) The environmental footprint of agriculture with note of report that insects are comprised of 40-75% protein by dry the origin of greenhouse gasses and comparisons of which weight making them comparable to mammal meat. Edible products use the most land and water is well described by insects have been proposed as one way to decrease iron Oonincx et al. (2010) and Oonincx and De Boer (2012). For and zinc deficiency in material resource-poor countries example, global warming potential of mealworm larvae, (Christensen et al., 2006). For example, insects are a more T. molitor is 2.7 g CO2 equivalents in comparison to milk bioavailable source of iron compared with other protein which is 1.77 to 2.80 times as high, to beef 5.52 up to 12.51 sources including beef (Latunde-Dada et al., 2016). times as high (Oonincx and De Boer, 2012).

Human physiology data points out that these 9 billion will Acceptability studies live healthier lives if we return to this ancient, paleo-diet (Lesnik, 2018). Advantages of edible insects to humans Several of the main professional groups in the USA who include reducing inflammatory bowel syndrome (Stull et perform a gate-keeping function for edible insects are: the al., 2018a) and supporting the innate and adaptive immune Entomological Society of America (ESA); the Institute of system (Lee et al. 2008). An additional benefit accrues when Food Technology (IFT); and the AAFCS. We searched for insects are used as feed, particularly feed for chickens which published reports of acceptability and perceptions with allows for elimination of routine antibiotic treatments for respect to edible insects in these three critically important the chickens, thereby reducing our exposure to unintended professional groups in the US, but none were found. antibiotics encountered in our diet, from chicken meat (Khempaka et al., 2011). There are, however, several articles that report measures of acceptability or preference among university students Environmental advantage in traditionally, non-insect eating countries. Sogari et al. (2017), in a study at the University of Parma with Using the FAO’s life cycle approach, livestock have been 135 university students, found perceived environmental found to emit approximately 7.1 gigatons of carbon dioxide and health benefits of insects were the most significant equivalent per year (Mottet and Steinfeld, 2018). While determinants of participants’ willingness to consume the production of insects (either through gathering or products containing insect flour. Menozzi with Sogari through commercial husbandry as mini livestock) does and others (2017) used the theory of planned behaviour to not have a zero impact on the environment, it is much analyse responses of 231 students also at the University of less than traditional livestock. Oonincx et al. (2010) made Parma, Italy, preparing for careers in environmental sciences, the important comparison of greenhouse gas production food sciences, social sciences, not specifically entomology. (environmental cost) to food production (benefit) and Again, perceived benefits to health and environment affected concluded that four out of five insect types tested had lower participant attitudes and intentions. Using the effect of greenhouse gas production than pigs and all five insects the Food Neophobia Scale with 135 students attending a types only produced about 1% of the gases produced by trilingual university in the Italian Alps, Sidali et al. (2018) ruminants. tested student reactions to edible insects presented as an Amazonian delicacy. Persuasion strategies such as peers’ The number of undernourished people in the world has recommendations and disguising the insect product in been on the rise since 2014 with the most recent figure in familiar food increased willingness to consume them. In a 2017 being 821 million people (FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP thorough review of literature on European perspectives of and WHO, 2018). A comprehensive report co-published edible insects, Charlotte Payne and colleagues (Payne et al., by the FAO, United Nations Children’s Fund, World Food 2016) concluded that acceptance of a product containing Programme and the World Health Organization (FAO, IFAD, insects depends on a variety of consumer traits, including UNICEF, WFP and WHO, 2018) states ‘…, we are concerned cultural exposure to insects as food, and, of course,

Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) 235 H.J. Hunts et al.

characteristics of the specific products. With some university over 90%) of middle school and high school teachers of student groups (Verneau et al., 2016), communication about FCS. Uniformly across all FCS classrooms in Montana, societal benefits had greater influence than communication teachers have working demonstration kitchens and teach about individual benefits. about food safety, purchasing, preparation, storage and nutrition. Some teachers also serve as Family, Career Finding no studies on segments of the USA (or European) and Community Leaders of America advisors (the professional populations who directly influence Career and Technical Student Organization for FCS). entrepreneurial starts or students’ food choices, we focused At the high school level, some teachers are involved our study on branches of organisations in three regions of with the National Restaurant Association sponsored the USA: ESA, AAFCS, and IFT. ProStart culinary program. The MAFCS is a long- standing affiliate of AAFCS (https://www.aafcs.org/ Hypothesis tested home). AAFCS has considerable influence in training those entering culinary services professions across the We hypothesised that there will be statistically significant USA and territories. differences in the acceptability of insects as food across 3. The Southern California Institute of Food Technologists gatekeepers of information on edible insects, more (SCIFT) meets annually in informational meetings specifically, this acceptability would be strongest among that include speakers from industry, government, and professions that were familiar with insects and weakest academia. Dunkel provided her PowerPoint presentation, among professionals who were not familiar with insects. tastings, and conducted the survey on 5 March 2015. There were a lot of product sampling opportunities 2. Materials and methods and student competitions at this meeting in addition to a food expo. The Southern California IFT Suppliers’ Locations and survey groups Night Expo is an active, vibrant show that provides an audience of exceptional quality for our exhibitors and We surveyed three geographically and professionally diverse produces quality contacts. They bring real decision groups: makers to the exhibit floor and plan an aggressive 1. The North Central Branch (NCB) of ESA holds annual marketing program to increase their attendance. SCIFT meetings featuring research updates through submitted markets to professionals from the food service, dairy, symposia, papers, and posters; member networking; meat, seafood, bakery, nutraceutical, and pharmaceutical recognition of undergraduate and graduate student industries specifically. In addition to being the industry achievements; and opportunities for early career show where professionals in the Western states go to professionals to meet and develop collaborations. discover the latest ingredients and new concepts, SCIFT Students compete in paper and poster presentations, pursues those customers and markets that the exhibitors several recognition awards, travel scholarships, and wish to see. The primary goal of SCIFT’s expo is to the Linnaean Games. NCB ESA includes educators, make participants successful vendors (https://www. Cooperative Extension personnel, consultants, students, scifts.net). The SCIFT Section has as their mission ‘To researchers, and scientists from agricultural colleges fulfill human needs for a quality food supply through at Land Grant institutions, health agencies, private science, technology and education’ (https://www.scifts. industries, colleges and universities, and state and federal net/about.html). We chose this group because of their governments. It also serves the professional and scientific location in a major food production area and in a major needs of entomologists and people in related disciplines. food processing area with a mixture of ethnic groups, The survey reported here was conducted June 6, 2016 including a Hispanic population that appreciates edible in Cleveland, OH, USA during the 71st annual meeting insects. of the NCB ESA. NCB is one of six branches of the ESA founded in 1889. ESA represents all those who conduct Method of exposure research, teaching, and provide outreach regarding insects and has more than 7,000 members. NCB includes A set of 38 PowerPoint slides was presented by Dunkel in academics, secondary and middle school teachers, and an informal, story format, with a one-on-one approach. For those in the private sector from Minnesota, the Dakotas, entomologists, the title was ‘Life, death, and land shrimp’. For Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, the other two presentations the title was ‘What’s for lunch?’ Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, and Kentucky Formal presentations were like the TEDx presentation as well as three Canadian provinces, Manitoba, Ontario, (Dunkel, 2012), but each lasted 20 minutes followed by a and Nunavut. lively question, answer, and comment session. Presentations 2. The Montana Association of Family and Consumer used a psychological rationale based on Rogers (2003) five Sciences (MAFCS) during time of data collection for this constructs of adoptability. study (April 10, 2014 and since) consisted mainly (well

236 Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) Gatekeepers in the food industry

• Compatibility: The audience was reminded of their Test yields results can be significantly lower than P-values memories of good tastes of related arthropods (lobster, = 0.05 because of conditioning on the margin (Berkson, shrimp, and crawfish) and then learned a new term, ‘land 1978). This has led to some authors recommending that a shrimp,’ meaning other arthropod relatives of shrimp that fixed significance threshold (i.e. P≤0.05) should be avoided mainly live on land and are widely accepted as edible in writing hypotheses for discrete variables in contingency worldwide. tables (Little, 1989; Yates, 1984). Many authors are under • Relative advantage: The audience was asked personally: agreement that the Fisher’s Exact Test is important to what nutrients do you care about in your diet? What can use when there are small sample sizes and/or small cell you get from 100 g serving of ‘land shrimp’ such as larvae sizes (Liddell, 1976; Little, 1989; Yates, 1984). We used of the lepidopteran, Usata terpsichore, in comparison the R Suite package (R Core Team, 2018) to calculate our to 100 g serving of beef roast? Then the audience was Fisher’s Exact Test results. We also used an online Social reminded of the environmental costs of producing a Science Statistics Calculator (https://www.socscistatistics. pound of beef compared to insects. com/tests/chisquare2/default2.aspx) and found identical • Observability: Using a series of everyday, dinner results. Sample sizes across all questions are not identical photographs, globally she said ‘Two billion people in because ‘no response’ observations were eliminated from the world eat insects. Even in Montana we eat insects!’ the analysis across questions. She closed the geographical summary with Rwanda and her first delicious ‘land shrimp’ dining experience (fresh 3. Results sautéed red locusts, Nomadacris septemfasciata). Tone of voice, inflection, and positive facial expressions during Table 1 compares the three groups (NCB ESA, N=51; the first delicious experience were repeated in each SCIFT, N=65; and MAFCS, N=43) post-intervention presentation. She closed this section with ‘Thousands responses to the question: ‘Are edible insects acceptable of people are farming edible insects in the world.’ to you? Using Fisher’s Exact Test. The overall P-value of • Trialability and complexity: ‘Let’s try some or at least 1.003e-12 is highly statistically significant and supports our appreciate those who want to try some and eat insects.’ hypothesis that there are differences across the groups. Foods samples offered were commercial insect bars; Likewise, in pair-wise comparisons, each result was highly microscopic insects in fig bars; and quesadillas with statistically significant SCIFT vs NCB-ESA (P=0.008037), larvae of the wax moth, Galleria mellonella (only at MAFSC vs NCB-ESA (P=1.679e-13) and SCIFT vs MAFCS the MAFCS event). (P=9.715e-7).

Method of survey Notably, 96% of NCB-ESA participants indicated insects acceptable, compared to 75% of the SCIFT observations and Survey questions and the consent form were distributed with only 25% of the MAFCS observations. This may indicate pen and paper (approved by the Montana State University that the deep knowledge entomologists (NCB-ESA) possess Institutional Review Board and each organisation holding of insects includes their knowing that insects are enjoyed the events). Questions asked in addition to demographic as food across the globe. The food technologists were less information were: Are edible insects acceptable to you?; enthusiastic about edible insects than their entomologist Does knowing about the nutritional benefits of insects counterparts perhaps, in part, from their training to try make them more appealing to you?; Does knowing about and keep pest insects out of the foods that they produce. the environmental benefits of insects make them more Not surprisingly, the family and consumer sciences appealing to you? Answers were: no = 1; maybe = 2; and teachers were the least enthusiastic of all groups about yes = 3. This created three nine square matrices. the acceptability of insects as they were likely not familiar with the concept of insects as food. Table 2 shows results Statistical analysis comparing the three groups (NCB-ESA, N=51; SCIFT, N=64; and MAFCS, N=42) post-intervention responses to Chi-square and Fisher’s Exact Test can both be used the question: Does knowing about the nutritional benefits to calculate the statistical difference across groups in of insects make them more appealing to you? The P-value of contingency tables. Because several of our cells were N≤5 0.055 is weakly statistically significant, giving weak support (Tables 1, 2, 3) dictating the use of Fisher’s Exact Test to the idea that nutrition information plays a different role (designed specifically to deal with contingency tables that across groups. In pair-wise comparisons, one result was include cells with N≤5) over the more commonly used Chi- statistically significant MAFCS vs NCB-ESA: P=0.0148. square equation (Fisher, 1922). In the statistical literature, there is some discussion that the Fisher’s Exact Test may It is notable that 76% of the NCB-ESA observations be too conservative, that is, it produces fewer statistically reported nutritional information influenced how acceptable significant results than what ‘actually’ exists (Yates, 1984). they found insects as food (Table 2). Conversely, only 47% Others argue that with small sample sizes Fisher’s Exact of MAFCS participants were influenced by nutrition

Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) 237 H.J. Hunts et al.

Table 1. Are edible insects acceptable to you?

Insects acceptable1,2 No Maybe Yes Row totals

ESA3,4 cell value 1 1 49 51 row % 1.9 1.9 96 column % 3.8 4.1 44.9 SCIFT3,5 cell value 10 6 49 65 row % 15.3 9.2 75.4 column % 38.5 2.5 44.9 MAFCS4,5 cell value 15 17 11 43 row % 34.9 39.5 25.6 column % 57.7 70.8 10.1 Column totals 26 24 109 159

1 2 Chi-square statistic is 57.5141 χ (2). 2 Fisher’s Exact Test: P=1.003e-12. 3 SCIFT vs ESA: P=0.008037. 4 MAFCS vs ESA: P=1.679e-13. 5 SCIFT vs MAFCS: P=9.715e-7.

Table 2. Does knowing about the nutritional benefits of insects make them more appealing to you?

Nutritional benefits1 No Maybe Yes Row totals

ESA2,3 cell value 7 5 39 51 row % 13.7 9.8 76.5 column % 20.6 23.8 38.2 SCIFT2,4 cell value 12 9 43 64 row % 18.7 14.1 67.2 column % 35.3 42.8 42.1 MAFCS3,4 cell value 15 7 20 42 row % 35.7 16.7 47.6 column % 44.1 33.3 19.6 Column totals 34 21 102 157

1 Fisher’s Exact Test: P=0.05551. 2 SCIFT vs ESA: P=0.578. 3 MAFCS vs ESA: P=0.01482. 4 SCIFT vs MAFCS: P=0.091.

information. In other pair-wise comparisons, SCIFT vs vs NCB-ESA (P=0.0092) and SCIFT vs MAFCS (P=0.0181) MAFCS (P=0.091) and SCIFT vs NCB-ESA (P=0.578), suggesting even insects’ environmental benefits were not differences were not pronounced. able to trump the eating insects ‘disgust factor’ for the MAFCS. Table 3 compares the influence of environmentally friendly insect husbandry information across groups. Findings were 4. Discussion statistically significant with a P-value of P=0.0250. No statistical difference was found in the pair-wise differences Summary of differences among professional groups of SCIFT vs NCB-ESA (P=0.9551). This may indicate that both professional groups equally value environmentally The three groups we surveyed ranged from having an in- sound food practices. Pair-wise comparisons that included depth professional knowledge of edible insects (NCB-ESA) MAFCS were both highly statistically significant (MAFCS to having some professional insect knowledge, both as food

238 Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) Gatekeepers in the food industry

Table 3. Does knowing about the environmental benefits of insects make them more appealing to you?

Environmental benefits1 No Maybe Yes Row totals

ESA2,3 cell value 9 5 37 51 row % 17.7 9.8 72.5 column % 23.1 26.3 37.8 SCIFT2,4 cell value 13 7 44 64 row % 20.3 10.9 68.8 column % 33.3 36.8 44.9 MAFCS3,4 cell value 17 7 17 41 row % 41.5 17.1 41.5 column % 43.6 36.8 17.3 Column totals 39 19 98 156

1 Fisher’s Exact Test: P=0.02497. 2 SCIFT vs ESA: P=0.9551. 3 MAFCS vs ESA: P=0.009242. 4 SCIFT vs MA FCS: P=0.0181.

and filth (SCIFT), and finally, to MAFCS with minimal development laboratories; a student cook-off, as well as professional knowledge about insects as food, but well- on-campus workshops in business, food science, media steeped in the insects as filth concepts of the USA (US arts, and intercultural competency (Bradley and Toews, Food and Drug Administration, 2002). These three groups, 2016; Cantrell, 2018; Dunkel, 2009; Goodyear, 2011). NCB-ESA, SCIFT and MAFCS, were different in their professional knowledge of insects and their knowledge and Even at MSU there is no formal outreach program developed professional attitudes about nutrition and the environment. by the Montana Cooperative Extension Service to respond to the people’s interest in edible insects. This function has For entomologists surveyed, insects were acceptable, but been taken over, in Montana, by one of the food insect they may need encouragement to make edible insects part of farms themselves, Cowboy Cricket Farms, L.L.C. (www. their curriculum and their research agendas. Entomologists CowboyCrickets.com) who offer free on-line step-wise should focus not only on managing pests but also on basic training, and, for a fee, more extensive, hands-on, ecological services such as provisioning insects as food on-site training to begin one’s own cricket farm. and feed. NCB-ESA membership is mainly entomologists with advanced degrees. While insect biology is likely The majority of SCIFT participants found insects their main area of interest, their preparatory coursework acceptable, and encouraged them to be in the marketplace included plant science, insect morphology/physiology/ with innovation. SCIFT interfaces directly with the market biochemistry, genetics, taxonomy, ecology, microbiology, during their Food Expos. Changes in the market leads to chemistry, environmental studies giving them experience at quick responses in the food expos and hence to agendas viewing things from a microenvironment level to a meso- of the food scientists. environment level. Consumer acceptance was lowest in the MAFCS group. At Montana State University (MSU), an 1862 Land For 25% of the teachers of Family Consumer Sciences Grant institution, the three-credit University Core who did not find insects acceptable for food, neither course, laboratory course, ‘Issues of insects and human nutritional nor environmental motivations seemed to have societies’, has evolved an extensive edible insect unit. potential for changing their viewpoint. In 2014, MAFCS One quarter of the student’s grade in this course is based respondents indicated insects were not acceptable as food, students’ learning about edible insects, and then using but as a result of that experience, many more teachers this knowledge to engage with various local communities, seemed to be accepting of food insects. Although based as well as to participate in the planning, executing, and in only Montana: the MT Family Consumer Pro-Start evaluation of response and perceptions during the week- students receive training through the national restaurant long annual, community-wide festival. The week’s events association, e.g. they get full scholarships at the Culinary include: a public tasting event, the Bug Buffet; an academic Institute of America, Poughkeepsie, NY, USA and in San symposium; tours to local cricket farms and fish feed Francisco; competitions in food innovations (new product

Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) 239 H.J. Hunts et al.

development) from the student association, Family Career We further offer that there may have been subtle nuanced and Community Leaders of America FFA and Business changes in the acceptability of all participants in this study Partners of America; competitions for culinary skills, who voted ‘no’ in acceptability, particularly the MAFCS associated with very fine scholarships. As integrative group. A pre-test along with a call for more detailed programs at MSU grow these high school students will responses than ‘yes,’ ‘no,’ ‘maybe’ questions would tease out be recruited into and, indeed, attracted to programs, such this information. We can create an educational platform at as: sustainable foods and bio-energy systems; hospitality, a pilot institution with the aim of scaling up the deliberate tourism, and recreation; food science and nutrition; and process of approaching the five barriers to adoption of entomology. innovation among faculty, the Cooperative Extension Service, and professional organisations in the food and Barriers to acceptance of innovation agricultural sciences.

Rogers (2003) reminds us to successfully diffuse, an Family consumer scientists and educators, food innovation must be ‘consistent with the existing values, technologists, and entomologists can, by collaborating, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters.’ Even open the gates for a broad acceptance of insects as food. though MAFCS teachers heard the PowerPoint and had Through this collaboration they can together be the guides opportunity to try food insects and were informed of to a healthier human and natural environment and, possibly, the relative advantage, they were still low in acceptance a more culturally accepting world view. This challenge can because they may have needed more time to contemplate be added to the research challenges posed by Van Huis the compatibility and be presented with ways to overcome (2017). During the 20th century dominant societies served as the complexity of sourcing insects such as G. mellonella, in gatekeepers imposing their view of what was food and what 2014. Compatibility and complexity, sourcing and pricing, was not food (Dunkel, 2017). The resulting disappearance were likely the greatest initial barrier to overcome the of insects among weaning food options and for mothers hesitancy recorded in the MAFCS participant data. In this during pregnancy and lactating (Stull et al., 2018b) may case, the innovation was using insects in Western culture have contributed to widespread stunting and other forms cuisine, borrowed from food practices of two billion of the of malnutrition among subsistence farmers in Africa and world’s population (Nadeau et al., 2015) in non-Western Asia. Disappearance of this form of gatekeeping by the cultures. MAFCS participants had likely not been exposed dominant society may be the key to our planet hosting 9 to insects in a positive way or to culinary practices of other billion food-secure people by the year 2050. cultures or had ever experienced the inclusion of edible insects in meals or recipes. The PowerPoint presentation 5. Conclusions followed immediately by the tastings event had no effect on 35% of the MAFCS participants. When this same Crucial work lies ahead for entomologists, food, nutrition, group met in April 2018, the enthusiasm seemed to be and family consumer scientists, and other gatekeepers, infectious when they were presented with the opportunity such as culinary schools, food retailers, and extensionists, to try commercial cookie mix fortified with powder of two to provide information on edible insects. Training cricket species, the house cricket, Acheta domesticus and opportunities and informative events for both educators the Jamaican field cricket, Gryllus assimilis (M. Vincent, and food industry professionals about the nutritional and personal communication, 2018). It is possible that the environmental benefits of edible insects are urgent. In exposure in 2014, posed a possibility (observability and future work, we will test the hypothesis that repeated trial-ability), that when presented with another opportunity exposure significantly increases adoption. Familiarity to try insects as an invisible ingredient in a chocolate chip includes observing other people consuming insects, having cookie mix, the food insect idea seemed positive. opportunities to try insects, and then being able to easily obtain edible insect products, and acquire the ‘know- Recommendations how’ to include them into one’s diet. These actions will impact acceptance of edible insects in Western cultures We propose that positive multiple exposures, i.e. if gatekeepers form close collaborations with those in observability and trial-ability, will significantly increase other disciplines and together participate in community acceptability. New knowledge from an authoritative/ engagement, respond to public questions in the media, and respected source (in this case, the 2014 PowerPoint design curricula. In this Internet age, media has become presentation), followed by sampling (the bars and quesadilla) a new educator. Insects have played an important role provided an opportunity for observability and trial-ability in at least one-third of the human population for tens of to occur. Later, evaluating an innovative product (cookie thousands of millennia. Now, opportunities for edible mix) at home or in their classroom along with peers and insects to contribute to worldwide food security await the students formed an inroad into existing values of MAFCS partnership of the media, the gatekeepers, and consumers. participants to guide them into a state of compatibility.

240 Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) Gatekeepers in the food industry

Acknowledgements Christensen, D.L., Orech, F.O., Mungai, M.N., Larsen, T., Friis, H. and Aagaard-Hansen, J., 2006. Entomophagy among the Luo of Kenya: The authors would like to thank Nicole Carnegie for a potential mineral source? International Journal of Food Sciences statistical assistance; Carol Anelli and MaLisa Spring, and Nutrition 57(3-4): 198-203. Department of Entomology, the Ohio State University for DeFoliart, G.R., 1992. Insects as human food. Crop Protection inviting Dunkel to make the presentation and subsequent 11: 395-399. survey with the NCB-ESA; Penney Wiley, Megan Vincent, DeFoliart, G.R., 1999. Insects as food: why the Western attitude is Nicole Wanago, and Holly Hunts who organised Dunkel’s important. Annual review. Entomology 44: 21-50. MAFCS presentation, survey, and tastings; and Martin DeVreyer, F., Guilbert, N. and Mesple-Somps, S., 2012. The 1987- Sancho-Madriz who invited Dunkel to present in the SCIFT 1989 locust plague in Mali. G-MonD Working Paper No 25, Paris symposium, ‘Button up for the winds of change’ and allowed School of Economics, Paris, France. Available at: https://tinyurl. the survey and tasting. Dunkel received funding for her com/y4jp9vdk sabbatical research from the MSU Office of the Provost. Dunkel, F., 2017. Incorporating cultures’ role in the food and Authors gratefully acknowledge funding from the Montana agricultural sciences. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA, 324 pp. Agricultural Experiment Station for project MONB00285 Dunkel, F., 2012. Eat less meat, more bugs. TEDx, Bozeman, MT, USA. Hatch accession 1014163 (Dunkel). Michael Thienes’ Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5GGKoYuXHs research and travel to present the research at the national Dunkel, F., 2009. Incorporating food insects into undergraduate ESA meetings was funded by the MSU Undergraduate entomology courses. In: DeFoliart, G., Dunkel, F. and Gracer, D. Scholars’ Program. (eds.) Chronicle of a changing culture: The Food Insects Newsletter. Aardvark Global Publishing, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, pp. 255-258. References Extension, 2018. Extension for professionals and the public they serve. Extension, Kansas City, MO, USA. Available at: https:// Ademolu, K.O., Idowu, A.B. and Olatunde, G.O., 2010. Nutritional www.extension.org/current/ value assessment of variegated grasshopper, Zonocerus variegatus Fisher, R.A., 1922. On the interpretation of χ2 from contingency tables, (L.) (Acridoidea: Pygomorphidae), during post-embryonic and the calculation of P. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 85: development. African Entomology 18: 360-364. https://doi. 87-94. https://doi.org/10.2307/2340521 org/10.4001/003.018.0201 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2011. Ali, A.E., 2016. A semiotic approach to entomophagy: the language, Global food losses and food waste – extent, causes and prevention. localization, and reimagining of insects as foodstuffs in America. FAO, Rome, Italy. Perspectives on Global Development and Technology 15: 391-405. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2013. Bauserman, M., Lokangaka, A., Gado, J., Close, K., Wallace, D., Food wastage footprint: impact on natural resources. Summary Kondondi, K.-K., Tshefu, A., and Bose, C., 2015. A cluster- report. FAO, Rome, Italy. Available at: http://www.fao.org/3/i3347e/ randomized trial determining the efficacy of caterpillar cereal as i3347e.pdf a locally available and sustainable complementary food to prevent Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, stunting and anaemia. Public Health Nutrition 18: 1785-1792. International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), United Bennett, M.J., 2004. From ethnocentrism to ethnorelativism. In: Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF), World Wurzel, J. (ed.) Toward multiculturalism. Intercultural Resources Food Programme (WFP), and World Health Organization (WHO). Corp. Newton, MA, USA, pp. 62-79. 2018. The state of food security and nutrition in the world: building Berkson, J., 1978. In dispraise of the exact test: do the marginal totals of climate resilience for food security and nutrition. FAO, Rome, Italy. the 2 × 2 tables contain enough relevant information respecting the Available at: www.fao.org/3/I9553EN/i9553en.pdf table portions? Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 2: 27-42. Garvey, K.K., 2015. Study: don’t look to bugs to feed world. College Boyd, M.C., 2019 Cricket soup: a critical examination of the regulation of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. UC Davis, University of insects as food. Yale Law & Policy Review 36: 17-81. of California, Davis, CA, USA. Bradley, M. and Toews, I., 2016. Bugs on the menu: the answer to Global Market Insights (GMI), 2017. Global edible insects market feeding the world’s expanding population may be smaller than you report 2023: edible insects market size by product (beetles, think. The Government of Canada. Available at: bugsonthemenu. caterpillars, grasshoppers, bees, wasps, ants, scale insects and true com bugs), by application (flour, protein bars, snacks), industry analysis Brown, W., 2017. Austin’s 10th annual BugFest. Available at: https:// report, regional outlook (U.S., Belgium, Netherlands, UK, France, agrilife.org/urban-ipm/tag/edible-insects/ China, Thailand, Vietnam, Brazil, Mexico), application potential, Cantrell, A., 2018. Bug bites: popular MSU event looks at entomophagy price trends, competitive market share, and forecast, 2016-2023. as a solution to world hunger. Mountains and Minds 12: 42-47. GMI, Selbyville, DE, USA. Available at: https://www.gminsights. Carlisle, E., 2015. Legume underground. Penguin Random House, com/industry-analysis/edible-insects-market New York, NY, USA. Goodyear, D., 2011. Grub: eating bugs to save the planet. The New Chiarodo, A.J., Kissel, J.H. and Mackell, T.E., 1970. Structure of synaptic Yorker of August 15 and 22, 2011, pp. 38-46. Available at: https:// relations in the larval central nervous systems of the blowfly and www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/08/15/grub mealworm. Journal of Insect Physiology 16: 361-371.

Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) 241 H.J. Hunts et al.

Heckman, J., 2006. A history of organic farming: transitions from Sir Oonincx, D.G., Van Itterbeeck, J., Heetkamp, M.J., Van den Brand, H., Albert Howard’s war in the soil to USDA national organic program. Van Loon, J.J. and Van Huis, A., 2010. An exploration on greenhouse Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 21: 143-150. gas and ammonia production by insect species suitable for animal Holt, V.M., 1885. Why not eat insects? Field & Tuer, The Leadenhall or human consumption. PLoS ONE 5: e14445. Press, E.C., London, UK. Payne, C.L.R., Dobermann, D., Forkes, A., House, J., Josephs, J., House, J., 2018. Sushi in the United States, 1945-1970. Food and McBride, A., Müller, A., Quilliam, R.S. and Soares, S., 2016. Insects Foodways 26: 40-62. as food and feed: European perspectives on recent research and Jadin, J., 2004. Cicada-licious: cooking and enjoying periodical cicadas. future priorities. Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 2: 269-276. University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA, 11 pp. https://doi.org/10.3920/JIFF2016.0011 Joffe, S.R., 1995. Desert locust management: time for change. World Purcell, T.W., 1998. Indigenous knowledge and applied anthropology: Bank Discussion Paper No. 284. World Bank, Washington, DC, USA. questions of definition and direction. Human Organization 57: Khempaka, S., Chitsatchapong, C. and Molee, W., 2011. Effect of 258-272. chitin and protein constituents in shrimp head meal on growth R Core Team, 2018. R-3.4.4 a language and environment for statistical performance, nutrient digestibility, intestinal microbial populations, computing. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/ volatile fatty acids and ammonia production in broilers. Journal of base/old/3.4.4/ Applied Poultry Research 20: 1-11. Ramaswamy, S.B., 2015. Setting the table for a hotter, flatter, more Latunde-Dada, G.O., Yang, W. and Vera Aviles, M., 2016. In vitro iron crowded earth: insects on the menu? Journal of Insects as Food and availability from insects and sirloin beef. Journal of Agricultural Feed 1: 171-178. https://doi.org/10.3920/JIFF2015.0032 and Food Chemistry 64: 8420-8424. Reuters, 2018. Global edible insects market will reach USD 1,181.6 Lee, C., Silva, C., Lee, J.-Y., Hartl, D. and Elias, J., 2008. Chitin regulation million by 2023: exclusive market research report. Available of immune responses: an old molecule with new roles. Current at: https://www.reuters.com/brandfeatures/venture-capital/ Opinion in Immunology 20: 684-689. article?id=64359 Lee, A., 2018. A history of pizza: the world’s most popular fast food Rogers, E.M., 2003. Diffusion of innovations (5th Ed.). Free Press, has ancient roots, but it was a royal seal of approval that set it on the New York, NY, USA. path to global domination. History Today 68. Available at: https:// Ruby, M.B. and Rozin, P., 2019. Disgust sushi consumption, and www.historytoday.com/archive/historians-cookbook/history-pizza other predictors of acceptance of insects as food by Americans Leonard, A., 2017. North Carolina’s edible insect revolution – are we and Indians. Food Quality and Preference 74: 155-162. ready for it? The Herald Sun. Available at: https://www.heraldsun. Rumpold, B.A. and Schlüter, O.K., 2013. Nutritional composition com/opinion/article190143394.html and safety aspects of edible insects. Molecular Nutrition and Food Lesnik, J., 2018. Edible insects and human evolution. University Press Research 57: 802-823. of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA, 184 pp. Schabel, H.G., 2010. Forest insects as food: a global review. RAP Liddell, D., 1976. Practical tests of 2 × 2 contingency tables. Journal Publication 2010/02. Food and Agriculture Organization of the of the Royal Statistical Society 25: 295-304. United Nations, Rome, Italy, pp.37-64. Little, R.J.A., 1989. Testing the equality of two independent binomial Shelomi, M., 2015. Why we still don’t eat insects: assessing proportions, The American Statistician 43: 283-288. entomophagy promotion through a diffusion of innovations Menozzi, D., Sogari, G., Veneziani, M., Simoni, E. and Mora, C., framework. Trends in Food Science and Technology 45: 311-318. 2017. Eating novel foods: an application of the theory of planned Sidali, K., Pizzo, S., Garrido-Perez, E. and Schamel, G., 2018. Between behavior to predict the consumption of an insect-based product. food delicacies and food taboos: a structural equation model to Food Quality and Preference 59: 27-34. assess Western students’ acceptance of Amazonian insect food. Mottet, A. and Steinfeld, H., 2018. Cars or livestock? Which contribute Food Research International 115: 83-89. more to climate change? Thomson Reuters Foundation: News. Sogari, G., Menozzi, D. and Mora, C., 2017. Exploring young foodies’ Available at: http://news.trust.org/item/20180918083629-d2wf0 knowledge and attitude regarding entomophagy: a qualitative study Mwangi, M.N., Oonincx, D.G.A.B., Stouten, T., Veenebos, M., Melse- in Italy. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science Boonstra, A., Dicke, M., and Van Loon, J.J.A., 2018. Insects as 7: 16-18. sources of iron and zinc in human nutrition. Nutrition Research Sosebee, C., 2018. Would you eat a bug? University of Georgia Reviews 31: 248-255. Extension News, Athens, GA, USA. Available at: http://extension. Nadeau, L., Nadeau, I., Franklin, F. and Dunkel, F., 2015. The potential uga.edu/story.html?storyid=7647 for entomophagy to address undernutrition. Ecology of Food and Stull, V., Finer, E., Bergmans, R., Febvre, H., Longhurst, C., Wanter, D., Nutrition 54: 200-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/03670244.2014. Patz, J. and Weir, T., 2018a. Impact of edible cricket consumption 930032 on gut microbiota in healthy adults, a double-blind, randomized Nature, 1938. International war on locusts. Nature 142: 565. https:// crossover trial. Scientific reports 8: 10762. https://doi.org/10.1038/ doi.org/10.1038/142565b0 s41598-018-29032-2 Oonincx, D.G. and De Boer, I.J., 2012. Environmental impact of the Stull, V., Wamulume, M., Mwalukanga, M., Banda, A., Bergmans, R.S. production of mealworms as a protein source for humans: a lifecycle and Bell, M.M., 2018b. ‘We like insects here’: entomophagy and assessment. PLoS ONE 7: e51145. society in a Zambian village. Agriculture and Human Values 35: 867-883. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-018-9878-0

242 Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) Gatekeepers in the food industry

Unger, L., 2009. Insect snacks from around the world. College of Van Huis, A., Van Itterbeeck, J., Klunder, H., Mertens, E., Halloran, A., Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Kentucky, Muir, G. and Vantomme, P., 2013. Edible insects: future prospects Lexington, KY, USA. for food and feed security. FAO Forestry Paper no. 171. Food and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2019. National Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, nutrient database standard reference legacy release: raw millet, 100 Italy, 187 pp. Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3253e/ gram serving. USDA, Beltsville, MD, USA. Available at: https:// i3253e.pdf. tinyurl.com/y662cp33 Van Huis, A., Cressman, K. and Magor, J.I., 2007. Preventing desert United States Department of Health and Human Services and US locust plagues: optimizing management interventions. Entomologia Department of Agriculture, 2015. 2015-2020 dietary guidelines Experimentalis et Applicata 122: 191-214. for Americans (8th Ed.). Available at: https://health.gov/ Verkerk, M.C., Tramper, J., Van Trijp, C.M. and Martens, D.E., 2007. dietaryguidelines/2015/ Insect cells for human food. Biotechnology Advances 25: 198-202. United States Food and Drug Administration, 2002. CPG sec. 555.600 Verneau, F., La Barbera, F., Kolle, S., Amato, M., Del Giudice, T. filth from insects, rodents, and other pests in foods. FDA, Silver and Grunert, K., 2016. The effect of communication and implicit Spring, MD, USA. Available at: https://tinyurl.com/y5dnnu5m associations on consuming insects: an experiment in Denmark and Van Huis, A., 2017. Edible insects and research needs. Journal of Insects Italy. Appetite 106: 30-36. as Food and Feed 3: 3-5. https://doi.org/10.3920/JIFF2017.x002 Walsh, B., 2008. Going green. Eating bugs. Time 171(23): 47-49. Yates, F., 1984. Tests of significance for 2×2 contingency tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 147: 426-463.

Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) 243