✅ Overcoming the linear production model is a major topic in recent years. Despite the popularity of the "circular economy and transition" concept, which originated several decades ago, defining it remains challenging. There are various proposals, each highlighting a different aspect. Can we try to clarify this, especially in relation to the agri-food sector?

In the agri-food sector, the concept of a circular economy is not new. For millennia, there have been agronomic and food processing practices focused on circularity, even at the household level: traditionally, people have always tried to reuse everything, minimizing waste and discarding only what was no longer safe to eat. We could give many examples from the history of human nutrition that are based on careful use of resources and so-called food waste. From this perspective, the agri-food sector has been circular long before the term existed, though it has adapted to the consumerist economic model that has dominated our lives for decades.

What is considered waste often contains valuable bioactive compounds that need to be extracted, stabilized, and transformed to be incorporated into products with higher nutraceutical content. The challenge is to enhance the functional properties of these products and make them appealing to consumers, convincing the public that these technologies are not only safe but also add nutritional and health value to food, while promoting responsible use of energy resources.

It's clear that in the context of circular transition, the reorganization of supply processes must be completely rethought, as current practices in production and logistics significantly impact the environment and health. This change process is not easy.

In this sense, what concerns me is the stance of large sectors of politics influenced by shortsighted pressures from some areas of the agricultural production system. These pressures are often justified by the real difficulties faced by operators, but the causes should be found elsewhere, not in the concept of transition itself.

For example, financial capital can move vast quantities of food, often creating competition that distorts local markets. In my view, these are among the phenomena that undermine ecological transition efforts, a process that should be based on the circular economy and bioeconomy.

Furthermore, after the recent European elections, the very concept of transition risks being diluted, potentially compromising the long journey towards more sustainable food production. For instance, there is a slowdown on the Green Deal, the European pact aimed at achieving climate neutrality by 2050. On the topic of GMOs, it's contradictory to support the use of more "green" chemistry while opposing techniques like CRISPR genome editing, which has revolutionized molecular biology, or prime editing, which advances genetic mutation correction.

The recent destruction of the experimental rice field in Mezzana Bigli, in Pavese, cultivated with Assisted Evolution Techniques (TEA), signals a failure by a portion of the public, hopefully a small one, to understand that such research fields could accelerate the genetic improvement process, making plants more disease-resistant and significantly contributing to zero environmental impact.


✅ To understand and implement the transition to circularity, a regenerative logic isn't enough. We need a "restorative" approach: thinking about restoring natural capital wherever possible. Does research into the valorization of food by-products support this direction? What framework do the regulations provide? Are they sufficient?

We are working extensively on preserving biodiversity, specifically by studying waste from different plant varieties and characterizing enzymes from microorganisms purified or isolated directly from them. To adopt these technologies, we need regulations that understand what science is doing. Research can experiment and characterize countless applications, and even consider their extension, but these applications must always align with current legislation.

EFSA, the European Food Safety Authority, does great work in this regard, providing clear guidelines on what can or cannot be applied. However, it is up to the legislators, especially in our country, to interpret these guidelines. Legislators are often influenced by pressure groups and the need to maintain or gain easy support, so they focus on "tradition" and take a lenient approach towards anti-science opinions that oppose scientific innovation.

As a result, there are regulatory gaps that need to be addressed, and this requires action.

✅ How much does public opinion on certain "divisive" topics impact your work?

From the perspective of public opinion and consumers, we see both highly informed individuals with a strong awareness and a significant portion of people exposed to misinformation. The quality and reliability of scientific information are crucial in this context. Regarding Spoke 2, for instance, it's important to convey as I mentioned earlier: food by-products are not always waste or low-nutritional-value products; they can be valuable treasures.

Take ricotta, for example, widely sold in our dairies and supermarkets. This food is produced from whey, a by-product of cheese making. Through this valorization process, consumers now appreciate the whey protein and low-fat content of ricotta, rather than simply viewing it as waste. There are other by-products and waste materials that possess significant nutraceutical value, and our goal is to illustrate that what is often perceived as waste can actually be a valuable and nutritionally rich resource.


✅ Spoke 2 is outlined through four main work packages (WPs), all focused on developing green technologies, biotechnologies, innovative processes, and digital solutions. The main objective of WP 2.1 is to reduce environmental impact by transforming waste into useful resources. Therefore, the work focuses on waste recovery and valorization through pre-treatment technologies and the extraction of bioactive compounds. Can you explain how these studies work and what is currently the market potential for these innovative technologies?

The potential for application is very high, and many companies are already transitioning from laboratory scale to pilot scale, and eventually to full-scale plants that leverage economies of scale, thereby reducing process costs. Additionally, within this WP, there is a segment dedicated to assessing acquisition through process developments, which directly connects us with other Spokes to obtain products with sustainable development.

From this perspective, Spoke 2 has ample opportunity to utilize molecules extracted through low-impact environmental processes. We define these processes as "green" precisely because they do not use solvents or potentially toxic methodologies.

The potential for development in these areas is also closely tied to collaboration with businesses, for whom the main issue - let's remember - remains economic sustainability. But significant progress is being made on this front.

In summary, Spoke 2 integrates various competencies ranging from biology to engineering, advanced diagnostics including sensory analysis, and chemistry into a holistic approach to the topic. Despite the activities of the Spoke being divided into four WPs, our effort is focused on maximizing interaction between these activities, addressing themes present in other Spokes as well.

✅ These processes directly lead us to WP 2.2, which focuses on waste reduction through the development of new solutions for bio packaging, sanitization, and storage. This segment utilizes food by-products from various sectors such as fruits, vegetables, cereals, legumes, fish, seaweed, olive oil, coffee, wine, and dairy products. What progress have you made in developing these new solutions?

We are at a crucial point in our work regarding the overall goals of the Spoke. One of the most interesting techniques being used in various laboratories - at the University of Bologna and also at CNR in Bari - is the use of plasma (not to be confused with blood plasma) to treat fruits and vegetables.

Plasma is a state of matter consisting of ionized gas, composed of free electrons, ions, and other reactive species. By applying electrical energy to air, which contains oxygen, nitrogen, and water vapor, plasma is generated at atmospheric pressure. The reactive species produced by plasma, such as radicals and ions, have potential antimicrobial effects and can be used to treat the surfaces of fruits and vegetables. This technology has been extensively tested for safety in research and is yielding excellent results in reducing microbial load on food.

Currently, we are at the pilot study stage, and our focus is on understanding how the process can be effectively applied. These are highly innovative techniques that are spreading globally and yielding objectively very promising results.

We are also studying and optimizing biotechnological processes for experimenting with microorganisms capable of valorizing substrates and inhibiting the growth of other microorganisms considered spoilage and potentially pathogenic.

As ISPA, and beyond the OnFoods framework, we are working on local fermented products in a European Horizon 2020 project, UP-RISE, aimed at contributing to building a food safety system in Africa. This collaboration involves three European partners and five African partners. The goal is to characterize the microbial flora present in fermented products to reduce the risks of contamination from naturally occurring toxic substances such as mycotoxins.


✅ Continuing through the areas of work, we encounter WP 2.3, which focuses on waste management. Here, the activity centers on implementing a digital framework to monitor and manage packaging chains and decision support systems. The goal is to analyze waste throughout the food supply chain, from production to food distribution. However, to monitor, for instance, excess and waste from agri-food businesses, data are needed, and obtaining them requires awareness and collaboration from companies. How are you addressing this? What is the current state of transparency and monitoring in supply chains in Italy?

It's somewhat patchy: there are areas of business with advanced awareness and others that are still lagging behind. Larger companies now have a mandatory sustainability reporting requirement in their financial statements, enabling them to precisely monitor their impacts throughout their production and distribution processes. The issue is increasingly recognized because sustainability is seen not just as a constraint but as an opportunity for innovation and profit.

However, ensuring the quality of corporate sustainability data is crucial, considering coverage and consistency, especially in anticipation of the adoption of EFRAG/ESRS sustainability reporting standards from 2025. While these new standards do not directly apply to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), they will be impacted through supply chains. Therefore, it's essential for businesses to develop increasing awareness of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) issues. Subsequently, there will be a growing need to adopt ESG disclosure, which involves disclosing information on companies' environmental, social, and governance impacts and performance, aiming to achieve better financial assessments or improved access to credit terms.


✅ The issue of corporate sustainability hence is increasingly intertwined with that of innovation, and it will be increasingly anachronistic to discuss innovation without considering sustainability, and vice versa. However, in a country dominated by small and micro enterprises, with few large companies capable of competing globally, innovation is not straightforward.

Exactly. Regarding the issue of technological innovation, the size of Italian companies is crucial. However, it is a limitation of policy to fail to understand that the size of companies, or at least the association of small companies, is key to implementing technological innovation and enhancing the country's competitiveness. Technological innovation improves not only the economic conditions of the entire country but also those of workers, because every enterprise that innovates gains competitiveness and is able to provide its employees with better wage and working conditions.

The so-called "dwarfism" of Italian enterprises should also be seen as an opportunity, not just a problem. Opportunities, I insist, exist: we should focus on flexibility and the ability to innovate through cooperation in global production chains, as demonstrated by some Italian industrial districts. On valorizing artisanal skills and the "genius loci" that characterize Made in Italy. On the possibility for companies to grow in size through generational transitions and aggregations, taking advantage of the opportunities offered by changes in management.

Therefore, policy should promote higher education levels and innovation to increase the competitiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises, thereby promoting growth in size and internationalization without altering the innovative small enterprise model typical of our country.


✅ Finally, we come to WP 2.4, which, using advanced digital solutions, aims to optimize the distribution of agri-food products, ensuring sustainable supply chains. Monitoring, provisioning, transportation, and delivery are the focal points of this area's work, with the goal of enhancing sustainability and creating a more circular economy to benefit all stakeholders. Let's talk about green logistics and urban logistics: could you explain in more detail what these new strategies entail and how they are applicable?

The work involves reclassifying logistics practices to subsequently monitor the status of products throughout the entire supply chain. We are developing a rapid method based on a new generation of sensors that monitor the preservation status of food. This methodology could have a positive impact on the entire food sector.

It's a trend of innovation that we observe almost everywhere: logistics is revolutionizing product sourcing methods, aided by the integration of sensors and smart systems that provide crucial information on preservation and spoilage.

Regarding the implementation of these solutions, we are still in a preliminary phase. However, we look optimistically towards the results: we are receiving very promising data from colleagues at Politecnico di Milano who are working in this area.


✅ The integrated approach among the various work areas of Spoke 2 is particularly appreciated in two major research projects like EXTRA-BIO and CHARACTER-BIO. Extraction first and valorization later of bioactive compounds derived from agricultural biomass: could you explain how this lengthy process works, starting from waste, using extraction methods to recover biocompounds to create nanotechnologies applicable, for example, in active bio-packaging?

The process starts with matrices, each with specific characteristics, and then employs different solvents to determine under which conditions a specific molecule can be extracted. The entire extraction process is refined in the EXTRA-BIO project. Next, the CHARACTER-BIO project comes into play, focusing on studying the characteristics of these molecules: they can be characterized either as food ingredients for their potential applications or biochemical characteristics, or they can be destined for packaging.

It is crucial for such projects to be interconnected: it begins with refining the extraction characteristics and proposing compounds; then, it moves to analyzing their composition to understand whether they have retained their original characteristics or adopted those intended for extraction. This interaction is based on dialogue among diverse expertise, each essential: chemists, biochemists, agronomists, food technologists, and microbiologists work together.


✅ But we know that the list of projects of Spoke 2 certainly doesn't end with EXTRA BIO and CHARACTER BIO; there are around 30 projects falling under Spoke 2, and among these, the business component is quite significant. I'm thinking of research projects with Sacco and De’Longhi. But also those coordinated by CNR and ENEA.

How much does applied research weigh in your work area? What, in your opinion, are the differences to be valued or smoothed out between the business approach to research and the academic approach?

They are two culturally different approaches: the researcher aims to understand what they are investigating, to achieve a new result that can contribute to increasing knowledge on the topic under study. In contrast, the company wants to apply the result and use it with the goal of profit.

However, within Spoke 2, we have found a good capacity for interaction with companies. I would like to mention the work that my research group is doing with De’Longhi. Our team of chemical researchers is collaborating on the development of new coffee machines to evaluate how to reduce the amount of coffee beans used while maintaining the organoleptic characteristics of the final product, thereby reducing processing waste. From this perspective, there is a good integration among various aspects of the process. Nevertheless, these applied aspects are clearly based on a very thorough preliminary basic study: we are able to analyze the volatile substances of the coffee bean and determine if a process causes fragrance loss because we previously studied how to analyze, characterize, and identify various volatile substances.

In this project, we are observing the company's ability to recognize and address the challenges that may arise during the application phase, seeking to resolve them. Overall, it is evident that the ability for technological transfer is one of the fundamental aspects of research. We have encountered companies very aware of this, and we are achieving excellent results.


✅ You previously mentioned your working group at ISPA, the Institute of Food Production Sciences of CNR, which you are currently directing. Your activities range from developing innovative methodologies for controlling contaminants and microorganisms in food to valorizing typical and local food productions. However, you are also a crucial link in the research-to-industry chain in the country. What are the experiences and expertise from CNR that you bring to OnFoods?

Certainly, I benefit from the work carried out by the previous director, reflecting exceptional teamwork where standout researchers include Marco Montemurro, Angelo Santino, and Tonia Gallo. Our organizational capability hinges on integrating diverse expertise since our institute is multidisciplinary: we have agronomists, chemists, microbiologists, and food technologists. This breadth of expertise allows us to address issues comprehensively. Moreover, we have a longstanding tradition of collaboration with both large multinational corporations and small businesses, positioning us as international benchmarks for food safety and quality. For instance, we are global leaders in mycotoxin research, a field I mention despite its indirect relation to this Spoke.

Our international credibility, along with our adeptness in networking and building extensive scientific cooperation networks, has enabled us to effectively manage this complex organization like the Spoke and establish excellent collaborative relationships with the numerous research groups involved in the project across various universities. My experience has always involved balancing significant research efforts with a keen focus on industry. We have partnered with major companies while maintaining data integrity, allowing us to fully engage with all stakeholders in the Spoke. In our work, we strive for coherence, and I believe the positive outcomes are evident to all.

I believe that the topic of circular economy is unquestionably a scientific theme that we, as an Institute, will continue to promote in line with CNR's strategic directions. I also think that our Spoke is achieving very positive results: we have received excellent evaluations from the Ministry.

It's also important to acknowledge the work of the administrative support staff for researchers, but it's essential to emphasize that in order to truly make research effective in our country, procedures must be simplified. Otherwise, we risk falling behind while other countries move forward more quickly.