Digital Food System

Table of Contents
Overview................................................................................................................................3

Define Search.........................................................................................................................3

Theoretical Framework..........................................................................................................3

Data trusts and trust frameworks........................................................................................3

Governance and legal form.................................................................................................4

Security, interoperability, and operation.............................................................................4

Intelligent and transformed food chain...............................................................................5

Conceptual Framework..........................................................................................................6

Literature Gap.........................................................................................................................7

Summary.................................................................................................................................7

Analysis..................................................................................................................................7

Overview.............................................................................................................................7

Social, Ethical and Legal Issues.........................................................................................8

Resources............................................................................................................................8

Critical Success Factor......................................................................................................10

Summary...........................................................................................................................10

Conclusion............................................................................................................................11

References............................................................................................................................11
Overview
Food production and consumption as they are now are a big problem for the whole world.
Seventy-five per cent of species going extinct, and 25 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions
can be linked to how the world feeds itself now (Sgroi and Marino, 2022). Even though many
of the world's almost 500 million smallholder farmers have to choose between feeding their
families and paying their bills, they still grow more than half of the food supply. Because of
the effects of climate change on farming and food security, more than 100 million people
could fall into extreme poverty by 2030. Farmers' incomes protect them from climate change
and improve their health (Clapp, 2021). All parts of the food value chain could be made much
better with the help of new digital technology.

Define Search
The parts of the study and the tools for gathering and analyzing data are given. The
recommended order of things to do, but it is not required. But each part can be done at a
different time. It is done in steps so that as the process improves, more can be learned about
other parts of the food system. Precision agriculture, gene editing, biological crop protection,
and other methods have the potential to make food systems more resource- and climate-
efficient. Tools that make it easier to track food from farm to fork are also examples of such
improvements.

Theoretical Framework
An extensive but mostly decentralized and tier-based supply chain network moves data
between and within itself (Lajoie-O'Malley et al., 2020). Data describes everything, from the
first ingredients to how food moves back and forth, the information and money that moves
along the supply chain, and the results, both planned and those that were not. Sharing
information can make food safer, set standards, and handle essential network dependencies.
Digital technology could help change systems for the public good by making it possible for
people to choose foods that produce less greenhouse gas (Glatzel et al. 2019). A digitally
transformed food system can only reach its full potential if permissioned and reliable data
flow smoothly through complex, multi-lateral supply chains, from farms to consumers. Even
though the transfer of business and personal data is strictly limited and regulated, supply
chains don't make it easy to share data that could help the public good. This type of
information includes how much it costs to make food, how it affects the environment, how
healthy it is, and anything that could make the whole food supply chain work better (Klerkx
and Begemann, 2020). No longer do the people in the supply chain have to send data through
the many levels of the food system or link traceability data. Sharing data, which could be
helpful for everyone, is complex because people do not trust each other, it's hard to keep
track of and monitor data transfer, and there isn't strong sector leadership. Private businesses
in a supply chain can make their agreements about data sharing if they are mutually agreeable
and don't break more extensive laws, like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or
antitrust laws (Wijerathna-Yapa, and Pathirana, 2022). Even though there are a lot of these
kinds of agreements, most of them were made on a case-by-case basis and need to be updated
as trading relationships change, new data sources become available, new ways of getting
value from data are developed, and differences in the way data is exchanged become clear.
These short-term solutions may help with the problem at hand but could cause more problems
(Bronson and Knezevic, 2019).

Data trusts and trust frameworks

Companies in many fields, not just the food system, find it hard to set up reliable multi-party
data interchange (Bahn, Yehya, and Zurayk, 2021). When data processors deal with private
information, the same problems can arise (business-to-consumer or B2C). Business-to-
business (B2B) data exchange requires complex governance systems to define who owns the
data, what commercial rights it has, how it can be used, and who can access it. But laws like
the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) require B2C data transfers to protect
consumers' privacy and other rights. Artificial intelligence and other cutting-edge technology,
in-depth studies of how people act. The idea of a "data trust" is becoming more popular for
AI-powered data processors to control how sensitive data is shared and used (Benfica et al.,
2023). Data trusts are a type of management based on the "trust law." They are like libraries
in that people can share their knowledge for the good of everyone. By law, those in charge
must always do what is best for the beneficiaries. One or more people can be the trust's
stewards and decide how the data should be used. The best interest of the trust's beneficiaries
and in line with the terms under which the data or rights were given to the trust. The author
says that data trusts are an excellent example of how governments should work. The language
surrounding data trust is murky. A data trust is a type of cooperative data governance allowed
by the law (World Bank Group, 2019). "Trust frameworks" might be a better term than
"governance sets" because it includes the management of all kinds of collaborative data, even
data that does not contain personally identifiable information or even use trust law. A "trust
framework" is a binding set of specifications, rules, and agreements that govern a multi-party
system with a common goal. Credit card networks, electronic payment networks, domain
name registration networks, and digital identification networks are all multi-party systems
that depend on trust frameworks. When a system encourages people to do what they should
and follow the rules, it is much easier to trust that they will (Cozzolino, D., 2019). These
trustworthy relationships can come from friends, family, or people with a lot of power. For
people to trust the food system, four things must be in place.
 A type of law and government that is not yet in effect;
 Authorization and safety measures for how users connect to the network;
 Knowledge-mapping features that make sure all the system's interfaces work together;
 The part of an organization that oversees day-to-day running operations.

Governance and legal form

Private actors in the food system could be defined as businesses along the food supply chain
that share a commitment to open communication with the whole food system, including
producers, distributors, retailers, restaurants, consumers, and advocacy groups (Rotz et al.,
2019). It is common knowledge that businesses in the public sector are government agencies
or regulators. The members' council will choose a supervisory board to represent the council
and set priorities. In contrast, the executive committee will oversee the day-to-day operations
of the data trust framework, including developing and implementing its protocols. With the
addition of a regulator to the governance structure, the public's trust in government and
business could go up, and the regulatory burden could go down (Baker et al. 2021). Long-
term, a corporation limited by guarantee or a similar legal organization that reflects this type
of governance structure may be best. Still, the group can start with a series of flexible
agreements. Gaining the trust of those involved requires a clear mission statement and good
governance to ensure that data are used morally and according to standards, that everyone is
treated fairly, and that their ideas are considered. The first will make people trust institutions
more, while the other two will make people trust each other more (Hodson de Jaramillo,
Trigo, and Campos, 2023).
Security, interoperability, and operation
There is a high risk of contamination, contamination by pathogens, or intentional disruption
of the digitally transformed food supply, such as cyberattacks (World Health Organization,
2021). As transactional operations become the norm within organizations, the smooth
operation of those organizations is dependent on the sharing of relevant information among
employees and departments. Consistent individual-party authentication is typically required
to permit operations regarding access control by user, role profile, group, data category, or
context. When many companies own and administer their own data sets, it becomes
increasingly difficult to control who has access to what information (Basso and Antle, 2020).
A function that helps make data more findable, open, reusable, and interoperable; sometimes
known as "FAIR." The commercial world is adopting these standards rapidly, even though
they were initially designed for the data-heavy academic community. It is crucial that users,
data management systems, and data sources in different locations all be able to communicate
with one another. Integrating data sources can be complex since information is frequently
kept in various unstandardized formats and proprietary systems. Users can engage with the
entire framework in several ways thanks to interoperability, which is enabled by features like
standardized APIs, open data repositories, and stringent quality assurance and control
methods (Granheim, 2019).

The operational layer specifies how community members will interact with one another. It
does so by keeping track of who belongs to the community, what roles they play, and what
information they have access to and may share depending on their position in the trust
hierarchy (Granheim et al., 2022). To better understand the supply chain as a whole or to
draw attention to specific issues, like food poisoning outbreaks, a reasoning engine could be
incorporated into the functional elements of the system. Procedures for monitoring members'
compliance with and adherence to standards are also stored in this operational layer.
Distributed data storage is essential for a data network supporting a food production supply
chain. Companies like farms, businesses, and transportation firms are the proud owners of
these information warehousing facilities. The information stored in a data warehouse belongs
to the company that built it. Each business in a decentralized system would oversee its data
storage and the management of its information flows associated with the transportation of
commodities (Helmi et al., 2019). Retailers can try to get more information from their
suppliers by asking questions, but often they will not get access to everything the suppliers
know.

In the same way, manufacturers receive extensive data from their suppliers; transportation
businesses would also benefit from such data. Information like this would be established for
everyday transactions via functional and regulatory processes (Macharia, 2020). In
exceptional circumstances, like product recalls and other incidents, new protocols would be
implemented, allowing for greater data access, and sharing. However, this is characteristic of
instances where companies trade information across borders for private rather than a public
advantage; these arrangements remain relatively workable within the current food supply
chain.

Intelligent and transformed food chain

A decentralized food supply chain's primary goal is to ensure everyone has access to a critical
resource. The safe distribution of data related to regulatory compliance, the discovery of new
insights made possible by artificial intelligence, and the secure consolidation of different
datasets (Prause, Hackfort, and Lindgren, 2021). Governance that puts people first and looks
out for the interests of everyone in the food chain, including the consumer, and AI services
that can be trusted and access anonymized, auditable data. The best way to strengthen food
supply chains is for improved data trust frameworks to help people follow the rules.
Participants in the supply chain have collected a lot of information that can be shared for
personal or professional reasons. Getting competitors to agree to share information is the
hardest part of the food supply chain. A trust framework prototype for food standards, which
could be the Food Data Trust, and then figuring out how useful it will be in the future (Klerkx
and Rose, 2020).
The success of this project depends on working with the right people, getting help from
business groups, and getting support from the academic community. Since the approach
should be co-designed and co-developed with partners that are relevant to each use case, it
will be necessary for the industry to be involved (Borodina et al., 2021). The pilot's goals
should be made clear, and scalable models should be made available so they can be used to
shape the legal and administrative structures that will follow. By keeping a close eye on pilot
projects and seeing if the governance structures that come out of them last and do a lot of
good for the public, it will be possible to figure out and measure the power of data trust
frameworks to change things. Still being figured out is how a data-driven revolution that
benefits everyone, like making food safer or switching to a food chain that cares more about
the environment and uses less carbon, could change everything. Digital technology is already
affecting some parts of the global food system (Herrero et al., 2020). To more food being
produced and better environmental and social outcomes. Multi-lateral trust frameworks are a
new way to control the flow of data that is more effective and reasonable. More and more,
data-driven technologies are being used in the food system to make business easier, increase
output, and ensure food is safe and reliable. By building a data trust framework, people can
improve how data is regulated, leading to the more public good and more stable economic
growth. The food business has undergone many significant changes in the last few decades.
Even the farming, trading, and eating practices that feed the world's people have been
improved by technology. People are becoming much more interested in going vegetarian or
vegan because they are worried about their carbon footprints. Options that are vegan or do
not have meat are more popular than ever. With these changes, the term "digital food" made
its way into chefs' vocabulary. There were unique tastes from all over the world, but that was
not all. A standard definition of "digital food" has not yet come about because the term is still
not precise. This is especially true given how quickly the digital food market changes (Sgroi,
2022). Using augmented reality in the food business is a fun and creative way to get many
people interested. "Digital food" is not the same as the cutting-edge technology the food
industry uses daily. New technologies have made production processes easier and faster.

On the other hand, eating virtual food is an experience like nothing else. People were upset
about how popular food photos were on Instagram five years ago (Steiner et al., 2020). They
talked about it in online forums. People are looking at, sharing, and enjoying more and more
images of digital food, also called "synthetic food."

Conceptual Framework
Scientists often use conceptual frameworks, graphical representations of the relationships
between these things, to understand better how different things are likely to interact. In some
situations, the user might say "research model" or "conceptual model" instead. The
expectations are shown by the model's many variables and the links between them that are
thought to exist. This structure could be a place to start learning more. The next thing that
could be used as a tool for analysis is a conceptual framework. It can be used to find
similarities and fundamental differences between different ideas.
Literature Gap
 Infrastructure needs more money for things like paved roads, reliable electricity, places to
store crops after harvest, and transportation systems that link farmers to markets.
 The investment climate improves, laws will get stricter, and more digital technologies will
be needed.
 As food systems become more digital, there needs to be a new way to manage data that is
legal, serves the public good, and builds the trust that is required to make data exchanges
possible across the whole food business.

Summary
"Smarter farming," "better public services," and "enhanced customer and farmer education
and participation" are all ways that digital technologies are improving the food chain. There
is a wide range of how complicated these tools are, from simple digital films with offline
advice for farmers to complex systems like distributed ledger technology for value chain
traceability and different kinds of precision agriculture. Even though digital technologies
have a lot of potentials, they also come with genuine risks. These include, but are not limited
to, an overabundance of service providers, a lack of data privacy, the exclusion of certain
groups or individuals, the decline of whole industries, and the loss of jobs. It is essential to
help smallholder farmers, women, and other marginalized groups. It is also necessary to
encourage skill development and lower barriers for service providers. There are many good
things about digital technologies, but they are not a silver bullet.

Analysis
Overview
One of the most recent and succinct definitions of a food environment is that it is the point of
contact between individuals and the food system (Phillips et al., 2019). It is well known that
food environments contribute to the current complicated burden of malnutrition
(undernutrition, overweight, obesity, and micronutrient deficiencies) and diet-related non-
communicable diseases. They are essential for making long-term plans for healthy eating.
Over the past ten years, there has been a significant increase in the number of academic
works that look at the food system as it is now. Several systematic reviews have examined
the link between where people eat and how healthy and well-nourished they are (Clark et al.,
2020). Many systematic studies examine the food system, but others focus on specific parts,
like food marketing. Recently, there has been a lot of concern about how digital technology is
used in nutrition and health, even though there are problems with standardizing measurement
methods and procedures. People and communities can work together to make the digital
world simultaneously through complex, multidirectional processes. When millions of people
can create and share information about food and nutrition online, thanks to the rise and spread
of social media, which is built on this dynamic interaction between people and technology (Li
et al. 2022). Several large-scale studies have investigated the effects of social media on
health. Within the more important topic of social media analysis, health research comprises a
large subfield. A thorough review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials were
used to determine how well social media can encourage healthy habits like regular exercise
and a balanced diet among the general population. Health behaviours that can be changed,
like smoking, drinking, eating habits, and not being physically active, are looked at in detail,
focusing on online social networks (Ballamingie et al. 2020). Researchers looked at the
potential of social networking sites as a critical intervention platform by looking at how well
weight-management counselling worked on these sites. This review uses various methods to
examine how social media affects young people's eating habits and health. Digital technology
has also had a significant effect on the way food is advertised. Even though most research on
food marketing is done through broadcast media, there has been a lot of progress in the last
few years in studying food marketing on the internet (Ruder, 2019). This paper looks at how
online ads for potentially dangerous products affect young people, including how they think
and act (food, alcohol, and tobacco).

Social, Ethical and Legal Issues

Ethics, the study of moral obligation, can help achieve the security that fits political and
social goals. Virtue ethics is based on an ethical system of shared values (Stephens and
Barbier, 2021). While deontology may be the best way to deal with legal problems, virtue
(values ethics) may be the best way to deal with social issues because consequentialism
focuses on the effects on the individual. Two significant legal challenges are finding a middle
ground between different values and ensuring that resources are shared relatively
(Neethirajan and Kemp, 2021). So, better security measures must not leave other parts of
society less safe or more vulnerable (to hazards or an imbalance between security and
liberty).

When people talk about the moral acceptability of security research, security technology, and
security practices, they usually discuss ethical issues (Clapp, 2022). When people talk about
the social acceptability of these things, they typically talk about how well the general public
accepts them. It is essential to have this point of view because new technology can both make
things safer and create unknown risks (Schneider and Eli, 2021). Safeguarding and defending
a society's accumulated values is related to an all-hazards/whole-community approach to
homeland security, an integrated strategy for disaster resilience worldwide, and the
globalization of disaster preparedness. For security research to be helpful, it must consider
moral, legal, and social issues. There are more legal implications in the field of security
science than just looking into compliance issues. As part of the overall framework of
homeland security, they also talk about the moral and institutional challenges of putting
systemic security concerns into the modern political and legal systems (Benton and Bailey,
2019).

 The product may offend some people. Is this possible?

 Is copyright material going to be used? Are you going to obtain permission to use it?
 How secure is the product for storing data? Does it adhere to accepted standards?
 Would the Ethics Committee be able to provide you with advice if you were dealing
 with confidential data?
 Would it be possible that the product might not be accessible to all users?
 What issues do you anticipate with the Data Protection Act (DPA), the data
 Protection Directive, or the Human Rights Act?
Resources
Software: web application toolkit, PHP framework, C, C++, JavaScript, boot camps, and
Visual Studio

Web Application Toolkit – The FileNet Toolkit gives programmers a flexible framework
and modular parts to help them make their Web applications. The Toolkit's operations and
data structures provide security and scalability features like authentication, event routing,
state data, user preferences, and multicultural support (Clapp and Ruder, 2020). Web
Application Toolkit was designed with an MVC framework and UI components that can be
used repeatedly as two of its primary goals. It was essential to understand this principle to
make reliable HTML-based application user interfaces that used as little DHTML or
JavaScript as possible. The UI elements of this model are made to let stateful data be scoped
to components based on where they are deployed and to link the presentation of features to
UI events sent from the server. Even though Struts has an MVC (Model-View-Controller)
event model, it does not support the most common UI elements and the events that go with
them. Unfortunately, not many tools can automatically scope stateful data based on where a
particular component is used. Version 3.0 added global events, which made it possible for an
event model that works the same as Struts' event model. A custom app can subscribe to
international affairs and have one or more UI module beans respond to them (Gulati et al.,
2023). Defining a bean on the application page or adding more subscribers makes it easy to
change or update how an event works.

PHP framework – PHP makes up about 79% of all websites. Compared to other server-side
programming languages, it is used eight times more. PHP's web hosting market share has
stayed steady in the past year. Most of the time, PHP developers use a framework to build
software. Read on to learn more about PHP frameworks, why they are helpful, and which
ones are the most popular. Web developers can make their web apps with the help of a PHP
framework (Zoran, 2019). It is a short way of saying that it is a framework for creating apps
that can run in the cloud. PHP frameworks give developers the solid frameworks they need to
develop applications quickly and satisfactorily. Most PHP-based web apps are built on top of
PHP frameworks. PHP frameworks reduce the amount of custom code that must be written
by giving access to libraries of commonly used features that already exist.

C- The programming language C, whose name sounds like the letter C, can be used in many
ways. Dennis Ritchie started it in the 1970s and has significantly impacted popular culture
ever since (Hendrickson et al. 2020). The features of C are made to work best with the target
CPUs. Even though it is used less and less in applications, it is still used in operating systems,
drivers, and protocol stacks. C is used to write code from the most powerful supercomputers
to the most miniature embedded systems and microcontrollers. Dennis Ritchie made C at Bell
Labs in the early 1970s to replace B, a programming language used to make tools for Unix.
The core of the Unix operating system was rewritten using this method (Baker et al. 2020).
By the 1980s, C had already become very popular. There are compilers for the programming
language C for almost all computer architectures and operating systems. Since 1989, groups
like ANSI and ISO have worked together to create a set of rules for C that everyone follows.
C is a static-typed, procedural, imperative, and recursive language. It also has a lexical
scoping of variables and structured programming. It was meant to be built so that it did not
need much help during runtime. To make it easier to access low-level memory and use
language structures that map to machine instructions. Even though the language has low-level
features, it was made to make developing for multiple platforms easier. With only minor
changes to the source code, a portable, standards-compliant C programme can run on a wide
range of hardware and software (Hassoun et al., 2022). 

C++ - C++ is a high-level, general-purpose programming language that builds on C. It was

made by the Danish programmer Bjarne Stroustrup and is sometimes called "C with Classes."
In modern versions of C++, functional programming, object-oriented programming, and
generic libraries are all supported. C++ compilers are available from several companies, such
as the Free Software Foundation, LLVM, Microsoft, Intel, Embarcadero, Oracle, and IBM
(Kreuze et al. 2022). Because C++ is implemented as a compiled language, it can be used on
many systems. C++ was made with the needs of systems programming, embedded software,
software with limited resources, and extensive systems in mind. Its design is based on
efficiency, effectiveness, and versatility. C++ is usually used for software infrastructure and
performance-critical applications that do not have a lot of resources. Desktop programmes,
video games, servers (for e-commerce, web searches, or database servers), and applications
that cannot afford to waste time or resources. Even so, it is helpful in several other situations
(e.g., telephone switches or space probes).

JavaScript – JavaScript (JS), like HTML and CSS, is a crucial programming language for
how websites work. By 2022, almost all websites will use client-side JavaScript to control
how pages work, and they will often add third-party libraries. For the code to run on the
user's device, they need a web browser with its JavaScript engine.

JavaScript is a high-level, JIT-compiled language that is compatible with ECMAScript. Its

first-class functions, dynamic typing, and prototype-based object-oriented approach (Gaitán-
Cremaschi et al., 2020). Document Object Models, regular expressions, dates, and commonly
used data structures have programming interfaces.

Bootcamps – Students can get specialized knowledge in the IT field in a short amount of
time through computer science boot camps. Students are pushed to take charge of their
education at this brutal boot camp. By only charging for the essential parts of education,
coding boot camps help students focus on the skills they need to start working right away in
the field.

Visual Studio – In addition to the editor and debugger that most IDEs have, Visual Studio
has a compiler, code completion tools, graphical designers, and many other tools that make it
easier to create software.

MYSQL-based database
MySQL is a popular fully-managed database option for SQL-based management. Oracle
Corporation has bought this C++ and C open-source project. The MySQL service is known
for its ability to install, run, and keep up with it. DevOps teams often use MySQL to build
cloud-native enterprise apps because it can be used anywhere and does not need a lot of
resources. MySQL has a lot of problems with scaling up, which leads to a bad user
experience in the long run. MySQL makes the situation even worse by not following standard
SQL practices. Because of this, MySQL does not have a backup for many SQL features.
Using NoSQL databases makes creating applications that many people can use more
accessible.
Critical Success Factor
Given the problems of modern life, it's not surprising that every business wants to get more
customers. The same thing happens in the food business. In the food service business, there
are new ways to offer services to customers. As a result of this process, an online platform for
ordering and delivering meals was made, which is a new way for the food business to work.
Digital platforms have changed along with social and cultural norms to meet the needs of a
wide range of users.

Summary
In conclusion, digital technology has a lot of potentials to improve health, especially self-
monitoring mobile apps for food and exercise. But the existing research also shows that the
digital world could be evil for nutritional health. For example, digital food marketing by
influencers could lead to more people eating unhealthy snacks, and more people engaging in
certain social behaviours online could lead to bad body image and eating disorders. The
digital food environment may affect people's diets and health in ways beyond social media,
digital health promotion interventions, and digital food marketing. The postmodern age and
the technological advances that came with it. A lot has been written about how nutrition,
food, and technology all affect each other, but this is the first time that the online food
economy has been tried to be understood.

Conclusion
Food system research has become more well-known because of two related problems: food
safety in developed countries and food supply security in emerging economies. Infrastructure,
surroundings, institutions, people, and things related to food production, distribution,
processing, preparation, sale, marketing, and consumption all play a role in food system
production. Food systems are connected at the economic, political, cultural, environmental,
and health levels. The framework for food systems describes all of these effects and traits,
such as what people do, what resources they have, how much food is available and how much
it costs, what they like, and how much they know. The "Food Systems Dashboard" is a
helpful tool for figuring out how hard it is to advocate for better health and nutrition through
dietary changes. It shows how the regional, national, and international food systems depend
on each other. Users can put their worries in a logical order and decide on the best next steps
with its help. This paper aims to look at what the Food Systems Dashboard means for policy
and consumers. Before making a Food Systems Dashboard, see if all the information needed
is available.

Make a dashboard for the food system that helps people reach their dietary, nutritional, and
health goals. Digital technology is improving the food supply chain in many ways, such as
more innovative farming, better public services, and more customer and farmer education and
participation. The range and depth of these technologies are incredible. They range from
simple digital films with offline farming training to complex systems like distributed ledger
technology for value chain traceability and precision agriculture. There are many good things
about using digital technologies, but there are also real risks that should be considered. There
could be too many service providers, insufficient protection for personal information, bias
against certain groups, the end of whole economic sectors, and the loss of tens of thousands
of jobs, among other things. It is essential to help small-scale farmers, women, and other
groups that don't get enough attention. It's also necessary to clear the way for service
providers and support their staff to grow professionally. Even though digital technologies can
help make some good things happen, they are not a cure-all. Food production and
consumption as they now pose a big problem for the whole world's population. Seventy-five
per cent of species going extinct and twenty-five per cent of greenhouse gas emissions can be
linked to how food is made around the world today. Still, over 500 million smallholder
farmers provide more than half of the world's food, and many have to choose between
feeding their families and paying their rent or mortgage. Because of the effects of climate
change on farming and food security, an extra 100 million people could fall into poverty by
2030. Farmers can better prepare for and deal with the effects of climate change if they are
financially stable. Using digital technologies could help all parts of the food supply chain.

To reach our goals, we need to work with the right people, get the support of business groups,
and get the academic community behind this effort. Involvement from the sector is significant
because the method should be co-designed and co-developed with partners who are relevant
to each use case. Setting goals for the pilot and providing examples that can be scaled up will
help shape future legal and administrative frameworks. Test cases help us determine if the
governance structures that come from data trust frameworks are long-lasting and suitable for
the public. They also give us a way to judge how well the frameworks work. The effects of a
data-driven revolution that helps everyone, like making food safer or choosing a food chain
that is good for the environment and makes less greenhouse gas, are still unclear. Some parts
of the global food chain are already suffering the consequences of digital technologies.
Increasing agricultural output is suitable for both people and the environment. Multi-lateral
trust frameworks are a refreshingly creative, efficient, and reasonable way to regulate data.
Data-driven technologies are being used increasingly in the food industry to improve
efficiency, increase output, and ensure that the food people eat safe and of good quality. Data
trust framework, people can better control data, which will be suitable for the public and lead
to more stable economic growth. The food business has undergone many significant changes
in the last few decades.

From farms to restaurants to grocery stores, technology has helped at every step of the way
food is made. More and more people are considering switching to a plant-based diet because
they care more about the environment. More and more people want to eat vegetarian and
vegan food. Because of these changes, the term "digital food" is becoming more common in
the culinary world. There were also differences in taste due to geography and culture.
Because most people don't know what "digital food" is, the term is often used without clarity
about what it means. Augmented reality in the food industry is a fun and unique way to get
people interested. Despite what most people think, modern kitchen equipment does not
include digital food. Because of changes in technology, manufacturing processes have
become more accessible and faster.

One of the best and most modern ways to describe a food environment is as the "point of
contact" between people and the food system. It is well known that the way food is made and
eaten affects the global burden of malnutrition (undernutrition, overweight, obesity, and
micronutrient deficiencies) and diet-related non-communicable diseases. They are essential
for keeping up healthy eating habits over time. In the past ten years, there has been a meteoric
rise in academic works that rebuke the food industry. Some studies look at the food system as
a whole, and some focus on specific parts, such as food marketing. Even though it's hard to
standardize measurement methods and procedures, digital technology in nutrition and health
has become a more significant concern in recent years. People can now develop the digital
world together in real-time by using complicated, multidirectional processes. Because of the
rise and popularity of social media, which is based on this interaction between people and
technology, millions of people worldwide can now learn about food and nutrition and share
what they know. Much research has been done on how social media affects a person's
physical and mental health. Health-related posts on social media are becoming more and
more enjoyable to study. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled
studies looked at how well social media like Facebook and Twitter get people to do healthy
things like exercise and eat well. The study looks at how online social networks affect health
behaviours that can be changed, like smoking, drinking too much alcohol, eating poorly, and
not getting enough exercise. Researchers tested the effectiveness of social networking sites as
intervention platforms by giving weight-management advice through them. In this survey, we
use different methods to look at how social media affects the diets and health of young
people. Food advertising has also changed significantly because of the rise of digital media.
Even though most food marketing research is still done through broadcast media, this field
has made much progress in the past few years because more and more people are using the
internet. Self-monitoring apps for food and fitness on smartphones are a great way to improve
digital health monitoring. Some online social behaviours, for example, may lead to a rise in
eating disorders and a lousy view of the body. For example, influencers' digital marketing of
unhealthy foods could make people eat them more often. The digital food environment may
affect people's diets and health beyond social media, digital health promotion programmes,
and digital food marketing. 

References
1. Sgroi, F. and Marino, G., 2022. Environmental and digital innovation in food: The role of
digital food hubs in creating sustainable local agri-food systems. Science of The Total
Environment, 810, p.152257.
2. Clapp, J., 2021. The problem with growing corporate concentration and power in the
global food system. Nature Food, 2(6), pp.404-408.
3. Lajoie-O'Malley, A., Bronson, K., van der Burg, S. and Klerkx, L., 2020. The future (s) of
digital agriculture and sustainable food systems: An analysis of high-level policy
documents. Ecosystem Services, 45, p.101183.
4. Glatzel, K., Tankari, M., Demmler, K. and Shah, M., 2019. Byte by byte: policy innovation
for transforming Africa's food system with digital technologies. Byte by byte: policy
innovation for transforming Africa's food system with digital technologies.
5. Klerkx, L. and Begemann, S., 2020. Supporting food systems transformation: The what,
why, who, where and how of mission-oriented agricultural innovation systems. Agricultural
Systems, 184, p.102901.
6. Wijerathna-Yapa, A. and Pathirana, R., 2022. Sustainable Agro-Food Systems for
Addressing Climate Change and Food Security. Agriculture, 12(10), p.1554.
7. Bronson, K. and Knezevic, I., 2019. The digital divide and how it matters for Canadian
food system equity. Canadian Journal of Communication, 44(2), PP-63.
8. Bahn, R.A., Yehya, A.A.K. and Zurayk, R., 2021. Digitalization for sustainable agri-food
systems: potential, status, and risks for the MENA region. Sustainability, 13(6), p.3223.
9. Benfica, R., Chambers, J., Koo, J., Nin-Pratt, A., Falck-Zepeda, J., Stads, G.J. and Arndt,
C., 2023. Food system innovations and digital technologies to Foster productivity growth and
rural transformation. In Science and Innovations for Food Systems Transformation (pp. 421-
437). Springer, Cham.
10. World Bank Group, 2019. Future of Food: Harnessing Digital Technologies to Improve
Food System Outcomes. World Bank.
11. Cozzolino, D., 2019. Food for thought: The digital disruption and the future of food
production. Current Research in Nutrition and Food Science Journal, 7(3), pp.607-609.
12. Rotz, S., Duncan, E., Small, M., Botschner, J., Dara, R., Mosby, I., Reed, M. and Fraser,
E.D., 2019. The politics of digital agricultural technologies: a preliminary review. Sociologia
Ruralis, 59(2), pp.203-229.
13. Baker, P., Santos, T., Neves, P.A., Machado, P., Smith, J., Piwoz, E., Barros, A.J.,
Victora, CG and McCoy, D., 2021. First‐food systems transformations and the ultra‐
processing of infant and young child diets: The determinants, dynamics, and consequences of
the global rise in commercial milk formula consumption. Maternal & child nutrition, 17(2),
p.e13097.
14. Hodson de Jaramillo, E., Trigo, E.J. and Campos, R., 2023. The role of science,
technology, and innovation in transforming food systems in Latin America and the
Caribbean. In Science and Innovations for Food Systems Transformation (pp. 737-749).
Springer, Cham.
15. World Health Organization, 2021. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World
2021: Transforming food systems for food security, improved nutrition, and affordable
healthy diets for all (Vol. 2021).
16. Granheim, S.I., 2019. The digital food environment. UNSCN Nutrition, 44, pp.116-21.
17. Basso, B. and Antle, J., 2020. Digital agriculture to design sustainable agricultural
systems. Nature Sustainability, 3(4), pp.254-256.
18. Granheim, S.I., Løvhaug, A.L., Terragni, L., Torheim, L.E. and Thurston, M., 2022.
Mapping the digital food environment: A systematic scoping review. Obesity Reviews, 23(1),
p.e13356.
19. Helmi, H., Tanjung, N.S., Figna, L.N. and Silviana, V.P., 2019. Adapting in Digital Era
of Globalized Agro-food System and Delivery of UN SDGs 1 and 2: Agriculture Extension in
Small-scale Red Onion (Shallot) Horticulture Area in Highland Solok District,
Indonesia. IPTEK Journal of Proceedings Series, (6), pp.73-77.
20. Macharia, J., 2020. From weekend farming to telephone farming: Digital food pathways
in Africa. In Routledge Handbook of Sustainable and Regenerative Food Systems (pp. 350-
362). Routledge.
21. Prause, L., Hackfort, S. and Lindgren, M., 2021. Digitalization and the third food
regime. Agriculture and human values, 38(3), pp.641-655.
22. Klerkx, L. and Rose, D., 2020. Dealing with the game-changing technologies of
Agriculture 4.0: How do we manage diversity and responsibility in food system transition
pathways? Global Food Security, 24, p.100347.
23. Steiner, A., Aguilar, G., Bomba, K., Bonilla, J.P., Campbell, A., Echeverria, R., Gandhi,
R., Hedegaard, C., Holdorf, D., Ishii, N. and Quinn, K.M., 2020. Actions to transform food
systems under climate change (No. 138-2021-1490).
24. Borodina, O., Rykovska, O., Mykhailenko, O. and Fraier, O., 2021. Digital
Transformations in Agri-Food Systems: Innovation Drivers and New Threats to Sustainable
Rural Development. In SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 100, p. 03002). EDP Sciences.
25. Herrero, M., Thornton, P.K., Mason-D'Croz, D., Palmer, J., Benton, T.G., Bodirsky, B.L.,
Bogard, J.R., Hall, A., Lee, B., Nyborg, K. and Pradhan, P., 2020. Innovation can accelerate
the transition toward a sustainable food system. Nature Food, 1(5), pp.266-272.
26. Sgroi, F., 2022. Evaluating the sustainability of complex rural ecosystems during the
transition from agricultural villages to tourist destinations and modern agri-food
systems. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 9, p.100330.
27. Phillips, P.W., Relf-Eckstein, J.A., Jobe, G. and Wixted, B., 2019. Configuring the new
digital landscape in western Canadian agriculture. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life
Sciences, 90, p.100295.
28. Clark, M.A., Domingo, N.G., Colgan, K., Thakrar, S.K., Tilman, D., Lynch, J., Azevedo,
I.L. and Hill, J.D., 2020. Global food system emissions could preclude achieving the 1.5 and
2 C climate change targets. Science, 370(6517), pp.705-708.
29. Li, M., Jia, N., Lenzen, M., Malik, A., Wei, L., Jin, Y. and Raubenheimer, D., 2022.
Global food miles account for nearly 20% of total food-systems emissions. Nature
Food, 3(6), pp.445-453.
30. Ballamingie, P., Blay-Palmer, A., Knezevic, I., Lacerda, A., Nimmo, E., Stahlbrand, L.
and Ayalon, R., 2020. Integrating a food systems lens into discussions of urban resilience: A
policy analysis. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 9(3),
pp.227-243.
31. Ruder, S.L., 2019. A digital agricultural revolution: Ontario grain farmer perceptions of
digital farming and Big Data (Master's thesis, University of Waterloo).
32. Stephens, R. and Barbier, M., 2021. Digital fooding, cashless marketplaces and
reconnection in intermediated third places: Conceptualizing metropolitan food provision in
the age of prosumption. Journal of Rural Studies, 82, pp.366-379.
33. Neethirajan, S. and Kemp, B., 2021. Digital livestock farming. Sensing and Bio-Sensing
Research, 32, p.100408.34. Clapp, J., 2022. Concentration and crises: exploring the deep
roots of vulnerability in the global industrial food system. The Journal of Peasant Studies,
pp.1-25.
35. Schneider, T. and Eli, K., 2021. Fieldwork in online foodscapes: How to bring an
ethnographic approach to studies of digital food and digital eating. In Research Methods in
Digital Food Studies (pp. 71-85). Routledge.
36. Benton, T.G. and Bailey, R., 2019. The paradox of productivity: agricultural productivity
promotes food system inefficiency. Global Sustainability, 2.
37. Clapp, J. and Ruder, S.L., 2020. Precision technologies for agriculture: Digital farming,
gene-edited crops, and the politics of sustainability. Global Environmental Politics, 20(3),
pp.49-69.
38. Gulati, A., Paroda, R., Puri, S., Narain, D. and Ghanwat, A., 2023. Food System in India.
Challenges, Performance and Promise. In Science and Innovations for Food Systems
Transformation (pp. 813-828). Springer, Cham.
39. Zoran, A., 2019. Cooking with computers: The vision of digital gastronomy [point of
view]. Proceedings of the IEEE, 107(8), pp.1467-1473.
40. Hendrickson, M.K., Howard, P.H., Miller, E.M. and Constance, D.H., 2020. The food
system: Concentration and its impacts. A Special Report to the Family Farm Action Alliance,
p.17.
41. Baker, P., Machado, P., Santos, T., Sievert, K., Backholer, K., Hadjikakou, M., Russell,
C., Huse, O., Bell, C., Scrinis, G. and Worsley, A., 2020. Ultra‐processed foods and the
nutrition transition: Global, regional and national trends, food systems transformations and
political economy drivers. Obesity Reviews, 21(12), p.e13126.
42. Hassoun, A., Alhaj Abdullah, N., Aït-Kaddour, A., Ghellam, M., Beşir, A., Zannou, O.,
Önal, B., Aadil, R.M., Lorenzo, J.M., Mousavi Khaneghah, A. and Regenstein, J.M., 2022.
Food traceability 4.0 as part of the fourth industrial revolution: key enabling
technologies. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, pp.1-17.
43. Kreuze, J., Adewopo, J., Selvaraj, M., Mwanzia, L., Kumar, P., Cuellar, W.J., Legg, J.P.,
Hughes, D.P. and Blomme, G., 2022. Innovative digital technologies to monitor and control
pest and disease threats in Root, Tuber, and Banana (RT&B) cropping systems: progress and
prospects. Root, Tuber and Banana Food System Innovations, pp.261-288.
44. Gaitán-Cremaschi, D., Klerkx, L., Duncan, J., Trienekens, J.H., Huenchuleo, C.,
Dogliotti, S., Contesse, M.E., Benitez-Altuna, F.J. and Rossing, W.A., 2020. Sustainability
transition pathways through ecological intensification: an assessment of vegetable food
systems in Chile. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 18(2), pp.131-150.