This review is focused on the utilization of insects as a new opportunity in food and feed products, including their commercialization both in traditional and new markets. It has been suggested that insects are considerably more sustainable when compared with other sources of animal protein, thus alleviating the pressure over the environment and the planet facing the necessity to feed the world population, constantly increasing. Many chefs have adhered to the trend of using insects in their culinary preparations, bringing insects to the plan of top gastronomy, highlighting their organoleptic qualities allied to a recognized high nutritional value. However, in some markets, insects or insect-based products are not readily accepted because of neophobia and disgust. Moreover, the insect markets, farming, and commercialization are experiencing a huge growth, in which the domain of animal feed is undoubtedly a very strong component. The future of insects as human food and animal feed seems promising in view of the recent trends and challenges.

This short article presents loss rates of honey bee colonies over winter 2017/18 from 36 countries, including 33 in Europe, from data collected using the standardized COLOSS questionnaire. The 25,363 beekeepers supplying data passing consistency checks in total wintered 544,879 colonies, and reported 26,379 (4.8%, 95% CI 4.7–5.0%) colonies with unsolvable queen problems, 54,525 (10.0%, 95% CI 9.8–10.2%) dead colonies after winter and another 8,220 colonies (1.5%, 95% CI 1.4–1.6%) lost through natural disaster. This gave an overall loss rate of 16.4% (95% CI 16.1–16.6%) of honey bee colonies during winter 2017/18, but this varied greatly from 2.0 to 32.8% between countries. The included map shows relative risks of winter loss at regional level. The analysis using the total data-set confirmed findings from earlier surveys that smaller beekeeping operations with at most 50 colonies suffer significantly higher losses than larger operations (p < .001). Beekeepers migrating their colonies had significantly lower losses than those not migrating (p < .001), a different finding from previous research. Evaluation of six different forage sources as potential risk factors for colony loss indicated that intensive foraging on any of five of these plant sources (Orchards, Oilseed Rape, Maize, Heather and Autumn Forage Crops) was associated with significantly higher winter losses. This finding requires further study and explanation. A table is included giving detailed results of loss rates and the impact of the tested forage sources for each country and overall.

This article presents managed honey bee colony loss rates over winter 2019/20 resulting from using the standardised COLOSS questionnaire in 37 countries. Six countries were from outside Europe, including, for the first time in this series of articles, New Zealand. The 30,491 beekeepers outside New Zealand reported 4.5% of colonies with unsolvable queen problems, 11.1% of colonies dead after winter and 2.6% lost through natural disaster. This gave an overall colony winter loss rate of 18.1%, higher than in the previous year. The winter loss rates varied greatly between countries, from 7.4% to 36.5%. 3216 beekeepers from New Zealand managing 297,345 colonies reported 10.5% losses for their 2019 winter (six months earlier than for other, Northern Hemisphere, countries). We modelled the risk of loss as a dead/empty colony or from unresolvable queen problems, for all countries except New Zealand. Overall, larger beekeeping operations with more than 50 colonies experienced significantly lower losses (p < 0.001). Migration was also highly significant (p < 0.001), with lower loss rates for operations migrating their colonies in the previous season. A higher proportion of new queens reduced the risk of colony winter loss (p < 0.001), suggesting that more queen replacement is better. All three factors, operation size, migration and proportion of young queens, were also included in a multivariable main effects quasi-binomial GLM and all three remained highly significant (p < 0.001). Detailed results for each country and overall are given in a table, and a map shows relative risks of winter loss at the regional level.

This article presents managed honey bee colony loss rates over winter 2018/19 resulting from using the standardised COLOSS questionnaire in 35 countries (31 in Europe). In total, 28,629 beekeepers supplying valid loss data wintered 738,233 colonies, and reported 29,912 (4.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.0–4.1%) colonies with unsolvable queen problems, 79,146 (10.7%, 95% CI 10.5–10.9%) dead colonies after winter and 13,895 colonies (1.9%, 95% CI 1.8–2.0%) lost through natural disaster. This gave an overall colony winter loss rate of 16.7% (95% CI 16.4–16.9%), varying greatly between countries, from 5.8% to 32.0%. We modelled the risk of loss as a dead/empty colony or from unresolvable queen problems, and found that, overall, larger beekeeping operations with more than 150 colonies experienced significantly lower losses (p < 0.001), consistent with earlier studies. Additionally, beekeepers included in this survey who did not migrate their colonies at least once in 2018 had significantly lower losses than those migrating (p < 0.001). The percentage of new queens from 2018 in wintered colonies was also examined as a potential risk factor. The percentage of colonies going into winter with a new queen was estimated as 55.0% over all countries. Higher percentages of young queens corresponded to lower overall losses (excluding losses from natural disaster), but also lower losses from unresolvable queen problems, and lower losses from winter mortality (p < 0.001). Detailed results for each country and overall are given in a table, and a map shows relative risks of winter loss at regional level.

The consumption of edible insects (EI) is traditional in many parts of the world, but not in others. In fact, despite globalization and the multiple advantages pointed out about the consumption of EI, there are still many countries where entomophagy is seen with disgust and aversion. This systematic review aimed to examine the motivations that influence the consumption of EI in diverse cultures and understand if there are differences between Western countries (WC) and insect-eating countries (IEC). It further evaluated whether the degree of acceptability was influenced by the form of consumption of the insects (eating whole insects or foods containing insects). This literature review was conducted in November 2021 within three databases, Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus, according to the Preferred Reporting of Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis and using PRISMA directives. From a total of 245 studies, 31 were selected to be included in this review, based on the inclusion criteria defined: only original research articles, from 2010 or beyond, and written in English. The results indicated that the main motivations that determine the consumption of EI are related to gender, age, sustainability, nutritional value, sensory attributes, tradition/culture, food neophobia, disgust and familiarity/past experiences. Moreover, whereas in IEC, there is a greater focus on factors related to sensory attributes, availability, affordability and preferences, in WC, there is a bigger emphasis on determinants such as nutritional value, sustainability, benefits, familiarity/past experience, tradition/culture, food neophobia and disgust. Finally, it was observed that people in WC are more willing to accept food products containing insects rather than the whole insect, which is one of the most promising points to be addressed in the future. Overall, this review highlights that there are numerous factors influencing the consumption of edible insects, and differences between WC and IEC are clear in what concerns the motivations of consumers. Hence, targeting market segments and consumers’ characteristics has to be present when designing strategies to incentivize the consumption of EI in WC as a part of a global strategy for sustainability of food systems.

The unadjusted intake of food constitutes a real challenge for the several sustainability dimensions. In this perspective, the main objectives of this research are to characterise the current contexts of food security, its relationship with sustainability, and identify proposals and actions that may support the design of more adjusted policies in the future. In addition, it is intended to assess if the food security pillars properly address the sustainability goals and if the evolution of undernutrition is accompanied by sustainable frameworks. In this way, statistical information from the FAOSTAT database was considered for the several dimensions of food security over the period 2000–2020. These data were analysed through factor-cluster approaches and panel data methodologies, namely those related to quantile regressions. As main insights, we may refer that undernutrition is more impacted by the availability of food and nutrients and political stability than by the level of GDP—Gross Domestic Product (except for the extreme cases). This means that the level of development is not the primary explanation for the problems of nutrition. The main focus of the national and international policies must be to improve the agrifood supply chains and to support political stability, in order to mitigate undernutrition worldwide and ensure a global access to sustainable and healthy diets. In addition, it is suggested to rethink the four pillars of food security (availability, access, utilisation and stability), in order to encompass other dimensions, such as climate change.