15. van Huis A, van Itterbeeck J, Klunder H, Mertens E, Halloran A, Muir G, et al, Edible insects:
Future prospects for food and feed security. FAO Forest. Rome: FAO, United Nations; 2013.
16. Oonincx D.G.A.B, de Boer I.J.M, Environmental impact of the production of mealworms as a
protein source for humans—a life cycle assessment. PLoS One [Internet]. 7, 2012 [cited 2014
Mar 19]; e51145. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?
artid=3526541&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract.
17. Nonhebel S, Raats J, Environmental impact of meat substitutes: comparison between quorn
and pork. Proc. 5th Int. Conf. LCA foods. Gothenburg, Sweden; 2007. p. 73–5.
18. Zhu X, van Ierland E.C, Protein Chains and Environmental Pressures: A Comparison of Pork
and Novel Protein Foods. Environ. Sci. [Internet]. 1, 2004; 254–76. Available from: http://
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15693430412331291652.
19. Nijdam D, Rood T, Westhoek H, The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon
footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes. Food
Policy [Internet]. Elsevier Ltd; 37, 2012 [cited 2013 Aug 9]; 760–70. Available from: http://
linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0306919212000942.
20. Sanders T.A.B, The nutritional adequacy of plant-based diets. Proc. Nutr. Soc. Cambridge
Univ Press; 58, 1999; 265–9.
21. Kumar P, Chatli M.K, Mehta N, Singh P, Malav O.P, Verma A.K, Meat analogues: Health
promising sustainable meat substitutes. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. [Internet]. 57, 2017; 923–
32. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408398.2014.939739.
22. Halloran A, Roos N, Eilenberg J, Cerutti A, Bruun S, Life cycle assessment of edible insects
for food protein: a review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. [Internet]. 36, 2016; 57. Available from:
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13593-016-0392-8.
23. Sturtewagen L, De Soete W, Dewulf J, Lachat C, Lauryssen S, Heirman B, et al, Resource use
profile and nutritional value assessment of a typical Belgian meal, catered or home cooked,
with pork or Quorn
TM as protein source. J. Clean. Prod. [Internet]. 112, 2016; 196–204.
Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959652615012275.
24. Draaisma R.B, Wijffels R.H, Slegers P, Brentner L.B, Roy A, Barbosa M.J, Food
commodities from microalgae. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. [Internet]. 24, 2013; 169–77.
Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S095816691200153X.
25. Poma G, Cuykx M, Amato E, Calaprice C, Focant J.F, Covaci A, Evaluation of hazardous
chemicals in edible insects and insect-based food intended for human consumption. Food
Chem. Toxicol. [Internet]. 100. 2017; 70–9. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/
retrieve/pii/S0278691516304598.
26. Rumpold B.A, Schlüter O.K, Potential and challenges of insects as an innovative source for
food and feed production. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. [Internet]. 17, 2013; 1–11.
Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1466856412001452.
27. Post M.J, Cultured meat from stem cells: challenges and prospects. Meat Sci. [Internet].
Elsevier Ltd; 92, 2012 [cited 2014 Feb 6]; 297–301. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/22543115.
28. Mattick C.S, Landis A.E, Allenby B.R, Genovese N.J, Anticipatory Life Cycle Analysis of In
Vitro Biomass Cultivation for Cultured Meat Production in the United States. Environ. Sci.
Technol. [Internet]. 49, 2015; 11941–9. Available from: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.
est.5b01614.
29. ISO 14044, Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Requirements and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization; 2006.
30. ISO 14040, Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and
Framework. 2006.
31. Jolliet O, Margni M, Charles R, Humbert S, Payet J, Rebitzer G, et al, IMPACT 2002+ : A
New Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methodology. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 8, 2003; 324–30.
32. Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, De Schryver A, Struijs J, van Zelm R. ReCiPe 2008, A LCIA
method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint
level. Characterisation. Updated RIVM report. Bilthoven, Netherlands: RIVM. 2013.
Agri-Food Waste Streams Utilization for Development …
153
Future prospects for food and feed security. FAO Forest. Rome: FAO, United Nations; 2013.
16. Oonincx D.G.A.B, de Boer I.J.M, Environmental impact of the production of mealworms as a
protein source for humans—a life cycle assessment. PLoS One [Internet]. 7, 2012 [cited 2014
Mar 19]; e51145. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?
artid=3526541&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract.
17. Nonhebel S, Raats J, Environmental impact of meat substitutes: comparison between quorn
and pork. Proc. 5th Int. Conf. LCA foods. Gothenburg, Sweden; 2007. p. 73–5.
18. Zhu X, van Ierland E.C, Protein Chains and Environmental Pressures: A Comparison of Pork
and Novel Protein Foods. Environ. Sci. [Internet]. 1, 2004; 254–76. Available from: http://
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15693430412331291652.
19. Nijdam D, Rood T, Westhoek H, The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon
footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes. Food
Policy [Internet]. Elsevier Ltd; 37, 2012 [cited 2013 Aug 9]; 760–70. Available from: http://
linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0306919212000942.
20. Sanders T.A.B, The nutritional adequacy of plant-based diets. Proc. Nutr. Soc. Cambridge
Univ Press; 58, 1999; 265–9.
21. Kumar P, Chatli M.K, Mehta N, Singh P, Malav O.P, Verma A.K, Meat analogues: Health
promising sustainable meat substitutes. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. [Internet]. 57, 2017; 923–
32. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408398.2014.939739.
22. Halloran A, Roos N, Eilenberg J, Cerutti A, Bruun S, Life cycle assessment of edible insects
for food protein: a review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. [Internet]. 36, 2016; 57. Available from:
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13593-016-0392-8.
23. Sturtewagen L, De Soete W, Dewulf J, Lachat C, Lauryssen S, Heirman B, et al, Resource use
profile and nutritional value assessment of a typical Belgian meal, catered or home cooked,
with pork or Quorn
TM as protein source. J. Clean. Prod. [Internet]. 112, 2016; 196–204.
Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959652615012275.
24. Draaisma R.B, Wijffels R.H, Slegers P, Brentner L.B, Roy A, Barbosa M.J, Food
commodities from microalgae. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. [Internet]. 24, 2013; 169–77.
Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S095816691200153X.
25. Poma G, Cuykx M, Amato E, Calaprice C, Focant J.F, Covaci A, Evaluation of hazardous
chemicals in edible insects and insect-based food intended for human consumption. Food
Chem. Toxicol. [Internet]. 100. 2017; 70–9. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/
retrieve/pii/S0278691516304598.
26. Rumpold B.A, Schlüter O.K, Potential and challenges of insects as an innovative source for
food and feed production. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. [Internet]. 17, 2013; 1–11.
Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1466856412001452.
27. Post M.J, Cultured meat from stem cells: challenges and prospects. Meat Sci. [Internet].
Elsevier Ltd; 92, 2012 [cited 2014 Feb 6]; 297–301. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/22543115.
28. Mattick C.S, Landis A.E, Allenby B.R, Genovese N.J, Anticipatory Life Cycle Analysis of In
Vitro Biomass Cultivation for Cultured Meat Production in the United States. Environ. Sci.
Technol. [Internet]. 49, 2015; 11941–9. Available from: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.
est.5b01614.
29. ISO 14044, Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Requirements and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization; 2006.
30. ISO 14040, Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and
Framework. 2006.
31. Jolliet O, Margni M, Charles R, Humbert S, Payet J, Rebitzer G, et al, IMPACT 2002+ : A
New Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methodology. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 8, 2003; 324–30.
32. Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, De Schryver A, Struijs J, van Zelm R. ReCiPe 2008, A LCIA
method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint
level. Characterisation. Updated RIVM report. Bilthoven, Netherlands: RIVM. 2013.
Agri-Food Waste Streams Utilization for Development …
153