Integrative review reveals major gaps between biomass availability, technology readiness, and high-value applications in banana waste valorization, highlighting barriers to commercial scaling.
This integrative review, conducted following PRISMA 2020 systematic search and selection reporting guidelines, analyzes the scientific literature published between 2005 and 2025 on banana residual biomass valorization to map research trends, assess Technological Readiness Level (TRL), and identify critical gaps for circular bioeconomy implementation. Based on 73 articles indexed in Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink, a structured dataset was built that systematically coded: (i) the residual structure (peel, pseudostem, leaves, flowers, corm, bunch), as documented in Supplementary Table S1, (ii) the valorization technology, (iii) application sector, and (iv) TRL. The findings reveal critical asymmetries across three dimensions. First, research concentration on peel (49.3%, n = 36, ~ 10–12% of biomass) contrasts with pseudostem (24.7%, n = 18, ~ 70–75% of biomass), revealing a fundamental mismatch between scientific priorities and biomass availability. Structures like corm (1.4%) and flowers (2.7%) remain marginally explored. Second, a technology transition barrier termed the "Valley of Death" is identified between laboratory phases (TRL < 6) and pilot/industrial scale (TRL ≥ 6), where 80.8% of technologies remain at laboratory scale despite demonstrated technical feasibility. High-value-added extraction and chemical processing routes remain predominantly at TRL 3, while biological conversion and materials/packaging pathways show broader maturity. Third, sectoral concentration in traditional applications (materials/packaging: 27.4% (n = 20), energy/bioenergy: 27.4% (n = 20), and water treatment: 12.3% (n = 9)) contrasts with underrepresentation in high-value sectors (pharmaceutical: 6.8% (n = 5), food: 8.2% (n = 6)). These gaps reflect systematic barriers including academia-industry disconnection and lack of pilot infrastructure in producing countries. The systematic quantification of these asymmetries provides an evidence-based foundation for prioritizing research investments and policy interventions to advance circular bioeconomy transitions in banana-producing regions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gaviria-Chaverra et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: