IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/areint/401373.html

Environmental impacts of food packaging: a systematic synthesis of LCA evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Koblianska, Inna
  • Lukash, Svitlana
  • Medvid, Viktoriia
  • Maslak, Oleksandr

Abstract

Purpose. This paper aims to systematically review and synthesise existing food packaging Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) research, focusing on applications, methodologies, and results to provide insights and recommendations for researchers, policymakers, and industry stakeholders to enhance the methodological relevance, sustainability, and environmental performance of food packaging solutions. Methodology. This study employed a systematic literature review approach, comprising the following steps: data collection and selection, coding and categorisation of data to comprehensively describe and compare the methodology, and synthesis of the results. The literature search was conducted in the Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and PubMed databases; the study selection was based on defined inclusion and exclusion criteria and followed a multi-stage screening process. The data comprise 88 peer-reviewed English-language journal papers published between 2000 and 2025; results were synthesised through qualitative analysis conducted in the RStudio environment. Results. An increase in LCA studies on food packaging is noted, which is intensifying against the backdrop of stricter regulatory requirements for plastics, packaging, and environmental assessment methods. Most often, such studies are based on data from European countries, with a prevalence of studies on food in general, as well as goods with a short shelf life, which draws attention to the functional aspects of packaging, namely its ability to extend shelf life and minimise waste. Concerning packaging materials, researchers are focusing on the assessment of new and biobased materials, as well as on the comparison of reusable and single-use packaging and recycling options, biomaterials, active, and smart packaging with traditional materials. From a methodological point of view, product-based functional units, packaging assessments using the cradle-to-grave method, and comparative LCAs are typically used. A synthesis of the reviewed cases facilitated the identification of the most common approach for conducting food packaging LCAs. Originality. The typical LCA methodology for food packaging in the European context is based on the application of ISO 14040 (in combination with ISO 14044), ReCiPe, environmental footprint, and product environmental footprint methods, utilising Ecoinvent databases and SimaPro software. An impact assessment based on midpoint indicators is carried out using a combination of 10 indicators, where the most frequent are the following: ozone depletion potential, marine eutrophication, global warming, climate change, freshwater eutrophication, ionising radiation, freshwater ecotoxicity, terrestrial acidification, acidification, and particulate matter formation. It is advisable to use comparative approaches based on the cradle-to-grave method, enabling a comprehensive impact assessment across all life cycle stages, supplemented by sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. Practical implications. The identified variability in assessment methodologies does not ensure the comparability of their results. Recommendations for conducting LCA should be specified in terms of requirements for disclosing information on methodological aspects of research and recommended sets of indicators. When making decisions on food packaging parameters, it is advisable for manufacturers to employ a multi-criteria approach, considering LCA results, functional properties, and economic aspects. At the policy level, decisions on restrictions (or incentives) for the use of certain types of packaging should consider the state of the secondary materials and waste management system, as well as its spatial configuration.

Suggested Citation

  • Koblianska, Inna & Lukash, Svitlana & Medvid, Viktoriia & Maslak, Oleksandr, 2026. "Environmental impacts of food packaging: a systematic synthesis of LCA evidence," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 12(1), March.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:areint:401373
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.401373
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/401373/files/11_Koblianska_article.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.401373?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Pauer & Bernhard Wohner & Victoria Heinrich & Manfred Tacker, 2019. "Assessing the Environmental Sustainability of Food Packaging: An Extended Life Cycle Assessment including Packaging-Related Food Losses and Waste and Circularity Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Marina Stramarkou & Christos Boukouvalas & Sokratis E. Koskinakis & Olga Serifi & Vasilis Bekiris & Christos Tsamis & Magdalini Krokida, 2022. "Life Cycle Assessment and Preliminary Cost Evaluation of a Smart Packaging System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-22, June.
    3. Riccardo Accorsi & Lorenzo Versari & Riccardo Manzini, 2015. "Glass vs. Plastic: Life Cycle Assessment of Extra-Virgin Olive Oil Bottles across Global Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-23, March.
    4. Daniela Summa & Elena Tamisari & Mattia Lanzoni & Giuseppe Castaldelli & Elena Tamburini, 2025. "How Reducing Fossil-Based Plastic Use Can Help the Overall Sustainability of Oyster Farming: The Case of the Gulf of La Spezia," Resources, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-21, January.
    5. Accorsi, Riccardo & Cascini, Alessandro & Cholette, Susan & Manzini, Riccardo & Mora, Cristina, 2014. "Economic and environmental assessment of reusable plastic containers: A food catering supply chain case study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 88-101.
    6. Miguel Vigil & Maria Pedrosa-Laza & JV Alvarez Cabal & Francisco Ortega-Fernández, 2020. "Sustainability Analysis of Active Packaging for the Fresh Cut Vegetable Industry by Means of Attributional & Consequential Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christina Tsouti & Christina Papadaskalopoulou & Angeliki Konsta & Panagiotis Andrikopoulos & Margarita Panagiotopoulou & Sofia Papadaki & Christos Boukouvalas & Magdalini Krokida & Katerina Valta, 2023. "Investigating the Environmental Benefits of Novel Films for the Packaging of Fresh Tomatoes Enriched with Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Compounds through Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-22, May.
    2. Diana Reinales & David Zambrana-Vasquez & Aitana Saez-De-Guinoa, 2020. "Social Life Cycle Assessment of Product Value Chains Under a Circular Economy Approach: A Case Study in the Plastic Packaging Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-17, August.
    3. Beatrice Salieri & Natasha Stoudmann & Roland Hischier & Claudia Som & Bernd Nowack, 2021. "How Relevant Are Direct Emissions of Microplastics into Freshwater from an LCA Perspective?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-16, September.
    4. Monia Niero & Charlotte L. Jensen & Chiara Farné Fratini & Jens Dorland & Michael S. Jørgensen & Susse Georg, 2021. "Is life cycle assessment enough to address unintended side effects from Circular Economy initiatives?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(5), pages 1111-1120, October.
    5. Sarah Verdonk & Keri Chiveralls & Drew Dawson, 2017. "Getting Wasted at WOMADelaide: The Effect of Signage on Waste Disposal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, February.
    6. Samadhi Hemachandra & Simone Pettigrew, 2025. "Sustainability Implications of Changes in Types and Variability of Yoghurt Packaging Solutions over a Decade," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-12, September.
    7. Roberto Petrucci & Gabriele Menegaldo & Lucia Rocchi & Luisa Paolotti & Antonio Boggia & Debora Puglia, 2025. "Olive Oil Wastewater Revalorization into a High-Added Value Product: A Biofertilizer Assessment Combining LCA and MCI," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-26, July.
    8. Gonzalo Wandosell & María C. Parra-Meroño & Alfredo Alcayde & Raúl Baños, 2021. "Green Packaging from Consumer and Business Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Álvaro J. Arnal & Patricia Royo & Gianpiero Pataro & Giovanna Ferrari & Víctor J. Ferreira & Ana M. López-Sabirón & Germán A. Ferreira, 2018. "Implementation of PEF Treatment at Real-Scale Tomatoes Processing Considering LCA Methodology as an Innovation Strategy in the Agri-Food Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Mark Anthony Camilleri, 2021. "Sustainable Production and Consumption of Food. Mise-en-Place Circular Economy Policies and Waste Management Practices in Tourism Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-13, September.
    11. Yue, Ruiting & Xu, Xianhao & Li, Zhiwen & Bai, Qingguo, 2024. "Reusable packaging adoption in e-commerce markets with green consumers: An evolutionary game analysis," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    12. Żaneta Muranko & Catriona Tassell & Anouk Zeeuw van der Laan & Marco Aurisicchio, 2021. "Characterisation and Environmental Value Proposition of Reuse Models for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods: Reusable Packaging and Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-35, March.
    13. Camilla Tua & Laura Biganzoli & Mario Grosso & Lucia Rigamonti, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of Reusable Plastic Crates (RPCs)," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-15, June.
    14. Graham, Stephanie & Graham, Byron & Holt, Diane, 2018. "The relationship between downstream environmental logistics practices and performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 356-365.
    15. Anuj Mittal & Caroline C. Krejci & Teri J. Craven, 2018. "Logistics Best Practices for Regional Food Systems: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-44, January.
    16. Berill Takacs & Aiduan Borrion, 2020. "The Use of Life Cycle-Based Approaches in the Food Service Sector to Improve Sustainability: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-31, April.
    17. Vincenzo Basile & Nunzia Petacca & Roberto Vona, 2024. "Measuring Circularity in Life Cycle Management: A Literature Review," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 25(3), pages 419-443, September.
    18. Agnieszka Nowaczek & Ewa Dziobek & Joanna Kulczycka, 2023. "Benefits and Limitations of Indicators for Monitoring the Transformation towards a Circular Economy in Poland," Resources, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, February.
    19. Sebastjan Škerlič & Robert Muha, 2020. "A Model for Managing Packaging in the Product Life Cycle in the Automotive Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-19, November.
    20. Clement, Lucas & Spinler, Stefan, 2025. "Advancing sustainability in e-commerce packaging: A simulation-based study for managing returnable transport items," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:areint:401373. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://are-journal.com/are .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.