IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v28y2024i6p1493-1506.html

Environmental analysis of returnable packaging systems in different eCommerce business and packaging management models

Author

Listed:
  • Jonghun Park
  • Zuha Waqar
  • William Ralph Snyder

Abstract

There is growing environmental concern regarding the increasing quantity of packages in retail eCommerce. This study investigated the environmental impact of two returnable packaging formats, performing life cycle assessment (LCA) case studies based on the Canadian apparel eCommerce market. In case study 1, the brand owner sold and shipped its products to final consumers using an expendable mailer and a returnable mailer that was managed and supplied via the centralized model. In case study 2, the brand owner rented its products to final consumers and shipped them using an expendable corrugated paperboard box and a returnable box that was managed and supplied via the decentralized model. Comparative, contribution, and sensitivity analyses were conducted to analyze and compare the environmental performance of these packaging options. For case study 1, the LCA revealed that the returnable mailer had greater impact than the expandable mailer in 9 of the 10 environmental impact categories, even if the returnable mailer was reused for 40 cycles and the final consumer was in the same city as the brand owner; this was primarily due to the length of transportation. For case study 2, the returnable box had smaller environmental impact than the expendable corrugated paperboard box in 6 of the 10 environmental impact categories, even though the brand owner shipped packages to final consumers a cumulative distance of 9000 km from its starting location. The overall results imply that the environmental burden of returnable packaging is primarily affected by total trip distance and the number of reuses.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonghun Park & Zuha Waqar & William Ralph Snyder, 2024. "Environmental analysis of returnable packaging systems in different eCommerce business and packaging management models," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 28(6), pages 1493-1506, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:28:y:2024:i:6:p:1493-1506
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.13537
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13537
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.13537?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. 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.
    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. Priyadarshi Roy Chowdhury & Himani Medhi & Krishna G. Bhattacharyya & Chaudhery Mustansar Hussain, 2023. "Impacts of emerging and novel plastic waste variants on marine and coastal ecosystems: Challenges and implications on the circular economy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(5), September.
    2. Irmeline Sadeleer & Kari-Anne Lyng, 2022. "A Life Cycle Assessment on Single-Use and Reuse Beer Cups at Festivals," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 1517-1539, December.
    3. Pınar Gürol, 2025. "An ESG-Integrated Decision Framework for Reusable Plastic Container Pooling Supplier Selection in the Sharing Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-37, September.
    4. H. Logan & T. F. Astrup & A. Damgaard, 2024. "Additive inclusion in plastic life cycle assessments part I: Review of mechanical recycling studies," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 28(6), pages 1582-1597, December.

    More about this item

    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:bla:inecol:v:28:y:2024:i:6:p:1493-1506. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    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.