Packaging which results in improved sustainability
Molded pulp uses recyclednewsprint to form package components. Here, researchers are molding packaging fromstraw[1]
Sustainable packaging ispackaging materials and methods that result in improvedsustainability.[2] This involves increased use of life cycle inventory (LCI) andlife cycle assessment (LCA)[3][4] to help guide the use of packaging which reduces theenvironmental impact andecological footprint. It includes a look at the whole of thesupply chain: from basic function, to marketing, and then through to end of life (LCA) and rebirth.[5] Additionally, an eco-cost to value ratio can be useful[6] The goals are to improve the long term viability andquality of life forhumans and the longevity of natural ecosystems. Sustainable packaging must meet the functional and economic needs of the present without compromising the ability offuture generations to meet their own needs.[7] Sustainability is not necessarily an end state but is a continuing process of improvement.[8]
Sustainable packaging is a relatively new addition to the environmental considerations for packaging (seePackaging and labeling). It requires more analysis and documentation to look at the package design, choice of materials, processing, and life-cycle. This is not just the vague "green movement" that many businesses and companies have been trying to include over the past years. Companies implementing eco-friendly actions are reducing theircarbon footprint, using more recycled materials and reusing more package components.[9]Extended producer responsibility indicates that packagers , product producers, and distributors have a full range of responsibility.
Environmental marketing claims on packages need to be made (and read) with caution. Ambiguousgreenwashing titles such asgreen packaging andenvironmentally friendly can be confusing without specific definition. Some regulators, such as the US Federal Trade Commission, are providing guidance to packagers[10]
Companies have long been reusing and recycling packaging when economically viable. Using minimal packaging has also been a common goal to help reduce costs. Recent years have accelerated these efforts based on social movements, consumer pressure, and regulation. All phases of packaging, distribution, and logistics are included.[11]
Sustainable packaging encompasses more than just recycling, addressing a broader range of environmental impacts across the product lifecycle. Just as packaging is not the only eco target, although it is still top of mind for many. Right or wrong, the packaging is frequently scrutinized and used as the measure of a company's overall sustainability, even though it may contribute only a small percentage to the total eco-impact compared to other things, such as transportation, and water and energy use.
Impacts of packaging originate from three main stages including feedstock sourcing, production of polymers and packaging, and the end of life treatment of the packaging. Emissions from each stage contribute toclimate change, air pollution,acidification, and other environmental issues. Food waste is another prominent issue as one third of food meant for human consumption is lost. Sustainable packaging aims to address properties of food, for example chemical and microbiological properties, in order to limit packaging and food waste.[12]
The criteria for ranking and comparing packaging based on their sustainability are an active area of development. General guidance, metrics, checklists, and scorecards are being published by several groups.
Use of minimal materials – reduced packaging, reduced layers of packaging, lower mass (product to packaging ratio), lower volume, etc.[20]
Energy efficiency, total energy content and usage, use ofrenewable energy, use of clean energy, etc.
Recycled content – as available and functional. Forfood contact materials, there are special safety considerations, particularly for use of recycled plastics and paper. Regulations are published by each country or region.[21][22]
Recyclability – recovery value, use of materials which are frequently and easilyrecycled, reduction of materials which hinder recyclability of major components, etc.
Worker impact: occupational health, safety,clean technology, etc.
The chosen criteria are often used best as a basis of comparison for two or more similar packaging designs; not as an absolute success or failure.[26] Such a multi-variable comparison is often presented as aradar chart (spider chart, star chart, etc.).[27]
Some aspects of environmentally sound packaging are required by regulators while others are decisions made by individual packagers. Investors, employees, management, and customers can influence corporate decisions and help set policies. When investors seek to purchase stock, companies known for their positive environmental policy can be attractive.[28] Potential stockholders and investors see this as a solid decision: lower environmental risks lead to more capital at cheaper rates. Companies that highlight their environmental status to consumers can boost sales as well as product reputation. Going green is often a sound investment that can pay off.[29]
Alongside the environmental benefits of adopting sustainable packaging, eco-friendly packaging can increase sales, reduce packaging cost, and increase the image of a company's brand alongside the rising awareness spread regarding environmental impact. There has also been found a direct correlation between a company's implementation of sustainable packaging and a more sustainable supply chain management.[30] Alternatives such as bio-based plastics that are abundant, low cost, and biodegradable, offer a possibility of reducing use of petroleum resources and carbon dioxide emissions.[31]
Bio-based materials have been developed or used for packaging without plastics, especially for use-cases in which packaging can't be phased-out, such as for food preservation.[32]
A plant proteins-basedbiodegradable packaging alternative to plastic was developed based on research aboutspider silk which is known for its high strength and similar on the molecular level.[33][34]
Researchers at theAgricultural Research Service are looking into using dairy-based films as an alternative to petroleum-based packaging. Instead of being made ofsynthetic polymers, these dairy-based films would be composed of proteins such ascasein andwhey, which are found in milk. The films would bebiodegradable and offer better oxygen barriers than synthetic, chemical-based films. More research must be done to improve the water barrier quality of the dairy-based film, but advances in sustainable packaging are actively being pursued.[35]
Sustainable packaging policy cannot be individualized by a specific product. Effective legislation would need to include alternatives to many products, not just a select few; otherwise, the positive impacts of sustainable packing will not be as effective as they need in order to propel a significant reduction of plastic packaging. Finding alternatives can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from unsustainable packaging production and reduce dangerous chemical by-products of unsustainable packaging practices.[36]
The process of engineering more environmentally acceptable packages can include consideration of the costs.[37] Some companies claim that their environmental packaging program is cost effective.[38] Some alternative materials that are recycled/recyclable and/or less damaging to the environment can lead to companies incurring increased costs. Though this is common when any product begins to carry the true cost of its production (producer pays, producer responsibility laws, take-back laws). There may be an expensive and lengthy process before the new forms of packaging are deemed safe to the public, and approval may take up to two years.[39] It is important to note here, that for most of the developed world, tightening legislation, and changes in major retailer demand (Walmart's Sustainable Packaging Scorecard for example) the question is no longer "if" products and packaging should become more sustainable, but how-to and how-soon to do it.[5]
Efforts toward "greener" packaging are supported in the sustainability community; however, these are often viewed only as incremental steps and not as an end. Some people foresee a true sustainablesteady state economy that may be very different from today's: greatly reduced energy usage, minimalecological footprint, fewerconsumer packaged goods,local purchasing withshort food supply chains, littleprocessed foods, etc.[41][42][43] Less packaging would be needed in a sustainablecarbon neutral economy, which means that fewer packaging options would exist and simpler packaging forms may be necessary.[44]
^Zabaniotou, A; Kassidi (August 2003). "Life cycle assessment applied to egg packaging made from polystyrene and recycled paper".Journal of Cleaner Production.11 (5):549–559.doi:10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00076-8.
^Fecourt, Adrien; Li, F. (2013),"Report No. E2013:015"(PDF),Improving transport packaging sustainability – a case study in a production logistics company, Gothenburg, Sweden: CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, Department of Technology Management and Economics, retrieved28 February 2014
^Mendes, Ana C.; Pedersen, Gitte Alsing (June 2021). "Perspectives on sustainable food packaging:– is bio-based plastics a solution?".Trends in Food Science & Technology.112:839–846.doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2021.03.049.ISSN0924-2244.S2CID234870300.
^Kunstler, James Howard (2012).Too Much Magic; Wishful Thinking, Technology, and the Fate of the Nation. Atlantic Monthly Press.ISBN978-0-8021-9438-1.
^McKibben, D, ed. (2010).The Post Carbon Reader: Managing the 21st Century Sustainability Crisis. Watershed Media.ISBN978-0-9709500-6-2.
^Brown, L. R. (2012).World on the Edge. Earth Policy Institute. Norton.ISBN978-1-136-54075-2.
^Speigleman, H, and Sheehan, B. (2010). "Climate Change, Peak Oil, and the End of Waste". In McKibben, D (ed.).The Post Carbon Reader: Managing the 21st Century Sustainability Crisis. Watershed Media.ISBN978-0-9709500-6-2.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
