Cereal and Confectionary Packaging: Assessment of Sustainability and Environmental Impact with a Special Focus on Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Contextualize packaging and sustainability as well as sustainability assessment methods;
- Display and discuss how and to what extent food packaging is included in existing life cycle assessments (LCAs) in the cereals and confectionary sector;
- Point out the environmental impact of cereal and confectionary packaging in relation to the food product with a special focus on GHG emissions;
- Highlight improvement strategies to optimize (cereal and confectionary) packaging systems as well as LCA of the same.
2. Packaging and Sustainability
2.1. Sustainable Packaging
2.1.1. Definition
2.1.2. Development
2.1.3. Challenges
2.2. Life Cycle Assessment
3. Sustainability of Cereal and Confectionary Packaging
3.1. Literature Analysis
3.2. Results
3.2.1. Goal and Scope
Focus
Aim
Functional Unit
System/Scope
3.2.2. Life Cycle Inventory
Packaging
Packaging End-of-Life
Data Quality
3.2.3. Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Impact Assessment Method and Impact Categories Used
Sensitivity/Scenario Analysis
3.2.4. Interpretation
Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Significance of the Results
4. Improvement Strategies
4.1. Packaging
4.2. Life Cycle Assessment
4.3. Management
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bauer, A.-S.; Leppik, K.; Galić, K.; Anestopoulos, I.; Panayiotidis, M.I.; Agriopoulou, S.; Milousi, M.; Uysal-Unalan, I.; Varzakas, T.; Krauter, V. Cereal and Confectionary Packaging: Background, Application and Shelf-Life Extension. Foods 2022, 11, 697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Crippa, M.; Solazzo, E.; Guizzardi, D.; Monforti-Ferrario, F.; Tubiello, F.N.; Leip, A. Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 198–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Poore, J.; Nemecek, T. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science 2018, 360, 987–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vermeulen, S.J.; Campbell, B.M.; Ingram, J.S. Climate Change and Food Systems. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2012, 37, 195–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jungbluth, N.; Tietje, O.; Scholz, R.W. Food purchases: Impacts from the consumers’ point of view investigated with a modular LCA. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2000, 5, 134–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verghese, K.; Crossin, E.; Clune, S.; Lockrey, S.; Williams, H.; Rio, M.; Wikström, F. The greenhouse gas profile of a “Hungry Planet”; quantifying the impacts of the weekly food purchases including associated packaging and food waste of three families. In Proceedings of the 19th IAPRI World Conference on Packaging, Melbourne, Australia, 15–18 June 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Heller, M.C.; Selke, S.E.M.; Keoleian, G.A. Mapping the Influence of Food Waste in Food Packaging Environmental Performance Assessments. J. Ind. Ecol. 2019, 23, 480–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Olsson, A.; Hellström, D. (Eds.) Managing Packaging Design for Sustainable Development: A Compass for Strategic Directions; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK; Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2017; ISBN 9781119151036. [Google Scholar]
- Licciardello, F. Packaging, blessing in disguise. Review on its diverse contribution to food sustainability. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 65, 32–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wikström, F.; Williams, H. Potential environmental gains from reducing food losses through development of new packaging-a life-cycle model. Packag. Technol. Sci. 2010, 23, 403–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, H.; Wikström, F. Environmental impact of packaging and food losses in a life cycle perspective: A comparative analysis of five food items. J. Clean. Prod. 2011, 19, 43–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wikström, F.; Williams, H.; Venkatesh, G. The influence of packaging attributes on recycling and food waste behaviour–An environmental comparison of two packaging alternatives. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 137, 895–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wikström, F.; Williams, H.; Verghese, K.; Clune, S. The influence of packaging attributes on consumer behaviour in food-packaging life cycle assessment studies-a neglected topic. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 73, 100–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hopewell, J.; Dvorak, R.; Kosior, E. Plastics recycling: Challenges and opportunities. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2009, 364, 2115–2126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: The European Green Deal, Brussels. 2019. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:b828d165-1c22-11ea-8c1f-01aa75ed71a1.0002.02/DOC_1&format=PDF (accessed on 2 February 2022).
- European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A Farm to Fork Strategy for a Fair, Healthy and Environmentally-Friendly Food System, Brussels. 2020. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0381 (accessed on 2 February 2022).
- United Nations. Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015: Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E (accessed on 2 February 2022).
- Clune, S.; Crossin, E.; Verghese, K. Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 766–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- HLPE. Food Losses and Waste in the Context of Sustainable Food Systems: A Report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security, Rome. 2014. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/i3901e/i3901e.pdf (accessed on 2 February 2022).
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Global Food Losses and Food Waste: Extent, Causes and Prevention. Study Conducted for the International Congress SAVE FOOD! At Interpack2011 Düsseldorf, Germany, Rome. 2011. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/mb060e/mb060e.pdf (accessed on 2 February 2022).
- Notarnicola, B.; Tassielli, G.; Renzulli, P.A.; Castellani, V.; Sala, S. Environmental impacts of food consumption in Europe. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 753–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garnett, T. Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? Food Policy 2011, 36, S23–S32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caobisco. Facts and Figures: Key Data of the European Sector (EU27 + Switzerland and Norway). Available online: https://caobisco.eu/facts/ (accessed on 17 January 2022).
- EUROSTAT. EU Production of Chocolate. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/ddn-20200831-1 (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- EUROSTAT. Main Producers of Chocolate in the EU. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/products-eurostat-news/-/edn-20190417-1 (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- Miah, J.H.; Griffiths, A.; McNeill, R.; Halvorson, S.; Schenker, U.; Espinoza-Orias, N.D.; Morse, S.; Yang, A.; Sadhukhan, J. Environmental management of confectionery products: Life cycle impacts and improvement strategies. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 177, 732–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeswani, H.K.; Burkinshaw, R.; Azapagic, A. Environmental sustainability issues in the food–energy–water nexus: Breakfast cereals and snacks. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2015, 2, 17–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Konstantas, A.; Jeswani, H.K.; Stamford, L.; Azapagic, A. Environmental impacts of chocolate production and consumption in the UK. Food Res. Int. 2018, 106, 1012–1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Konstantas, A.; Stamford, L.; Azapagic, A. Evaluating the environmental sustainability of cakes. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2019, 19, 169–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Konstantas, A.; Stamford, L.; Azapagic, A. Evaluation of environmental sustainability of biscuits at the product and sectoral levels. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 230, 1217–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Noya, L.I.; Vasilaki, V.; Stojceska, V.; González-García, S.; Kleynhans, C.; Tassou, S.; Moreira, M.T.; Katsou, E. An environmental evaluation of food supply chain using life cycle assessment: A case study on gluten free biscuit products. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 170, 451–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Recanati, F.; Marveggio, D.; Dotelli, G. From beans to bar: A life cycle assessment towards sustainable chocolate supply chain. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 613–614, 1013–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zeng, T.; Durif, F. The Impact of Eco-Design Packaging on Food Waste Avoidance: A Conceptual Framework. J. Promot. Manag. 2020, 26, 768–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pauer, E.; Wohner, B.; Heinrich, V.; Tacker, M. Assessing the Environmental Sustainability of Food Packaging: An Extended Life Cycle Assessment including Packaging-Related Food Losses and Waste and Circularity Assessment. Sustainability 2019, 11, 925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on Packaging and Packaging Waste; European Council: Brussels, Belgium, 1994.
- Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on Waste and Repealing Certain Directives (Text with EEA Relevance); European Council: Brussels, Belgium, 2008.
- Walmart. Sustainable Packaging Playbook: A Guidebook for Suppliers to Improve Packaging Sustainability. Available online: https://s4rbimagestore.blob.core.windows.net/images/rightnow/walmartsustainability.custhelp.com/for_answers/packagingplaybook.pdf (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- Australian Packaging Covenant Organization. Sustainable Packaging Guidelines. 2021. Available online: https://documents.packagingcovenant.org.au/public-documents/Principles%20of%20the%20SPGs%20-%20Content%20For%20Translation (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- GS1 Austria GmbH; ECR Austria; FH Campus Wien; Circular Analytics TK GmbH. Packaging Design for Recycling: A Global Recommendation for ‘Circular Packaging Design’. Available online: https://www.ecr-community.org/global-recyclable-packaging-guide/ (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- The Consumer Goods Forum. Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0. 2011. Available online: https://www.theconsumergoodsforum.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/CGF-Global-Protocol-on-Packaging.pdf (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- FH Campus Wien; Circular Analytics TK GmbH. Circular Packaging Design Guideline: Empfehlungen für die Gestaltung Recyclinggerechter Verpackungen, Vienna. 2021. Available online: https://www.fh-campuswien.ac.at/fileadmin/redakteure/Forschung/FH-Campus-Wien_Circular-Packaging-Design-Guideline_V04_DE.pdf (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- Sustainable Packaging Alliance. Sustainable Packaging Alliance. Available online: https://www.sustainablepack.org/ (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- Verghese, K.; Lewis, H.; Fitzpatrick, L. (Eds.) Packaging for Sustainability; Springer: London, UK, 2012; ISBN 9780857299871. [Google Scholar]
- Sustainable Packaging Coalition. Definition of Sustainable Packaging. 2011. Available online: https://sustainablepackaging.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Definition-of-Sustainable-Packaging.pdf (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- Lewis, H.; Sonneveld, K.; Fitzpatrick, L.; Nicol, R. Towards Sustainable Packaging: Discussion Paper. 2002. Available online: http://www.sustainablepack.org/database/files/filestorage/Towards%20Sustainable%20 (accessed on 14 May 2009).
- Robertson, G.L. Food Packaging: Principles and Practice, 3rd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2013; ISBN 9781439862414. [Google Scholar]
- Singh, P.; Wani, A.A.; Langowski, H.-C. (Eds.) Food Packaging Materials: Testing & Quality Assurance; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis Group: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2017; ISBN 9781466559943. [Google Scholar]
- Soroka, W. Fundamentals of Packaging Technology, 5th ed.; Institute of Packaging Professional: Herndon, VA, USA, 2014; ISBN 0615709346. [Google Scholar]
- Lewis, H.; Fitzpatrick, L.; Verghese, K.; Sonneveld, K.; Jordon, R. Sustainable Packaging Redefined: DRAFT. 2007. Available online: http://www.helenlewisresearch.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Sustainable-Packaging-Redefined-Nov-2007.pdf (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- Bauer, A.-S.; Tacker, M.; Uysal-Unalan, I.; Cruz, R.M.S.; Varzakas, T.; Krauter, V. Recyclability and Redesign Challenges in Multilayer Flexible Food Packaging-A Review. Foods 2021, 10, 2702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ISO. 21067:2007(en); Packaging—Vocabulary. Available online: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:21067:ed-1:v1:en (accessed on 2 February 2022).
- Wikström, F.; Verghese, K.; Auras, R.; Olsson, A.; Williams, H.; Wever, R.; Grönman, K.; Kvalvåg Pettersen, M.; Møller, H.; Soukka, R. Packaging Strategies That Save Food: A Research Agenda for 2030. J. Ind. Ecol. 2019, 23, 532–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiménez-Guerrero, J.F.; Gázquez-Abad, J.C.; Ceballos-Santamaría, G. Innovation in eco-packaging in private labels. Innovation 2015, 17, 81–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wandosell, G.; Parra-Meroño, M.C.; Alcayde, A.; Baños, R. Green Packaging from Consumer and Business Perspectives. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindh, H.; Olsson, A.; Williams, H. Consumer Perceptions of Food Packaging: Contributing to or Counteracting Environmentally Sustainable Development? Packag. Technol. Sci. 2016, 29, 3–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Herbes, C.; Beuthner, C.; Ramme, I. Consumer attitudes towards biobased packaging–A cross-cultural comparative study. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 194, 203–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woodward, D.G. Life cycle costing—Theory, information acquisition and application. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 1997, 15, 335–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laso, J.; García-Herrero, I.; Margallo, M.; Vázquez-Rowe, I.; Fullana, P.; Bala, A.; Gazulla, C.; Irabien, Á.; Aldaco, R. Finding an economic and environmental balance in value chains based on circular economy thinking: An eco-efficiency methodology applied to the fish canning industry. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 133, 428–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunkeler, D.; Lichtenvort, K.; Rebitzer, G. Environmental Life Cycle Costing, 1st ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2008; ISBN 9780429140440. [Google Scholar]
- Konstantas, A.; Stamford, L.; Azapagic, A. Economic sustainability of food supply chains: Life cycle costs and value added in the confectionary and frozen desserts sectors. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 670, 902–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Martinez-Sanchez, V.; Tonini, D.; Møller, F.; Astrup, T.F. Life-Cycle Costing of Food Waste Management in Denmark: Importance of Indirect Effects. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 4513–4523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Jørgensen, A.; Le Bocq, A.; Nazarkina, L.; Hauschild, M. Methodologies for social life cycle assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2008, 13, 96–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vinyes, E.; Oliver-Solà, J.; Ugaya, C.; Rieradevall, J.; Gasol, C.M. Application of LCSA to used cooking oil waste management. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2013, 18, 445–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benoît, C.; Norris, G.A.; Valdivia, S.; Ciroth, A.; Moberg, A.; Bos, U.; Prakash, S.; Ugaya, C.; Beck, T. The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: Just in time! Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2010, 15, 156–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chhipi-Shrestha, G.K.; Hewage, K.; Sadiq, R. ‘Socializing’ sustainability: A critical review on current development status of social life cycle impact assessment method. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2015, 17, 579–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ISO. 14040:2006. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- ISO. 14044:2006. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/38498.html (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- European Commission. Single Market for Green Products-The Product Environmental Footprint Pilots-Environment-European Commission. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/ef_pilots.htm (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- Klöpffer, W.; Grahl, B. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): A Guide to Best Practice; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany, 2014; ISBN 1306550475. [Google Scholar]
- Pauer, E.; Heinrich, V.; Tacker, M. Methods for the Assessment of Environmental Sustainability of Packaging: A review. IJRDO-J. Agric. Res. 2018, 3, 33–62. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Environment Programme. Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products and Organizations. 2020. Available online: https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Guidelines-for-Social-Life-Cycle-Assessment-of-Products-and-Organizations-2020-22.1.21sml.pdf (accessed on 9 February 2022).
- Ramos Huarachi, D.A.; Piekarski, C.M.; Puglieri, F.N.; de Francisco, A.C. Past and future of Social Life Cycle Assessment: Historical evolution and research trends. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 264, 121506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Koeijer, B.; de Lange, J.; Wever, R. Desired, Perceived, and Achieved Sustainability: Trade-Offs in Strategic and Operational Packaging Development. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Magnier, L.; Crié, D. Communicating packaging eco-friendliness. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 2015, 43, 350–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steenis, N.D.; van Herpen, E.; van der Lans, I.A.; Ligthart, T.N.; van Trijp, H.C. Consumer response to packaging design: The role of packaging materials and graphics in sustainability perceptions and product evaluations. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 162, 286–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steenis, N.D.; van der Lans, I.A.; van Herpen, E.; van Trijp, H.C. Effects of sustainable design strategies on consumer preferences for redesigned packaging. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 205, 854–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Magnier, L.; Schoormans, J.; Mugge, R. Judging a product by its cover: Packaging sustainability and perceptions of quality in food products. Food Qual. Prefer. 2016, 53, 132–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herbes, C.; Beuthner, C.; Ramme, I. How green is your packaging—A comparative international study of cues consumers use to recognize environmentally friendly packaging. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2020, 44, 258–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taufik, D.; Reinders, M.J.; Molenveld, K.; Onwezen, M.C. The paradox between the environmental appeal of bio-based plastic packaging for consumers and their disposal behaviour. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 705, 135820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, A.T.; Parker, L.; Brennan, L.; Lockrey, S. A consumer definition of eco-friendly packaging. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 252, 119792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Magnier, L.; Mugge, R.; Schoormans, J. Turning ocean garbage into products–Consumers’ evaluations of products made of recycled ocean plastic. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 215, 84–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ketelsen, M.; Janssen, M.; Hamm, U. Consumers’ response to environmentally-friendly food packaging-A systematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 254, 120123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Magnier, L.; Schoormans, J. Consumer reactions to sustainable packaging: The interplay of visual appearance, verbal claim and environmental concern. J. Environ. Psychol. 2015, 44, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunt, R.G.; Franklin, W.E. LCA—How it came about. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 1996, 1, 4–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guinée, J.B.; Lindeijer, E. (Eds.) Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment: Operational Guide to the ISO Standards; Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2002; ISBN 978-1-4020-0557-2. [Google Scholar]
- Hunt, R.G.; Sellers, J.D.; Franklin, W.E. Resource and environmental profile analysis: A life cycle environmental assessment for products and procedures. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 1992, 12, 245–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunt, R.G.; Franklin, W.E.; Welch, R.O.; Cross, J.A.; Woodall, A.E. Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis of Nine Beverage Container Alternatives; EPA/530/SW-91c 1974; United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), Office of Solid Waste Management Programs: Atlanta, GA, USA, 1974. [Google Scholar]
- Detzel, A.; Mönckert, J. Environmental evaluation of aluminium cans for beverages in the German context. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2009, 14, 70–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gasol, C.M.; Farreny, R.; Gabarrell, X.; Rieradevall, J. Life cycle assessment comparison among different reuse intensities for industrial wooden containers. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2008, 13, 421–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belboom, S.; Renzoni, R.; Verjans, B.; Léonard, A.; Germain, A. A life cycle assessment of injectable drug primary packaging: Comparing the traditional process in glass vials with the closed vial technology (polymer vials). Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2011, 16, 159–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ustun Odabasi, S.; Buyukgungor, H. Comparison of Life Cycle Assessment of PET Bottle and Glass Bottle. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314100348_Comparison_of_Life_Cycle_Assessment_of_PET_Bottle_and_Glass_Bottle (accessed on 12 April 2022).
- Shi, S.; Yin, J. Global research on carbon footprint: A scientometric review. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2021, 89, 106571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Von Falkenstein, E.; Wellenreuther, F.; Detzel, A. LCA studies comparing beverage cartons and alternative packaging: Can overall conclusions be drawn? Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2010, 15, 938–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ayres, R.U. Life cycle analysis: A critique. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 1995, 14, 199–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verghese, K.L.; Horne, R.; Carre, A. PIQET: The design and development of an online ‘streamlined’ LCA tool for sustainable packaging design decision support. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2010, 15, 608–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dorn, C.; Behrend, R.; Giannopoulos, D.; Napolano, L.; James, V.; Herrmann, A.; Uhlig, V.; Krause, H.; Founti, M.; Trimis, D. A Systematic LCA-enhanced KPI Evaluation towards Sustainable Manufacturing in Industrial Decision-making Processes. A Case Study in Glass and Ceramic Frits Production. Procedia CIRP 2016, 48, 158–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schonert, M.; Motz, G.; Meckel, H.; Detzel, A.; Giegrich, J.; Ostermayr, A.; Schorb, A.; Schmitz, S. Ökobilanz für Getränkeverpackungen II/Phase 2: Berichtsnummer UBA-FB 000363. 2002. Available online: https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/publikation/long/2180.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- Detzel, A.; Kauertz, B.; Grahl, B.; Heinisch, J. Prüfung und Aktualisierung der Ökobilanzen für Getränkeverpackungen. 2016. Available online: https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/pruefung-aktualisierung-der-oekobilanzen-fuer (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- Säynäjoki, A.; Heinonen, J.; Junnila, S.; Horvath, A. Can life-cycle assessment produce reliable policy guidelines in the building sector? Environ. Res. Lett. 2017, 12, 13001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sonneveld, K. The role of life cycle assessment as a decision support tool for packaging. Packag. Technol. Sci. 2000, 13, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fullana i Palmer, P.; Puig, R.; Bala, A.; Baquero, G.; Riba, J.; Raugei, M. From Life Cycle Assessment to Life Cycle Management. J. Ind. Ecol. 2011, 15, 458–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manfredi, S.; Allacker, K.; Pelletier, N.; Chomkhamsri, K.; de Souza, D.M. Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/pdf/footprint/PEF%20methodology%20final%20draft.pdf (accessed on 12 April 2022).
- Lehmann, A.; Bach, V.; Finkbeiner, M. Product environmental footprint in policy and market decisions: Applicability and impact assessment. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. 2015, 11, 417–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Weidema, B.; Wenzel, H.; Peterson, C.; Hansen, K. The Product, Functional Unit and Reference Flows in LCA: Environmental News No. 70. 2004. Available online: https://lca-center.dk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/The-product-functional-unit-and-reference-flows-in-LCA.pdf (accessed on 25 March 2022).
- European Commission-Joint Research Centre-Institute for Environment and Sustainability: International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook-General Guide for Life Cycle Assessment-Detailed Guidance, Luxembourg. 2010. Available online: https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/uploads/ILCD-Handbook-General-guide-for-LCA-DETAILED-GUIDANCE-12March2010-ISBN-fin-v1.0-EN.pdf (accessed on 28 March 2022).
- Weidema, B.P. Comparing Three Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methods from an Endpoint Perspective. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zampori, L.; Saouter, E.; Schau, E.; Cristobal, J.; Castellani, V.; Sala, S. Guide for Interpreting Life Cycle Assessment Result, Luxembourg. 2016. Available online: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/jrc104415/lb-na-28266-en-n.pdf (accessed on 12 April 2022).
- BSI. PAS 2050:2011: Specification for the Assessment of the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Goods and Services. London, UK, 2011. 13.020.40. Available online: https://middleware.accord.bsigroup.com/pdf-preview?path=Preview%2F000000000030227173.pdf&inline=true (accessed on 25 March 2022).
- ISO. 14067:2018. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/71206.html (accessed on 12 April 2022).
- Wohner, B.; Pauer, E.; Heinrich, V.; Tacker, M. Packaging-Related Food Losses and Waste: An Overview of Drivers and Issues. Sustainability 2019, 11, 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Molina-Besch, K.; Wikström, F.; Williams, H. The environmental impact of packaging in food supply chains—Does life cycle assessment of food provide the full picture? Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2019, 24, 37–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- European Commission. Guidance Document Describing the Food Categories in Part E of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 on Food Additives. 2017. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/food/system/files/2017-09/fs_food-improvement-agents_guidance_1333-2008_annex-2.pdf (accessed on 4 February 2022).
- Rohatgi, A. WebPlotDigitizer-Extract Data from Plots, Images, and Maps: Version 4.5. Available online: https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer/ (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- van den Berg, N.; Huppes, G.; Lindeijer, E.; van der Ven, B.L.; Wrisberg, N.M. Quality Assessment for LCA: CML Report 152, Leiden, Netherlands. 1999. Available online: https://www.leidenuniv.nl/cml/ssp/publications/quality.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- Curran, M.A. Strengths and Limitations of Life Cycle Assessment. In Background and Future Prospects in Life Cycle Assessment; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 189–206. [Google Scholar]
- Boakye-Yiadom, K.A.; Duca, D.; Foppa Pedretti, E.; Ilari, A. Environmental Performance of Chocolate Produced in Ghana Using Life Cycle Assessment. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cimini, A.; Cibelli, M.; Moresi, M. Cradle-to-grave carbon footprint of dried organic pasta: Assessment and potential mitigation measures. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2019, 99, 5303–5318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Volpe, R.; Messineo, S.; Volpe, M.; Messineo, A. Carbon Footprint of Tree Nuts Based Consumer Products. Sustainability 2015, 7, 14917–14934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Büsser, S.; Jungbluth, N. LCA of Chocolate Packed in Aluminium Foil Based Packaging, Switzerland. 2009. Available online: http://www.alufoil.org/files/alufoil/sustainability/ESU_-_Chocolate_2009_-_Exec_Sum.pdf (accessed on 4 February 2022).
- Espinoza-Orias, N.; Stichnothe, H.; Azapagic, A. The carbon footprint of bread. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2011, 16, 351–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Svanes, E.; Oestergaard, S.; Hanssen, O. Effects of Packaging and Food Waste Prevention by Consumers on the Environmental Impact of Production and Consumption of Bread in Norway. Sustainability 2019, 11, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pérez-Neira, D. Energy sustainability of Ecuadorian cacao export and its contribution to climate change. A case study through product life cycle assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 2560–2568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pérez-Neira, D.; Copena, D.; Armengot, L.; Simón, X. Transportation can cancel out the ecological advantages of producing organic cacao: The carbon footprint of the globalized agrifood system of ecuadorian chocolate. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 276, 111306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kägi, T.; Wettstein, D.; Dinkel, F. Comparing rice products: Confidence intervals as a solution to avoid wrong conclusions in communicating carbon footprints. Proc. LCA Food 2010, 1, 229–233. [Google Scholar]
- Nunes, F.A.; Seferin, M.; Maciel, V.G.; Flôres, S.H.; Ayub, M.A.Z. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from rice production systems in Brazil: A comparison between minimal tillage and organic farming. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 139, 799–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Usva, K.; Saarinen, M.; Katajajuuri, J.-M. Supply chain integrated LCA approach to assess environmental impacts of food production in Finland. Agric. Food Sci. 2009, 18, 460–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saget, S.; Costa, M.; Barilli, E.; Wilton de Vasconcelos, M.; Santos, C.S.; Styles, D.; Williams, M. Substituting wheat with chickpea flour in pasta production delivers more nutrition at a lower environmental cost. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2020, 24, 26–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nette, A.; Wolf, P.; Schlüter, O.; Meyer-Aurich, A. A Comparison of Carbon Footprint and Production Cost of Different Pasta Products Based on Whole Egg and Pea Flour. Foods 2016, 5, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bianchi, F.R.; Moreschi, L.; Gallo, M.; Vesce, E.; Del Borghi, A. Environmental analysis along the supply chain of dark, milk and white chocolate: A life cycle comparison. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2021, 26, 807–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sieti, N.; Rivera, X.C.S.; Stamford, L.; Azapagic, A. Environmental impacts of baby food: Ready-made porridge products. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 212, 1554–1567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Korsaeth, A.; Jacobsen, A.Z.; Roer, A.-G.; Henriksen, T.M.; Sonesson, U.; Bonesmo, H.; Skjelvåg, A.O.; Strømman, A.H. Environmental life cycle assessment of cereal and bread production in Norway. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. A–Anim. Sci. 2012, 62, 242–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Florén, B.; Sund, V.; Nilsson, K. Environmental Impact of the Consumption of Sweets, Crisps and Soft Drinks, Copenhagen. 2011. Available online: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:702819/FULLTEXT01.pdf (accessed on 17 February 2022).
- Röös, E.; Sundberg, C.; Hansson, P.-A. Uncertainties in the carbon footprint of refined wheat products: A case study on Swedish pasta. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2011, 16, 338–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, J.K.; Arlbjørn, J.S. Product carbon footprint of rye bread. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 82, 45–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EPD International AB. Product Category Rules. Available online: https://www.environdec.com/product-category-rules-pcr/the-pcr (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. PCR Library. Available online: https://environdec.com/pcr-library (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- Weidema, B. Short Procedural Guideline to Identify the Functional Unit for a Product Environmental Footprint and to Delimit the Scope of Product Categories, 2.-0 LCA… 2017. Available online: https://lca-net.com/files/granularity-guideline-final_20170331.pdf (accessed on 25 March 2022).
- ISO. 14025:2006. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/38131.html (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Environmental Product Declarations. Available online: https://www.environdec.com/all-about-epds/the-epd (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. EPD Library. Available online: https://www.environdec.com/library (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- Sonesson, U.; Davis, J.; Ziegler, F. Food Production and Emissions of Greenhouse Gases: An Overview of the Climate Impact of Different Product Groups; Goteborg.se: Gothenburg, Swedish, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Lillford, P.; Hermansson, A.-M. Global missions and the critical needs of food science and technology. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 111, 800–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- HLPE. Nutrition and Food Systems: A Report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security, Rome. 2017. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/i7846e/i7846e.pdf (accessed on 2 February 2022).
- Miah, J.H.; Griffiths, A.; McNeill, R.; Halvorson, S.; Schenker, U.; Espinoza-Orias, N.; Morse, S.; Yang, A.; Sadhukhan, J. A framework for increasing the availability of life cycle inventory data based on the role of multinational companies. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2018, 23, 1744–1760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Saner, D.; Walser, T.; Vadenbo, C.O. End-of-life and waste management in life cycle assessment—Zurich, 6 December 2011. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2012, 17, 504–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EPD International AB. Wasa Sandwich Cheese & Chives: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/b43098fc-14bf-48f7-a9a6-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto: Pasta di Semola di Grano Duro 100% Italiano Confezionata in Astuccio di Cartoncino. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/e43a8cfd-b9f6-4fc0-aa28-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- Cederberg, C.; Berlin, J.; Henriksson, M.; Davis, J. Utsläpp av växthusgaser i ett Livscykelperspektiv för Verksamheten vid Livsmedelsföretaget Berte Qvarn (Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in a Life Cycle Perspective from the Food Company Berte Quarn, in Swedih): SIK-Report 777. RISE Research Institutes of Sweden: Göteborg, Sweden, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Ruini, L.; Marino, M. LCA of semolina dry pasta produced by Barilla. In Proceedings of the Sustainable Development: A Challenge for European Research, Brussels, Belgium, 26 May 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Morris, B.A. The Science and Technology of Flexible Packaging; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 259–308. ISBN 9780323242738. [Google Scholar]
- EPD International AB. La Semola Bio: Emvironmental Product Declaration of Organic Durum Wheat Semolina. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/8822ab25-5883-4fe6-279b-08d98899db1f/Data (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. La Farina Bio: Environmental Product Declaration of Soft Wheat Organic Flour Type 00. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/d9903b95-632f-4715-279d-08d98899db1f/Data (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. La Semola Kronos: Environmental Product Declaration of Kronos Durum Wheat Semolina. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/62db622e-4912-49ce-279a-08d98899db1f/Data (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Gran Cereale Mix di Cereali Croccanti Classico, Con Mela e Succhi di Frutta, Con Cioccolato: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/cb2a9ca1-013b-4e26-4e9e-08d900a54cf5/Data (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Product Environmental Statement: Dried Durum Wheat Semolina Pasta–Patrimoni D’italia. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/ab6d6b61-3eb2-4313-b9b2-08d8cda02dc5/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. De Cecco Durum Wheat Semolina Pasta: Environmental Product Declaration. 2017. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/64aa83be-3e76-41c1-abdd-d82e16ec9f78/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. De Cecco Durum Wheat Semolina Egg Pasta: Environmental Product Declaration. 2017. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/0909bd0f-3d65-4aa6-86d1-27e551ac6dbd/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Environmental Product Declaration: Yellow Label Sgambaro Pasta. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/19073946-0ccb-42b3-b778-1936b12e662c/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Environmental Product Declaration: Pasta la Marca del Consumatore. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/7f928e88-b8d5-4be8-86fe-b81138e24f31/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Durum Wheat Semolina Pasta 5kg for FoodService: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/b193b95b-c170-43ac-a9e4-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Dry Semolina Pasta Selezione Oro Chef: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/f9981fe1-6b66-4178-a9d6-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Whole Durum Wheat Semolina Pasta 1 kg for Food Service: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/fd2b635a-2ce8-4d36-a9c4-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Climate Declaration: For the Pasta Sgambaro Food Service Bio. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/280e8f6b-7b9a-4b28-80fc-51e1ce523b01/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Climate Declaration: For the Pasta Sgambaro Food Service. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/54c03318-54c0-4419-9d93-d8688ce8e2d5/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Misko Dry Semolina Pasta: Environmental Product Declaration. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/537a6cc4-1ed7-4782-ba2d-093cff8734e8/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Filiz Dry Semolina Pasta: Environmental Product Declaration. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/ebf474c9-6a8c-4a34-aa98-ad0a1f93a7b6/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Pasta di Semola di Grano Duro Prodotta Nello Stabilimento di Marcianise: Environmental Product Declaration. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/d0b3003a-1fb7-40cf-b875-c65a80c7133a/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto: Emiliane Chef. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/9d9688d8-91fa-407f-a9ce-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Durum Wheat Semolina Pasta in Paperboard Box: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/106e48ea-59a2-4f53-aa01-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto: Pasta All’uovo. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/190f73a6-6b4f-459d-8af5-08d8c43682c8/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. 100% Mie Nature: Environmental Product Declaration. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/afd47b97-0538-4fe3-be49-74b7b67d53bf/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Extra Moelleux Nature: Environmental Product Declaration. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/033ee9c2-597e-4c11-a0bb-d60914474eba/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. American Sandwich Complet: Environmental Product Declaration. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/78e7ac3b-8a10-408c-b455-2ed9ba31a943/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Harry’s Beau&Bon Semi-Complet: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/d4a1ec1c-a775-4616-aa1d-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. American Sandwich Nature: Environmental Product Declaration. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/6bd63f5b-eafd-4a20-8bd1-da48e8563b59/Data (accessed on 19 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Pan Goccioli: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/848a5614-8dd6-418d-afc0-b0b5ebeaf5ec/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Brioches Tranchée Nature: Environmental Product Declaration. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/262969ee-db8f-468c-90df-00568cabe234/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Pan Brioscè: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/7639ac50-e766-436b-39d8-08d99c9745fc/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Cuor di Lino: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/9e6e5863-e8fc-462d-39d4-08d99c9745fc/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Pan Bauletto Bianco, Grano duro, Cereali e soia, Integrale: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/662dd665-ab91-4eea-39d0-08d99c9745fc/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Gran Bauletto Grano Tenero e farro, Rustico, Erbe Aromatiche e Integrale Con Semi E Noci: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/a5c26146-b4a4-400d-a32e-c52f2253c511/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Pagnotta di Grano Duro e Integrale: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/7287bf42-716a-4f57-1942-08d972a96257/Data (accessed on 19 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. PanCarrè: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/d1a7c8f1-c51f-4e4d-b839-b06e92fcf624/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- Wolf, B. Confectionery and Sugar-Based Foods. In Reference Module in Food Science; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; ISBN 978-0-08-100596-5. [Google Scholar]
- EPD International AB. Wasa Ragi, Original: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/2d1fdfb7-2ee4-4e0c-a9fc-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Wasa Light Rye, Integrale & Delikatess: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/62f7828d-abe6-4da5-a9f9-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Wasa Havre and Vitalité: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/556e2d20-ef90-4702-a9f4-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 19 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Wasa Celebrating 100: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/be88b6e7-7852-490b-a9ee-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Wasa Frukost: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/cf56e76d-c4c6-4611-a9eb-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Sfoglia di Grano: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/ac02fb10-73e7-46de-91a5-77d4c7d3b634/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Wasa Rounds Sesame & Sea Salt: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/5d142443-04cc-4426-a9b1-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Wasa Multigrain, Surdeg Flerkorn: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/7f3e9948-c324-4ccb-a99b-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Wasa Husman: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/dc6b5576-d135-4b33-a994-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Wasa Crisp Rosemary & Seasalt: Environmental Product Declaration. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/88860279-1a5f-413c-a9a2-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 21 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Gran Pavesi: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/57212d22-3896-4351-8f93-81848397d396/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Fiori d’acqua: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/44eca5f8-c6c8-4370-b3da-d6a039f75adf/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Granetti Classici e Integrali: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/f2ff3ed9-dc5b-4cd1-b945-2cc56fda0835/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Michetti: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/ecf89ab9-abb0-4115-82b6-a983e50d58ae/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Biscotto Pan di Stelle: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/9ed5c329-2f4f-4b8a-aa10-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Macine: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/cb2e0333-ec45-45ec-aa08-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Abbracci: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/c08f30f7-28d6-4ccf-d9a1-08d9b3162149/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Batticuori: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/e7996471-de4f-4009-d99b-08d9b3162149/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Buongrano: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/f87dad27-d3a6-41a0-9dec-aa92e7efa9ea/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Campagnole: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/f5a121b8-3f6e-4a3d-8043-efa659a3710f/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Gran Cereale Biscotto Classico, Frutta, Cioccolato, Croccante, Digestive, Legumi Croccanti: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/1b7751a2-3d35-4b30-4e9f-08d900a54cf5/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Pavesini Classico, al Caffè, al Cacao: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/70c7b37a-cbc3-453f-ad85-2aafa75aa436/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Petit Pavesi: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/be18f17e-9a6d-4260-a5f3-ea0920bb8a96/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Ringo cacao, vaniglia, nocciola: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/b9794225-dd22-4bf6-9125-54849ea7f9f0/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Tarallucci: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/8c9aafe6-67c5-48ac-8b16-08d8c43682c8/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Galletti: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/ee75691d-ebee-42c6-be7f-59881ba2e854/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Girotondi: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/4f13f759-963b-42f0-96dd-bfbfbcca0038/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Camille: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/6b5afcb6-5256-486a-aa07-08d9c4927501/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Merendina Pan di Stelle: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/e4c2c88b-cd36-42e0-d9a8-08d9b3162149/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Torta Pan di Stelle: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/328195e6-bdbc-42a2-d9ab-08d9b3162149/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Torta Limone: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/e1ae7a16-3621-4547-8e65-7c9de212c5b6/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Mooncake Pan di Stelle: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2021. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/dcf7cd43-ab7f-4524-d9a4-08d9b3162149/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. Plumcake Classico, Integrale, Con Gocce di Cioccolato, Senza Zuccheri Aggiunti: Dichiarazione Ambientale di Prodotto. 2020. Available online: https://portal.environdec.com/api/api/v1/EPDLibrary/Files/4968396f-dfa9-4919-9d49-7a625efa6e48/Data (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- Ronchi, E.; Nepi, M.L. L’Italia del Riciclo 2017, Rome. 2017. Available online: https://www.fondazionesvilupposostenibile.org/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2017/12/Rapporto_Italia_del_riciclo_2017.pdf (accessed on 19 February 2022).
- Institut Cyclos-HTP GmbH. Cyclos-HTP Institute for Recyclability and Product Responsibilty. Available online: https://www.cyclos-htp.de/cyclos-htp/ (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- Bicalho, T.; Sauer, I.; Rambaud, A.; Altukhova, Y. LCA data quality: A management science perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 156, 888–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- BSI. PD CEN/TR 13910:2010 Packaging. Report on Criteria and Methodologies for Life Cycle Analysis of Packaging. 2010. Available online: https://www.en-standard.eu/pd-cen-tr-13910-2010-packaging-report-on-criteria-and-methodologies-for-life-cycle-analysis-of-packaging/ (accessed on 25 March 2022).
- European Commission. Horizon Europe. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- Wohner, B.; Gabriel, V.H.; Krenn, B.; Krauter, V.; Tacker, M. Environmental and economic assessment of food-packaging systems with a focus on food waste. Case study on tomato ketchup. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 738, 139846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Sustainable Development Goals: 12.3.1 Global Food Losses. Available online: https://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/indicators/1231/en/ (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- EPD International AB. EPD Applications. Available online: https://www.environdec.com/all-about-epds/epd-applications (accessed on 12 April 2022).
- Kooijman, J.M. Environmental assessment of packaging: Sense and sensibility. Environ. Manag. 1993, 17, 575–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silvenius, F.; Grönman, K.; Katajajuuri, J.-M.; Soukka, R.; Koivupuro, H.-K.; Virtanen, Y. The Role of Household Food Waste in Comparing Environmental Impacts of Packaging Alternatives. Packag. Technol. Sci. 2014, 27, 277–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, J.; Sonesson, U. Life cycle assessment of integrated food chains—A Swedish case study of two chicken meals. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2008, 13, 574–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flysjö, A. Potential for improving the carbon footprint of butter and blend products. J. Dairy Sci. 2011, 94, 5833–5841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Girgenti, V.; Peano, C.; Baudino, C.; Tecco, N. From “farm to fork” strawberry system: Current realities and potential innovative scenarios from life cycle assessment of non-renewable energy use and green house gas emissions. Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 473–474, 48–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bacenetti, J.; Cavaliere, A.; Falcone, G.; Giovenzana, V.; Banterle, A.; Guidetti, R. Shelf life extension as solution for environmental impact mitigation: A case study for bakery products. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 627, 997–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amienyo, D.; Camilleri, C.; Azapagic, A. Environmental impacts of consumption of Australian red wine in the UK. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 72, 110–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amienyo, D.; Azapagic, A. Life cycle environmental impacts and costs of beer production and consumption in the UK. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2016, 21, 492–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bonamente, E.; Scrucca, F.; Rinaldi, S.; Merico, M.C.; Asdrubali, F.; Lamastra, L. Environmental impact of an Italian wine bottle: Carbon and water footprint assessment. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 560–561, 274–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dalla Riva, A.; Burek, J.; Kim, D.; Thoma, G.; Cassandro, M.; de Marchi, M. Environmental life cycle assessment of Italian mozzarella cheese: Hotspots and improvement opportunities. J. Dairy Sci. 2017, 100, 7933–7952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fusi, A.; Guidetti, R.; Benedetto, G. Delving into the environmental aspect of a Sardinian white wine: From partial to total life cycle assessment. Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 472, 989–1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hanssen, O.J.; Vold, M.; Schakenda, V.; Tufte, P.-A.; Møller, H.; Olsen, N.V.; Skaret, J. Environmental profile, packaging intensity and food waste generation for three types of dinner meals. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 142, 395–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Humbert, S.; Loerincik, Y.; Rossi, V.; Margni, M.; Jolliet, O. Life cycle assessment of spray dried soluble coffee and comparison with alternatives (drip filter and capsule espresso). J. Clean. Prod. 2009, 17, 1351–1358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manfredi, M.; Vignali, G. Life cycle assessment of a packaged tomato puree: A comparison of environmental impacts produced by different life cycle phases. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 73, 275–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Point, E.; Tyedmers, P.; Naugler, C. Life cycle environmental impacts of wine production and consumption in Nova Scotia, Canada. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 27, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rinaldi, S.; Barbanera, M.; Lascaro, E. Assessment of carbon footprint and energy performance of the extra virgin olive oil chain in Umbria, Italy. Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 482–483, 71–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schmidt Rivera, X.C.; Espinoza Orias, N.; Azapagic, A. Life cycle environmental impacts of convenience food: Comparison of ready and home-made meals. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 73, 294–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thoma, G.; Popp, J.; Nutter, D.; Shonnard, D.; Ulrich, R.; Matlock, M.; Kim, D.S.; Neiderman, Z.; Kemper, N.; East, C.; et al. Greenhouse gas emissions from milk production and consumption in the United States: A cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment circa 2008. Int. Dairy J. 2013, 31, S3–S14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zufia, J.; Arana, L. Life cycle assessment to eco-design food products: Industrial cooked dish case study. J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16, 1915–1921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hassard, H.A.; Couch, M.H.; Techa-erawan, T.; McLellan, B.C. Product carbon footprint and energy analysis of alternative coffee products in Japan. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 73, 310–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Amienyo, D.; Gujba, H.; Stichnothe, H.; Azapagic, A. Life cycle environmental impacts of carbonated soft drinks. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2013, 18, 77–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bevilacqua, M.; Braglia, M.; Carmignani, G.; Zammori, F.A. Life cycle assessment of pasta production in italy. J. Food Qual. 2007, 30, 932–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calderón, L.A.; Iglesias, L.; Laca, A.; Herrero, M.; Díaz, M. The utility of Life Cycle Assessment in the ready meal food industry. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010, 54, 1196–1207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cellura, M.; Longo, S.; Mistretta, M. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of protected crops: An Italian case study. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 28, 56–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garofalo, P.; D’Andrea, L.; Tomaiuolo, M.; Venezia, A.; Castrignanò, A. Environmental sustainability of agri-food supply chains in Italy: The case of the whole-peeled tomato production under life cycle assessment methodology. J. Food Eng. 2017, 200, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laso, J.; Margallo, M.; Fullana, P.; Bala, A.; Gazulla, C.; Irabien, Á.; Aldaco, R. When product diversification influences life cycle impact assessment: A case study of canned anchovy. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 581–582, 629–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tasca, A.L.; Nessi, S.; Rigamonti, L. Environmental sustainability of agri-food supply chains: An LCA comparison between two alternative forms of production and distribution of endive in northern Italy. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 725–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cordella, M.; Tugnoli, A.; Spadoni, G.; Santarelli, F.; Zangrando, T. LCA of an Italian lager beer. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2008, 13, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, D.S. Modified Atmosphere Packaging of Foods: Principles and Applications; John Wiley & Sons Inc; Institute of Food Technologists: Hoboken, NJ, USA; Chichester, UK, 2021; ISBN 9781119530770. [Google Scholar]
- European Parliament, Council of the European Union. Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 on Materials and Articles Intended to Come into Contact with Food and Repealing Directives 80/590/EEC and 89/109/EEC; European Council: Brussels, Belgium, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Commission Regulation (EC) No 450/2009 of 29 May 2009 on Active and Intelligent Materials and Articles Intended to Come into Contact with Food (Text with EEA Relevance); European Council: Brussels, Belgium, 2009.
- Han, J.H. (Ed.) Innovations in Food Packaging; Elsevier Ltd.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2005; ISBN 978-0-12-311632-1. [Google Scholar]
- Wohner, B.; Schwarzinger, N.; Gürlich, U.; Heinrich, V.; Tacker, M. Technical emptiability of dairy product packaging and its environmental implications in Austria. PeerJ 2019, 7, e7578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boz, Z.; Korhonen, V.; Koelsch Sand, C. Consumer Considerations for the Implementation of Sustainable Packaging: A Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zeng, T.; Durif, F.; Robinot, E. Can eco-design packaging reduce consumer food waste? an experimental study. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2021, 162, 120342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Australian Packaging Covenant Organization. Sustainable Packaging Guidelines (SPGs). 2020. Available online: https://documents.packagingcovenant.org.au/public-documents/Sustainable%20Packaging%20Guidelines%20(SPGs) (accessed on 28 March 2022).
- Kirchherr, J.; Reike, D.; Hekkert, M. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- RecyClass. Recyclass Recyclability Methodology. 2021. Available online: https://recyclass.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Recyclass_methodology_UPDATED_-JANUARY-2022.pdf (accessed on 27 March 2022).
- Marrone, M.; Tamarindo, S. Paving the sustainability journey: Flexible packaging between circular economy and resource efficiency. J. Appl. Packag. Res. 2018, 10, 53–60. [Google Scholar]
- European Food Safety Authority. Food Ingredients and Packaging. Available online: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/food-ingredients-and-packaging (accessed on 28 March 2022).
- European Bioplastics. Bioplastics Market Development Update 2021. Available online: https://docs.european-bioplastics.org/publications/market_data/Report_Bioplastics_Market_Data_2021_short_version.pdf (accessed on 27 March 2022).
- Rosenboom, J.-G.; Langer, R.; Traverso, G. Bioplastics for a circular economy. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2022, 7, 117–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A New Circular Economy Action Plan. For a Cleaner and More Competitive Europe, Brussels. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1583933814386&uri=COM:2020:98:FIN (accessed on 2 February 2022).
- Circularity Gap Report 2022: Five Years of Analysis by Circle Economy|European Circular Economy Stakeholder Platform. Available online: https://circulareconomy.europa.eu/platform/en/knowledge/circularity-gap-report-2022-five-years-analysis-circle-economy (accessed on 27 March 2022).
- Sazdovski, I.; Bala, A.; Fullana-i-Palmer, P. Linking LCA literature with circular economy value creation: A review on beverage packaging. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 771, 145322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Slorach, P.C.; Jeswani, H.K.; Cuéllar-Franca, R.; Azapagic, A. Environmental and economic implications of recovering resources from food waste in a circular economy. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 693, 133516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schmidt Rivera, X.C.; Leadley, C.; Potter, L.; Azapagic, A. Aiding the Design of Innovative and Sustainable Food Packaging: Integrating Techno-Environmental and Circular Economy Criteria. Energy Procedia 2019, 161, 190–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosa, D.; Figueiredo, F.; Castanheira, É.G.; Freire, F. Life-cycle assessment of fresh and frozen chestnut. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 742–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Open Science: An Approach to the Scientific Process That Focuses on Spreading Knowledge as Soon as It Is Available Using Digital and Collaborative Technology. Expert Groups, Publications, News and Events. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/strategy/strategy-2020-2024/our-digital-future/open-science_en (accessed on 23 February 2022).
- Di Polizzi Sorrentino, E.; Woelbert, E.; Sala, S. Consumers and their behavior: State of the art in behavioral science supporting use phase modeling in LCA and ecodesign. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2016, 21, 237–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Speck, R.; Selke, S.; Auras, R.; Fitzsimmons, J. Choice of Life Cycle Assessment Software Can Impact Packaging System Decisions. Packag. Technol. Sci. 2015, 28, 579–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kennedy, D.J.; Montgomery, D.C.; Quay, B.H. Data quality. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 1996, 1, 199–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antonioli, B.; Massarutto, A. The municipal waste management sector in Europe: Shifting boundaries between public service and the market: Snythesis Report. Ann. Public Coop. Econ. 2012, 83, 505–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy, Brussels. 2018. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:2df5d1d2-fac7-11e7-b8f5-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&format=PDF (accessed on 2 February 2022).
- COST. European Cooperation in Science and Technology. Available online: https://www.cost.eu/ (accessed on 28 March 2022).
- EUROSTAT. Data Explorer. Available online: http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=env_waspac&lang=en (accessed on 12 April 2022).
- EUROPEN. European and National Legislation on Packaging and the Environment, Brussels. 2016. Available online: https://www.europen-packaging.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/European-and-National-Legislation-on-Packaging-and-the-Environment.pdf (accessed on 12 April 2022).
- Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Education and Learning: Learning to Apply Circular Economy Thinking. Available online: https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/resources/education-and-learning/overview (accessed on 19 February 2022).
- ISO. ISO/TC 122/SC 4-Packaging and the Environment. 2022. Available online: https://www.iso.org/committee/52082.html (accessed on 12 April 2022).
- Benn, S.; Dunphy, D.; Griffiths, A. Enabling Change for Corporate Sustainability: An Integrated Perspective. Australas. J. Environ. Manag. 2006, 13, 156–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- TerraChoice Environmental Marketing Inc. The “Six Sins of GreenwashingTM”: A Study of Environmental Claims in North American Consumer Markets. 2007. Available online: https://sustainability.usask.ca/documents/Six_Sins_of_Greenwashing_nov2007.pdf (accessed on 19 February 2022).
- Escursell, S.; Llorach-Massana, P.; Roncero, M.B. Sustainability in e-commerce packaging: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 280, 124314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- European Commission. Screening of Websites for ‘Greenwashing’: Half of Green Claims Lack Evidence. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_269 (accessed on 19 February 2022).
- European Commission. Initiative on Substantiating Green Claims. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/initiative_on_green_claims.htm (accessed on 19 February 2022).
Category | Sub-Category | LCAs * n = 28 | Products n = 108 | Greenhouse Gas Emissions | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | % | n | % | Food-Packaging System [kg CO2eq] | Packaging [kg CO2eq] | Packaging (%) | ||
Confectionary | Cocoa and chocolate products | 9 | 32 | 41 | 38 | 3.28 | 0.25 | 9.86 |
Other confectionary including breath-freshening micro-sweets | 2 | 7 | 4 | 4 | 2.80 | 0.16 | 4.68 | |
Cereals and cereal products | Whole, broken or flaked grain | 2 | 7 | 9 | 8 | 12.53 | 0.14 | 1.25 |
Flours and other milled products and starches | 2 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 0.65 | 0.04 | 5.30 | |
Breakfast cereals | 2 | 7 | 4 | 4 | 0.87 | 0.15 | 19.68 | |
Pasta | 4 | 14 | 10 | 9 | 1.33 | 0.10 | 7.24 | |
Bakery wares | Bread and rolls | 5 | 18 | 20 | 19 | 1.03 | 0.04 | 4.37 |
Fine bakery wares | 3 | 11 | 12 | 11 | 1.93 | 0.04 | 11.22 | |
Ready-to-eat savories and snacks | Potato-, cereal-, flour- or starch-based snacks | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0.43 | 0.04 | 8.14 |
Processed nuts | 1 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1.87 | 0.33 | 20.10 | |
Overall (average) | 2.67 | 0.13 | 9.18 |
Category | Sub-Category | Product | Primary Packaging Level | Secondary Packaging Level | Tertiary Packaging Level | GHG [%] | Ref. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Confectionery | Cocoa and chocolate products | Chocolate-covered hazelnut | Modified atmosphere in LDPE bag, label | Box | - | 17.80 | [118] |
Chocolate-covered almond | Modified atmosphere in LDPE bag, label | Box | - | 6.00 | |||
Dark chocolate | Aluminum foil, cardboard | - | - | 13.02 | [32] | ||
Chocolate (100%) | Aluminum foil, paper | - | - | 8.56 | [122] | ||
Malty chocolates (in bags) | Aluminum foil | Corrugated cardboard boxes | LDPE stretch-film, LDPE consumer plastic bags | 13.00 | [28] | ||
Chocolate-coated wafers (contlines) | Aluminum foil | Corrugated cardboard boxes | LDPE stretch-film, LDPE consumer plastic bags | 8.00 | |||
Milk chocolate (molded) | Aluminum foil | Corrugated cardboard boxes | LDPE stretch-film, LDPE consumer plastic bags | 6.00 | |||
Milk chocolate | Aluminum foil, paper | - | - | 6.94 | [119] | ||
Dark chocolate | 11.90 | ||||||
White chocolate | 6.10 | ||||||
Chocolate with sultanas | 10.42 | ||||||
Milk chocolate confectionary | Aluminum foil | Corrugated board box | Not considered | 2.27 | [26] | ||
Dark chocolate confectionary | PET tray, corrugated cardboard component | Corrugated board box | 5.18 | ||||
Milk chocolate biscuit confectionary | PP film | Corrugated board box | 3.00 | ||||
Dark chocolate | PP | - | - | 4.71 | [129] | ||
Dark chocolate | Aluminum foil, fiber-based layer (cardboard) | 24.87 | |||||
Dark chocolate | Aluminum foil, fiber-based layer (Kraft paper) | 18.82 | |||||
Milk chocolate | PP | - | - | 2.20 | |||
Milk chocolate | Aluminum foil, fiber-based layer (cardboard) | 11.65 | |||||
Milk chocolate | Aluminum foil, fiber-based layer (Kraft paper) | 8.82 | |||||
White chocolate | PP | - | - | 2.26 | |||
White chocolate | Aluminum foil, fiber-based layer (cardboard) | 11.94 | |||||
White chocolate | Aluminum foil, fiber-based layer (Kraft paper) | 9.04 | |||||
Extra dark chocolate, 65 g strip | Paper covered Aluminum foil, paper sticker | Paper box | Cardboard/carton box | 23.64 | [116] | ||
Dark chocolate, 65 g strip | 23.35 | ||||||
Milk chocolate, 65 g strip | 9.31 | ||||||
Flavored milk chocolate, 65 g strip | 9.26 | ||||||
Extra dark chocolate, 100 g bar | Aluminum foil) | Printed paper wrapper | Cardboard/carton box | 12.12 | |||
Dark chocolate, 100 g bar | 11.98 | ||||||
Milk chocolate, 100 g bar | 4.77 | ||||||
Flavored milk chocolate, 100 g bar | 4.75 | ||||||
Extra dark chocolate, 300 g pouch | Paper covered aluminum foil, paper sticker | Paper box | Cardboard/carton box | 13.94 | |||
Dark chocolate, 300 g pouch | 13.77 | ||||||
Milk chocolate, 300 g pouch | 5.49 | ||||||
Flavored milk chocolate, 300 g pouch | 5.46 | ||||||
Conventional monoculture chocolate (min. transport) | Aluminum foil, paper | - | - | 8.71 | [123] based on [32,122] | ||
Conventional agroforestry chocolate, (min. transport) | 11.84 | ||||||
Organic agroforestry chocolate, (min. transport) | 13.24 | ||||||
Conventional monoculture chocolate, (max. transport) | 5.79 | ||||||
Conventional agroforestry chocolate, (max. transport) | 7.03 | ||||||
Organic agroforestry chocolate, (max. transport) | 7.50 | ||||||
Other confectionaries, including breath-freshening micro-sweets | Jelly sweets | PP bags | Not included | Not included | 8.75 | [132] | |
Foam sweets | PP container | 1.88 | |||||
Sugar confectionary | Aluminum foil, paper | Corrugated board box | Not considered | 5.26 | [26] | ||
Milk-based confectionary | PP film | Corrugated board box | 2.85 | ||||
Cereals and cereal products | Whole, broken or flaked grain | Rice (IT) | Plastic bag | - | - | 1,95 | [124] |
Rice organic (IT) | 1.33 | ||||||
Rice (US) | Cardboard box | 0.36 | |||||
Rice parboiled (US) | 0.91 | ||||||
Rice upland (CH) | 1.82 | ||||||
Minimal tillage white rice | LDPE bags | - | - | 1.46 | [125] | ||
Minimal tillage brown rice | 1.82 | ||||||
Organic cultivation white rice | 0.62 | ||||||
Organic cultivation brown rice | 1.02 | ||||||
Flours and other milled products and starches | Oatmeal | - | - | - | 6.02 | [126] | |
Potato flour | 7.69 | ||||||
Wheat flour | - | - | - | 2.17 | [141] based on [148] | ||
Breakfast cereals | Breakfast cereals | Printed board folding-box, HDPE bag/liner | Corrugated-board box, HDPE stretch film/wrap | Corrugated pallet layer pads, Wooden pallet | 15.00 | [27] | |
Dry ready-made porridge | LDPE bag, cardboard box (“bag in box”) | Not considered | Not considered | 9.93 | [130] | ||
Wet ready-made porridge | Glass jar, cab (aluminum and plastics) | 38.02 | |||||
Wet ready-made porridge (scenario) | Pouch, cap | 15.77 | |||||
Pasta | Dried short pasta 0.5 kg | Re-closeable PP bag | Carton, adhesive label, scotch tape | Stretch and shrink film, label, EPAL wood pallet, different layers of cartons | 5.90 | [117] | |
Dried long pasta 0.5 kg | Re-closeable PP bag | 3.40 | |||||
Dried short pasta 0.5 kg | Paperboard box | 13.90 | |||||
Dried long pasta 0.5 kg | Paperboard box | 9.40 | |||||
Dried short pasta 3 kg | PE bag | 8.20 | |||||
Dried long pasta 3 kg | PE bag | 3.10 | |||||
Pasta | Paper | Cardboard paper, plastic film | Corrugated board | 1.00 | [133] | ||
Pasta (wheat, 0% straw) | Low-density PET film, cardboard box, printing | Corrugated board, PP film | Pallet | 10.00 | [127] | ||
Pasta (wheat, 80% straw) | 10.20 | ||||||
Pasta (egg) | - | - | Pallet | 7.26 | [128] based on [149] | ||
Bakery wares | Bread and rolls | White bread (medium slices, 40 g) | PE bag | - | - | 1.61 | [120] |
Wholemeal bread (medium slices, 40 g) | 1.73 | ||||||
White bread (thick slices, 57.5 g) | 1.67 | ||||||
Whole meal bread (thick slices, 57.5 g) | 1.80 | ||||||
White bread, medium slices (generic study) | 2.73 | ||||||
Wholemeal bread, medium slices (generic study) | 2.91 | ||||||
Brown bread, medium slices | 2.84 | ||||||
White bread, thick slices (generic study) | 2.86 | ||||||
Wholemeal bread, thick slices (generic study) | 3.07 | ||||||
Brown bread, thick slices (generic study) | 2.99 | ||||||
White bread (medium slices, 40 g) (generic study) | 5.31 | ||||||
Wholemeal bread (medium slices, 40 g) (generic study) | Wax coated paper bag | 5.66 | |||||
Brown bread, medium slices (generic study) | 5.51 | ||||||
White bread (thick slices, 57.5 g) (generic study) | 5.56 | ||||||
Whole meal bread (thick slices, 57.5 g) (generic study) | 5.95 | ||||||
Brown bread, thick slices (generic study) | 5.80 | ||||||
Bread (wheat) | Paper bag (paper and polylactide) | - | - | 11.58 | [131] | ||
Rye bread | LDPE bag, plastic clip | Returnable plastic box | - | 6.10 | [134] based on [11] | ||
Bread | PET and paper | HDPE box | HDPE trolley, extra packaging used by consumers | 7.07 | [121] | ||
Bread | LDPE bag, PS clip | Returnable plastic box | - | 4.59 | [11] | ||
Fine bakery wares | Biscuits | Tray, wrap, cardboard case, plastic film | - | - | 17.62 | [31] | |
Crackers | PP film | Cardboard box | LDPE film, LDPE shopping bag | 7.00 | [30] | ||
Low fat/sugar biscuits | PP film | LDPE film, LDPE shopping bag | 6.00 | ||||
Semi-sweet biscuits | PP film | LDPE film, LDPE shopping bag | 6.00 | ||||
Chocolate-coated biscuits | PP film | LDPE film, LDPE shopping bag | 4.00 | ||||
Sandwich (Chocolate cream) biscuits | Metallized (aluminum) PP film | Cardboard box | LDPE film, LDPE shopping bag | 8.00 | |||
Sandwich (vanilla cream) biscuits | 7.00 | ||||||
Whole cakes | PP, cardboard folding box | Cardboard | LDPE wrap, consumer shopping bags | 7.00 | |||
Cake slices | Cardboard folding box, LDPE | Cardboard | LDPE wrap, consumer shopping bags | 19.00 | [29] | ||
Apple pie | Cardboard folding box, LDPE, aluminum foil | Cardboard | LDPE wrap, consumer shopping bags | 24.00 | |||
Cupcakes | Cardboard folding box, LDPE, paper | Cardboard | LDPE wrap, consumer shopping bags | 24.00 | |||
Cheesecake | PP, cardboard folding box, LDPE | Cardboard | LDPE wrap, consumer shopping bags | 5.00 | |||
Ready-to-eat savories and snacks | Potato-, cereal-, flour- or starch-based snacks | Crisps | OPP and (aluminum) metallized OPP | Not included | Not included | 8.14 | [132] |
Processed nuts | Pistachio | Modified atmosphere in LDPE bag, label | Box | - | 12.80 | [118] | |
Almond | 12.90 | ||||||
Hazelnut | 29.80 | ||||||
Peanut | 24.90 |
Sustainable Packaging Principle | Recommendation | Reference |
---|---|---|
Effective | Usage of packaging fit for purpose | [43,44,46] |
Provision of appropriate shelf-life | [43,111] based on [228,229,230] | |
Employment of shelf-life extension strategies | [11,231] | |
Avoidance of over-engineering | [43] | |
Holistically integrate primary, secondary and tertiary packaging levels | [43] | |
Provide packaging with high consumer value | [10,11,43,111] based on [229] | |
Target-group oriented packaging with consumer value | [10,11,43,111] based on [229] | |
Right-sized portions | [111,120,121] based on [120,228,229] | |
Provide clear and understandable communication | [11,37,43] | |
Efficient | Optimize packaging with regard to function and environmental impact | [26,28,29,37,43,111,116,119,123,141] based on [27,232,233,234,235,236,237,238,239,240,241,242,243,244,245] |
Rethink material choice and packaging design | [10,27,43,111,116,117,118,121,129,130] based on [27,120,233,235,236,238,240,244,246,247,248,249,250,251] | |
Increase transport efficiency | [43,111,141] based on [232,237,244] | |
Decrease energy demand along the supply chain (e.g., process and transport) | [43,111] based on [243] | |
Focus on renewable resources (materials and energy) | ||
Cyclic | Avoid unneeded packaging | [111] based on [252] |
Prevent and reduce food and packaging waste along the supply chain | [26,43,111,132] based on [242]; | |
Use reusable, returnable or refillable (primary, secondary, tertiary) packaging solutions | [43,111] based on [240,246,252,253] | |
Design packaging for recycling | [35,37,39,41,43] | |
Design packaging from recycling | [37,43,111,116] based on [230,231,244,248,249] | |
Use bio-based and/or bio-degradable materials | [37,43,44,111] | |
Assure proper end-of-life management | [31,43,134] | |
Promote a circular economy | [35,36], | |
Safe | Focus clean production | [35,37,43,44] |
Install ecological stewardship | [37,43] | |
Reduce possibility for litter formation | [43] |
Life Cycle Assessment Stage | Recommendation | Reference |
---|---|---|
Goal and scope | Holistic representation of the food packaging system | [43,111] |
Inclusion of all packaging levels | [43,111] | |
Inclusion of direct and indirect packaging effects | [43,52,111] | |
Awareness of interrelation | [43,111] | |
Integration of Circular Economy principles within the goal and scope of food packaging LCAs | [270,271,272] | |
Special attention to time, geography and technology aspects | [130,221,273] | |
Life cycle inventory | Focus on appropriate and reasonable high-quality data and software | [43,52,120,134,144] |
Provision of data transparency and consistency | [274] | |
Usage of common language (definitions) | [51] | |
Inclusion of details on packaging | [41] | |
Inclusion of actual packaging recyclability and recycling quotas | [39,41] | |
Inclusion of food and packaging waste | [111] | |
Inclusion of consumer attitudes and behavior | [111] | |
Life cycle impact assessment | Use and build upon standards | [66,67,102] |
Include sensitivity or scenario analyses | [52,66,67,111] based on [12,13,275] | |
Interpretation | Discuss limitations | [43,52,111] |
Address trade-offs and burden-shifting | [31,134] | |
Use multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) | [31,134] | |
Only give sufficiently substantiated recommendations | [52,138] |
Recommendation | Reference |
---|---|
Give incentives | [52] |
Develop new business models | [52] |
Engage and connect stakeholders | [130] |
Follow an open (science) approach and promote best practices and standards | [274,284] |
Promote education | [283] |
Develop companies to sustaining corporations | [43,285] |
Strengthen collaboration and communication | [26,116,130] |
Avoid double efforts | [26,116,130] |
Identification of environmental hotspots and potentials for change | [27,117] |
Combine and prioritize actions | [27,117] |
Extensively test (re)designed packaging solutions | [43,46,47,48] |
Communicate sustainability aspects transparently and provide evidence | [121,138] |
Avoid misleading or greenwashing | [124,141,286] |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Krauter, V.; Bauer, A.-S.; Milousi, M.; Dörnyei, K.R.; Ganczewski, G.; Leppik, K.; Krepil, J.; Varzakas, T. Cereal and Confectionary Packaging: Assessment of Sustainability and Environmental Impact with a Special Focus on Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Foods 2022, 11, 1347. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11091347
Krauter V, Bauer A-S, Milousi M, Dörnyei KR, Ganczewski G, Leppik K, Krepil J, Varzakas T. Cereal and Confectionary Packaging: Assessment of Sustainability and Environmental Impact with a Special Focus on Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Foods. 2022; 11(9):1347. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11091347
Chicago/Turabian StyleKrauter, Victoria, Anna-Sophia Bauer, Maria Milousi, Krisztina Rita Dörnyei, Greg Ganczewski, Kärt Leppik, Jan Krepil, and Theodoros Varzakas. 2022. "Cereal and Confectionary Packaging: Assessment of Sustainability and Environmental Impact with a Special Focus on Greenhouse Gas Emissions" Foods 11, no. 9: 1347. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11091347