The environmental impacts of packages have been found to be relatively small compared with the food items they contain. Furthermore, from the environmental and operational point of view, the most significant task of the package is to protect the product, which is important to acknowledge in the packaging design process. This study introduces a guiding framework for designing sustainable food packaging. In this approach, the entire life cycle of the product–package combination is taken into consideration. The emphasis is on the prevention of food losses in packaging design as a major environmental criterion. Consideration of the properties of both the package and the product itself when designing the final package will lead to a better end result with smaller product losses and environmental impacts. By using different assessment methods in the different stages of the packaging design, the sustainability of the package can be enhanced. The decision making of the packaging designer is facilitated with methods that are introduced step by step and in a certain order that will also allow for corrective measures through back‐loops in the design process. The purpose is to integrate sustainability aspects at all stages firmly into the design process. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Summary Thoroughly considering and optimizing packaging systems can avoid food loss and waste. We suggest a number of issues that must be explored and review the associated challenges. Five main issues were recognized through the extensive experience of the authors and engagement of multiple stakeholders. The issues promoted are classified as follows: (1) identify and obtain specific data of packaging functions that influence food waste; (2) understand the total environmental burden of product/package by considering the trade‐off between product protection and preservation and environmental footprint; (3) develop understanding of how these functions should be treated in environmental footprint evaluations; (4) improve packaging design processes to also consider reducing food waste; and (5) analyze stakeholder incentives to reduce food loss and waste. Packaging measures that save food will be important to fulfill the United Nations Sustainable Development goal to halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and to reduce food losses along production and supply chains.

This paper examines the environmental impacts of food waste and the influence that packaging alternatives can have on causing food waste. This paper presents the results of three life cycle assessment case studies on packed food products. The life cycle assessments were conducted for ham, dark bread and Soygurt drink (fermented soy‐based drink). In each case study, the environmental impacts of the products were assessed with different assumptions about the packaging sizes and alternative materials. The studies especially considered the environmental impacts resulting from food waste generated by consumers as a function of the variable packaging options. The food waste of other parts of the production chain of the studied products was also taken into account. A consumer survey was carried out to estimate the amounts of product waste generated in Finnish households connected to the three investigated products. The environmental impacts of the food products, household food waste and packaging were modelled by scenarios with varying rates of household food waste and different waste management options. The results indicated that the significance of the production and post‐consumer life of packaging was relatively low for climate change, eutrophication and acidification, in comparison with the production chain of the ham, dark bread and Soygurt. According to the results, packaging solutions that minimize the waste generation in households as well as in distribution and retail will lead to the lowest environmental impacts of the entire product‐packaging chain. Therefore, it is important to design packages that protect the food properly and allow the consumer to use the product fully. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The capacity to calculate and communicate the beneficial environmental impact of products and services is lacking in scientific guidelines. To fill this gap, this article presents a new approach for calculating the carbon handprint of products. The core of the suggested approach involves comparing the carbon footprint of an improved product with the carbon footprint of the baseline product, and subsequently calculating the reduction in greenhouse gas emission that can be achieved by utilizing the improved product. The proposed approach is founded on the standardized life cycle assessment methodology for footprints until the use stage, and it provides a framework to recognize the effects of the remaining life cycle stages in the actual operational environment. This calculation is meant to be used by manufacturers that wish to show potential customers the positive climate impacts offered by the manufacturer's product. The carbon handprint approach complements the existing methodologies by introducing new definitions and consistent guidelines for comparing the baseline product and the improved product. This article presents the developed calculation approach and demonstrates the approach with one case study about renewable diesel. Results of the diesel handprint calculation indicate that a driver can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by choosing renewable diesel over baseline fuel. Thus, the producer of the renewable diesel will create a handprint.Organizations can use carbon handprints for quantifying the greenhouse gas reductions their customers can achieve by utilizing the product. Thus, the carbon handprint can be a powerful tool in communications and marketing. By conducting carbon handprint assessments, a company can also find out how their product qualifies in comparison to baseline products. Therefore, carbon handprints can also support decision-making and lifelong product design.

Purpose: The year-round supply of fresh fruit and vegetables in Europe requires a complex logistics system. In this study, the most common European fruit and vegetable transport packaging systems, namely single-use wooden and cardboard boxes and re-useable plastic crates, are analyzed and compared considering environmental, economic, and social impacts. Methods: The environmental, economic, and social potentials of the three transport packaging systems are examined and compared from a life cycle perspective using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Life Cycle Costing (LCC) and Life Cycle Working Environment (LCWE) methodologies. Relevant parameters influencing the results are analyzed in different scenarios, and their impacts are quantified. The underlying environmental analysis is an ISO 14040 and 14044 comparative Life Cycle Assessment that was critically reviewed by an independent expert panel. Results and discussion: The results show that wooden boxes and plastic crates perform very similarly in the Global Warming Potential, Acidification Potential, and Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential categories; while plastic crates have a lower impact in the Eutrophication Potential and Abiotic Resource Depletion Potential categories. Cardboard boxes show the highest impacts in all assessed categories. The analysis of the life cycle costs show that the re-usable system is the most cost effective over its entire life cycle. For the production of a single crate, the plastic crates require the most human labor. The share of female employment for the cardboard boxes is the lowest. All three systems require a relatively large share of low-qualified employees. The plastic crate system shows a much lower lethal accident rate. The higher rate for the wooden and cardboard boxes arises mainly from wood logging. In addition, the sustainability consequences due to the influence of packaging in preventing food losses are discussed, and future research combining aspects both from food LCAs and transport packing/packaging LCAs is recommended. Conclusions: For all three systems, optimization potentials regarding their environmental life cycle performance were identified. Wooden boxes (single use) and plastic crates (re-usable) show preferable environmental performance. The calibration of the system parameters, such as end-of-life treatment, showed environmental optimization potentials in all transport packaging systems. The assessment of the economic and the social dimensions in parallel is important in order to avoid trade-offs between the three sustainability dimensions. Merging economic and social aspects into a Life Cycle Assessment is becoming more and more important, and their integration into one model ensures a consistent modeling approach for a manageable effort