1) The document discusses sustainability and alternative food packaging from the perspectives of various stakeholders including consumers, suppliers, corporations, investors, and governments. 2) It notes that consumers are increasingly concerned about the environmental impact of waste packaging and are more willing to purchase alternative eco-friendly options. 3) Suppliers must ensure their materials and products are sustainable and meet business standards to collaborate effectively. Corporations are transforming their policies to be greener while investors see opportunities in eco-companies and packaging innovations. Governments play a role in regulations and incentives to support sustainability.

1. CW 1
Group (
Sustainability And The Environment
1. Sivanathaa (ID:I41110939) 2. Narasimha Bhat (ID:765HLC94) 3.Shawn (ID:008BIPE5)
4. Aziz Tarek (ID:790RPKSA) 5. Zahrin (ID:028I4BZH)

2. Part A

3. Awareness of the Current Situation
Annual waste generated - 2.01 billion metric tonnes
Expected to go up to 3.4 billion metric tonnes by
2050.
Plastic, Paper & food waste contributes to 70% and
more (Worldbank, 2017)
Plastic are produced/discarded within the same
year instead of recycled or returning to the
economic market
Steep growth in production/consumption and
disposal have ended up contributing to higher
waste internationally (Estimated 15–35% of
household solid waste globally) (Diggle & Walker,
2022).
Data shows 1950 to 2015 increased plastic waste. If
the same trend if continues till 2050 we will reach
an alarming level of Plastic pollution on the
environment. Pollution from plastics is a global
challenge and requires immediate attention with
significant policy changes on the plastic industry
(Ncube et al., 2021)
3

4. Wastes are dumped in landfills destroying natural habitats for wildlife.
The release of methane gas in such landfills has serious
environmental concerns surrounding it.
Discharges have a serious health impact on those who live and work
around landfills. A study in New York found that there is a 12%
increased risk of congenital malformations in children (Colorado,
2021)
Overall waste mismanagement seriously threatens wildlife on land
and at sea, global environmental health, and human livelihoods.
It is evident that pollution created by plastic and waste has a serious
impact on
wildlife around the world (Diggle & Walker, 2022).
Social Enviornmental Econimic
Dumped waste impacts
human health
Negative impact, because of the pollution of
land, rivers and oceans,
Challenges on poor countries
Impact current & future
generation
Climate change due to the release of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere
More work/ resource to be spend to
clean
Possible danger of new
deseases
Water animals health issues to humans
Pressure and new challenges to
Govt. officials and organizations
Impact of Poor Waset Management
4

5. 1. Shifting to alternatives has economic development as positive but there are side effects of carbon
emissions that effective management. There is a point for carbon emissions will increase first and then
decrease after a specific point, so, longer term it benefits everyone.
2. Technology progress has an impact on economic development and can play a key role in the short and
long term.
3. To promote such ideas, stringent environmental regulation will be needed for deep decarbonization. One
alone cannot achieve this, but needs policymakers, government bodies, and institutions to come together.
4, By considering the policy effect, we obtain that the policies related to energy savings and emissions
reduction can have a great impact on controlling carbon emissions. When there are effective policies, the
impact of economic development on carbon emissions becomes much smaller. Additionally, the negative
influence of other variables becomes less significant as pollution control strengthens (Oláh et al., 2018)
What Next?
5

6. Risks and Opportunities
Risks and Opportunities of Alternative Food Packaging in the
Global Nexus of Ecology, Social, and Economic Challenges

7. Environmental
• By utilizing discarded by-products and
residues, valuable raw materials can be
obtained for alternative packaging (Gaspar &
Braga, 2023).
• Agricultural waste, such as tomato waste,
pumpkin waste, and fruit/vegetable peel, can
be processed to yield polymers and proteins
for edible packaging (Gaspar & Braga, 2023).
Reduced Environmental Impact and Resource Conservation
• Transition to a circular economy mindset
encourages the use of agricultural and
industrial waste for resource conservation
(Cristofoli et al., 2023).
• This shift creates opportunities for
sustainable packaging solutions that focus
on waste reduction, reutilization, and
closed-loop systems (Cristofoli et al., 2023).
Circular Economy and Closed-Loop Systems
Figure 1: Circular Economy Model of Food Packaging Chain (Cristofoli et al., 2023)
Opportunity
Risk
• Environmental conditions during
processing and storage affect the
barrier and transport properties of
alternative packaging (Trajkovska
Petkoska et al., 2021).
• Alternative packaging contributes to
sustainability but may not completely
solve the problem of plastic waste
pollution (Trajkovska Petkoska et al.,
2021).
Life Cycle Analysis and Carbon Footprint

8. Social
Engaging Consumers in
Sustainability Initiatives
Enhanced Brand Reputation and
Customer Loyalty
• McDonald's, Unilever, Nestlé, Kraft-
Heinz, PepsiCo, and Coca-Cola have
established action plans to enhance the
sustainability of their packaging by 2025
and beyond (Boz et al., 2020).
• These initiatives aim to improve brand
reputation and foster customer loyalty
through their commitment to sustainability
(Boz et al., 2020).
• Alternative packaging meets
consumer demand for eco-friendly
and sustainable products, addressing
environmental concerns and
regulatory pressures (Nair et al.,
2023; Prakash & Mishra, 2023).
• Companies can engage consumers in
sustainability initiatives by offering
waste-free and eco-friendly packaging
solutions through alternative
packaging (Nair et al., 2023).
Figure 2: Research been carried out from 2012 – 2022
regarding alternative food packing (Asgher et al., 2020)
Acceptance and Behavior Change Challenges Among
Consumers
Labor and Supply Chain
Implications
• The biodegradability of alternative packaging materials may
impact their protective functions over time, necessitating
investigation for stability and safety during storage (Prakash &
Mishra, 2023).
• Alternative packaging demands careful shipping due to its
sensitivity to temperature changes (Nair et al., 2023).
Risk
Opportunity

9. Economic
Alternative packaging
provides innovative uses
and serves as an
alternative to traditional
packaging technologies
(Prakash & Mishra, 2023).
This opens opportunities
for market differentiation
and expanded possibilities
in food packaging and
protection (Prakash &
Mishra, 2023).
Innovation
and Market
Differentiation
Alternative packaging extends product
shelf life, minimizing costs related to
spoilage and food waste (Nair et al.,
2023).
It acts as an oxygen barrier, delaying the
ripening of fruits and vegetables and
enhancing freshness, leading to improved
operating costs for food manufacturers
(Nair et al., 2023; Prakash & Mishra,
2023).
.
Cost-Saving
Potential in
the Long
Term
Opportunity
Risk
Companies often prioritize plastic
collection and recycling over
adopting sustainable packaging
alternatives (Gaspar & Braga,
2023).
Current production of alternative
packaging is mostly on a costly
laboratory scale compared to
synthetic plastic films, requiring
research for cost reduction and
larger-scale commercial feasibility
(Prakash & Mishra, 2023).
Initial
Investment
and Cost-
Effectiveness
Alternative packaging may
lack mechanical strength and
barrier properties, limiting
their suitability for packaging
materials (Gaspar & Braga,
2023).
The alternative packaging
industry is still relatively small,
with only a few companies
involved in this area (Gaspar
& Braga, 2023).
Unclear benefits of alternative
packaging may hinder
consumer acceptance and
understanding of its
advantages (Trajkovska
Petkoska et al., 2021).
Market
Competition
and Demand
Uncertainties
Figure 3: Cost Different between Plastic packaging
and Alternative Packaging(Deal, 2020)

10. Part B

11. COMPLEXITY:
Ecofriendly vs. function / cost
• Consumer will not buy just for environmentally friendly if its too
expensive or has worst function (Boaz et al, 2020, p. 10).
Being misunderstood
• If Companies don’t communicate their sustainability well,
consumers will not be aware product’s sustainable (Boaz et al,
2020, p. 7).
Eco-mindset for all
• Make eco-mindset appeal to all demographics, e.g., likely
women or affluent consumers purchases eco-label products
and engage in recycling (Boaz et al, 2020, p. 13).
Food safety
• Not enough Toxicology data biodegradable materials for human
consumption / interaction (Gaspar & Braga, 2023, p. 3).
• No effective method so far to filter microscopic material
(phthalates) that is hazardous (Ncube et al, 2020, p. 3).
To eat or not to eat
• Source bio-plastics from by products instead of raw materials,
this is also to avoid having a conflict of use against (Guillard,
2018, p. 2)
What complexities limit sustainability?
Figure 7
Framework for consumer eco-friendly
buying intention (Granato et al, 2022)
Material : Conventional Plastic
Format : Flexible Bag
open / close mechanism : non-re-closable
Color : Transparent
Material : Biodegrable and compostable
Format : Rigid box
open / close mechanism : re-closable
Color : Opaque
Figure 8
Food Packaging compared (Granato et al, 2022)
11

12. INTERCONNECTEDNESS
How are the policies , businesses and consumers interconnected in pursuing alternate food packaging?
Global iniative for sustainability
• Increasing participation from businesses to promote their
sustainability achievements (United Nations, 2023)
Life cycle analysis
• Life cycle analysis helps optimize food packaging to improve its
shelf life thus reducing eventual food loss(Guillard et al ,2018, p. 6).
Pro Eco thinking
• Effluent consumers tend to seek out products that satisfy their
belief system like sustainable food packaging (Boaz et al, 2020, p.
11).
Sustainbility branding
• Majority of shoppers did not look at sustainability logos even if they
have sustainability as consideration (Boaz et al, 2020, p.22)
• Brands that showcase their sustainability efforts( through fliers), got
more awareness and lead to better sales (Boaz, 2020, p.22).
Figure 3
% increase of companies publish sustainability
report from 2020 to 2021 (United Nations ,2023)
Figure 4
Example of Modified Atmosphere Packaging vs. conventional (Guillard et al ,2018)
12

13. INTERDEPENDENCY:
Eco-friendly economy
• In Europe there are close to 20 million people in Bio-economy and 2.2
trillion € in revenue in 2014 (Hamed et al, 2021, p. 8).
Expanded producter responsibility
• With enforcement of extended producer responsibilities, companies
must plan all aspects of their product, including planning on disposal
(Ncube et al, 2021, p. 12).
Dual purpose
• Extract byproducts from the producing food into bio polymers. gives
another alternative material for packaging while also disposing the by-
products(Hamed at el, 2021, p. 22)
Overcompensate
• Else, consumer might overcompensate and completely neglect others
e.g., excessive use of paper products because its recyclable (Boaz et al,
2020, p. 12).
Sustainable mindset
• Once a consumer can start a habit sustainable, it can cultivate other
green activities (Boaz et al, 2020, p. 12)
Figure 5
illustrates plastics in linear economy (Payparus, 2021)
How the factors are dependent on each other to achieve sustainability?
Figure 6
Cicular economy illustration using food by products (Guillard, 2018)
13

14. Example Singapore Context :
Of the 1125 participants surveyed,
How many know about the eco-label?
• Those aged 18-24 were least familiar with the label and more than half were
unaware of what Green label was.
• Overall close to 40% were not aware of the Green label was.
(Tan, 2022)
Figure 8
Examples of Eco-labels in Singapore (Tan, 2022)
Table 1
Distribution by age on familiarity with Singapore GreenLabel, (Tan, 2022)
Q: How familiar with
Singapore green label,
n=1125
Answer distributed by age (%)
ALL 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 5
Quite / Very familiar 8.1 3.3 11.0 11.3 9.3 5
Not familiar / Have no
seen this before
37.4 53.2 38.2 27.4 34.7 3
How much are they willing to pay ?
• More than half were not willing to pay more than
10% coffee/tea
• For all flour milk, it was most likely a consumer was
willing to pay between 50%-80% more or not more
than 10%
(Tan, 2022)
Figure 9
Illustration of how much more (%) willing to pay for Eco-Label (Tan,
2022)
7
.
9
6
.
1
7
.
9
5
.
5
14

15. Evaluation of various stakeholders perspectives
of alternative packaging business and building
shared values.
Fig 1 Source: Simon-Kucher & Partners; Global Sustainability study 2021
(N=10281).
• The research has been conducted by 10,281 consumers globally
and aware the importance of sustainability.
• The research is based on sustainability topics which has been
categorised into aspire, commit, prioritise & spend.
• By the year 2032 the market share of sustainability packaging is
projected to reach up to the size of USD $200 billions.
• The year on year of market growth is estimated up to 8%.
Fig 2 Source: www.precedenceresearch.com

16. STAKEHOLDERS
CONSUMERS
SUPPLIERS
• End user
• Regular Shopper
• Restaurant
owners
SUSTAINABILITY
&
ENVIRONMENT
CORPORATE
INVESTORS
GOVERNMENTS
• Legislation
• Regulations
• Associated
agencies (NEA,
FDA & etc)
• Wealthy
Individuals
• Investment
Companies
• Distributors
• Supply Chain
• Vendors
• Manufacturers
• Research
companies
• Private companies
• Government
companies
16

17. PERSPECTIVES Government
Investors
Corporate
Suppliers
Consumers • Needs to understand
consumer perspective
of what they want.
• Be knowledgeable of
consumers interest to
tackle the environment
issues.
• Helping company to do
better together with
policy maker (Hao et al.,
2019).
• Companies with good
green records can
increase their revenue
as the global market
forecast fig 2 to growth
rapidly.
• Transforming company
policy towards greener
future.
• Being a suitable supplier
emphasizing in sustainability
is
• Guarantee to businesses
management with green
practices
• Supplying raw materials or
products they procured for
business and consumers to
be free from any environment
issues.
• Abiding to all or any
standards set by businesses.
• Incorporating green circular
economy.
• Need to make the necessary
changes in the supply chain
for better collaboration with
businesses.
• Placing robust and firm
regulations.
• Ensuring that business
and innovators are
among the key factors to
conserve natural
resource and protecting
the environment (Higgins
et al., 2018).
• Assisting business to
push for green initiatives
with national green
guidelines.
• Giving out green
incentives.
• Promoting business
branding adhering to
green policies.
• Emphasizing sustainable
economy growth.
17
• Research in fig 1 shows
an increase in
consumers concerns
• Impact from waste
package product has on
the environment.
• Increase consumers
behaviours changes to
accepting green
products.
• Consumers shows more
interest in purchasing
alternatives package
products to non eco
friendly pacakges
(Ketelsen et al., 2020).
• Even though price would
be higher.
• Vital role to mitigate
plastic waste problems
(Rhein & Schmid, 2020).
• Integral role supporting
business to funds their
innovation for better
alternative packaging.
• Funds injected can help
innovators find necessary
packaging ideas which in
turn eliminating any
environmental issues
(Silva et al., 2021).
• Creating opportunities to
business by collaborate
with research companies
• Develop packaging
platforms relying on
renewable resources
(Moustafa et al., 2019).
• Recognize the positive
value in investing eco
companies.

18. EVALUATION
CONSUMERS SUPPLIERS CORPORATE INVESTORS GOVERNMENT
RELEVANCE
• Social responsibility
• Unity for common
cause
• Eco friendly
product choice.
• Influencing in green
market trend.
• Conserving natural
resource.
• Meeting in demand for
consumers and business.
• Adhering to
environmental
requirements
• Acknowledged the
importance of green
business operations.
• Consumer demands for
sustainable products.
• Corporate social
responsibility (CSR)
• Access to fresh funds.
• Seeking to invest in
prospect green
companies.
• Confidence with green
market growth.
• Protecting the
environment
• Promoting renewable
resources
• Consumers protection.
IMPACT
• Increase in positive
behavior.
• Reducing waste.
• Dispose waste
properly
• Consumer
awareness.
• Ensuring materials
source is sustainable
produce.
• Partnering with business
for green practices.
• Adapting to long term
business profitability.
• Better waste management
• Supporting in company
transformation.
• Driving for innovations.
• Funds for new
sustainable research
study.
• Regulating waste
disposal management
• Maintaining
sustainable circular
economy.
• Promoting green
initiatives.
CHALLENGES
• Prefer more
information about
packaging.
• Better packaging
design
• Less varieties to
select in the market
• High demand for
sustainable
packing.
• Big competitive green
market.
• Changing methods ways
of doing things.
• Aligning to meet business
standards.
• Demand for better product
design.
• Improving company
branding.
• Producing products for
more affordable.
• Updating with regulations.
• Embracing green mindset.
• Advocating companies
to ensure compliance to
green practices.
• Immediate returns may
not be possible due to
long term commitment.
• Resources to monitor
data.
• Convincing business
to change to
sustainable practices.
• Maintaining green
policy.
• Cultural differences
which can influence
sustainability.
18

19. Business Strategies For Food Packaging
 Effective food packaging plays a crucial role in the success of
any food business. The quality and freshness of products also
serve as a powerful marketing tool to attract consumers. This
requires careful product protection, sustainability, branding,
and consumer convenience.
The business strategy should consider complying with future
sustainability requirements
• Active packaging
• Intelligent packaging
• Bioactive packaging
• Intelligent supply chain
• Edible packaging.
• Recycled packaging materials.
Example of Biz Strategy to comply with further requirements
for sustainability:
• 5-year plan for 25% of petroleum plastic to Bio-base:
• Harvest production waste from the process as feedstock for Bio-basses:
• Start to Apply LCA (Life Cycle Analysis) on products to map out a
sustainability roadmap (where we can reduce/replace:
• Market / Promote sustainability gain for customer awareness/branding:
• Lobby with goy for eco-label (stricter) for comp edge
19

20. Packaging solutions in this category
include the Triple Bottom Line (TBL)
approach based on economic, social, and
environmental impacts (Jain and
Hudnurkar, 2022
It is also noted that sustainable packaging
always comes with an environmental
impact, therefore ‘more’ and ‘less’
sustainable packaging would be a more
appropriate term (Boz et al., 2020
FOOD PACKAGING STRATEGY
The following graph summarises the key issues to consider in the
design and selection of sustainable food packaging strategy options.
FOOD PACKAGING STRATEGY
20

21. CIRCULAR ECONOMY
Even though sustainability and circular
economy have similar concerns, the
terms have different focal points.
Sustainability aims to integrate the three
pillars in organisations by reducing
material flows and unwanted outcomes
from production and consumption
processes. Circular economy, on the
other hand, stretches the boundaries of
environmental sustainability (Genovese et
al., 2015), aiming to maximise the value
of products and materials, and to
minimise resource consumption. It also
challenges the paradigm of the current
(linear) business models (Genovese et
al., 2015; Pieroni et al., 2019). The Ellen
MacArthur Foundation (2013, p.7) defines
circular economy as:
21

22. Recyclable packaging is made of materials that
can be re-introduced within the circle with the
help of disposal, collection, sorting, and
reprocessing with mechanical or chemical
methods. Efficiency or economics are not
included in this definition, nor if recycling is
down-cycling. Muranko et al. (2021), Wang
et al. (2021)
Circular packaging is designed according to the
principles of the circular economy (recycled
content, reusability, design for disassembly, and
recyclability) to preserve natural resources,
optimize their use, and minimize the negative
impact on the environment. Zero-waste
packaging is specifically focused on the
material flow, with no waste. However, often
confused with zero landfill. In this case also, at
end of life, the packages are reused, repaired,
or redistributed within the system. Testa et al.
(2020); Jäger and Piscicelli (2021); Song et al.
(2015)
RECYCLING
22

23. Reference
A.L.P. Silva, J.C. Prata, T.R. Walker, A.C. Duarte, W. Ouyang, D.Barcelò, T. Rocha-Santos (2021). Increased plastic pollution due to COVID-19 pandemic: challenges and
recommendations. Chem. Eng. J., 405 (2021), Article 126683
Asgher, M., Qamar, S. A., Bilal, M., & Iqbal, H. M. N. (2020). Bio-based Active Food Packaging Materials: Sustainable alternative to conventional petrochemical-based
packaging materials. Food Research International, 137, 109625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109625
Boz, Z., Korhonen, V., & Koelsch Sand, C. (2020). Consumer considerations for the implementation of sustainable packaging: A Review. Sustainability, 12(6), 2192.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062192
Boz, Z., Korhonen, V., & Sand, C. K. (2020). Consumer Considerations for the Implementation of Sustainable Packaging: A review. Sustainability, 12(6), 2192.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062192
Colorado, U. (2021, April 15). The hidden damage of landfills. Environmental Center. https://www.colorado.edu/ecenter/2021/04/15/hidden-damage-
landfills#:~:text=Environmental%20Impact%20of%20Landfills&text=Along%20with%20methane%2C%20landfills%20also,create%20smog%20if%20left%20uncontrolled
Cristofoli, N. L., Lima, A. R., Tchonkouang, R. D., Quintino, A. C., & Vieira, M. C. (2023). Advances in the food packaging production from Agri-Food Waste and by-
products: Market trends for a sustainable development. Sustainability, 15(7), 6153. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15076153
Cruz, R. M., & Varzakas, T. (2023). Frontiers on Sustainable Food Packaging. Foods, 12(2), 349. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12020349
Deal, D. (2020b, October 6). Alternatives to plastic packaging for products. Deal Design. https://dealdesign.com/2020/10/05/alternatives-to-plastic-packaging/
Diggle, A., & Walker, T. R. (2022). Environmental and economic impacts of mismanaged plastics and measures for mitigation. Environments, 9(2), 15.
https://doi.org/10.3390/environments9020015
EcoEnclose. (2019). What Is Plastic Anyway?.https://www.ecoenclose.com/blog/what-is-plastic-anyway/

24. Ferrario, M. (2023), The 7 different types of plastic. Plastics For Change. https://www.plasticsforchange.org/blog/different-types-of-plastic
Gaspar, M. C., & Braga, M. E. (2023). Edible films and coatings based on agrifood residues: A new trend in the Food Packaging Research. Current Opinion in Food
Science, 50, 101006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2023.101006
Gogulapati, S. (2022). Edible packaging: Composition, shelf life and safety. International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology, 10(1),
1268–1270. https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2022.40036
Granato, G., Fischer, A. R. H., & van Trijp, H. C. M. (2022). The price of sustainability: How consumers trade-off conventional packaging benefits against sustainability.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 365, 132739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132739
Guillard, V., Gaucel, S., Fornaciari, C., Angellier-Coussy, H., Buche, P., & Gontard, N. (2018). The next generation of sustainable food packaging to preserve our
environment in a circular economy context. Frontiers. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2018.00121/full
Hamed, I., Jakobsen, A. N., & Lerfall, J. (2021). Sustainable edible packaging systems based on active compounds from food processing byproducts: A review.
Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 21(1), 198–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/15414337.12870
Higgins, L.M.; Schroeter, C.; Wright, C. (2018) Lighting the flame of entrepreneurship among agribusiness students. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 2018, 21, 121–132.
Jain, P., and Hudnurkar, M. (2022). Sustainable packaging in the FMCG industry. Clean. Responsible Consum. 7:100075. doi: 10.1016/j.clrc.2022.100075
Krauter, V., Bauer, A.-S., Milousi, M., Dörnyei, K. R., Ganczewski, G., Leppik, K., Krepil, J., & Varzakas, T. (2022). Cereal and confectionary packaging: Assessment of
sustainability and environmental impact with a special focus on greenhouse gas emissions. Foods, 11(9), 1347. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11091347
M. Ketelsen, M. Janssen, U. Hamm (2020). Consumers’ response to environmentally-friendly food packaging-a systematic review J. Clean. Prod., 254 (2020),
Article 120123, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120123

25. Ma, G. G. H., Rau,P.-L. P., & Guo, Z. (2018). The Effects of Environmental Awareness and Consumption Value on Green Makeup Product Purchase Intentions.
Psychology, 9, 1898-1916. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2018.97110
Ma, X., & Jiang, Q. (2019, March 18). How to balance the trade-off between economic development and climate change?. MDPI.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061638
Moustafa, H.; Youssef, A.M.; Darwish, N.A.; Abou-Kandil, A.I. (2019). Eco-friendly polymer composites for green packaging: Future vision and challenges. Compos. Part
B Eng. 2019, 172, 16–25.
Muranko, Ż., Tassell, C., Zeeuw van der Laan, A., and Aurisicchio, M. (2021). Characterisation and environmental value proposition of reuse models for fast-moving
consumer goods: reusable packaging and products. Sustainability 13:2609. doi: 10.3390/ su13052609
Nair, S. S., Trafiałek, J., & Kolanowski, W. (2023). Edible packaging: A technological update for the Sustainable Future of the Food Industry. Applied Sciences, 13(14),
8234. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13148234
Oláh, J., Kitukutha, N., Haddad, H., Pakurár, M., Máté, D., & Popp, J. (2018). Achieving sustainable e-commerce in environmental, social and economic dimensions by
taking possible trade-offs. Sustainability, 11(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010089
Orzan, G., Cruceru, A. F., Bălăceanu, C. T., and Chivu, R. G. (2018). Consumers’ behavior concerning sustainable packaging: an exploratory study on Romanian
consumers. Sustainability 10:1787. doi: 10.3390/su10061787
Papyrus Australia. (2021). Take, make, waste, repeat. Papyrus. https://papyrusaustralia.com.au/2021/10/take-make-waste repeat/
Plastic Europe. (2021). Plastics – the Facts. 2022.
https://plasticseurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/PE- PLASTICS-THE-FACTS_FINAL_DIGITAL-5.pdf
Prakash, G., & Mishra, R. K. (2023). Edible and bio-based food packaging: A Review. The Pharma Innovation, 12(7S), 1497–1505.
https://doi.org/10.22271/tpi.2023.v12.i7sr.21623

26. S. Rhein, M. Schmid (2020). Consumers’ awareness of plastic packaging: more than just environmental concerns. Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 162 (2020),
Article 105063, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105063
Sustainable Packaging Alliance (2004). Defining sustainable packaging. Available at: http://www.sustainablepack.org/.
Sustainable Packaging Coalition (2005). Definition of sustainable packaging. Available at: http://www.sustainablepackaging.org/.
Sustainable Packaging Coalition (2009). Sustainable packaging indicators and metrics framework. Available at:
http://www.sustainablepackaging.org/Uploads/Resources/ spc_indicator_metrics_framework.pdf.
Sustainable supply chain management and the transition towards a circular economy: evidence and some applications Omega (2015), 10.1016/j.omega.2015.05.015
Testa, F., Iovino, R., and Iraldo, F. (2020). The circular economy and consumer behaviour: the mediating role of information seeking in buying circular packaging. Bus.
Strateg. Environ. 29, 3435–3448. doi: 10.1002/bse.2587
The European commission. (2019). The European Green Deal.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:b828d165-1c22-11ea-8c1f-01aa75ed71a1.0002.02/DOC_1&format=PDF
Towards the Circular Economy. Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition (2013
Trajkovska Petkoska, A., Daniloski, D., D’Cunha, N. M., Naumovski, N., & Broach, A. T. (2021). Edible packaging: Sustainable solutions and novel trends in Food
Packaging. Food Research International, 140, 109981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109981
United Nations. (2023). The Sustainable Development Goals Report.
https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2023/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2023.pdf

27. Versino, F., Ortega, F., Monroy, Y., Rivero, S., López, O. V., & García, M. A. (2023). Sustainable and bio-based Food
Packaging: A review on past and current Design Innovations. Foods, 12(5), 1057.
https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12051057
Worldbank, W. (2017). What a waste 2.0. Trends in Solid Waste Management. https://datatopics.worldbank.org/what
waste/trends_in_solid_waste_management.html
Y. Hao, H. Liu, H. Chen, Y. Sha, H. Ji, J. Fan (2019). What affects consumers’ willingness to pay for green packaging?
Evidence from China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 141 (2019), pp. 21-29, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.001