Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAlmeida, Cheila
dc.contributor.authorLoubet, Philippe
dc.contributor.authorPacheco da Costa, Tamiris
dc.contributor.authorQuinteiro, Paula
dc.contributor.authorLaso, Jara
dc.contributor.authorBaptista de Sousa, David
dc.contributor.authorCooney, Ronan
dc.contributor.authorMellett, Sinead
dc.contributor.authorSonnemann, Guido
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez, Carlos José
dc.contributor.authorRowan, Neil J.
dc.contributor.authorClifford, Eoghan
dc.contributor.authorRuiz-Salmón, Israel
dc.contributor.authorMargallo, María
dc.contributor.authorAldaco, Rubén
dc.contributor.authorNunes, Maria Leonor
dc.contributor.authorDias, Ana Cláudia
dc.contributor.authorMarques, António
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-15T15:58:31Z
dc.date.available2023-02-15T15:58:31Z
dc.date.copyright2021
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationAlmeida, C/, Loubet, P., Pacheco da Costa, T., Quinteiro, P. Laso, J., Baptista de Sousa, D., Cooney, R., Mellett, S., Sonnemann, G., Rodríguez, C.J.,, Rowan, N.,, Clifford, E., Ruiz-Salmón, I., Margallo, M., Aldaco, R.,, Nunes, M.L., Dias, A.C.,, Marques, A. (2022). Packaging environmental impact on seafood supply chains: A review of life cycle assessment studies. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 26:1961–1978. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13189en_US
dc.identifier.issn1088-1980
dc.identifier.urihttps://research.thea.ie/handle/20.500.12065/4388
dc.description.abstractPackaging is fundamental for food preservation and transportation but generates an environmental burden from its production and end-of-life management. This review evaluates packaging contribution to the environmental performance of seafood products. Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies were evaluated by both qualitative and quantitative analysis. The qualitative analysis assessed how direct (e.g., packaging material) and indirect impacts (e.g., influence on seafood loss and waste) have been considered, while the quantitative analysis evaluated packaging contribution to products’ weight and climate change impact. Qualitative analysis revealed that seafood LCAs focus mainly on direct environmental impacts arising from packaging materials, for which some articles conducted sensitivity analysis to assess materials substitution. Recycling was found to be the most common recommendation to diminish direct potential environmental impacts arising from packaging end-of-life. However, standardized recovery rates and other end-of-life options (e.g., reuse), should be considered. Quantitative analysis revealed that cans’ production contributes significantly to the overall climate change impact for canned products. On average, it contributes to 42% of a product’s climate change impact and 27% of a product’s weight. Packaging has a lower contribution when considering freezing, chilling, and other post-harvesting processing. It represents on average less than 5% of a product's climate change impact (less than 1 kg CO2 eq/kg) and 6% of a product's weight. Packaging material production is more relevant to aluminum, tinplate, and glass than for plastic and paper. Therefore, it is essential to accurately include these materials and their associated processes in inventories to improve the environmental assessment of seafood products.en_US
dc.formatPDFen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Industrial Ecologyen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectCanningen_US
dc.subjectFIsh food packagingen_US
dc.subjectIndustrial ecologyen_US
dc.subjectLife cycle assessmenten_US
dc.subjectPlasticen_US
dc.titlePackaging environmental impact on seafood supply chains: a review of life cycle assessment studiesen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationTechnological University of the Shannon: Midlands Midwesten_US
dc.contributor.sponsorThis work was supported by the NEPTUNUS project (EAPA_576/2018). The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of Interreg Atlantic Area. Ana Cláudia Dias, Paula Quinteiro and Tamíris da Costa acknowledge FCT/MCTES for the financial support to CESAM (UIDB/50017/2020+UIDP/50017/2020), through national funds, and Ana Cláudia Dias and Paula Quinteiro to the research contracts CEECIND/02174/2017 and CEECIND/00143/2017, respectively.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewyesen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jiec.13189en_US
dc.identifier.endpage1978en_US
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3498-981Xen_US
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1228-3733en_US
dc.identifier.startpage1961en_US
dc.identifier.volume26en_US
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subject.departmentBioscience Research Institute TUS: Midlandsen_US
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States