IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i5p2552-d506642.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon Footprint Comparative Analysis of Cardboard and Plastic Containers Used for the International Transport of Spanish Tomatoes

Author

Listed:
  • Vanesa G. Lo-Iacono-Ferreira

    (Project Management, Innovation and Sustainability (PRINS) Research Centre, Campus de Alcoy, Universitat Politècnica de València, Plaza Ferrándiz y Carbonell 1, 03801 Alcoy, Spain)

  • Rosario Viñoles-Cebolla

    (Project Management, Innovation and Sustainability (PRINS) Research Centre, Campus de Valencia, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

  • María José Bastante-Ceca

    (Project Management, Innovation and Sustainability (PRINS) Research Centre, Campus de Valencia, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

  • Salvador F. Capuz-Rizo

    (Project Management, Innovation and Sustainability (PRINS) Research Centre, Campus de Valencia, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain)

Abstract

Agricultural packaging has a direct impact on the environmental performance of food. The carbon footprint (CF) of two of the most used packaging systems for international transport by road of fruit and vegetables is assessed and compared. Corrugated cardboard boxes (CCB) and polypropylene foldable boxes (PPB) in two different sizes are the object of this study. For the reusable boxes, three different scenarios are considered regarding the number of uses of each box (20, 50, and 100 uses). Product CF ISO 14067:2018 standard is applied, and requirements of ISO 14026:2017 and ISO 14044:2006 are met for a cradle-to-grave CF analysis. Product distribution and return of the empty box are the stages with the most significant impact for PPB over the manufacturing stage. CCB that does not have any returning stage or requirements of sanitation has its main impact in manufacturing. The comparison between both packaging systems of the same size, considering the functional unit and defined scope, points out CCB has a lower CF than PPB.

Suggested Citation

  • Vanesa G. Lo-Iacono-Ferreira & Rosario Viñoles-Cebolla & María José Bastante-Ceca & Salvador F. Capuz-Rizo, 2021. "Carbon Footprint Comparative Analysis of Cardboard and Plastic Containers Used for the International Transport of Spanish Tomatoes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-28, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:5:p:2552-:d:506642
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/5/2552/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/5/2552/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Pauer & Bernhard Wohner & Victoria Heinrich & Manfred Tacker, 2019. "Assessing the Environmental Sustainability of Food Packaging: An Extended Life Cycle Assessment including Packaging-Related Food Losses and Waste and Circularity Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Ólafur Ögmundarson & Markus J. Herrgård & Jochen Forster & Michael Z. Hauschild & Peter Fantke, 2020. "Addressing environmental sustainability of biochemicals," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 3(3), pages 167-174, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Katia Hueso-Kortekaas & José C. Romero & Raquel González-Felipe, 2021. "Energy-Environmental Impact Assessment of Greenhouse Grown Tomato: A Case Study in Almeria (Spain)," World, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-17, September.
    2. Kasper Górny & Natalia Idaszewska & Zuzanna Sydow & Krzysztof Bieńczak, 2021. "Modelling the Carbon Footprint of Various Fruit and Vegetable Products Based on a Company’s Internal Transport Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-15, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christina Tsouti & Christina Papadaskalopoulou & Angeliki Konsta & Panagiotis Andrikopoulos & Margarita Panagiotopoulou & Sofia Papadaki & Christos Boukouvalas & Magdalini Krokida & Katerina Valta, 2023. "Investigating the Environmental Benefits of Novel Films for the Packaging of Fresh Tomatoes Enriched with Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Compounds through Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-22, May.
    2. Monia Niero & Charlotte L. Jensen & Chiara Farné Fratini & Jens Dorland & Michael S. Jørgensen & Susse Georg, 2021. "Is life cycle assessment enough to address unintended side effects from Circular Economy initiatives?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(5), pages 1111-1120, October.
    3. Gonzalo Wandosell & María C. Parra-Meroño & Alfredo Alcayde & Raúl Baños, 2021. "Green Packaging from Consumer and Business Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    4. Cheila Almeida & Philippe Loubet & Tamíris Pacheco da Costa & Paula Quinteiro & Jara Laso & David Baptista de Sousa & Ronan Cooney & Sinead Mellett & Guido Sonnemann & Carlos José Rodríguez & Neil Row, 2022. "Packaging environmental impact on seafood supply chains: A review of life cycle assessment studies," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(6), pages 1961-1978, December.
    5. Marion Garaus & Christian Garaus & Elisabeth Wolfsteiner & Charlotte Jermendy, 2022. "Anthropomorphism as a Differentiation Strategy for Standardized Reusable Glass Containers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-17, August.
    6. Nate Stephens & Rupert A. Hurley & Robert Kimmel & William Bridges & Ami Frierson & Duncan Darby & Jeanne Skaggs & Maggie Albro, 2023. "The Environmental Impacts of Caesar Salad Packaging," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-60, June.
    7. Nathana L. Cristofoli & Alexandre R. Lima & Rose D. N. Tchonkouang & Andreia C. Quintino & Margarida C. Vieira, 2023. "Advances in the Food Packaging Production from Agri-Food Waste and By-Products: Market Trends for a Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-33, April.
    8. Erik Roos Lindgreen & Roberta Salomone & Tatiana Reyes, 2020. "A Critical Review of Academic Approaches, Methods and Tools to Assess Circular Economy at the Micro Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-27, June.
    9. Huang, Yingying & Chen, Xuechu & Liu, Silu & Lu, Jinzhong & Shen, Yingshi & Li, Lei & Peng, Lin & Hong, Jingjie & Zhang, Qiuzhuo & Ostrovsky, Ilia, 2021. "Converting of nuisance cyanobacterial biomass to feedstock for bioethanol production by regulation of intracellular carbon flow: Killing two birds with one stone," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    10. Tian Zeng & Fabien Durif, 2019. "The Influence of Consumers’ Perceived Risks towards Eco-Design Packaging upon the Purchasing Decision Process: An Exploratory Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-29, November.
    11. Karim Naderi Mahdei & Seyed Mohammad Jafar Esfahani & Philippe Lebailly & Thomas Dogot & Steven Passel & Hossein Azadi, 2023. "Environmental impact assessment and efficiency of cotton: the case of Northeast Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(9), pages 10301-10321, September.
    12. Sae Eun Lee & Kyu-Hye Lee, 2024. "Environmentally sustainable fashion and conspicuous behavior," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
    13. Diana Reinales & David Zambrana-Vasquez & Aitana Saez-De-Guinoa, 2020. "Social Life Cycle Assessment of Product Value Chains Under a Circular Economy Approach: A Case Study in the Plastic Packaging Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-17, August.
    14. Amna Farrukh & Sanjay Mathrani & Aymen Sajjad, 2022. "A Systematic Literature Review on Environmental Sustainability Issues of Flexible Packaging: Potential Pathways for Academic Research and Managerial Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-21, April.
    15. Marzena Smol & Renata Koneczna, 2021. "Economic Indicators in Water and Wastewater Sector Contributing to a Circular Economy (CE)," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-13, December.
    16. Nimni Pannila & Madushan Madhava Jayalath & Amila Thibbotuwawa & Izabela Nielsen & T.G.G. Uthpala, 2022. "Challenges in Applying Circular Economy Concepts to Food Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-24, December.
    17. Gianluca Biggi, 2023. "Risk, Precaution, and Regulation in Chemical Search and Innovation: The Case of the EU REACH Legislation," LEM Papers Series 2023/06, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    18. Mark Anthony Camilleri, 2021. "Sustainable Production and Consumption of Food. Mise-en-Place Circular Economy Policies and Waste Management Practices in Tourism Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-13, September.
    19. Agnieszka Nowaczek & Ewa Dziobek & Joanna Kulczycka, 2023. "Benefits and Limitations of Indicators for Monitoring the Transformation towards a Circular Economy in Poland," Resources, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, February.
    20. Emma A. R. Zuiderveen & Koen J. J. Kuipers & Carla Caldeira & Steef V. Hanssen & Mitchell K. Hulst & Melinda M. J. Jonge & Anestis Vlysidis & Rosalie Zelm & Serenella Sala & Mark A. J. Huijbregts, 2023. "The potential of emerging bio-based products to reduce environmental impacts," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-7, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:5:p:2552-:d:506642. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.