LCA Food 2012 in Saint Malo, France! - Manifestations et colloques ...

PARALLEL SESSION 3B: PACKAGING 8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
For example, consider the attribute contain the desired quantity. If the offered quantity of fresh bread does
not agree with the desired, the service of eating fresh bread may not be used for the entire piece of bread,
some may be frozen, some may be eaten “old”, and some may be wasted, depending on consumer preferences
and behaviour. Therefore, the size of the bread can affect the consumer behaviour and the amount of
food that is discharged, and thus the environmental outcome. In Australia Bakers Delight introduced small
block loaves of bread provide a simple alternative to the full loaf of bread – potentially reducing associated
food waste for single person or small households (Verghese et al., 2011). By understanding the consumer
preferences and behaviour the services that are provided from a specific packaging attribute can be designed
to better meet the consumer needs and facilitate consumers to waste less food.
5. Conclusion
There are many packaging attributes that influence consumer behaviour and the portion of food that is
wasted. A small change in the percentage of food wasted significantly affects the outcome of an LCA of food
products. Due to the high environmental impact of the food sector, it is important to include these aspects in
the LCA of food products, especially when the results are used for decision-making about packaging. There
is certainly a long journey ahead until this can be done in a standardized way. It will be necessary for the
food packaging supply chain including food producers, manufacturers, brandowners and retailers to include
both qualitative and quantitative information about how different packaging attributes influence consumer
behaviour and food waste. It will also be important to consider and include consumer behaviour in LCAstudies
of food products to take into account the environmetnal impacts of the 30% of bought food that is
ultimately wasted. If a LCA study is used for packaging development, or for packaging regulations, the
packaging function to avoid food waste certainly should be included to inform better decisions. In such studies,
the proper functional unit should be set to “consumed food” rather than “delivered food” or “bought
food”. The assumptions of how different packaging attributes affect food waste should also be clearly stated
and discussed.
6. References
APCC. 2010. Australian Packaging Covenant – A commitment by governments and industry to the sustainable design, use and recovery
of packaging. Australian Packaging Covenant Council, Amended 10 October 2011.
Audsley, E., Brander, M., Chatterton, J., Murphy-Bokern, D., Webster, C., and Williams, A. 2009. “How low can we go? An assessment
of greenhouse gas emissions from the UK food system and the scope to reduce them by 2050”. FCRN-WWF-UK.
Baker, D., J. Fear and R. Denniss. 2009. What a waste: An analysis of household expenditure on food. Policy Brief No. 6. Canberra,
The Australia Institute.
Carlsson-Kanyama, A. 1998. "Climate change and dietary choices—how can emissions of green-house gases from food consumption
be reduced?" Food Policy 23(3/4): 277-193.)
DECCW. 2009. "Food Waste Avoidance Benchmark Study 2009." Retrieved 12/10/2010, 2010, from
http://www.lovefoodhatewaste.nsw.gov.au/portals/0/kit/print/10242FWAFactsheetCMYK_print.pdf.
Duizer, L.M., Robertson, T., Han, J., 2009. Requirements for packaging from an ageing consumer's perspective. Packaging Technology
and Science. Vol 22, 4, 187-197
Eady, S. J., P. Sanguansri, R. Bektash, B. Ridoutt, L. Simons and P. Swiergon. 2011. Carbon foot-print for Australian agricultural
products and downstream food products in the supermarket. ALCAS Conference. Melbourne, ALCAS.
Edvardsson, B., Gustafsson, A., Roos, I., 2005. Service Portraits in Service Research – A Critical Review, International Journal of
Service Industry Management. Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 107-121.
Engström, R., Carlsson-Kanyama, A., 2004. Food losses in food service institutions: Examples from Sweden. Food Policy. Vol. 29,
No 3, pp. 203-294.
European Commission. COM(2006) 767 final. 2006. Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on
the implementation of Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste and its impact on the environment, as well as the
functioning of the internal market.
Ecoinvent .2012. Ecoinvent Database v2.2. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories. Hamburg.
European Council. 1994. Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste. Official Journal of the European Union.
31/12/1994; L365:0010 - 0023.
Hammond, G. and C. Jones. 2011. Inventory of Carbon & Energy (ICE). University of Bath. Department of Mechanical Engineering.
Bath. ICE V2.0.
Hanssen, O.J., 1998. Environmental impacts of product systems in a life cycle perspective: a survey of five product types based on
life cycle assessments studies. Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 6, pp. 299-311.
Jelsma, J. 2006. Designing ‘moralized’ products. User Behavior and Technology Development. P.-P. Verbeek and A. Slob. Netherlands,
Springer 221-231.
Lindenthal, T., T. Markut, S. Hörtenhuber and G. Rudolph. 2010. Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Organic and Conventional Foodstuffs
in Austria.
Löfgren, M., 2006. The leader of the pack. Faculty of Economic Sciences, Communication and IT. Karlstad, Karlstad University.
ISBN: 91-7063-089-5.
Löfgren, M., Witell, L., 2005. Kano's Theory of Attractive Quality and Packaging. Quality Management Journal. Vol. 12, pp. 7-20.
Quested, T., Johnson, H., 2009. Household food and drink waste in the UK. wrap. Banbury UK. 2009. ISBN: 1-84405-430-6.
296