Sustainability and Circularity
Sustainability and circularity define the foundation of responsible packaging, no longer just a container but a system designed to preserve ecosystems, support communities, and enable long-term innovation across the entire value chain.
Design for Sustainability and Circularity
Design for sustainability and circularity has progressively moved beyond a logic centred on the optimisation of the single product, now configuring itself as a systemic approach that integrates environmental, social, and economic dimensions. Sustainability, therefore, is no longer limited to the reduction of impacts, but entails the redefinition of production and consumption models, the extension of life cycles, and the activation of cultural and behavioural transformations. Design thus assumes an extended responsibility, oriented not only towards the selection of materials and processes, but towards the development of solutions capable of influencing the relational systems in which the product is embedded.
Within this context, packaging represents a strategic domain where these dynamics converge. On the one hand, it constitutes one of the main sources of environmental pressure; on the other, it emerges as a privileged device for enabling circular strategies. Practices such as reuse, recycling, and return systems contribute to maintaining material value over time, while the transition towards mono-material solutions, bio-based materials, and refill systems reflects a progressive shift away from the linear model. Packaging thus emerges as an operational and communicative infrastructure capable of orienting behaviours and supporting more conscious consumption patterns.
This transformation is accompanied by the increasing integration of digital technologies. Tools such as intelligent labels, traceability systems, and digital twins enable the monitoring of flows, transparency across the supply chain, and access to extended lifecycle information. These devices contribute to the development of more efficient and interoperable circular systems, while simultaneously introducing new criticalities related to energy consumption and electronic waste management. The design challenge therefore lies in governing a “twin transition”, in which sustainability and digitalisation must be critically and coherently integrated .
From a historical perspective, this shift is part of a broader evolution of design, which has moved from the “green design” approaches of the 1970s, through Ecodesign and systemic approaches, to its current configuration as an anticipatory and transformative practice. Within this framework, packaging assumes a central role: no longer merely a technical solution, but a cultural device and a mediating infrastructure between actors, processes, and values. Its design thus becomes a key field for aligning innovation, responsibility, and the transition towards circular and sustainable models in the long term.
LCSA: an Integrated Approach to Measuring Packaging Sustainability across the life Cycle
Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) can be understood as a fundamental framework for guiding packaging design within a systemic and integrated perspective. Moving beyond traditional approaches focused exclusively on the environmental dimension, LCSA articulates sustainability across three interdependent axes—environmental, economic, and social—enabling packaging to be interpreted as part of a complex system that unfolds לאורך its entire life cycle. From raw material extraction to production, from distribution to use, and through to recovery or disposal phases, packaging is analysed in relation to the flows of materials, energy, value, and impact that traverse the supply chain.
The value of LCSA lies in its composite nature, which integrates complementary methodologies within a single interpretative framework. The environmental dimension is examined through Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), which quantifies indicators such as greenhouse gas emissions, resource consumption, and impacts on ecosystems. The economic dimension is addressed through Life Cycle Costing (LCC), enabling the evaluation of costs across the entire life cycle, including production, logistics, use, and end-of-life. This is complemented by Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA), which introduces a qualitative and relational reading of impacts, considering working conditions, equity, health, and implications for the communities involved. The integration of these three perspectives enables the construction of a multidimensional assessment capable of capturing the complexity of design decisions.
When applied to packaging, LCSA makes it possible to move beyond partial optimisation logics by highlighting trade-offs across different sustainability dimensions. A design solution, such as the introduction of bio-based materials, reusable systems, or lightweighting strategies, is not evaluated solely in terms of environmental performance, but also in relation to its economic feasibility and social implications.
In this sense, LCSA makes explicit the tensions between often divergent objectives: for instance, a reduction in environmental impact may lead to increased costs or require infrastructures that are not yet widely available, while circular solutions may generate new logistical or operational complexities.
The relevance of this approach is particularly evident in the packaging sector, characterised by strong systemic complexity and a multiplicity of actors. Producers, material suppliers, logistics operators, retailers, end users, and end-of-life management systems jointly contribute to defining the sustainability profile of packaging. Within this context, LCSA operates as a decision-support tool, enabling the comparison of alternative scenarios and the identification of solutions that maximise overall value across the supply chain, rather than optimising isolated parameters.
LCSA thus contributes to redefining packaging not as a static artefact, but as a dynamic device embedded within networks of material, economic, and social relations. Its application supports a shift towards extended responsibility, enabling informed and anticipatory decision-making and contributing to the development of more resilient, transparent, and coherent packaging systems aligned with the objectives of the circular transition.
Circular Strategies for Sustainable Packaging
In the context of packaging, circularity implies moving beyond the linear model of production and consumption towards systems in which materials and resources are kept in use for as long as possible, preserving their value and functionality. This perspective does not concern end-of-life management alone, but operates upstream in the design phase, guiding decisions that affect the entire life cycle of packaging and the relationships it activates within the supply chain. One of the most consolidated operational references is represented by the 9R framework, which structures a hierarchical set of design and decision-making strategies.
At the top of this hierarchy are prevention-oriented actions:
- Refuse: eliminating unnecessary packaging or redundant components, thereby preventing waste generation at its source.
- Rethink: redesigning systems and usage models, for example through shared, modular, or service-integrated packaging.
- Reduce: optimising the use of materials and energy, simplifying structures and reducing weight and volume without compromising performance.
A second group of strategies concerns the extension of packaging lifespan:
- Reuse: designing packaging to be used multiple times, within return systems, refill schemes, or closed-loop models.
- Repair: enabling the restoration of damaged components in order to extend system longevity.
- Refurbish: updating or improving existing packaging to meet new functional or regulatory standards.
- Remanufacture: recovering parts or components to produce new packaging with the same original function.
- Repurpose: assigning packaging or its elements to uses different from their initial purpose.
When these options are no longer viable, recovery strategies apply:
- Recycle: transforming materials into new raw materials, preserving as much of their value as possible.
- Recover: extracting energy from materials (for example through incineration), representing the least circular option.
The adoption of these strategies is no longer solely a design choice, but is increasingly shaped and constrained by the European regulatory framework. The Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) introduces stringent targets in terms of waste reduction, recyclability, and the expansion of reuse and refill systems. In particular, the regulation explicitly promotes models based on refill and reuse, establishing targets and requirements that directly influence design decisions, logistical configurations, and business models.
In this sense, regulation does not act only as a constraint, but as a lever for transformation, steering packaging towards systemic solutions aligned with circular economy principles.
Applied to packaging, the 9R framework highlights how design does not concern the artefact alone, but also usage systems, logistical infrastructures, and the behaviours of involved actors. From the design of reusable and modular packaging to the development of service models that reduce the very need for packaging, circularity emerges as a systemic design device. Within this perspective, packaging assumes an active role in the transition, contributing to the development of more efficient supply chains, the reduction of waste, and the activation of regenerative practices aligned with long-term sustainability objectives.
Sustainability and Circularity Glossary
European Regulatory Framework on Sustainability
Designing packaging in Europe today means operating within a regulatory framework that directly influences design decisions. Regulation no longer concerns only waste management, but shapes packaging configurations from the earliest stages: materials, weight, volume, recyclability, reusability, refill systems, labelling, and access to information. In this sense, design cannot be limited to downstream compliance; regulation must be assumed as a parameter already at the concept definition stage.
The primary reference is the PPWR – Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation. The European Commission presents it as the new framework for packaging and packaging waste: it entered into force on 11 February 2025 and will generally apply from 12 August 2026. The regulation covers all packaging, regardless of material or origin, and establishes requirements concerning manufacturing, composition, reusability or recoverability, as well as waste prevention and management measures. Its stated objectives include ensuring that all packaging on the EU market is recyclable by 2030 in an economically viable way, increasing the use of recycled plastics, and reducing reliance on virgin raw materials.
For design practice, this translates into highly concrete implications. Packaging must be conceived to be simpler, more legible, and more compatible with real collection and recycling systems. This entails, for example, reducing material combinations that are difficult to separate, limiting superfluous components, controlling weight and volume, avoiding overpackaging, and designing formats that facilitate material identification and correct disposal. The regulation also addresses specific cases: it introduces restrictions on certain single-use plastic packaging, such as single-portion formats and sachets for condiments or sauces, and requires takeaway businesses to allow customers to use their own containers at no additional cost. This shifts the focus from packaging as an isolated object to packaging as part of a broader system of use and service.
A particularly relevant aspect concerns reuse. The PPWR does not merely promote it in principle, but links it to performance requirements. The Commission specifies that reusable packaging must be capable of multiple use cycles, comply with health, safety, and hygiene requirements, be suitable for emptying, cleaning, and refilling, and maintain compliance with food safety regulations. This means that designing for reuse is not simply a matter of increasing container robustness; it requires addressing washability, durability, reversibility of closure systems, traceability of cycles, return logistics, and the quality of user experience in return and refill processes.
Alongside the PPWR, the ESPR – Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation further expands the scope. It introduces the Digital Product Passport (DPP) as a digital identity for products, components, and materials. The DPP collects information relevant to sustainability, circularity, and regulatory compliance, making it accessible in electronic form to consumers, producers, and authorities. For packaging, this has a clear design implication: packaging increasingly becomes an interface for accessing data, through codes, markings, or other devices that connect the physical artefact to dynamic information on composition, origin, maintenance, disassembly, end-of-life, and environmental performance.
The informational dimension is therefore central. The DPP aims to strengthen transparency and sustainability through more accessible and standardised data. From a design perspective, this requires careful attention to information design: where to place the code, how to ensure accessibility, how to avoid visual overload, and how to integrate digital content without compromising legibility, inclusivity, and coherence with the user experience. Packaging thus evolves from a material support into a threshold between product, user, and data infrastructure.
Another decisive aspect concerns the presence of critical substances. The Commission indicates that the PPWR also introduces measures to minimise substances of concern, including restrictions on PFAS in food-contact packaging beyond certain thresholds. This has immediate implications for design: material selection can no longer be driven solely by mechanical performance, barrier properties, or cost, but must more rigorously consider chemical safety, regulatory compliance, and long-term market viability within the European context.
For these reasons, the issue today is not merely design for compliance, but design through regulation. Regulation becomes a matrix for design. It requires packaging to be more recyclable, more compatible with reuse and refill systems, more transparent in informational terms, and more aligned with existing infrastructures for collection, treatment, and control. Operationally, this leads design to address key questions from the outset: is the format truly necessary? Can it be reused? Is it easily emptied, cleaned, and refilled? Are the materials compatible with existing waste streams? Is the information accessible and verifiable?