Cited by 353Food Waste Reduction and SustainabilityEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact

Environmental impact of packaging and food losses in a life cycle perspective: a comparative analysis of five food items

Williams, Helén, Wikström, Fredrik·2011·Journal of Cleaner Production

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.08.008

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An estimate based on a survey of Swedish households' waste behavior showed that packaging-related FLW (PFLW) contributes to 20% to 25% of a household's total amount of food waste.

    “An estimate based on a survey of Swedish households' waste behavior showed that packaging-related FLW (PFLW) contributes to 20% to 25% of a household's total amount of food waste [39]”
  • The waste associated with emptying a yogurt package was very different between the two surveyed groups, one with education about environmental issues and one without.

    “the waste associated with emptying a yogurt package was very different between the two surveyed groups, one with education about environmental issues and one without [39].”
  • Waste due to the poor emptiability of packaging led to approximately 4% of the total amount of FLW generated by the surveyed households.

    “In total, waste due to the poor emptiability of packaging led to approximately 4% of the total amount of FLW generated by the surveyed households.”
  • In an exploratory study with Swedish households, yogurt and sour milk in liquid packaging board contributed 75%, and other products contributed 25% to the 'difficult-to-empty' waste.

    “In this study, yogurt and sour milk in liquid packaging board contributed 75%, liquid margarine, jam, porridge, mayonnaise, and soups in plastic, glass, fiber-based, or metal packaging 25% to the 'difficult-to-empty' waste.”
  • The viscosity of the food is likely to play an important role, as products with high viscosity were more inclined to stick to the inside of the packaging.

    “The viscosity of the food is likely to play an important role, as products with high viscosity were more inclined to stick to the inside of the packaging.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Williams, H., & Wikström, F.
Affiliations
Karlstad University (SE)
Corresponding author
Williams, Helén
Venue
Journal of Cleaner Production
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-01
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
43-48
ISSN
0959-6526 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1965678164
Cited by
353
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 8
FWCI
13.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Cleaner Production (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Waste Reduction and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Keywords
food packaging, food waste, food loss, environmental impact, life cycle assessment, packaging waste, packaging design, cheese, bread

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review