ArticleJournal of industrial ecology2024
Environmental analysis of returnable packaging systems in different eCommerce business and packaging management models.
Article in Journal of industrial ecology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is growing environmental concern regarding the increasing quantity of packages in retail eCommerce. This study investigated the environmental impact of two returnable packaging formats, performing life cycle assessment (LCA) case studies based on the Canadian apparel eCommerce market. In case study 1, the brand owner sold and shipped its products to final consumers using an expendable mailer and a returnable mailer that was managed and supplied via the centralized model. In case study 2, the brand owner rented its products to final consumers and shipped them using an expendable corrugated paperboard box and a returnable box that was managed and supplied via the decentralized model. Comparative, contribution, and sensitivity analyses were conducted to analyze and compare the environmental performance of these packaging options. For case study 1, the LCA revealed that the returnable mailer had greater impact than the expandable mailer in 9 of the 10 environmental impact categories, even if the returnable mailer was reused for 40 cycles and the final consumer was in the same city as the brand owner; this was primarily due to the length of transportation. For case study 2, the returnable box had smaller environmental impact than the expendable corrugated paperboard box in 6 of the 10 environmental impact categories, even though the brand owner shipped packages to final consumers a cumulative distance of 9000 km from its starting location. The overall results imply that the environmental burden of returnable packaging is primarily affected by total trip distance and the number of reuses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.