Packaging has a long history intertwined with human civilization, its concept emerging when early humans first utilized tools. One of the earliest examples of "packaging" is likely the use of leaves to wrap food. In modern times, packaging typically refers to an object that encloses and protects products for distribution, storage, transport, sale, use, and reuse. Its core function is to securely safeguard products, but as environmental degradation worsens due to mounting packaging waste, there is growing demand for packaging to be designed, manufactured, consumed, and recycled more sustainably.
Against the urgent need for a healthier, sustainable ecosystem, the circular economy (CE) concept was proposed by EU and Chinese policymakers to address global challenges by closing the product lifecycle loop. Transitioning to CE requires a radical shift from the linear economic model; its fundamental principle is closed resource loops where materials are used, reused, and recycled, creating value across multiple lifecycles. Goods at the end of their service life are converted into resources for others, minimizing waste through this closed-loop system.
CE development demands collaborative efforts from diverse sectors: suppliers, manufacturers, recyclers, distributors, retailers, consumers, and waste collection providers. The packaging industry is a crucial, fast-growing economic sector—its turnover in Western Europe accounts for ~2% of GDP, with the food industry as the top user (nearly 60% of total production). Packaging permeates daily life, but its downside is massive environmental issues from traditional linear "manufacture-transport-consume-dispose" models. Plastics dominate packaging materials: global plastic packaging consumption has surged since the 1950s, accounting for 40.5% of all plastics produced (the EU’s largest plastic-consuming sector). However, recycling rates remain low—34.6% in the EU, with over 23% landfilled; China and the U.S. have even lower rates (25% and 9%, respectively), causing severe pollution.
Packaging involves multiple stakeholders: raw material producers, designers, manufacturers, transporters, distributors, consumers, and authorities. Packaging design is a decisive link in the value chain, as it determines materials, manufacturing processes, and end-of-life options—all critical to CE’s closed-loop model. Yet existing literature reviews rarely systematically address CE-focused packaging design; most focus on consumer behavior, plastic waste management, or recycling techniques, neglecting the design stage. Notably, design influences ~80% of packaging’s environmental impacts. While some studies touch on industrial packaging development and basic design tools, the detailed design process and considerations remain underexplored. No prior review specifically examines packaging design for CE from a design-centric perspective.
Thus, this study focuses on CE-related packaging design, conducting a state-of-the-art literature review. Findings are synthesized into a circular packaging design framework, outlining key factors and considerations for the design process. The paper is structured as follows: Section 1 introduces CE and packaging backgrounds; Section 2 overviews CE-related packaging design regulations/policies at various government levels; Section 3 details the literature review methodology; Section 4 presents systematic reviews of academic publications on CE-focused packaging design; Section 5 discusses results and future research trends.
This section provides an overview of the regulations and policies introduced by governments in different levels for tackling packaging waste challenges and achieving a circular economy.
To address pressing environmental protection challenges, the EU has enacted numerous regulations and policies. The EU Waste Legislation defines targets and provisions for waste recycling: as detailed in the Waste Framework Directive 2018/851, municipal waste reuse and recycling rates must reach 55% by 2025, 60% by 2030, and 65% by 2035. Since packaging waste constitutes a large share of household waste, achieving these goals requires packaging to be designed for multiple reuses and enhanced recyclability.
Among waste types like paper and glass, plastic packaging waste is specifically highlighted in Directive 2018/852, which sets strict weight-based recycling targets: a minimum of 65% of all packaging waste must be recycled by 2025, rising to 70% by 2030. Aligned with EU waste policy and legislation, the first European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy was launched, aiming to improve plastic product design, boost plastic waste recycling rates, and enhance the quality of recycled plastics.
To meet the long-term targets outlined in the EU Waste Legislation, the EU’s “A new Circular Economy Action Plan for a cleaner and more competitive Europe” proposed an action plan. A core component of this plan is designing and producing sustainable products while transforming consumption patterns. The plan focuses on several sectors, with packaging and plastics identified as having high circularity potential. Packaging designers therefore play a pivotal role in advancing the circular economy—by creating sustainable packaging, they can influence consumer behavior and minimize waste throughout both the product manufacturing and consumption stages.
National level
To respond to the EU's Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive 2018/852 and EU Waste Legislation, numerous national governments have formulated corresponding policies. For instance, the UK government issued the Circular Economy Package (CEP) policy statement, which outlines three core requirements for packaging:
(i) packaging must be designed, manufactured, and commercialized to enable reuse or recovery;
(ii) the content of hazardous or noxious substances in packaging must be minimized;
(iii) packaging weight and volume must be restricted to the minimum necessary while ensuring the required levels of hygiene, safety, and consumer acceptance.
In addition, France enacted a new law in 2020 targeting reduced plastic consumption, enhanced reuse and recycling, expanded producer responsibility, and mandatory provision of consumer information to facilitate packaging sorting. Sweden has also announced a national circular economy strategy, with sustainable product and associated packaging design, alongside sustainable material usage, identified as two of its four key focus areas. For details on policies and strategies in other countries, readers are referred to the relevant literature.
Regional level
Aligning with national circular economy (CE) policies and legislation, local authorities have released regional CE strategies and roadmaps tailored to their local economic contexts. These regional plans are shaped not only by environmental considerations but also by the interests of the region's key sectors.
The white paper "City governments and their role in enabling a circular economy transition" summarized municipal CE roadmaps, many of which adopt a sector-specific approach. For example, Rotterdam's circular economy plan prioritizes the bio-based materials sector as a core focus. Another city's CE roadmap proposes measures to cut single-use plastic packaging bag usage—critical as local tourism, a major economic driver, also generates substantial single-use packaging waste. Paris aims to install drinkable fountains to reduce bottled water consumption and associated plastic waste.
Glasgow's circular economy strategy urges designers to select eco-friendly materials, eliminate waste through design, and adhere to principles of design for disassembly and adaptability. Cities worldwide, such as [examples omitted], have developed similar strategies; relevant white papers provide detailed overviews of global municipal circular initiatives.
Across these local government-led CE strategies, a consistent emphasis emerges: to realize circularity, designers and producers must take greater responsibility for post-use waste from their products—responsibility they currently do not fully bear.
Methods
To identify academic studies focusing on packaging design within the circular economy context, a systematic literature review was conducted, drawing on the methodology proposed. The review followed three core steps: planning, execution, and reporting.
In the planning phase, key research keywords were identified alongside a detailed review protocol. The execution step involved searching for literature across several reputable academic databases—including ISI Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Ei Compendex—followed by initial screening and in-depth analysis of relevant sources. Finally, the review findings were synthesized and documented in the reporting stage.
Consistent with the adopted methodology, specific keywords and search terms (listed below) were selected. To ensure a comprehensive review, combinations of these keywords were utilized in multiple database searches to locate studies relevant to circular economy-oriented packaging design. The search was performed exclusively through the aforementioned academic databases to curate suitable literature for the research.
Results and discussions
This section focuses on reviewing the latest research on packaging design in the context of a circular economy. The results of this literature review can be found in the material selection, concept design stage, design development stage, and tools and indicators for design verification. An in-depth discussion was conducted on the results and future research opportunities were identified.
Material selection
Principles of material selection
Material selection lies at the core of the circular economy (CE) concept. The significance of adopting eco-friendly materials has been repeatedly emphasized in academic literature, national government strategies, and public discourse alike. Packaging can be crafted from various materials—paper, glass, metal, plastics, and more—with plastics drawing particular attention: plastic packaging waste constitutes the largest share of packaging waste globally, posing a severe threat to Earth’s ecosystems.
Amid major EU legislative changes, polymer materials used in packaging must now be properly managed throughout the entire product lifecycle. Two critical priorities for meeting EU targets are: reducing packaging waste generation and enhancing the recyclability of packaging materials for material recovery. Waste reduction can be achieved by minimizing material usage through thoughtful design (detailed in subsequent sections on conceptual design, design development, and packaging reuse) and adopting biodegradable materials that avoid landfilling or incineration. Material recycling, meanwhile, can be realized by using recycled materials or those with high recycled content; when recycling is unfeasible, energy recovery (waste-to-energy) serves as a viable alternative. Practical examples include Dell’s green packaging—its trays use over 93% recyclable plastics by weight, including 25% ocean-bound plastics and recycled high-density polyethylene (HDPE) from bottles and food containers—and Adidas-Parley’s A.I.R. strategy, where sea-foam running shoes incorporate polyethylene terephthalate (PET) fiber from plastic bottles and nylon from discarded gill nets.
Beyond CE-specific material selection principles, traditional packaging design criteria remain applicable:
(i) enhancing material functionality to protect product quality;
(ii) cost reduction;
(iii) using clean, safe materials that are non-hazardous to humans and ecosystems.
The following subsections outline the key considerations for selecting materials in circular packaging design.
Properties of reused and recycled packaging materials
Materials and mechanical properties of reused and recycled materials
The viability of closing material loops hinges heavily on the properties of reused and recycled materials—specifically, whether these materials (or the components and products crafted from them) can be effectively recovered, reprocessed, and redistributed for reuse or recycling, given their residual properties, characteristics, and functionalities.
Scholars have urged designers and engineers to understand the material and mechanical properties of packaging plastics, as these can gradually degrade after multiple uses or reprocessing cycles. Research indicates that plastics typically deteriorate to the point of unusability after seven recycling iterations. For example, studies found that the elastic modulus of polypropylene (PP) decreases post-reprocessing, rendering the material less elastic and more brittle; repeated washing also negatively impacts PP packaging quality. Additionally, processing recycled polyethylene terephthalate (PET) increases melt viscosity, reducing material flowability during blow molding and leading to subpar finished products. In contrast, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) retains nearly unchanged mechanical properties across multiple reprocessing cycles, making it superior to PP and PET in this regard. Other research explored the virgin-to-recycled PET blend ratio, finding that a 70/30 mixture exhibits favorable rheological, mechanical, and thermal properties during extrusion. Studies analyzing the processability and mechanical performance of reprocessed PET, polyethylene (PE), and PP samples noted that PET waste—even with high heterogeneity—is well-suited for closed-loop recycling and can be recycled multiple times, whereas PP waste (whether mixed or single-type) is not, due to substantial degradation during recycling. Further research evaluated the impact of ethylene vinyl alcohol (EVOH) content in recycled multilayer HDPE food packaging (e.g., drinkable yoghurt bottles for out-of-home consumption). As cited in prior work, ocean-bound plastics and other recycled HDPE are blended at a 1:3 ratio in some packaging applications, ensuring the chemical composition and end-product quality are not significantly compromised by impurities in recycled plastics. When selecting materials for circular packaging design, designers must also consider subsequent recycling processes: for instance, PET recycling consumes more energy due to its high-temperature resistance and relative inertness. A study on the economic and environmental impacts of various polymers identified PP, PE, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and polylactic acid (PLA) as preferred options, as their production reduces fossil depletion and their recycling requires less energy. Additionally, polyolefins have a higher contaminant sorption rate than PET, necessitating intensive cleaning during recycling and increasing associated costs. For detailed insights into recycling techniques and plastic waste management, readers are referred to the cited literature.
Notably, when selecting potential materials, product application should be a primary consideration, as it largely restricts material availability. For example, refillable hand wash gel packaging requires rigid, durable materials—ideally translucent in specific areas—while returnable drink bottles demand elastic, lightweight materials (to reduce transport costs) with excellent reprocessibility for multiple recycling cycles.
Hazards of recycled materials
While the EU’s Circular Economy Action Plan encourages using recycled materials as a core "golden rule," it is crucial to note that certain recycled materials carry inherent hazards. Designers must be fully aware of these potential risks when using such materials in specific applications—particularly food packaging and children’s toy packaging.
Recycled polymers pose hazards primarily due to phthalates, a class of human health-damaging chemicals commonly added as plasticizers during plastic manufacturing. However, complete elimination of phthalates is not always feasible, as they are critical additives for shaping products into desired forms. Additional phthalates may be introduced during the reprocessing of recycled plastics or later production stages (e.g., labeling and gluing), and these substances are generally not removed during the recycling of household plastic waste.
Researchers have developed a database documenting chemicals used in plastic packaging, including those hazardous to human health and the environment. Studies measuring phthalate content in virgin, recycled, and waste plastics revealed that recycled plastics accumulate more phthalates during the recycling process. Further research linked increased use of recycled PET bottles in food packaging to higher childhood phthalate exposure. Beyond phthalates, other additives—such as flame retardants—have been detected in children's toys, with evidence suggesting these substances enter new product lifecycles via recycled materials. Banned brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) flame retardants have also been found at high concentrations in various new and reusable consumer products and packaging (including children’s toys and automotive components). These bioaccumulative BDEs and other persistent substances cannot be effectively separated from plastic waste streams, so stricter restrictions should be imposed on the use of recycled plastics for specific products and applications.
Conceptual design phase
Upon selecting appropriate materials, the next phase is to generate multiple packaging design concepts. It should be emphasised that this is an iterative process from material selection to conceptual design given their interconnected nature. This subsection reviews and summaries the factors that designers should consider during the concept generation stage.
Reusable packaging
Reusable packaging aligns perfectly with the circular economy concept and should be designers’ primary pursuit where feasible—its use avoids additional costs associated with recycled packaging processing and subsequent remanufacturing. In general, reusable packaging can be categorized into four types: bulk dispenser-refillable (reusable), parent packaging-refillable (bottles and containers), returnable packaging (containers, bottles, cups, and plates), and transit packaging (boxes and soft packages).
Scholars have analyzed factors influencing the economic and environmental impacts of reusable packaging. It was found that return rates, transport distances, and the difficulty and cost of sorting, cleaning, and maintenance exert negative effects on the benefits of reusable packaging—with any increase in these factors undermining its value. A careful balance must be struck between reusable and single-use packaging, considering material production, single-use material disposal, and the increased transport demands of reusable packaging. Additionally, when designing reusable packaging for markets traditionally reliant on single-use options, designers need to understand the barriers to its adoption. Research indicates that introducing reusable packaging requires systemic changes not only for producers and retailers but also for consumers, which is only achievable through supply chain reorganization and new investments in production lines. Below is a summary of key barriers for each stakeholder:
Producers: Increased logistics complexity; supply chain reorganization to adapt to new packaging and inventory scenarios; higher costs and delays in handling returned refillable packaging (e.g., containers), particularly in global supply chains; significant investments to establish manufacturing systems for reusable packaging.
Retailers: Additional warehouse investments to store returned reusable packaging (e.g., containers); extra costs to meet hygiene requirements for returned packaging; ongoing expenses for cleaning and maintaining equipment (e.g., dispensers for sorting and storing returned containers).
Consumers: Primary concerns center on inconvenience, including:
(i) usability challenges across age groups (e.g., some refillable packaging is difficult for the elderly),;
(ii) the need to return empty packaging to retailers or designated stations for refilling;
(iii) potential unavailability of refills or replacements, and (iv) higher packaging costs.
Researchers have identified and evaluated 14 success factors for reusable plastic packaging, among which reduced packaging waste, lower transportation/packaging/waste management expenses, and efficient warehouse space utilization are directly linked to effective packaging design. However, other studies highlight that top management commitment, optimized inventory management, and lean support are the three most critical factors for the viability of reusable plastic packaging business models. Key attributes of effective refillable packaging have also been identified: good quality and value, ease of use, and a significant reduction in the volume of packaging materials produced and distributed.
Multi-material usage
A core guideline for circular packaging design is to minimize the number of materials used—this is particularly critical for household plastic packaging. Household plastic waste is typically heterogeneous and may contain contaminants, resulting in lower-quality recycled plastics that impede closed-loop recycling. A study examining single-use infant formula bottle packaging waste in Irish maternity hospitals found that such bottles are often designed with a high diversity of materials (e.g., bottles, teats, and outer packaging), creating challenges in identifying appropriate waste treatment methods. The research recommended reducing material variety to facilitate recycling processes.
Additionally, the use of multi-polymer materials should be avoided wherever feasible. Multi-polymers often contain impurities that compromise material recyclability and contaminate other recovered plastic waste. These materials are typically rejected during reprocessing and diverted to incineration, causing additional environmental pollution. If the use of multi-polymers is unavoidable, scholars suggest designing individual, separable components (e.g., via modular design) to enable the separation and sorting of multi-polymer parts during recycling.
End-of-life options
Researchers studied the environmental implications of packaging reuse and recycling, emphasizing that designers must consider and define a product’s end-of-life options during the design phase. Environmental impact, relevant legislation, packaging quality, and costs (e.g., manufacturing and remanufacturing expenses) all require careful weighting, as these factors directly influence the formulation of return policies.
Other scholars suggested that designers should rethink the nature of packaging—framing it not merely as a protective accessory but as a product that consumers purchase, own, and eventually dispose of. Instead of traditional ownership models, consumers should engage with packaging as a service: after use, they return the packaging to retailers (and ultimately to producers) in exchange for credits that can be applied toward purchasing new packaging.
Design for logistics
Researchers have demonstrated the heightened logistical complexity and associated cost increases, as outlined in prior studies. For commercial enterprises, striking a balance between cost and environmental impact is imperative. Moreover, environmental impact assessment is multifaceted—for instance, reusable packaging reduces waste but may elevate CO₂ emissions due to more frequent transportation. A study compared two packaging and distribution systems for Italian fruits and vegetables across Europe: one-way disposable corrugated containers and reusable plastic containers. It identified transportation distance and packaging size as the two most critical influencing factors.
This underscores that designers must incorporate
logistics-related considerations when developing reusable and returnable packaging. While transportation distances are often fixed, packaging should be reconfigurable to maximize load capacity and accommodate more items per shipment. A case study documented the redesign of
shipping boxes to be reconfigurable, enabling them to hold LCD panels of varying sizes and reducing the need for additional containers to transport returned items. Another study developed a conceptual packaging model integrating technical design, environmental factors, and supply chain systems, which can optimize corrugated container design to minimize environmental impacts throughout the supply chain. Scholars further noted that transportation cost reduction can be achieved through packaging modularity and standardized practices.
Researchers have also raised concerns about increased greenhouse gas emissions from multiple transportations of reusable packaging. A notable example is a study comparing the environmental impacts of two mango packaging materials in Brazil: reusable composite and traditional single-use cardboard. Key concerns included the higher electricity consumption for producing composite packaging and greater fuel use for transporting the heavier composite containers. The study found that after more than four uses, the CO₂ emissions from transporting composite packaging became less environmentally favorable compared to single-use cardboard boxes—attributed to Brazil’s large geographic size requiring long-distance transportation. Additionally, single-use cardboard in Brazil is incinerated for energy recovery. Thus, single-use cardboard proved a better option after four reuses of composite packaging. In contrast, results showed that the break-even point (where composite packaging becomes more eco-friendly) was reached only after 35 reuses in the European context. This indicates that while designers are generally encouraged to maximize packaging reuse cycles, transportation distances and resulting greenhouse gas emissions cannot be overlooked.
Furthermore, if products and their packaging target local or regional markets, local return rates must be integrated into the design process. A study evaluated the household packaging waste collection system in Slovakia, finding that the recycling rate of certain materials (e.g., PET beverage packaging) fell significantly short of EU targets, with variations observed between two cities. Researchers added that recycling rates are a determining factor affecting total logistics costs, as higher recycling rates typically correlate with lower associated costs. Therefore, when selecting materials, designers should be cognizant of local return or recycling rates for those materials. Informed material choices are essential to facilitate local waste recycling and thereby reduce overall costs.
Design development phase
Functionality of the packaging
While the primary function of packaging is to protect the enclosed product, other factors influencing packaging quality and user experience are also closely linked to waste generation. Scholars have pointed out that current research focuses heavily on extending product lifespans or utilizing waste as feedstock, yet pays insufficient attention to addressing the root causes of waste. A study investigating food waste related to inadequate packaging design identified three main drivers of unnecessary waste: "difficulty in completely emptying packaging," "damaged packaging," and "food spoiling rapidly in resealable or opened packaging." This indicates that food packaging should be designed for easy emptying and resealing, while providing adequate physical and chemical protection for the contents.
Researchers advise designers to consider a dual perspective in food packaging design: although packaging—particularly plastic-based packaging—increases overall waste volumes, it simultaneously reduces food waste by protecting products and extending shelf lives. Key indicators for food packaging design include shelf-life extension, reduced food damage, and minimized secondary packaging. Further studies have noted that the environmental impact of food packaging is relatively minor compared to that of the food it contains.
In a separate study, researchers redesigned refillable packaging for a body wash product and found that the critical success factor was ensuring consumers could easily understand how to refill the primary container and use the product. Beyond the expected durability of refillable packaging, functionality is equally important and should not be compromised.
Size, shape and colour
From a recycling perspective, a general best practice is to avoid using black or dark-colored plastics for packaging. The primary reason is that most sorting facilities utilize Near Infrared (NIR) spectroscopy scanners, which face technical challenges in detecting black or dark plastics. Nevertheless, 10–11% of PET, PP, and PE plastics currently used in packaging are black.
Regarding packaging size and shape, designers must balance refill volume and cost. Refillable packaging is often designed to be large to hold more content, maximizing economic benefits—but larger packs add to the cost of packaging that is already more expensive than single-use alternatives. Researchers suggest that food packaging should be well-adapted to the food content: using appropriately dimensioned packaging was found to reduce both food losses/waste and packaging waste. Scholars have also pointed out that oversized packaging is a major contributor to food waste and should be avoided. Additionally, to further lower packaging costs, studies highlight the need to reduce the variety of packaging shapes and sizes.
Modular design and labelling
Modular design is a design theory that subdivides a product or system into smaller constituent parts. These parts can be independently designed, modified, produced, replaced, or exchanged within a single product or across different products and systems. For packaging composed of diverse materials or multi-polymers, modular design should be adopted where feasible. This facilitates the separation and sorting of different materials—especially critical for multi-polymers, which cannot be mixed with other polymers for recycling, as such mixing would cause substantial degradation of recycled materials.
In a case study on the life cycle of Carlsberg’s beverage can packaging, researchers found that designing the can body and lid for easy separation improved recyclability, particularly in multiple closed-loop recycling systems. Clear labeling of material compositions and recycling guidelines was also identified as essential for achieving high-quality recycling. Another study proposed a three-layered polyethylene (PE) structure for food packaging: virgin PE outer layers (for food contact safety) and a middle layer made from recycled flexible PE films. This design reduces reliance on virgin materials by incorporating recycled PE in the non-food-contact layer, a concept that can be extended to modular packaging—where recycled materials are utilized for specific components. Hospitals generate significant volumes of plastic packaging and product waste; a study on single-use infant formula bottle packaging waste found that clear recyclability labeling for each component reduced complexity in waste management and recycling processes.
Embedding circular economy concept into design
The environmental benefits of circular packaging depend not only on packaging design characteristics (e.g., materials used and visual appearance) but also on consumers’ willingness to purchase such products. Studies have shown that visual appearance and advertising influence consumers’ perceptions of packaging sustainability. Researchers investigating consumer responses to packaging design—from the dual perspectives of materials and graphics—found that consumers are willing to pay a premium for sustainable packaging. Another study on consumers’ motivation to avoid plastic packaging waste revealed a willingness to pay extra for recycled and recyclable packaging materials, particularly plastics. However, the term “sustainability” is ambiguous to consumers, who often rely on inaccurate, sometimes misleading lay beliefs to judge a package’s sustainability. Scholars strongly advise that circular economy concepts—such as refillable packaging for body wash—should be clearly communicated to consumers, with distinct differentiation between original and refill packs.
This underscores the critical need to embed circular economy principles in packaging design, highlighting the product’s and/or packaging’s positive contributions to circularity. A review study also noted that consumers’ willingness to recycle plastic packaging is driven by environmental concerns, and eco-related messages can enhance their recycling motivation. Thus, designers must consider how to optimally integrate and convey such messages through packaging design to boost consumer engagement in recycling. However, researchers have warned against overutilizing circular economy concepts: incorporating multiple such principles in a single packaging design does not increase consumers’ willingness to buy or recycle, as it yields only minimal additional moral satisfaction from these actions.
Design pitfalls
Beyond the various design considerations that enhance circular packaging, there are common pitfalls in traditional packaging designs that designers should avoid. For instance, lacquer is widely used in the beverage packaging industry (e.g., aluminum cans). However, scholars advise that even low-level use of lacquer and other substances (e.g., at parts-per-million concentrations) may adversely affect recyclability. The chemical composition of lacquer can introduce contaminants during recycling, thereby hindering material reuse. The principle of "design for zero contamination" should be embedded in packaging design to enable can-to-can recycling. Additionally, as noted earlier, combining biological and technical strategies or overapplying multiple circular economy design approaches neither significantly improves packaging functionality nor increases consumers’ purchasing willingness.
Furthermore, researchers have proposed key considerations for designing refillable packaging for personal care products (e.g., body wash). A critical insight emerged: despite the technical feasibility of refilling and reusing such packaging over 10 times, consumers are reluctant to pay a premium for this extended reuse potential. Instead, consumers prefer access to a wide range of fragrances, making repeated refills of the same fragrance less desirable.
Tools and indicators for design validation
After finalizing the detailed design, the proposed packaging undergoes rigorous assessment and validation. A range of tools—such as life cycle analysis (LCA) tools—can facilitate this process, and it is noteworthy that these tools are applicable across all design phases. This subsection outlines the tools and indicators identified in the literature that demonstrate potential for supporting circular packaging design.
Researchers have developed an LCA-based tool to assess environmental impacts, waste generation, and resource consumption. Another study established a set of indicators for evaluating packaging design’s environmental effects, including material toxicity, biodiversity impact, and energy use, and presented an “eco-indicator” table to assess packaging concepts across three dimensions: production, transportation, and landfill & recycling. A data mining model was also proposed, which reduces packaging size variety by clustering similar shapes and sizes, replacing them with a single universally suitable package model. Scholars have put forward five criteria for assessing circular packaging design:
(i) reduce (packaging minimization);
(ii) reuse;
(iii) reclaim (energy recovery from packaging waste combustion without secondary pollution);
(iv) recycle;
(v) degradability.
Corresponding measures for circular packaging design were also suggested, urging designers to enhance consumer circular economy awareness and rationally utilize logistics packaging resources. Additionally, an LCA tool was developed to assist designers in evaluating environmental impacts across material production, returned package cleaning, transportation, and waste management processes, while another integrated LCA tool was created to analyze trade-offs between packaging functionality and environmental performance.
Other researchers proposed a framework combining LCA and the Cradle-to-Cradle (C2C) certification program. Studies have examined the C2C design protocol, the life cycle sustainability assessment framework, and the Material Circularity Indicator (MCI). The C2C design protocol is grounded in three core principles: “waste equals food,” “use current solar income,” and “celebrate diversity,” with key packaging-related certification criteria including material health and reusability, carbon management, and renewable energy use. The MCI evaluates material restorative potential from product production to recycling, with primary packaging design-related factors including material recycled content, recycling rate, and recycling efficiency. A review of three types of packaging development models and tools—protocols, diagrams, and evaluations—found that evaluation-type models (e.g., LCA) are most useful in later development stages. In contrast, protocol-type models were deemed to lack tangible descriptions, limiting their effectiveness in supporting circular packaging design.
Conclusions
The traditional model of packaging production and consumption is linear: packaging is designed, manufactured, consumed, discarded, and ultimately incinerated or landfilled. In contrast, the circular economy aims to achieve zero waste by keeping resources in closed loops for as long as possible, rather than allowing them to become waste that harms Earth’s ecosystems. The integration of circular economy principles demands innovations in packaging design—approximately 80% of environmental impacts are determined during this stage, which largely defines packaging materials, production processes, consumption patterns, reuse potential, and recyclability. This makes design critical to realizing a circular economy. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first academic review to explore current research on packaging design and circular economy from a design-centric perspective.
While this literature review focuses primarily on academic research, it is noteworthy that industry is actively adopting circular packaging practices. Future research should review and synthesize industrial advancements in circular packaging, which can provide actionable guidance for a broader community of packaging practitioners. Furthermore, the outcomes of this study are expected to benefit designers, R&D managers, and packaging industry professionals in developing circular economy-oriented solutions, with the identified design considerations serving as a practical reference. Educators may also leverage these findings to train the next generation of circular economy-focused talents.
