Multilayer Flexible Food Packaging: Comparison
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Amina Yu and Version 1 by Theodoros Varzakas.

Multilayer flexible food packaging is under pressure to redesign for recyclability. Most multilayer films are not sorted and recycled with the currently available infrastructure, which is based on mechanical recycling in most countries. Up to now, multilayer flexible food packaging was highly customizable.

  • multilayer packaging
  • flexible packaging
  • recyclability
  • redesign

1. Introduction

Packaging is essential for maintaining the quality, safety, and security of many food products [1][2]. Robertson [1][3] described its basic functions as protection, containment, convenience, and communication. In addition to these functions, packaging should be recyclable but often faces end-of-life challenges. Recycling rates, particularly for plastic packaging, are low (42% on average throughout the European Union in 2018) [4]. Politics at the European level demand a stepwise increase in recycling rates for packaging [5]. This induces pressure on certain packaging solutions. Trend analysis shows that non-recyclable plastic packaging will no longer be tolerated by brand owners and retail chains [6]. Until 2030, all plastic packaging must be reusable or recyclable [5]. To reach this goal in the EU, most countries need investments to upgrade the collection, sorting, and recycling infrastructure, and principles of design for recycling must be comprehensively applied [7][8][9]. Guidelines from industry and academia support this transformation. They give guidance on material choice and design for packaging, packaging aid, and decoration, mostly in relation to established collection, sorting, and recycling infrastructure of specific regions or countries [10][11][12].

A challenge is posed by the fact that enhancing the recyclability of multilayer films often goes hand in hand with a reduction of packaging efficiency. Current solutions on the market have been optimized over the last decades for resource efficiency and product protection. Reducing the complexity of these films would likely lead to thicker films and therefore heavier packaging solutions would be required [13][14]. This goes against the goals of a circular economy to reduce resource consumption and environmental impacts [7].

A brief overview of the characteristics of multilayer flexibles, their contribution to sustainability, and their incompatibility in widely applied recycling technology make it possible to discuss the future design of this type of packaging. Research is necessary to bring recyclability and overall sustainability together in barrier packaging. Material combinations and recycling options with a clear benefit for the environment have to be developed.

The main objective of this entreviewy is to gather information on the benefits of multilayer flexible food packaging and show the negative recyclability trade-offs, especially for food technologists. The whole food-producing industry is under pressure to apply recyclable, at best circular packaging solutions throughout. To get there, we have toit raises consciousness about what is considered as recyclable, and which negative effects might come along with redesign if we strive for circularity to enhance the packaging sustainability of specific products. This work mainly focuses on literature back to 2009, as the very first collection of hurdles ( Figure 1 ) started in 2019, collecting evidence on a topic that gained momentum in the last decade.

Figure 1. Hurdles to circularity of packaging focused on, but not limited to multilayer flexible packaging [7][8][9][15][16][17][18][19][13][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62].

2. Multilayer Flexible Food Packaging

Multilayer food packaging is a tailored packaging application. Beneficial properties of diverse materials are combined into one packaging solution. Flexible packaging like pouches, bags, lidding as well as rigid packaging like trays, cups, and bottles consist of variable material, sometimes combined in layers. Through the approach to combine materials, these products offer technical and systemic strengths but also weaknesses along the life cycle stages, from production to use phase and end-of-life scenarios [15][17][20][63].

Figure 1 shows a collection of hurdles in relation to circular packaging, with a focus on multilayer flexible packaging, but not solely limited to it, encompassing literature research via Science Direct, Google Scholar, and Scopus, following the keywords “circular multilayer packaging”, “recycling flexible packaging”, “circular economy multilayer”, “multilayer recycling”, “polymer film food”, as well as secondary sources therein. Most mentioned hurdles, for example, the coordination along the supply chain, costs, and profitability, or the separation of materials, were collected and assigned to life cycle stages.

Hurdles to circularity of packaging focused on, but not limited to multilayer flexible packaging [7][8][9][15][16][17][18][19][13][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62].

However, the weak spot of multilayer packaging is, that it is difficult to recycle, and its recycling rate is very low [15][64][17]. Ellen MacArthur [18] estimated in 2017 that 26 weight percent of flexible packaging is multi-material, representing 10% of global plastic packaging. Worst case, these 10% are lost for the aspired circular economy, as with the current infrastructure, the properties of the materials cannot reach the ones of virgin material again.

3. Discussion

Thus, a strong research need is present to develop recyclable barriers substituting EVOH and other barrier polymers such as PA and PVDC. A clear tendency is visible that the percentage of allowed EVOH in recyclable packaging solutions is one focus of discussion, as could be seen in the case of rigid PP packaging in 2020 and 2021 [65][66]. The range of currently available barrier options is small with SiOx and AlOx, and most SiOx- and AlOx coatings are currently neither generally suitable for sterilizable packaging nor deep drawing applications, which is of importance in the sector of, for example, convenience foods [67].

The focus on mostly mono-polyolefins with certain tolerated barrier layers for enhanced recyclability of multilayer flexibles should not lead to higher resource consumption, as this would increase the environmental burden. This is particularly important in the specific case of flexible packaging where in recent decades, lightweight solutions have been developed and optimized [13][14].

Multilayer flexibles are considered as a sustainable packaging solution due to low resource consumption and low carbon footprint but are being difficult to recycle with the collection and recycling infrastructure currently in place. Thus, there is this clear and urgent need for a redesign that balances recyclability and sustainability [68][69][18][70]. The switch from non-recyclable multilayer flexible to easily recyclable, predominantly mono-material packaging solutions, within the intention to increase recycling rates, however, leaves questions for discussion: If all rigid packaging (excluding beverage packaging) was 100% recyclable but substituted by non-recyclable flexible packaging, the global warming potential would decrease [69]. Questions arise referring to the intended goals of packaging redesign, underlying the increase of recycling rates.

Still, in the current infrastructure, this above all is one knock-out criterion inhibiting the attempts to achieve truly circular flexibles for food packaging at present.

4. Conclusions

Multilayer flexible packaging is efficient. It combines the properties of polymers and non-polymeric materials to thin, lightweight packaging solutions for foods with and without barrier needs. The main problem is that it is rarely recycled in the existing waste management infrastructure. This is caused by multiple circumstances. The variability of used materials, the collection infrastructure, the complex sorting, and high levels of food residues outline the situation. Furthermore, the focus on mechanical recycling through combined processing complicates the situation. New solutions in recycling technology exist but are not yet available on a larger scale. This leads to a concentration on mono-material solutions to fit into the existing recycling infrastructure and diminishes the material choice to overcome thermal incompatibilities. The maximum tolerated levels of barrier materials are widely discussed and are in the process of being reduced. The substitution of a specific material is challenging, as only a limited number of barriers are available. In relation to the main purpose of packaging, the products’ protection, this could result in negative side effects. A reduction of food shelf-life, higher packaging weights, and derived increased environmental burden are imaginable consequences that need to be considered when taking steps towards the goal of packaging redesign for holistic sustainability.


  1. Robertson, G.L. Food packaging and shelf life. In Food Packaging and Shelf Life: A Practical Guide, 1st ed.; Robertson, G.L., Ed.; CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2009.
  2. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The State of Food and Agriculture. 2019. Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  3. Robertson, G.L. Food Packaging: Principles and Practice, 3rd ed.; CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012.
  4. PlasticsEurope. Plasctics—The Facts 2020. Brussels, Belgium. 2020. Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  5. European Commission. A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2018; Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  6. Smithers. Brand Owners and Converters Drive Packaging Recycling Growth. Available online: (accessed on 4 January 2021).
  7. European Commission. Towards a Circular Economy: A Zero Waste Programme for Europe; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2014; Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  8. Bicket, M.; Guilcher, S.; Hestin, M.; Hudson, C.; Razzini, P.; Tan, A.; ten Brink, P.; van Dijl, E.; Vanner, R.; Watkins, E. Scoping Study to Identify Potential Circular Economy Actions, Priority Sectors, Material Flows and Value Chains; European Union: Luxembourg, 2014; Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  9. European Commission. Closing the Loop—An EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2015; Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  10. Ceflex. Designing for a Circular Economy: Recyclability of Polylefin-Based Flexible Packaging. 2020. Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  11. RecyClass. PE Natural Flexible Film Guideline. 2020. Available online: (accessed on 6 October 2020).
  12. FH Campus Wien. Circular Packaging Design Guideline: Empfehlungen für Recyclinggerechte Verpackungen; FH Campus Wien: Vienna, Austria, 2020; Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  13. Barlow, C.; Morgan, D. Polymer film packaging for food: An environmental assessment. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2013, 78, 74–80.
  14. van Sluisveld, M.; Worrell, E. The paradox of packaging optimization—A characterization of packaging source reduction in the Netherlands. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2013, 73, 133–142.
  15. Kaiser, K.; Schmid, M.; Schlummer, M. Recycling of Polymer-Based Multilayer Packaging: A Review. Recycling 2018, 3, 1.
  16. Marrone, M.; Tamarindo, S. Paving the sustainability journey: Flexible packaging between circular economy and resource efficiency. J. Appl. Packag. Res. 2018, 10, 53–60.
  17. Hopewell, J.; Dvorak, R.; Kosior, E. Plastics recycling: Challenges and opportunities. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 2009, 364, 2115–2126.
  18. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. The New Plastics Economy: Catalysing Action. 2017. Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  19. Nonclercq, A. Mapping Flexible Packaging in a Circular Economy ; Delft University of Technology: Delft, Netherland, 2018; Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  20. Morris, B. End-use factors influencing the design of flexible packaging. In The Science and Technology of Flexible Packaging; Elsevier: Oxford, UK; Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 617–654.
  21. Milios, L.; Holm Christensen, L.; McKinnon, D.; Christensen, C.; Rasch, M.K.; Hallstrøm Eriksen, M. Plastic recycling in the Nordics: A value chain market analysis. Waste Manag. 2018, 76, 180–189.
  22. World Economic Forum. Towards the Circular Economy: Accelerating the Scale-Up Across Global Supply-Chains. 2014. Available online: (accessed on 27 September 2021).
  23. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the Circular Economy Vol. 2: Opportunities for the Consumer Goods Sector; Ellen MacArthur Foundation: Isle of Wight, UK, 2013; Available online: (accessed on 17 February 2021).
  24. Geueke, B.; Groh, K.; Muncke, J. Food packaging in the circular economy: Overview of chemical safety aspects for commonly used materials. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 193, 491–505.
  25. Geissdoerfer, M.; Savaget, P.; Bocken, N.; Hultink, E.J. The Circular Economy—A new sustainability paradigm? J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 143, 757–768.
  26. Fellner, J.; Lederer, J.; Scharff, C.; Laner, D. Present Potentials and Limitations of a Circular Economy with Respect to Primary Raw Material Demand. J. Ind. Ecol. 2017, 21, 494–496.
  27. Singh, J.; Ordoñez, I. Resource recovery from post-consumer waste: Important lessons for the upcoming circular economy. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 134A, 342–353.
  28. Ragaert, K.; Delva, L.; van Geem, K. Mechanical and chemical recycling of solid plastic waste. Waste Manag. 2017, 69, 24–58.
  29. Haig, S.; Morrish, L.; Mortin, R.; Wilkinson, S. Final Report: Film Reprocessing Technologies and Collection Schemes; The Waste and Resources Action Programme: Banbury, UK, 2012; Available online: (accessed on 4 October 2020).
  30. Kampmann Eriksen, M.; Damgaard, A.; Boldrin, A.; Astrup Fruergaard, T. Quality Assessment and Circularity Potential of Recovery Systems for Household Plastic Waste. J. Ind. Ecol. 2019, 23, 156–168.
  31. Dainelli, D. 12-Recycling of food packaging materials: An overview. In Environmentally Compatible Food Packaging; Chiellini, E., Ed.; (Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition); Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2008; pp. 294–325.
  32. Bartl, A. Moving from recycling to waste prevention: A review of barriers and enables. Waste Manag. Res. 2014, 32, 3–18.
  33. Carey, J. On the brink of a recycling revolution?: We’re awash in plastics, many of which are hard to recycle. Could innovations, girded by the right incentives, finally whittle down the piles of plastic waste? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 612–616.
  34. Horodytska, O.; Valdés, F.; Fullana, A. Plastic flexible films waste management–A state of art review. Waste Manag. 2018, 77, 413–425.
  35. Iacovidou, E.; Gerassimidou, S. Sustainable packaging and the circular economy: An EU perspective. In Reference Module in Food Science; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018.
  36. House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee. Growing a Circular Economy: Ending the Throwaway Society; House of Commons: London, UK, 2014; Available online: (accessed on 27 September 2021).
  37. Dixon, J. Packaging Materials 9: Multilayer Packaging for Food and Beverages; ILSI Europe Report Series; ILSI Europe Packaging Materials: Washington, DC, USA, 2011; Available online: (accessed on 17 February 2011).
  38. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the Circular Economy Vol.1: Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition; Ellen MacArthur Foundation: Isle of Wight, UK, 2013; Available online: (accessed on 27 September 2021).
  39. Selke, S. Recycling: Polymers. In Reference Module in Materials Science and Materials Engineering; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016.
  40. PlasticsEurope. Plasctics—The Facts 2017; PlasticsEurope: Brussels, Belgium, 2020; Available online: (accessed on 27 September 2021).
  41. European Commission. REGULATION (EC) No 282/2008 of 27 March 2008 on Recycled Plastic Materials and Articles Intended to Come into Contact with Foods and Amending Regulation (EC). No 2023/2006; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2008.
  42. Faraca, G.; Astrup, T. Plastic waste from recycling centres: Characterisation and evaluation of plastic recyclability. Waste Manag. 2019, 95, 388–398.
  43. Hultman, J.; Corvellec, H. The European Waste Hierarchy: From the sociomateriality of waste to a politics of consumption. Environ. Plan. A 2012, 44, 2413–2427.
  44. European Commission. Green Paper: On a European Strategy on Plastic Waste in the Environment; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2013; Available online: (accessed on 27 September 2021).
  45. Iacovidou, E.; Millward-Hopkins, J.; Busch, J.; Purnell, P.; Velis, C.; Hahladakis, J.; Zwirner, O.; Brown, A. A pathway to circular economy: Developing a conceptual framework for complex value assessment of resources recovered from waste. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 168, 1279–1288.
  46. Brems, A.; Baeyens, J.; Dewil, R. Recycling and recovery of post-consumer plastic solid waste in a European context. Therm. Sci. 2012, 16, 669–685.
  47. Dahlbo, H.; Poliakova, V.; Mylläri, V.; Sahimaa, O.; Anderson, R. Recycling potential of post-consumer plastic packaging waste in Finland. Waste Manag. 2018, 71, 52–61.
  48. Allwood, J. Squaring the circular economy: The role of recycling within a hierarchy of material management strategies. In Handbook of Recycling: State-of-the-Art for Practitioners, Analysts, and Scientists; Worrell, E., Reuter, M., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 445–477.
  49. Al-Salem, S.; Lettieri, P.; Baeyens, J.; Al-Salem, S.M.; Lettieri, P.; Baeyens, J. Recycling and recovery routes of plastic solid waste (PSW): A review. Waste Manag. 2009, 29, 2625–2643.
  50. Cooper, T. Developments in plastic materials and recycling systems for packaging food, beverages and other fast-moving consumer goods. In Trends in Packaging of Food, Beverages and Other Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG), 1st ed.; Farmer, N., Ed.; Woodhead Publishing Limited: Southston, UK, 2013; pp. 58–107.
  51. Luijsterburg, B.; Goossens, H. Assessment of plastic packaging waste: Material origin, methods, properties. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2014, 85, 88–97.
  52. Tartakowski, Z. Recycling of packaging multilayer films: New materials for technical products. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010, 55, 167–170.
  53. Veelaert, L.; Du Els, B.; Hubo, S.; van Kets, K.; Ragaert, K. Design from recycling. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Experiential Knowledge and Emerging Materials, Delft, The Netherlands, 19–20 June 2017; Available online: (accessed on 27 September 2021).
  54. Favaro, S.L.; Pereira, A.G.B.; Fernandes Rodrigues, J.; Baron, O.; da Silva, C.T.P.; Moisés, M.P.; Radovanovic, E. Outstanding Impact Resistance of Post-Consumer HDPE/Multilayer Packaging Composites. Mater. Sci. Appl. 2017, 8, 15–25.
  55. Drzyzga, O.; Prieto, A. Plastic waste management, a matter for the ‘community’. Microb. Biotechnol. 2019, 12, 66–68.
  56. Grosso, M.; Niero, M.; Rigamonti, L. Circular economy, permanent materials and limitations to recycling: Where do we stand and what is the way forward? Waste Manag. Res. 2017, 35, 793–794.
  57. Haas, W.; Krausmann, F.; Wiedenhofer, D.; Heinz, M. How Circular is the Global Economy?: An Assessment of Material Flows, Waste Production, and Recycling in the European Union and the World in 2005. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19, 765–777.
  58. European Parliament and Council. Directive 2008/98/EC of 19 November 2008 on Waste and Repealing Certain Directives (Text with EEA Relevance). Available online: (accessed on 27 September 2021).
  59. Briassoulis, D.; Tserotas, P.; Hiskakis, M. Mechanical and degradation behaviour of multilayer barrier films. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2017, 143, 214–230.
  60. Velis, C.; Brunner, P. Recycling and resource efficiency: It is time for a change from quantity to quality. Waste Manag. Res. 2013, 31, 539–540.
  61. Garcia, J.; Robertson, M. The future of plastics recycling: Chemical advances are increasing the proportion of polymer waste that can be recycled. Science 2017, 358, 870–872.
  62. Soto, J.M.; Blázquez, G.; Calero, M.; Quesada, L.; Godoy, V.; Martín-Lara, M.Á. A real case study of mechanical recycling as an alternative for managing of polyethylene plastic film presented in mixed municipal solid waste. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 203, 777–787.
  63. Selke, S.; Hernandez, R. Packaging: Polymers in flexible packaging. In Reference Module in Materials Science and Materials Engineering; Elsevier: Oxford, UK; Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016.
  64. Gandenberger, C.; Orzanna, R.; Klingenfuß, S.; Sartorius, C. The Impact of Policy Interactions on the Recycling of Plastic Packaging Waste in Germany. Working Paper Sustainability and Innovation. 2014. Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  65. RecyClass. RecyClass Tests Functional Barriers in PP Containers. Available online: (accessed on 5 September 2021).
  66. RecyClass. PP Natural Containers Guideline. 2020. Available online: (accessed on 6 October 2020).
  67. Morris, B. Barrier. In The Science and Technology of Flexible Packaging; Elsevier: Oxford, UK; Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 259–308.
  68. Wellenreuther, F. Resource Efficient Packaging; IFEU (Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg): Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  69. Wellenreuther, F. Potential Packaging Waste Prevention by the Usage of Flexible Packaging and Its Consequences for the Environment; IFEU (Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung Heidelberg): Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
  70. Reclay StewardEdge. Analysis of Flexible Film Plastics Packaging Diversion Systems. 2013. Available online: (accessed on 16 February 2021).
Video Production Service