Bio-based plastics in food packaging: performance, environmental impact, end-of-life, technology readiness level and market trends

Rising concern over plastic waste and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has intensified interest in bio-based plastics for food packaging. This narrative review synthesizes developments, comparing biodegradable polylactic acid (PLA), polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs), polybutylene succinate (PBS), thermoplastic starch (TPS), chitosan, and non-biodegradable bio-based polymers [polyethylene (bio-PE), polypropylene (bio-PP), polyethylene terephthalate (bio-PET), polyamides (bio-PA), polyethylene furanoate (PEF)] across feedstocks, food–packaging interactions, recyclability, environmental impacts, and economics. Biodegradable polymers show mixed performance: PLA is brittle, though surface modification can improve its gas barrier by up to 70%; PHAs offer excellent oxygen barriers but poor thermal stability; PBS provides mechanical strength yet needs additives to reduce high gas permeability; TPS and chitosan are moisture-sensitive. Among non-biodegradable polymers, PEF exhibits gas-barrier properties up to 20 × better than PET (polyethylene terephthalate). Bio-PE and bio-PP are chemically identical to fossil-based polymers, enabling compatibility with mechanical recycling streams. Life cycle assessment (LCA) studies indicate GHG-reduction potential, but results are not comparable due to differing boundaries and end-of-life assumptions. Economically, bio-based plastics remain more expensive than conventional resins, limiting uptake. On the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale, PLA is TRL 9; bio-PE is fully commercial, targeting ∼1 Mt per year by 2030. PEF, bio-PP, and PHAs are at demonstration scale. Despite momentum, bio-based plastics constitute