In: Food Processing: Methods, Techniques and Trends ISBN 978-1-60692-414-3

Editor: Valerie C. Bellinghouse © 2009 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 17

SUITABILITY OF PACKAGING FOR

FOOD BASED ON INTERACTION STUDIES

R. Rial-Otero*, C. González-Barreiro†, E. Martínez-Carballo‡,

N. Pérez-Guerra, L. Pastrana-Castro and J. Simal-Gándara
Nutrition and Bromatology Group, Department of Analytical and Food Chemistry, Food
Science and Technology Faculty, Ourense Campus, University of Vigo,
E-32004 Ourense, Spain

ABSTRACT
The main purpose of food packaging is to act as a barrier between the food and the
environment to ensure the safety and maintain the quality of the food during
transportation and storage throughout its expected shelf-life. However, neither food nor
packaging is a totally inert system. Mass transfer processes with losses and/or
incorporation of components in any of these systems can have place. These transfer
processes, alone or even combined with chemical reactions, are known as food-packaging
interactions. It is interesting to note that they are not always undesirable such as in the
case of active/intelligent packaging. Undesirable product/package interactions result
usually from the so-called permeation, migration and sorption processes. Package failure
may be due to inadequate permeation properties (to oxygen, water vapor, light,
contaminants, etc.) for the intended shelf-life or from loss of integrity during distribution.
The migration of low molecular weight components (e.g. starting materials such as
monomers and additives) from packaging materials to a contained product may lead to
food safety and quality defects. While the term migration is used to describe the transport
of compounds from the packaging material to the food, the term sorption is used for the
inverse transport of compounds from the food to the packaging material.

*
E-mail: raquelrial@uvigo.es; Tel. +34-988-387000. Fax +34-988-387001.
†
cargb@uvigo.es
‡
elena.martinez@uvigo.es
440 R. Rial-Otero, C. González-Barreiro, E. Martínez-Carballo et al.

Keywords: Food Contact Materials, Food-Packaging Interactions, Selection of Food

Packaging, Food Shelf-Life, Active and Intelligent Packaging

FOOD PACKAGING FUNCTIONS

The principal roles of food packaging are to protect food products from outside
influences and damage, to contain the food, and to provide consumers with ingredient and
nutritional information (Coles, 2003). Traceability, convenience, and tamper indication are
secondary functions of increasing importance. The goal of food packaging is to contain food
in a cost-effective way that satisfies industry requirements and consumer desires, to maintain
food safety, and to minimize environmental impact.

Protection/Preservation

Simply stated, packaging maintains the benefits of food processing after the process is
complete, enabling foods to travel safely for long distances from their point of origin and still
be wholesome at the time of consumption. Food packaging can retard product deterioration,
retain the beneficial effects of processing, extend shelf-life, and maintain or increase the
quality and safety of food. In doing so, packaging provides protection from three major
classes of external influences: chemical, biological, and physical.
Chemical protection minimizes compositional changes triggered by environmental
influences such as exposure to gases (typically oxygen), moisture (gain or loss), or light
(visible, infrared, or ultraviolet). Many different packaging materials can provide a chemical
barrier. Glass and metals provide a nearly absolute barrier to chemical and other
environmental agents, but few packages are purely glass or metal since closure devices are
added to facilitate both filling and emptying. Closure devices may contain materials that
allow minimal levels of permeability. For example, plastic caps have some permeability to
gases and vapors, as do the gasket materials used in caps to facilitate closure and in metal can
lids to allow sealing after filling. Plastic packaging offers a large range of barrier properties
but is generally more permeable than glass or metal.
Biological protection provides a barrier to microorganisms (pathogens and spoiling
agents), insects, rodents, and other animals, thereby preventing disease and spoilage. In
addition, biological barriers maintain conditions to control senescence (ripening and aging).
Such barriers function via a multiplicity of mechanisms, such as preventing access to the
product, preventing odor transmission, and maintaining the internal environment of the
package.
Physical protection shields food from mechanical damage and includes cushioning
against the shock and vibration during distribution. Typically developed from paperboard and
corrugated materials, physical barriers resist impacts, abrasions, and crushing damage, so they
are widely used as shipping containers and as packaging for delicate foods such as eggs and
fresh fruits. Appropriate physical packaging also protects consumers from various hazards.
For example, child-resistant closures hinder access to potentially dangerous products. In
 Suitability of Packaging for Food Based on Interaction Studies 441

addition, the substitution of plastic packaging for food products has reduced the danger from
broken glass containers.

Marketing and Information

A package is the face of a product and often is the only product exposure consumers
experience prior to purchase. Consequently, distinctive or innovative packaging can boost
sales in a competitive market. The package may be designed to enhance the product image
and/or to differentiate the product from the competition. For example, larger labels may be
used to accommodate recipes. Packaging also provides information to the consumer. For
example, package labeling satisfies legal requirements for product identification, nutritional
value, ingredient declaration, net weight, and manufacturer information. Additionally, the
package conveys important information about the product such as cooking instructions, brand
identification, and pricing. All of these enhancements may impact waste disposal.

Traceability

The Codex Alimentarius Commission defines traceability as “the ability to follow the
movement of a food through specified stage(s) of production, processing and distribution”
(Codex Alimentarius Commission, 2004). Traceability has 3 objectives: to improve supply
management, to facilitate trace-back for food safety and quality purposes, and to differentiate
and market foods with subtle or undetectable quality attributes (Golan et al., 2004). Food
manufacturing companies incorporate unique codes onto the package labels of their products;
this allows them to track their products throughout the distribution process. Codes are
available in various formats (for example, printed barcodes or electronic radio frequency
identification [RFID]) and can be read manually and/or by machine.

Convenience

Convenience features such as ease of access, handling, and disposal; product visibility;
resealability; and microwavability greatly influence package innovation. As a consequence,
packaging plays a vital role in minimizing the effort necessary to prepare and serve foods.
Oven-safe trays, boil-in bags, and microwavable packaging enable consumers to cook an
entire meal with virtually no preparation. New closure designs supply ease of opening,
resealability, and special dispensing features. Advances in food packaging have facilitated the
development of modern retail formats that offer consumers the convenience of 1-stop
shopping and the availability of food from around the world. These convenience features add
value and competitive advantages to products but may also influence the amount and type of
packaging waste requiring disposal.
442 R. Rial-Otero, C. González-Barreiro, E. Martínez-Carballo et al.

Tamper Indication

Willful tampering with food products has resulted in special packaging features designed
to reduce or eliminate the risk of tampering and adulteration. Although any package can be
breeched, tamper-evident features cannot easily be replaced. Tamper-evident features include
banding, special membranes, breakaway closures, and special printing on bottle liners or
composite cans such as graphics or text that irreversibly change upon opening. Special
printing also includes holograms that cannot be easily duplicated. Tamper-evident packaging
usually requires additional packaging materials, which exacerbates disposal issues, but the
benefits generally outweigh any drawback.

Other Functions

Packaging may serve other functions, such as a carrier for premiums (for example,
inclusion of a gift, additional product, or coupon) or containers for household use. The
potential for packaging use/reuse eliminates or delays entry to the waste stream.

MATERIALS FOR FOOD PACKAGING

Package design and construction play a significant role in determining the shelf life of a
food product. The right selection of packaging materials and technologies maintains product
quality and freshness during distribution and storage. Materials that have traditionally been
used in food packaging include glass, metals (aluminum, foils and laminates, tinplate, and tin-
free steel), paper and paperboards, and plastics (Table 1 shows their respective advantages
and drawbacks). Moreover, a wider variety of plastics have been introduced in both rigid and
flexible forms. Nowadays, food packages often combine several materials to exploit their
functional or aesthetic properties.

Glass

Glass has an extremely long history in food packaging; the first glass objects for holding
food are believed to have appeared around 3000 BC (Sacharow and Griffin, 1980). The
production of glass containers involves heating a mixture of silica (the glass former), sodium
carbonate (the melting agent), and limestone/calcium carbonate and alumina (stabilizers) to
high temperatures until the materials melt into a thick liquid mass that is then poured into
molds. Recycled broken glass (cullet) is also used in glass manufacture and may account for
as much as 60 % of all raw materials. Glass containers used in food packaging are often
surface-coated to provide lubrication in the production line and eliminate scratching or
surface abrasion and line jams. Glass coatings also increase and preserve the strength of the
bottle to reduce breakage. Improved break resistance allows manufacturers to use thinner
glass, which reduces weight and is better for disposal and transportation (McKown, 2000).
 Suitability of Packaging for Food Based on Interaction Studies 443

Table 1. Advantages and drawbacks of the different materials for food contact
applications

Materials Advantages Drawbacks

Glass Transparency Large weight and volume
Chemical inertness Low thermal conductivity
Tightness Fragile
Microwave compatible
Reusable and recyclable

Metal Mechanical resistance Large volume

Lightness Corrosion
Tightness Migration from coatings
Opaque
Thermal conductivity
Recyclable

Plastics Wide range of materials Permeability to gas and light

Lightness and flexibility Poor thermal stability
Wide range of mechanical properties Migration of components to food
Easy to print and decorate
Easy to be welded
Microwave compatible
Different shapes and dimensions
Recyclable

Paper and Lightness Very hygroscopic

paperboard Different shapes and dimensions Poor barrier properties
Easy to print and decorate No for liquid contact
Biodegradable and recyclable

Because it is odorless and chemically inert with virtually all food products, glass has
several advantages for food-packaging applications. It is impermeable to gases and vapors, so
it maintains product freshness for a long period of time without impairing taste or flavor. The
ability to withstand high processing temperatures makes glass useful for heat sterilization of
both low- acid and high-acid foods. Glass is rigid, provides good insulation, and can be
produced in numerous different shapes. The transparency of glass allows consumers to see the
product, yet variations in glass color can protect light-sensitive contents. Finally, glass
packaging benefits the environment because it is reusable and recyclable. Like any material,
glass has some disadvantages. Despite efforts to use thinner glass, its heavy weight adds to
transportation costs. Another concern is its brittleness and susceptibility to breakage from
internal pressure, impact, or thermal shock.
444 R. Rial-Otero, C. González-Barreiro, E. Martínez-Carballo et al.

Metal

Metal is the most versatile of all packaging forms. It offers a combination of excellent
physical protection and barrier properties, formability and decorative potential, recyclability,
and consumer acceptance. The two metals most predominantly used in packaging are
aluminum and steel.
a) Aluminum. Commonly used to make cans, foil, and laminated paper or plastic
packaging, aluminum is a lightweight, silvery white metal derived from bauxite ore, where it
exists in combination with oxygen as alumina. Magnesium and manganese are often added to
aluminum to improve its strength properties (Page et al., 2003). Unlike many metals,
aluminum is highly resistant to most forms of corrosion; its natural coating of aluminum
oxide provides a highly effective barrier to the effects of air, odors, temperature, light,
moisture, microorganisms and chemical attack.
Besides providing an excellent barrier, aluminum has good flexibility and surface
resilience, excellent malleability and formability, and outstanding embossing potential. It is
also an ideal material for recycling because it is easy to reclaim and process into new
products. Pure aluminum is used for light packaging of primarily soft-drink cans, pet food,
seafood, and prethreaded closures. The main disadvantages of aluminum are its high cost
compared to other metals (for example, steel) and its inability to be welded, which renders it
useful only for making seamless containers.
b) Aluminum foil. Aluminum foil is made by rolling pure aluminum metal into very thin
sheets, followed by annealing to achieve dead-folding properties (a crease or fold made in the
film will stay in place), which allows it to be folded tightly. Moreover, aluminum foil is
available in a wide range of thicknesses, with thinner foils used to wrap food and thicker foils
used for trays. Like all aluminum packaging, foil provides an excellent barrier to moisture,
air, odors, light, and microorganisms. It is inert to acidic foods and does not require lacquer or
other protection. Although aluminum is easily recyclable, foils cannot be made from recycled
aluminum without pinhole formation in the thin sheets.
c) Laminates and metallized films. Lamination of packaging involves the binding of
aluminum foil to paper or plastic film to improve barrier properties. Thin gauges facilitate
application. Although lamination to plastic enables heat sealability, the seal does not
completely bar moisture and air. Because laminated aluminum is relatively expensive, it is
typically used to package high value foods such as dried soups, herbs, and spices. A less
expensive alternative to laminated packaging is metallized film. Metallized films are plastics
containing a thin layer of aluminum metal (Fellows and Axtell, 2002). These films have
improved barrier properties to moisture, oils, air, and odors, and the highly reflective surface
of the aluminum is attractive to consumers. More flexible than laminated films, metallized
films are mainly used to package snacks. Although the individual components of laminates
and metallized films are technically recyclable, the difficulty in sorting and separating the
material precludes economically feasible recycling.
d) Tinplate. Produced from low-carbon steel (that is, blackplate), tinplate is the result of
coating both sides of blackplate with thin layers of tin. The coating is achieved by dipping
sheets of steel in molten tin (hot-dipped tinplate) or by the electro-deposition of tin on the
steel sheet (electrolytic tinplate). Although tin provides steel with some corrosion resistance,
tinplate containers are often lacquered to provide an inert barrier between the metal and the
 Suitability of Packaging for Food Based on Interaction Studies 445

food product. Commonly used lacquers are materials in the epoxy phenolic and oleoresinous
groups and vinyl resins.
In addition to its excellent barrier properties to gases, water vapor, light, and odors,
tinplate can be heat-treated and sealed hermetically, making it suitable for sterile products.
Because it has good ductility and formability, tinplate can be used for containers of many
different shapes. Thus, tinplate is widely used to form cans for drinks, processed foods, and
aerosols; containers for powdered foods and sugar- or flour-based confections; and as
package closures. Tinplate is an excellent substrate for modern metal coating and
lithoprinting technology, enabling outstanding graphical decoration. Its relatively low weight
and high mechanical strength make it easy to ship and store. Finally, tinplate is easily
recycled many times without loss of quality and is significantly lower in cost than aluminum.
e) Tin-free steel. Also known as electrolytic chromium or chrome oxide coated steel, tin-
free steel requires a coating of organic material to provide complete corrosion resistance.
Even though the chrome/chrome oxide makes tin-free steel unsuitable for welding, this
property makes it excellent for adhesion of coatings such as paints, lacquers, and inks. Like
tinplate, tin-free steel has good formability and strength, but it is marginally less expensive
than tinplate. Food cans, can ends, trays, bottle caps, and closures can all be made from tin-
free steel. In addition, it can also be used to make large containers (such as drums) for bulk
sale and bulk storage of ingredients or finished goods (Fellows and Axtell, 2002).

Plastics

Plastics are made by condensation polymerization (polycondensation) or addition

polymerization (polyaddition) of monomer units. In polycondensation, the polymer chain
grows by condensation reactions between molecules and is accompanied by formation of low
molecular weight byproducts such as water and methanol. Polycondensation involves
monomers with at least 2 functional groups such as alcohol, amine, or carboxylic groups. In
polyaddition, polymer chains grow by addition reactions, in which 2 or more molecules
combine to form a larger molecule without liberation of by-products. Polyaddition involves
unsaturated monomers; double or triple bonds are broken to link monomer chains. There are
several advantages to using plastics for food packaging. Fluid and moldable, plastics can be
made into sheets, shapes, and structures, offering considerable design flexibility. Because
they are chemically resistant, plastics are inexpensive and lightweight with a wide range of
physical and optical properties. In fact, many plastics are heat sealable, easy to print, and can
be integrated into production processes where the package is formed, filled, and sealed in the
same production line. The major disadvantage of plastics is their variable permeability to
light, gases, vapors, and low molecular weight molecules. There are 2 major categories of
plastics: thermosets and thermoplastics (EPA, 2006).
a) Thermosets are polymers that solidify or set irreversibly when heated and cannot be
remolded. Because they are strong and durable, they tend to be used primarily in applications
such as adhesives and coatings (Simal-Gandara et al., 1998; Simal-Gándara, 1999). Epoxy
resins are thermosetting resins that contain two or more epoxide (oxirane) groups per
molecule. They were first obtained commercially over 40 years ago by condensation of
epichlorohydrin (CAS no. 106-89-8) and bisphenol A (CAS no. 80-05-7), which yields
bisphenol A diglycidyl ethers (BADGEs) of varying degrees of condensation (n), depending
446 R. Rial-Otero, C. González-Barreiro, E. Martínez-Carballo et al.

on the reaction conditions and the mole ratio of the reactants (Lee and Neville, 1982;
Kroschwitz, 1987). For example, when n = 0 the product is BADGE (n = 0) (molecular mass
340; CAS no. 1675-54-3).
The three leading commercial producers of epoxy resins are Dow Chemicals, Shell, and
Ciba-Geigy. High-temperature cured formulations of epoxy coatings for cans are supplied
commercially either as water-borne spray coatings, which satisfy most important
environmental regulations and can be used with traditional can production equipment, or as
powder formulations, which are essentially pollution-free but have the drawback that they
require some modification of traditional can-manufacturing equipment. It is powder
formulations of high-molecular-weight epoxies that are mainly used to coat the internal
surfaces of two-piece draw and redraw food cans, whereas UV-curable coatings based on
low-viscosity aromatic, aliphatic, and cyclo-aliphatic epoxy resins are being used increasingly
to coat the exterior and ends of cans (Gaschke, 1978).
Epoxy resins need to react with other products, that is, curing agents, hardeners, or
crosslinking agents, to obtain a cross-linked structure. Such a structure is directly related to
the chemical and mechanical properties. There are many compounds suitable as curing
agents: amines and their derivatives, polyfunctional organic acids and their anhydrides,
polymercaptans, polyglycols, polyphenols, and several catalytic agents such as Lewis acids
and bases. In the can-coating industry the epoxy systems based on bisphenol A diglycidyl
ether resins cured with several polyfunctional phenolic resins are the most common. The
reason is that these formulations provide one of the best coatings from a chemical resistance
point of view. They have, however, two main problems: phenolic resins are not pure
compounds, and the cure with the epoxy resins must be carried out at high temperatures (Han
et al., 1998). Both factors can have a negative effect on the final properties of the coatings.
Different types of molecules in the phenols-based curing agent imply different reactivities.
On the other hand, if the cure program (essentially, time and temperature) is not correctly
selected, residual monomers remain, being the main source of migrations when the coating is
in contact with foods or drinks. It is important to point out that the bisphenol A diglycidyl
ether-based epoxy resins used for can coating purposes have a high molecular weight (MW≈
3000 to 4000 g mol–1, n ≈ 9 to 11) compared with the pure BADGE (MW= 340 g mol–1, n =
0). Many commercial resins are BADGE (n = 0) free. In fact, when n is a fractional number,
it indicates that the resin is a mixture of different molecular weights with different n values
(Figure 1).
Epoxy resins are applied to food cans when chemical resistance is required (Simal-
Gándara, 1999), for example, to internal surfaces of cans for aggressive products such as tuna
fish, asparagus, spinach, sauerkraut, and tomato paste (in these applications epoxies are used
mainly in combination with phenolic resins). They are also applied to cans for beer and soft
drinks, to both the internal and external surfaces of can ends and bodies, as the sole vehicle on
two-piece aluminum can bodies, while on two-piece tinplate cans they may either be used
alone or in combination with vinyls. In three-piece tinplate or tin-free steel cans, they are used
in two-layer coatings as a base coat under a polyvinyl topcoat. Epoxy resins are also used to
coat the interiors of screw caps for various types of food containers. The success of epoxies as
coatings for food cans is due to their desirable flavor-retaining characteristics, their excellent
chemical resistance, and their outstanding mechanical properties. The coatings they compete
with are mainly vinyl and acrylic resins, although the latter account for only a minor share of
 Suitability of Packaging for Food Based on Interaction Studies 447

the inner-coatings market, and epoxy resins are displacing vinyl resins because of increased
use of two-piece can lines at the expense of three-piece can lines. In some instances, epoxy
resins are used in formulations with vinyl and acrylic resins, and also with phenolic resins.
b) Thermoplastics (see Table 2), instead, are polymers that soften upon exposure to heat
and return to their original condition at room temperature. Because thermoplastics can easily
be shaped and molded into various products such as bottles, jugs, and plastic films, they are
ideal for food packaging. Moreover, virtually all thermoplastics are recyclable (melted and
reused as raw materials for production of new products), although separation poses some
practical limitations for certain products. There have been some health concerns regarding
residual monomer and components in plastics, including stabilizers, plasticizers, and
condensation components. Despite these safety concerns, the use of plastics in food
packaging has continued to increase due to the low cost of materials and functional
advantages (such as thermosealability, microwavability, optical properties, and unlimited
sizes and shapes) over traditional materials such as glass and tinplate (Lopez-Rubio et al.,
2004). Multiple types of plastics are being used as materials for packaging food, including
polyolefin, polyester, polyvinyl chloride, polyvinylidene chloride, polystyrene, polyamide,
and ethylene vinyl alcohol. Although more than 30 types of plastics have been used as
packaging materials (Lau and Wong, 2000), polyolefins and polyesters are the most common

Figure 1. Epoxy resins monomers (both bisphenol A and F diglycidil ethers n= 0) and oligomers with
different degrees of condensation and molecular weight (MW< 1000 amu, which are able to pass
through biological membranes when ingested with food after migration from epoxy coatings.

.
 Table 2. Thermoplastics used in contact with food

Olefins Chemical name Homo-/co- Characteristics and Monomer

polymer or applications
blend
LDPE Low density Homo- High gas permeability
polyethylene Low permeability to water
vapour
HDPE High density Homo- Versatility depending
polyethylene on density
E/VA Ethylene/Vinyl Co- As higher the level of
acetate vinyl acetate, the higher the
flexibility and the resistance to
cold for frozen foods

EVOH Ethylene vinyl Co- Good barrier properties for

alcohol gases
Hygroscopic
Used in bottles of
ketchup, mayonnaise…
PP Polypropylene Homo- Used in bottles and cups for
dairy products
PB Polybuthylene Homo- Used for hot-packed
foods

PP Polymethyl Homo- High rigidity

pentene Used in moulds for
precooked foods

Styrenes Chemical name Homo-/co- Characteristics and Monomer

polymer or applications
blend
PS Polystyrene Homo- Low water sorption
Disposable packages for
yoghourt, coffee…

SAN Styrene/ Co- Long-term resistance

Acrylonitrile High water sorption
Used in coffee filters
 Table 2. Continued

HIPS Styrene/ Co-, blend Non-returnable packages

Butadiene (meat, fish, fruit, etc.)
(High Impact PS)

ABS Acrylonitrile/ Co-, blend High impact resistance

Butadiene/
Styrene

Esters Chemical name Homo-/co- Characteristics and Monomer

polymer or applications
blend
PET Polyethylene Homo- Medium water sorption
tereftalate High impermeability to
gas
(e.g., bottles and
flexible tubes)
PC Polycarbonate Homo- Used in feeding bottles,
dishes, coffee maker filters…)

Chlorinate Chemical name Homo-/co- Characteristics and Monomer

d polymer or applications
blend
PVC Polyvinyl chloride Homo- Impermeable to gases
Permeable to water
Low heat resistance
(oil and water bottles)
PVDC Polyvinyl Homo- Very sensitive to light
dichloride Gas and water
impermeability
(functional barriers in bottles)
Fluorinate Chemical name Homo-/co- Characteristics and Monomer
d polymer or applications
blend
PTFE Polytetra Homo- Inert till 260 ºC
fluoro Antiadhesive behaviour
ethylene Gas and water proof
(Teflon®) (Coating for frying pan,
mould, conveyor belt…)
Nitrogenat Chemical name Homo-/co- Characteristics and Monomer
ed polymer or applications
blend
PA 6 Polyamide 6 Homo- Hygroscopic
Very permeable to
gases
(Synthetic casings,
sheets for vacuum-
packed foods…)
PA 6I Polyamide 6I Homo- Less hygroscopic
Good barrier for gases
(Bottles and sheets)
PAN Poly Co- Very good barrier for gases
acrylenitrile (Bottles for carbonated
drinks)
452 R. Rial-Otero, C. González-Barreiro, E. Martínez-Carballo et al.

Paper and Paperboard

The use of paper and paperboards for food packaging dates back to the 17th century with
accelerated usage in the later part of the 19th century (Kirwan and Strawbridge, 2003). Paper
and paperboard are sheet materials made from an interlaced network of cellulose fibers
derived from wood by using sulfate and sulfite. The fibers are then pulped and/or bleached
and treated with chemicals such as slimicides and strengthening agents to produce the paper
product. Paper and paperboards are commonly used in corrugated boxes, milk cartons,
folding cartons, bags and sacks, and wrapping paper. Tissue paper, paper plates, and cups are
other examples of paper and paperboard products.
a) Paper. Plain paper is not used to protect foods for long periods of time because it has
poor barrier properties and is not heat sealable. When used as primary packaging (that is, in
contact with food), paper is almost always treated, coated, laminated, or impregnated with
materials such as waxes, resins, or lacquers to improve functional and protective properties.
The many different types of paper used in food packaging are as follows:

• Kraft paper—Produced by a sulfate treatment process, kraft paper is available in

several forms: natural brown, unbleached, heavy duty, and bleached white. The
natural kraft is the strongest of all paper and is commonly used for bags and
wrapping.
It is also used to package flour, sugar, and dried fruits and vegetables.
• Sulfite paper—Lighter and weaker than kraft paper, sulfite paper is glazed to
improve its appearance and to increase its wet strength and oil resistance. It can be
coated for higher print quality and is also used in laminates with plastic or foil. It is
used to make small bags or wrappers for packaging biscuits and confectionary.
• Greaseproof paper—Greaseproof paper is made through a process known as beating,
in which the cellulose fibers undergo a longer than normal hydration period that
causes the fibers to break up and become gelatinous. These fine fibers then pack
densely to provide a surface that is resistant to oils but not wet agents. Greaseproof
paper is used to wrap snack foods, cookies, candy bars, and other oily foods, a use
that is being replaced by plastic films.
• Glassine—Glassine is greaseproof paper taken to an extreme (further hydration) to
produce a very dense sheet with a highly smooth and glossy finish. It is used as a
liner for biscuits, cooking fats, fast foods, and baked goods.
• Parchment paper—Parchment paper is made from acid-treated pulp (passed through
a sulfuric acid bath). The acid modifies the cellulose to make it smoother and
impervious to water and oil, which adds some wet strength. It does not provide a
good barrier to air and moisture, is not heat sealable, and is used to package fats such
as butter and lard.

b) Paperboard. Paperboard is thicker than paper with a higher weight per unit area and
often made in multiple layers. It is commonly used to make containers for shipping—such as
boxes, cartons, and trays—and seldom used for direct food contact. The various types of
paperboard are as follows (Soroka, 1999):
 Suitability of Packaging for Food Based on Interaction Studies 453

• White board—Made from several thin layers of bleached chemical pulp, white board
is typically used as the inner layer of a carton. White board may be coated with wax
or laminated with polyethylene for heat sealability, and it is the only form of
paperboard recommended for direct food contact.
• Solid board—Possessing strength and durability, solid board has multiple layers of
bleached sulfate board. When laminated with polyethylene, it is used to create liquid
cartons (known as milk board). Solid board is also used to package fruit juices and
soft drinks.
• Chipboard—Chipboard is made from recycled paper and often contains blemishes
and impurities from the original paper, which makes it unsuitable for direct contact
with food, printing, and folding. It is often lined with white board to improve both
appearance and strength. The least expensive form of paperboard, chipboard is used
to make the outer layers of cartons for foods such as tea and cereals.
• Fiberboard—Fiberboard can be solid or corrugated. The solid type has an inner white
board layer and outer kraft layer and provides good protection against impact and
compression. When laminated with plastics or aluminum, solid fiberboard can
improve barrier properties and is used to package dry products such as coffee and
milk powder. The corrugated type, also known as corrugated board, is made with 2
layers of kraft paper with a central corrugating (or fluting) material. Fiberboard
resistance to impact abrasion and crushing damage makes it widely used for shipping
bulk food and case packing of retail food products.

c) Paper laminates. Paper laminates are coated or uncoated papers based on kraft and
sulfite pulp. They can be laminated with plastic or aluminum to improve various properties.
For example, paper can be laminated with polyethylene to make it heat sealable and to
improve gas and moisture barrier properties. However, lamination substantially increases the
cost of paper. Laminated paper is used to package dried products such as soups, herbs, and
spices.

MIGRATION FROM PACKAGING COMPONENTS TO FOOD

Packaging materials and systems for foods contain many substances which can migrate
into the food during processing or storage (Figure 2). Increasingly, these substances are
becoming subject to control and regulation (Simal-Gándara et al., 2002). The major concern
regarding safety of food-contact materials is that the effects of prolonged exposure in humans
are still very poorly known. Risks, which are uncertain and unknown in their nature and
extent, are known to be those which generate the greatest concern, quite independent of the
actual risk they eventually prove to represent.
454 R. Rial-Otero, C. González-Barreiro, E. Martínez-Carballo et al.

ENVIRONMENT
PACKAGING M M EC
M EC Permeation
FOOD FC EC
M M Migration EC
M FC FC M
FC FC
EC Sorption
M
FC

Figure 2. Food-packaging interactions: permeation, migration and sorption. FC= food component; M=
migrant; EC= external contaminant.

Some compounds can be present in foodstuff even though their introduction could not
reasonably be expected from normal practices and procedures. Such contaminants might be
degradation products of allowed or inoffensive molecules, impurities or unknowingly the
result of ‘‘bad practices’’. Examples of this type of contamination might be isopropyl
thioxanthone (ITX) from printing inks or phthalates from corks. Such cases present particular
problems as: (i) often no agreed screening methodologies exist (or they are not applied to the
foodstuff as they are not expected to be present) and (ii) there is a lack of toxicological data
which could support the definition of a safety objective. Additionally, in many cases the
packaging producers do not have full information on the additives that their suppliers use in
the raw material, thus making compliance assessment, highly complex and expensive.
The migration of additives or contaminants from polymeric food packaging to food may
be separated into three different, but inter-related, stages: diffusion within the polymer,
solvation at the polymer-food interface, and dispersion into bulk food.
a) Diffusion within the polymer. At this stage, the migration of additives or contaminants
is controlled by diffusion, which is a macroscopic manifestation of a random walk or
Brownian motion of individual migrant molecules within the polymer lattice. This mode of
molecular transport has been shown in most cases to obey Fick’s laws of diffusion (Crank,
1975):

∂Cp
Fick’s first law: F= - Dp . (1)
∂x

Further, if the diffusion coefficient is independent of concentration,

 Suitability of Packaging for Food Based on Interaction Studies 455

∂Cp ∂ 2Cp
Fick’s second law: = Dp. 2 (2)
∂t ∂x

where F is the rate of transport per unit area of the polymer, Dp is the diffusion coefficient of
migrant in the polymer, Cp is the migrant concentration in the polymer, x is the space
coordinate measured normal to the polymer–food interface, and t is the elapsed time. These
are the parameters that may affect the rate of migration according to the above equations at
this stage.
For contaminants coming from the surrounding environment, such as naphthalene or
other volatile organics, Lau and Wong reported that the rate of migration is also related to the
glass transition temperature of the polymer, Tg. This is due to the fact that polymer with Tg
lower than room temperature, such as polyethylene and polypropylene, has a larger
permeability for organic vapours compared with those with Tg higher than room temperature,
such as polystyrene and PVC (Lau and Wong, 1995).
Furthermore, the rate of migration was found to vary with the thickness of the polymer
packaging. However, the rate reached a constant value from a particular thickness onwards.
This was defined as the limiting thickness, dg, which was found to vary with the nature of the
polymer. For example, in the polyolefin polymer, dg decreases in the order LDPE > HDPE >
PP (Figge, 1988).
b) Solvation at the polymer–food interface time. At this stage, the migrant moves by way
of solvation into the food. If the migrant partitions well into the food, i.e. more soluble in the
food than in the polymer, the migrant concentration profile is smooth and continuous in this
region, which facilitates the rate of migration into the food. On the other hand, if the migrant
partitions poorly into the food, the migrant concentration profile may be discontinuous in this
region, which retards the rate of migration into the food. That is the reason why the problem
of food contamination is more serious in fatty foods than in aqueous foods, as most of the
polymer additives and contaminants are fat-soluble. Lau and Wong reported that the extent of
migration of adipates from PVC cling film into cheese varied exponentially with the fat
content of the cheese samples (Lau and Wong, 1996).
c) Dispersion into bulk food. At this stage, just beyond the interface between the polymer
and the food, the solvated migrant molecules diffuse away from the interface and move into
the bulk food. The migration at this stage as well as that for the previous two stages are driven
mainly by entropy, a measure of randomness. Limm and Hollifield demonstrated that mixing
could increase the migration into food because mixing enhances kinetically migrant solvation
by removing solvated migrant from the interface thus reducing reprecipitation (Limm and
Hollifield, 1995). However, the migrant solubility and diffusion coefficient are the prime
factors governing the dispersion of migrant into food, thus affecting the rate of migration as a
whole.
With this in mind, various experimental approaches are being developed, compared and
validated to quantify the presence and interactions of toxicants or contaminants (Barnes et al.,
2006) in

• packaging material,
• the food matrix after migration, or
• simple liquid medium used as food simulant.
456 R. Rial-Otero, C. González-Barreiro, E. Martínez-Carballo et al.

An estimate of the exposure to additives or contaminants in the diet is determined by

combining migration data with information on the uses of food packaging that may contain
the additives or contaminants. Traditionally, migration data were obtained from migration
tests performed by using food-simulating liquids such as water, edible oils, ethanol–water
solutions. However, these tests are quite time consuming and expensive. In an effort to
overcome the inherent difficulties associated with migration tests, researchers suggested the
use of predictive migration modeling to estimate the extent of migration. In general, studies
have shown that migration is controlled by diffusion through the polymer according to Fick’s
law and diffusion follows Arrhenius behavior with temperature. Hence, the extent of
migration should be predictable, at least theoretically. Indeed, quite a number of mathematical
models have been established for such purposes.

ACTIVE AND INTELLIGENT PACKAGING

A great technological development for food packaging has been developed over the past
few decades to satisfy consumer demands relating to more natural forms of preservation, and
methods to control packaging and storage for assurance and food safety. Active packaging is,
certainly, one of the most important innovations in this field. Active packages are designed to
perform a role other than to provide an inert barrier between the product and the outside
environment, using the possible interactions between food and package in a positive way to
improve product quality and acceptability. Active food packaging is a heterogeneous concept
involving a wide range of possibilities which globally can be grouped in two main goals
(Table 3): (i) to extend shelf life, and (ii) to facilitate processing, control and consumption of
foods (the so-called intelligent packaging). In the first case (Figure 3a), active packaging
solutions include the systems studied to control the mechanisms of deterioration inside the
package (i.e. oxygen scavengers, moisture absorbers or antimicrobial agents). In relation to
the second goal (Figure 3b), active (intelligent) packaging allows us to match the package to
the properties of the food, to reduce costs of processing, or even to perform some processing
operations in-package or to control the product history and quality.
There is a relatively new European Framework Regulation for food contact materials
(1935/2004/EC) in which the use of active and intelligent packaging systems are now
included. The Regulation authorizes the use of active and intelligent packaging, provided the
packaging can be shown to enhance the safety, quality and shelf-life of the packaged foods.
All active and intelligent packaging systems are also subject to pre-existing food contact
material (FCM) regulations, e.g. plastics, ceramics, etc. In addition, some of the systems may
also be subject to regulations on food additives, biocides, labelling, environment/waste,
modified atmosphere, food hygiene, safety, weight and volume control (a gas absorber or
releaser can theoretically influence the volume of a packed food product). All new active and
intelligent packaging systems initially need to be evaluated by the European Food Safety
Authority (EFSA). Based on the outcome of that evaluation, the Commission (DG SANCO)
will grant a petitioner, authorization for the submitted active and intelligent
ingredients/systems, which will be entered in the Regulation.
 Suitability of Packaging for Food Based on Interaction Studies 457

(a)

(b)

Figure 3. Systems for active and intelligent packaging: (a) different oxygen absorbers to extend food
shelf life, and (b) system for testing storage temperature to facilitate food control.
458 R. Rial-Otero, C. González-Barreiro, E. Martínez-Carballo et al.

Table 3. Active packaging functions

to extend food shelf life By absorbing or removing Oxygen

Ethylene
Humidity
Undesirable flavours/aromas

By releasing or emitting Antimicrobial components:

- ethanol
- carbon dioxide
- preservatives (sorbic, benzoic and
propionic acids, bacteriocins…)

Other additives:
- flavours/aromas
- colours
- antioxidants
- food ingredients…

to facilitate food control By testing storage temperature

(intelligent packaging) By testing leaks
By testing freshness

The general requirements for food contact materials also apply to active and intelligent
packaging systems and, consequently, they shall not endanger human health. Releasing
systems are however allowed to change the composition of the food, provided the released
substance is an authorized food additive. Labelling should comply with the food additive
Directive. The release or absorption of substances should not mislead the consumer.
Antimicrobial components incorporated in FCMs and articles intended to be released into the
food (directly or via the headspace) must be approved food additives and will need evidence
of their effectiveness. Any claim which is made for the active system should be proven.
Preservatives may also be added to FCMs in order to obtain an anti-microbial surface. These
applications are not considered active materials. These systems should not release the
preservative into the food and thus have no effect on the microbial conditions of the food. If
the material is a plastic, it must comply with the current framework Regulation
(1935/2004/EC) and the Directives on plastics (2002/72/EC).
A bright future may be anticipated for active and intelligent packaging, as it fits perfectly
with the food safety strategy, involving an improved level of food safety and transparency to
consumers. For the future development in Europe some major factors have to be considered:

1. Some legal hurdles: Most active and intelligent concepts that are on the market in the
USA and Australia cannot be introduced in Europe yet, due to more stringent EU
legislation.
 Suitability of Packaging for Food Based on Interaction Studies 459

2. Reliability and effectiveness: Active systems must be thoroughly validated for each
specific application to be sure that they are dedicated and effective. In case the shelf-
life date would be replaced by the indicator, the performance of the indicator would
need to be 100% effective, giving a guarantee for a ‘zero false-positive’ result.
3. Technical hurdles: For active systems incorporation of the active component with
sufficient capacity in the main material is needed. The main technical hurdle for
intelligent systems is in the development of interactive freshness indicators, which
measure directly the level of (microbiological) contamination of the product or other
parameters that are indicative of the product quality level.
4. Costs for both types are still high. It is obvious, that these costs will drastically be
reduced with broader application and thus scaling-up of production. Discussions are
ongoing as to whether consumers will be ready to pay the extra costs for the extra
safety/quality tools.
5. Food producer, consumer and retail acceptance will be needed to enable an
introduction on a large scale. Most European consumers are open to innovations in
this area, provided the material is safe and the information is unambiguous for the
user.

Despite the hurdles that have to be overcome in the near future, there is a strong view that
active and intelligent packaging will be a technical tool in the market with a high potential,
covering both more transparent communication to consumers and the need for the retail and
food industry to better control the food production chain.
The opportunities for change in packaging draw heavily on the development of new and
novel materials. Smarter packaging will extend the traditional functions of protecting,
containing, and informing to also include an ability to enhance the product and its
consumption, safety, convenience, and security. To do these things, traditional packaging
materials – glass, metal, plastic, and paper/board – will need to be modified by the
incorporation of smart and functional materials, deposited largely as coatings and as part of
printed labels and thin-film electronic devices. So packaging in the future will be radically
different from that of today. Sound and vision on packaging will be ubiquitous – together
with aromas, automatic updating, and other useful responsive features. The technology
enablers for this journey are strongly materials based. So while packaging is not a very
fashionable subject, there are fascinating challenges in the development of inexpensive,
disposable packaging incorporating smart labels, coatings, and devices. Simple but useful
functionality could make a difference to people by preventing errors, saving lives, and
helping to limit waste.

SUMMARY POINTS

• The primary purpose of food packaging must continue to be maintaining the safety,
wholesomeness, and quality of food. Knowledgeable efforts by industry,
government, and consumers will promote continued improvement, and an
understanding of the functional characteristics of packaging will prevent not to
adequately account for both preconsumer and postconsumer packaging factors.
460 R. Rial-Otero, C. González-Barreiro, E. Martínez-Carballo et al.

• The packaging material itself can have negative effects on foodstuff. It can release
solvents, toxic substances and various off-odour components. Food Safety
Regulatory Confirmity have to be fulfilled in order to protect the consumer. Not only
for regulatory reasons, but to satisfy the consumer as well, there is a need to monitor
off-odours and residual substances during the production of packaging materials for
certain food applications at an early stage.
• The development of a framework, bringing together consumption and food-type
distribution factors, at European level, would permit the adoption of an approach
somewhere between the simplified point estimates and the elaborated probabilistic
approaches based on data collected at consumer level. Such an approach, whilst
possessing many of the virtues of the FDA model, would be better adapted to
European consumer patterns.
• The important trends in the food market including health, quality, convenience, and
safety, will continue to determine what types of packaging are used in future.
Manufacturers are making packaging unique enough to keep products fresh and
nutritionally valuable until consumption. European enterprises from the packaging
industry and the chemical industry have developed oxygen absorber and indicator
systems that can be incorporated into polymer composite foils for food packaging.
Through integration of further types of absorbers and emitters into packaging
materials, new function principles will be made possible such as humidity adjustment
or antimicrobial effects. The packaging industry is also taking effective measures to
develop and integrate special indicators into packaging materials that will permit
indicating product specific quality reduction on the basis of key substances, which
also will be particularly effective for high price segment.
• The industry needs effective packaging to pack the food safely for transport and
storage while maintaining the food quality, along with increasing demands of the
consumer for fresher, minimally processed, more convenient and safer foods. The
consumers expect to be informed about the origin, treatment and quality/safety of the
food. It would even be desirable to expand the current possibilities to track and trace
food products from the point of sale to the point of consumption.
• Smart materials boost the packaging industry and perform the functions of
preventing errors, saving lives, and reducing waste. In future, the majority of
consumers will expect information on food packaging regarding freshness, ripeness,
health benefits, and the ethics of food production. More sophisticated indicator labels
will need to be developed that combine chemical sensing with simple electronic
processing and low-cost displays in a flexible, disposable format.

REFERENCES
Barnes K, Sinclair R, Watson D. 2006. Chemical migration and food contact materials.
Woodhead Publishing Ltd. Cambridge. United Kingdom.
Codex Alimentarius Commission. 2004. Report of the 20th session of the Codex committee on
general principles. Joint FAO/WHO food standards programme. 2004 May 2–7. Paris,
France. 44 p.
 Suitability of Packaging for Food Based on Interaction Studies 461

Coles R. 2003. Introduction. In: Coles R, McDowell D, Kirwan MJ, editors. Food packaging
technology. London, U.K.: Blackwell Publishing, CRC Press. p 1–31.
Crank J. 1975. Mathematics of Diffusion, 2nd ed., Oxford Science Press, Oxford, UK.
EPA – Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.). 2006. Plastics. Washington, D.C.: EPA.
Available from: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/plastic.htm.
Fellows P, Axtell B. 2002. Packaging materials. In: Fellows P, Axtell B, editors. Appropriate
food packaging: materials and methods for small businesses. Essex, U.K.: ITDG
Publishing. p 25–77.
Figge K. 1988. Dependence of the migration out of mass plastics on the thickness and
sampling of the material. Food Addit. Contam. 5:397-420.
Gaschke MM. 1978. Epoxy resins. Plastics Engineering, 34(10):33–34.
Golan E, Krissoff B, Kuchler F, Calvin L, Nelson K, Price G. 2004. Traceability in the U.S.
food supply: economic theory and industry studies. Agricultural economic report number
830. Washington, DC: Economic Research Service, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. 48 p.
Han S, Kim WG, Yoon HG, Moon TJ. 1998. Curing reaction of biphenyl epoxy resin with
different phenolic functional hardeners. Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer
Chemistry, 36(5):773–783.
Kirwan MJ, Strawbridge JW. 2003. Plastics in food packaging. In: Coles R, McDowell D,
Kirwan MJ, editors. Food packaging technology. London, U.K.: Blackwell Publishing, CRC
Press. p 174–240.
Kroschwitz JI. 1987. Polymers: An Encyclopedic Sourcebook of Engineering Properties.
John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Lau OW, Wong SK. 1995. Permeability of naphthalene in different types of polymeric food
packaging materials Packag. Technol. Sci. 8:271-277.
Lau OW, Wong SK. 1996. The migration of plasticizers from cling film into food during
microwave heating - Effect of fat content and contact time. Packag. Technol. Sci. 9:19-
27.
Lau OW, Wong SK. 2000. Contamination in food from packaging materials. J. Chrom. A
882(1–2):255–70.
Lee H, Neville K. 1982. Handbook of Epoxy Resins. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Limm W, Hollifield HC. 1995. Effects of temperature and mixing on polymer adjuvant
migration to corn oil and water. Food Addit. Contam. 12:609-624.
Lopez-Rubio A, Almenar E, Hernandez-Munoz P, Lagaron JM, Catala R, Gavara R. 2004.
Overview of active polymer-based packaging technologies for food application. Food
Reviews International 20(4):357–87.
McKown C. 2000. Containers. In: Coatings on glass—technology roadmap workshop. 2000
Jan 18–19. Livermore, Calif: Sandia National Laboratories report. p 8–10.
Page B, Edwards M, May N. 2003. Metal cans. In: Coles R, McDowell D, Kirwan MJ,
editors. Food packaging technology. London, U.K.: Blackwell Publishing, CRC Press. p
121–51.
Sacharow S, Griffin Jr. RC. 1980. The evolution of food packaging. In: Sacharow S, Griffin
Jr. RC, editors. Principles of food packaging. 2nd ed. Westport, Conn.: AVI Publishing
Co. Inc. p 1–61.
Simal-Gándara J. 1999. Selection of can coatings for different applications. Food Reviews
International 15(1):121-137.
462 R. Rial-Otero, C. González-Barreiro, E. Martínez-Carballo et al.

Simal-Gándara J, Damant AP, Castle L. 2002. The use of LC-MS in studies of migration
from food packaging materials. A review of present applications and future possibilities.
Critical Reviews in Analytical Chemistry 32(1):47-78.
Simal-Gándara J, Paz-Abuín S, Ahrné L. 1998. A critical review of the quality and safety of
BADGE-based epoxy coatings for cans. Implications for legislation on epoxy coatings
for food contact. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 38(8):675-688.
Soroka W. 1999. Paper and paperboard. In: Emblem A, Emblem H, editors. Fundamentals of
packaging technology. 2nd ed. Herndon, Va.: Inst. of Packaging Professionals. p 95–112.