Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
ABSTRACT The escalating global plastic packaging crisis—marked by projected near‐tripling of plastic consumption by 2060, the pervasive detection of micro‐ and nanoplastics (MNPs) in food and human tissues, and mounting food loss exceeding 13% of global supply chains—has intensified the search for sustainable alternatives aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Bioplastics, encompassing polylactic acid (PLA), polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), thermoplastic starch (TPS), cellulose derivatives, and chitosan, have emerged as the most promising material class, combining renewable origin with functional versatility. This comprehensive review critically synthesizes advances across four interconnected dimensions uniquely absent from prior reviews in combination: (1) material performance benchmarks and blend strategies for major biopolymer classes; (2) active and intelligent packaging functionalities including antimicrobial nanocomposites, antioxidant flavonoid systems, and AI‐integrated sensor platforms; (3) life cycle assessment (LCA) and circular economy implications, including MNP generation from bioplastics and end‐of‐life infrastructure gaps; and (4) the rapidly evolving global and Indonesian regulatory landscape, from the EU's Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) (Regulation (EU) 2025/40, in force February 2025) to Indonesia's National Circular Economy Roadmap 2025–2045. Key findings confirm that PLA offers CO 2 reductions of 25%–61% versus conventional polyethylene under favorable conditions, while PHA from agro‐industrial waste streams offers the most environmentally complete circular profile. Active packaging with chitosan, quercetin, and essential oil nanocomposites achieves multi‐log pathogen reductions in real food systems, and pH‐responsive anthocyanin sensors enable real‐time freshness monitoring. Critical barriers persist in end‐of‐life infrastructure, nano‐safety characterization, and economic scalability, particularly in Southeast Asian contexts. This review identifies five high‐priority research gaps and proposes a multi‐stakeholder roadmap toward genuinely food‐safe, high‐performance, and circular bioplastic packaging systems, with explicit reference to SDG 2, SDG 3, SDG 12, and SDG 13. In response to peer review, this revised version additionally covers three further bioplastic classes (polybutylene succinate, polyvinyl alcohol, and polycaprolactone), explains the mechanistic basis of nanocomposite antimicrobial action and bioplastic‐derived microplastic generation, benchmarks bioplastic production costs against conventional polyolefins, and situates the EU and Indonesian regulatory analysis alongside the United States FDA framework.
Sophian et al. (Wed,) studied this question.