The aim of Deliverable 7.2 is to use screening studies for each use-case performed in the BUDDIE-PACK project to identify environmental, economic and social hotspots of reusable plastic packaging life cycles, and assess their potential benefits compared to single-use alternatives. This Deliverable enables the achievement of Milestone 7, which aims to reach a consensus on designs and materials choices made in WP1 and WP3 using LCA, LCCA and SIA screening, by communicating the screenings results with the partners throughout the screening tasks. The first part of this deliverable underlines the methodological choices made in Deliverable 7.1 for LCA and LCCA screenings and the full assessment studies. Any deviations from these methodological choices that are used in the screening studies, due to data availability, feasibility or inputs from other Work Packages, are then described and justified. For LCCA, generic economic data used for every use-case is also indicated. The screening studies include an LCA and an LCCA of the contributing factors, along with the assessment of Break-Even Points (BEP) of reusable systems, i.e. the number of times the reusable system must be used to be better than a single-use comparator. All use-cases were studied for this Deliverable and all available results are presented in this document. The Dawn Meats use-case (Meat secondary food packaging) is to be finalised after the Deliverable submission, as the data arrived later. The results are presented for all EF3.0 indicators for the contributor analysis and comparison to single-use, and are focused on Climate change and Water use for the sensitivity analyses of the Break-Even Point. For the take-away food container in Vytal’s use-case, a reusable PP container (used 20 times) is compared to a single-use laminated cardboard container, for service and on-site washing in a restaurant in Berlin. The baseline study gives a break-even point of 17 uses for Climate change and 32 uses for Water use. The LCCA break-even point is at 15 uses. For the laundry detergent system in Asevi/SmurfitKappa’s use-case, a reusable PP bottle (used 10 times) filled by a 10 l Bag-in-Box is compared to a single-use laundry detergent bottle. The baseline study gives a break-even point of 2 uses for Climate change and Water use. The LCCA break-even point has not been calculated as there is too big a discrepancy between the types of cost collected for the two systems. For the catering tray in Ausolan’s use-case, two systems are analysed: A multiportion tray, where the reusable CPET tray (used 50 times) is compared to a reusable steel tray (used 100 times). The baseline study shows a non-attainable break-even point on Climate change and Water use. A single-portion container, where the reusable PBT and PP container (used 50 times) is compared to a single-use PP container. The baseline study gives a break-even point of 8 uses for Climate change and 14 uses for Water use. The systems are then combined to represent the proportional allocation of meals packaged in trays (80%) and those packed in containers (20%). The combined systems considered are: Steel trays and single-use single-portion plastic SUPP containers (the current system); Plastic RPP trays and reusable single-portion plastic RPP containers (the fully reusable plastic system); Steel trays and reusable single-portion plastic RPP containers (hybrid system). The BEP analysis comparing them shows the hybrid system as the potentially best option. For the on-the-spot food container in Uzaje’s use-case, a reusable PP container (reused 20 times) is compared to a single-use PP container, for a usage in a supermarket and industrial washing both in Ile-de-France. The baseline study gives a break-even point of 11 uses for Climate change and 12 uses for Water use. As the production of a single-use container is less expensive than the washing of a reusable container, the BEP is not reachable for the current system. For all use-cases, the following data and prospective hypotheses should be collected and revised: Real reuse rate: return rate, decommissioning rate…; Final mass and material of the packaging developed in the project; Specific washing data; End-of-Life scenario of the reusable packaging: integration in existing recycling schemes, closed loop recycling; Integration of other single-use (cardboard…) and reusable options (steel, glass…) available on the market to get a comprehensive idea of the relevance of using a plastic reusable packaging. The screening S-LCA is performed differently to the LCA and LCCA, as some methodological points needed to be addressed, as discussed in Deliverable 7.1. By doing screening studies of the plastic industry, with tools such as the Risk Mapping tool, this deliverable has successfully identified the relevant social topics for the full assessment of BUDDIE-PACK use-cases. These cover a range of stakeholder categories ranging from workers to local communities and consumers. These are largely aligned with the WBCSD, and UNEP and SETAC guidelines. However, a mandatory social topic (child labour) was removed due to lack of relevance for the project. Within this screening study generic data from literature and databases was used to assess representative sectors and countries of operation. Risk hot spots were subsequently identified, and the approach to impact characterisation within the full S-LCA was selected. Owing to several data related considerations, a reference scale approach is identified as the most appropriate. The developed reference scales, in conjunction with the partners co-operation and CSR documentation should enable a complete assessment of the use-cases with minimal need for assumptions of data imputations. In conclusion, this deliverable shows the potential positive impact of the reusable solutions developed in the project. Many assumptions have been taken concerning decisive parameters of systems (packaging mass and End-of-Life, washing consumptions…), as data coming from the other Work packages was available at the end of the screening tasks or is still not available. These data gaps will be filled throughout the rest of the project, with input from large-scale demonstration of each use-case, and identification of methodological improvements from the screenings to the full assessment (real reuse rate calculation, transport allocation…).