When it comes to the environment, packaging has a bad rep. For some, the ultimate earth-friendly package is no package. And yet, packaging reduces product damage and waste, cuts product costs, controls disease, provides convenience and protects against product tampering.
Obviously, packaging is a necessity. However, manufacturers can be more environmentally responsible by simplifying their packaging, by creating returnable, refillable or reusable packaging, and by developing recyclable packing and packaging made from recycled materials.
Environmental concern and business success are not mutually exclusive. Studies have shown that faced with two products of equal value and quality, consumers will choose the one they perceive to be environmentally sound. By going "green," companies can protect the environment, enhance corporate image and sales, and save money by cutting back on excess materials.
Far from being insensitive scoundrels out to ravage Mother Earth, companies have made significant progress on the environmental front. Over the past three decades, research has shown a steady decline in the amount of material used to produce a single package. For example, today 12,750 tons of paper are needed to make a billion half-pint milk containers, as compared with 16,500 tons needed in 1974 -- a 23% decrease.
To be sure, overpackaging is still a problem, and some packages have carried less-than-truthful environmental claims. Nevertheless, several companies have successfully modified their packaging with tangible results. Some examples:
General Mills has designed and produced a new tray-style shipping container yielding an annual material savings of more than 2 million pounds.
Procter & Gamble's Secret and Sure deodorant packages were designed to eliminate the outer folding carton, reducing solid waste by 3.4 million pounds of paperboard per year. In addition, by concentrating formulas, P&G has also reduced the size of its paperboard detergent cartons by 50%.
Nabisco has reduced the weight of its margarine and spread packaging since 1980, saving 2.2 million pounds of plastic. A similar program for glass has reduced packaging by 1.1 million pounds in three years.
Kraft General Foods now manufactures Maxwell House Coffee cans with 10% less metal, which will yield a savings of nearly 200 million pounds of metal each year.
Faced with increasing pressure by consumers, environmental activists and governments around the world, companies can ill afford not to take into account environmental considerations when planning a package design.
When evaluating packaging from an environmental perspective, companies should:
Consider a product's environmental impact in terms of the entire life cycle: production, distribution, use and disposal. How much pollution will be created during manufacturing? How much energy will be used to make and transport the package? How much refrigeration will be required?
Choose materials carefully. Be informed. Despite its reputation as an environmental scourge, plastic is not necessarily worse for the earth than paper or glass. Each packaging material has its own environmental pros and cons that must be considered.
Reduce the amount of material used that ends up as waste. Take a single-material rather than multi-material approach. Eliminate unnecessary secondary packaging. Make smaller and/or thinner packages.
Think globally. Don't assume that every country has the same environmental standards as the United States -- many nations have stricter requirements. It is a good idea to design a global package to conform with basic requirements in as many countries as possible.
Don't fudge on environmental claims. "Degradable" plastic does not really degrade in sanitary landfills. A product that is overpackaged in recyclable materials yields little environmental benefit.
Elinor Selame is the president of Package Design Council International and president of BrandEquity International, a visual communications and brand identity consulting firm based in Newton, Mass.
