THE PACKAGING JOURNEY

EFFICIENCY ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Down gauging Lower temperature
Scrap avoidance Higher volume
Prototyping Faster cycle time
M Elimination of Right-sized equipment
AT
G N E
secondary packaging
I
FUNCTIONALITY WATER CONSUMPTION

RI
S
DE

AL
Shelf life Lower requirements
Integrity Closed-loop system

S
Protection Proper disposal

CONSERVATION COMPLIANCE
Recyclability Proper resin
Storage/shipping identification coding
optimisation Responsible package
Lightweighting labeling

SAFETY PACKAGING
BPA free Accepted in municipal
No hazardous substances recycling
Leachables/extractables Appropriate for
testing industrial composting
Standards compliance

REDUCTION CLOSED LOOP

Mineral fillers Customer scrap
RE

Lower-density resins Post-industrial material

G
Foamed resins Post-consumer material
CO

IN

COMPOSITION
RY
VE

SS

C E Bio-based

R O Biodegradable
P Recyclable
Compostable
Recycled content
- Post-industrial
- Post-consumer Source: PolyOne 2015

CONSUMER ATTITUDES TOWARD FOOD PACKAGING AND THE ENVIRONMENT (%)

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Retailers should provide more help with recycling 24 49 23 3 1

Id like to see more products sold in refill packs 24 47 25 4 1

Its not always clear which parts of packaging are recyclable 18 50 21 9 2

Id be interested in packaging that can be composted 17 34 30 14 5

Id be interested in finding out more about recycling 13 37 36 11 4

Its more important to reduce packaging waste than food waste 17 31 39 11 2

Id like to compare different types of environmentally friendly packaging 12 34 37 13 4

I wouldnt know what to do with biodegradable packaging 7 24 31 26 12

Source: Lightspeed GMI/Mintel 2016

UK PACKAGING WASTE AND RECYCLING/RECOVERY BY CONSUMER ATTITUDES

MATERIAL TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY
Packaging waste Waste recovered Recovery/recycling rate (%)
(million tonnes) (million tonnes) Percentage of
consumers willing 2015
to pay more for
3.87 sustainable goods 2014
PAPER 89.4%
3.46 Source: 2013
Nielsen 2015

2.4
GLASS 68.3%
1.64

PLASTIC
2.26
31.6% 5 0%
0.71 % 55%
66

1.03
WOOD 42.3%
0.44

METAL 0.81 MOST IMPORTANT DRIVERS OF

Aluminium and 57.4%
steel 0.46 ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES
FOR GLOBAL FOOD AND DRINK PACKAGING COMPANIES

0.02
OTHER 0%
0
01 BRAND EQUITY
61% Reputation, stakeholder
Packaging waste Waste recovered Recovery/recycling relations
TOTAL (million tonnes) (million tonnes) rate (%)
10.38 7.55 72.7%

Source: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 2016

02 COST REDUCTIONS
43% Operational performance,
logistical efficiency, fee/tax
BARRIERS TO CONSUMERS PURCHASING cost savings
ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND PRODUCTS
[WHO WAS SURVEYED]

31% 03 RISK AVOIDANCE

Regulatory compliance

44% 33% 31% 29% 25%

REVENUE
Greater Lack of Lack of Lack of Lower 27% 04 GENERATION
cost environmental awareness information quality
products (knowing what is/is Consumer/retailer
not environmental) preference

Source: Tetra Pak 2015 Source: Tetra Pak 2015