The difference between industry and consumer perceptions of ‘sustainability’

In a rush? Click here to read a short summary of this article

Introduction
Consumers and packaging industry professionals often define “sustainability” differently – consumers tend to focus on immediate, personal choices, while the industry views it in terms of materials, processes, and measurable targets. This report explores those differing perspectives, how sustainability is measured, and the implications for packaging design, regulation, and business strategy.

Key Takeaways

• Both consumers and industry agree on the importance of sustainable materials and sourcing, but priorities vary by region and product category, as shown in McKinsey’s global survey on packaging preferences.
• Consumer perception can be influenced as much by the feel and familiarity of packaging as by its sustainability credentials, with category norms affecting acceptance of new materials.
• Studies from Pro Carton suggest strong consumer preference for cartonboard over plastic, with recyclability and avoiding overpacking being key drivers of brand switching.
• Industry measures sustainability through ratings, certifications, and defined targets, covering areas like carbon reduction, water and energy use, traceability, and circularity – as seen with Archroma, Klöckner Pentaplast, and Siegwerk.
• Many major brands, including PepsiCo, Unilever, and Colgate-Palmolive, have missed their packaging sustainability targets, highlighting the technical, economic, and logistical challenges of rapid change.
• Analyst John Blake advises setting realistic goals based on specific product needs, investing in collaboration, and leveraging regulation to create scale and level the playing field.

Conclusion
While consumer demand pushes brands toward sustainable packaging, the industry faces a balancing act between ambition and practicality. Success will depend on setting achievable, product-specific targets, aligning strategies with regulatory frameworks, and fostering partnerships that drive innovation and investment in waste management. The gap between consumer perception and industrial reality underscores the need for clearer communication and shared definitions of what “sustainability” really means in practice.

When it comes to the concept of sustainability, consumers and industry players can have different perceptions of what the term means and how it affects them. In this edition of The Brief, we examine both industry and consumer perceptions of what sustainability is, how this can be measured, and its impact on areas such as consumer choices and companies’ sustainability targets.

As a consumer, we often think of sustainability in terms of how it directly impacts us, such as in our buying choices which shops we go to, what food we buy, where our clothes come from and what materials things are made of. You could argue that consumers have a more ‘immediate’ frame of reference.

On the other hand, those within the packaging industry might perceive the term ‘sustainability’ in relation to company strategies, business processes, products, materials or data analysis. There could be a much broader scope of what ‘sustainability’ means.

However, one area in which both consumers and the industry are united is sustainable sourcing and materials.

In August 2023, a report from McKinsey examined the attitudes of 11,500 consumers across eleven countries towards sustainable packaging, discovering varieties in hygiene concerns, environmental priorities and the definition of a ‘sustainable’ material.

Apparently, compostable and plant-based packaging took a “significant lead” in every country except Japan, where fully recyclable plastics or those containing recycled content were considered to be similarly sustainable. Plastic films made from renewable or compostable materials were “highly regarded across the board.”

However, there were some variations in whether recyclable plastics or recyclable films were more popular as a sustainable packaging type, with containers made of recyclable plastics “noticeably more popular” in Asia and Latin America than North America or Europe, while Chinese consumers considered recyclable films to be “the least sustainable packaging type” amongst the available options.

As part of last year’s Sustainable Packaging Summit, Smruti Kulkarni, vice president of BASES & Neuro Design Practice Area, Europe at NielsenIQ and Stuart James, sales director of Packaging at NielsenIQ presented the findings of a study assessing the impact of sustainable packaging on consumers. This included a comparison of consumer reactions to both plastic and paperboard packaging for deodorant and chocolate bars.

The study recorded the conscious and non-conscious reactions of consumers using electroencephalogram (EEG) research, which measures electrical activity in the brain. Kulkarni stated that consumers often find it difficult to articulate their feelings when it comes to packaging material, with packaging weight or size perceptions being particularly hard for people to articulate. She commented: “When it comes to sustainable packaging in particular, consumers often say they want to ‘do the right thing’ – buy the sustainable pack because it feels like the right thing to do.”

Some of the main conclusions of the study were that including a sustainable story on-pack is embraced by consumers, but sometimes the ‘hand feel’ of sustainable a material can create hesitation; and that existing category pack norms influence perception.

Kulkarni explained this through the results of consumer reactions to the deodorant and chocolate packs – with the deodorant paper packaging, the research found that consumers’ physical experience with the packaging was superior to the plastic, however, the brand associations with sustainability were weaker.

When it came to product quality, the perceptions were found to be on par with plastic. With the paper chocolate packaging, the physical experience, brand associations and product quality perceptions were all found to be weaker than plastic.

In March this year, Winfried Muehling of Pro Carton discussed a series of studies the company commissioned exploring consumer attitudes towards and perception of packaging, as part of our Packaging Europe podcast series. Muehling spoke to our editor in chief Elisabeth Skoda about the insights and takeaways from the 2024 report.

He highlighted that when consumers were asked: “If you have a product offered in both a cartonboard package and a plastic package, which one do you prefer?” A reported 87% of consumers preferred cartonboard over plastic.

He also pointed out the impact packaging can make when it comes to branding, stating that an end-of-life decision is already being made at the point of sale. This is because 41% of consumers said they would change brand if the packaging had changed in the last 12 months.

When asked for the reasons behind this, Muehling says the respondents’ main reason was non-recyclable packaging, followed by ‘overpacking’, or an unnecessary amount of packaging. Consumers also appeared to be secure in their judgements of what is recyclable or not, with 82% apparently stating they felt comfortable to make these judgements.

Whilst both the packaging industry and consumers seem to agree that the perception of ‘sustainability’ includes sustainable sourcing and materials, what are the other areas this could include? For the industry, certifications and ratings can sometimes be used as measures of a company’s sustainability, with the criteria ranging from carbon footprint validation to traceability, ethics, labour and human rights.

In July, specialty chemicals company Archroma was awarded a Gold rating by EcoVadis, the global rating agency for sustainability performance. Apparently, over 130,000 companies from 180 countries and 220 industries are assessed by EcoVadis against criteria covering environmental performance, ethics, labour and human rights, and sustainable procurement.

As well as ratings, many companies in the industry have set sustainability targets which include goals such as reducing carbon emissions and water and energy usage.

Archroma has set sustainability targets including reducing water intensity by 40%, energy intensity by 15% and waste intensity by 10%, with zero hazardous waste to landfill, from 2023 to 2030. The company also aims to reduce absolute Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from its plants and processes by 20% and reduce absolute Scope 2 indirect GHG emissions from the energy it consumes by 40%.

In the same month, Klöckner Pentaplast (kp) claimed it had become the first food packaging business to receive RecyClass’ Traceability Certification with a module focused on closed loop for its recycled PET (rPET) at its production site in Pravia, Spain. The company stated its food packaging trays were the first food packaging trays in the market comprised of 100% rPET, derived exclusively from trays and fully transparent.

Siegwerk recently announced the completion of its carbon audit - consisting of the validation of the Partial Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) of inks, coatings and varnishes and the verification of the Corporate Carbon Footprint (CCF). The audit has apparently received International Organization for Standardization (ISO) certification.

The company stated that accredited verification body TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH conducted the verification and validation processes, ensuring adherence to standards. The PCF validation reportedly provides product-specific carbon emissions, while the CCF provides the overall emissions of Siegwerk, including emissions in the value chain.

Siegwerk’s systematic approach is said to be compliant with the relevant standards and the greenhouse gas emissions are presented fairly. The validation is based on data from 2020 and is valid until the end of 2025.

However, when it comes to measures for sustainability such as ratings, certifications and targets in the industry, what happens when these measures are not met? How might the industry perception of sustainability change?

Major brand owners like PepsiCo, Unilever and Colgate-Palmolive have recently announced that they will fail to reach their sustainable packaging objectives. Senior director analyst at Gartner, John Blake, predicted this trend back in 2021.

He spoke to us about the important learnings the industry can take away from this, such as the consequences of ambitious targets, with “the level of engineering and science that is inherent in common packaging formats is often misunderstood”. Blake gave the example of plastics, stating whilst they are highly engineered for lightweight, economic product protection, they were not developed for easy reuse or recycling. He argues that to “unwind this innovation” in a short timeframe is not currently technically or economically feasible.

Blake also highlighted that “products are unique in how they are made, consumed and what is required to protect them,” adding that goals need to be designed with nearly as much detail as the products themselves.

He states that many of the pledges made did not factor in the time or investments required to drive the scale required, and there was a draw to high-level “consumer-preferred” initiatives.

The ambitious targets of brands and NGOs should be applauded, as without them the industry would not have made the investments or progress it has to date, Blake continues. However, he advises organisations that have not yet committed to a sustainable packaging strategy to learn from the early adopters. He adds: “Take a pragmatic approach based on your packaging consumption and where you can have both short- and long-term impact. Understand fully the opportunities and limitations of sustainable packaging in the locations where you manufacture and sell products.”

Regulations can level the playing field, he says, reducing the risk for first movers, balancing costs and growing efficiencies through scale. He believes the sudden rise of ubiquitous sustainable packaging commitments should have been a warning sign to the industry, signalling more of a trend than a strategy.

When it comes to the industry’s perceptions and challenges around sustainability, Blake concludes that to overcome the challenges the industry faces, there needs to be greater commitment to collaboration and adherence to regulations that drive investment back into waste management and foster growth in innovation.

If you liked this story, you might also enjoy:

How are the top brands progressing on packaging sustainability?

Sustainable Innovation Report 2024: Current trends and future priorities

Reuse vs. single use – which is better for the environment?

The ultimate guide to global plastic sustainability regulation