Trade Talk: Consumers unsure how to solve packaging waste problems

As this issue of QMRR is devoted to packaging research, I've been thinking quite a bit about topics related to the subject of packaging; particularly, in light of certain local and national developments, about the problem of packaging waste disposal.

Here in the Twin Cities, local government bodies have recently taken steps towards banning the use of certain types of packaging (plastic soda bottles, styrofoam fast food containers, etc.), and within months downtown Minneapolis will see the start-up of a controversial garbage incinerator located on the edge of its warehouse district.

Events such as these are being repeated all over the country. As it was decades ago, pollution has become a hot topic. With trash piling up and space for landfills running out, solutions to the waste disposal problem, from outright banning of certain non-degradable materials to other  alternatives such as incineration and recycling, have become hotly debated issues.

It's become clear that more and more companies, and not just packaged goods manufacturers, will have to pay attention to consumer attitudes on pollution, recycling, and other packaging issues. Some already have; for example, degradable trash bags are now on the market, and so are degradable diapers.

To get some insight into how consumers feel about the problem, I contacted Lorna Opatow, president of Opatow Associates Inc., who's investigated that area for 20 years in the course of performing research in the once-disparate but now converging areas of public issues and packaging design.

My curiosity was piqued after receiving a copy of a presentation Opatow gave to a meeting of the Packaging Institute International earlier this spring, which traced the course of consumer attitudes on pollution over the past two decades.

Opatow says that consumers are involved in waste disposal issues, but unlike the consumer-led anti-pollution movement of the 1970's—which attacked litter and got phosphates removed from detergents—in general, as with the container banning effort here in the Twin Cities, it is the local governments that are taking the lead in acting on the problem, because they are the ones confronted daily with managing waste disposal.

"I think consumers are becoming more aware of waste issues, and that packaging is a part of it. But they feel there is a limit to what they can do about it. In the past, the pollution problems have been citizens' problems—turning on your faucet and getting soap suds, for example—but this is something where citizens aren't responsible for getting rid of their own garbage—yet."

Geographic factors exert a strong influence on consumer awareness of waste disposal, Opatow says. The more populous areas naturally generate more garbage, and thus their residents are more likely to be involved in recycling programs, for example, and exposed to extensive media coverage on the issue.

Much of the difficulty lies in inconsistent consumer definitions of the types of packaging that are environmentally problematic. It is agreed that plastic bottles and garbage bags pose a threat, but some consumers don't seem to consider other convenience-oriented packaging as hazards.

"When they are asked, consumers accustomed to the convenience of heat-and-serve microwave products are surprised that the disposability of the 'next-to-nothing' tray is being questioned. Fast food and take-out customers appreciate the convenience of leak-proof and grease-proof containers, especially the ones that retain heat. When they are asked about it directly, these people do not think take-out containers are a problem," Opatow told the Packaging Institute International.

In general, she says, most consumers will provide socially acceptable answers when questioned about the waste disposal problem, but when asked about solutions, they are unable to provide pat, easy answers, reflecting the sense of confusion surrounding the issue.

"One of the critical problems is that the experts haven't agreed on what's good and what's bad. It's all well and good to say you can't have any more plastics, but there are some paperboard containers that are worse in terms of their disposability."

That confusion also clouds the issue of disposal. No one is sure what is the safest and most efficient disposal method. Everyone agrees that the waste must be disposed of, but no one wants to have a garbage incinerator or landfill in their back yard. And they don't always believe that the government bodies who administer the disposal efforts are trustworthy, Opatow says.

"It's hard for the average person to know what's right and what isn't. The 'government' used to be an unimpeachable source. It no longer is, so there is a certain amount of skepticism."

Opatow says that in the near future, the following issues will influence packaging innovation:

• "Continuing consumer demand for safety (including tamper evidence)."
• "Consumer demand for convenience. This demand will be tempered by considerations related to price and to waste disposal."
• "Profits will continue to motivate manufacturers' choices of packages and packaging materials, but companies will have fewer options."
• "There will be a move to legislate standardization of certain types of packages in terms of materials to accommodate to recycling, plus shapes and configurations to reduce the amount of packaging and lower the volume of waste."
• "The recent attempts to use packaging as product enhancers will be re-examined...to determine tradeoffs between convenience and quality image on the one hand, and economical disposability on the other."
• "All of this will result in products with less packaging and more recyclable packages. As a result, there will be new challenges for package developers, especially for graphic designer and those in the printing industry. As containers become standardized, there will be fewer opportunities to differentiate one brand from another by means of packaging structure, materials, or inner and outer wraps. Instead, graphic design and copy will have to carry a larger share of the burden of image communications and the execution of printing will become an even more important quality indicator."

It's the area of convenience that seems to be the stickiest. Opatow says that consumers will either pay more or sacrifice convenience to ease the pollution problem, but they will not do both.

"Consumers already pay more for what they perceive as convenience, but to pay more and not get the convenience would be a difficult idea to sell, because we've become a country where we're used to science solving our problems. I think it will take a while to sink in that maybe this is something that science doesn't have an answer for yet."