Thoughts on the Problem of Easter Packaging Waste
How the candy industry can reduce waste through packaging redesign during Easter
By Charles Haverfield, Packaging Expert for US Packaging and Wrapping
In the UK, Easter’s impact on the environment has long been documented, with more than 8,000 tons of packaging waste generated every year over the Easter period. While Easter eggs are less traditional in the US, arguably the most iconic candy brand to dominate Easter in the states is Peeps, with 2bn marshmallow chicks produced each year, 75 percent of which are made specifically for the Easter holiday.
Yet it’s not the only sweet treat consumers are after this season; according to a recent study, 51 percent of Americans who will buy Easter candy this year plan to pick up jelly beans, while Reese’s Peanut Butter Eggs topped the charts as the most wanted candy in 29 states.
And with Americans spending $2.6bn on Easter candy each year, this is a significant amount of packaging likely to end up in landfill.
In this article, I evaluate the popular packaging alternatives candy brands are exploring to determine how the packaging industry can help tackle Easter’s big waste problem.
Further Reading:
5 Solutions to Easter Packaging Waste
Author: aussiegall from sydney, Australia – Easter Egg Hunt
Source
Reducing excessive packaging
By reducing excessive packaging, candy brands can not only reduce waste but also save on production costs over time by streamlining packaging design and adjusting packaging to the specification of individual products.
Additionally, brands should look to optimize inventory management. By accurately forecasting demand and adjusting production levels, candy companies can avoid overproduction, lowering the volume of packaging waste generated. This will, in turn, improve supply chain efficiency and minimize the time and resources needed to move products from the production line to the store shelves.
Reusable alternatives
Other brands in the FMCG sector have begun exploring reusable or refillable systems including switching to more durable materials to reduce packaging waste. Coca-Cola, for example, pledged to make 25 percent of its packaging reusable by 2030 through the integration of refillable or returnable glass or plastic bottles to help promote a circular packaging economy.
While this is certainly a step toward meeting sustainability goals, the logistics of implementing these practices for candy brands remain complex, as their success relies on changing consumer behaviors. Consumers need to be willing to return the packaging to the store or a collection point for reuse. Encouraging and educating consumers on the importance of returning packaging can be a significant challenge.
This poses a logistical problem for candy brands that rely on e-commerce and don’t operate out of traditional brick-and-mortar stores, limiting consumer options to physical stores in nearby proximity. Reusable packaging also depends upon significant investment and collaboration with suppliers, retailers as well as consumers.
However, while the upfront cost of developing durable, reusable packaging would initially be higher, businesses can enjoy savings to production costs in the long term by scrapping single-use packaging while meeting sustainability goals.
Recyclable packaging
Some of the biggest candy brands, such as Ferrara and Hershey, have pledged to make all packaging 100 percent recyclable, reusable or compostable by 2025 and 2030 respectively.
This will undoubtedly have a significant impact on the volume of packaging waste produced each Easter. In the UK, Mars Wrigley saved 142 tons last Easter alone by switching its Easter egg portfolio to 97 percent plastic-free packaging.
While brands are taking strides to become more environmentally friendly, significant change needs to come from investing in recycling infrastructure, especially across the US.
According to a report by the Environmental Protection Agency, America’s recycling infrastructure has not kept pace with today’s waste stream. So, even if candy manufacturers switch to recyclable packaging, there may not be adequate recycling infrastructure to handle the increased volume of recyclable materials.
Candy wrappers are also often small and lightweight, which makes them difficult to sort and collect in recycling facilities. There are also at high risk of food contamination. This can result in recyclable packaging being sent to landfills or incinerators, defeating the purpose of using recyclable materials in the first place.
Until more investment can be put into improving the US’ recycling infrastructure, recyclable packaging alternatives may not prove the most effective way to reduce waste over the Easter holiday.
Biodegradable alternatives
To combat the mounting issue of Easter packaging waste entering landfill, some brands, like Skittles, are turning to biodegradable packaging as a more sustainable alternative to single-use wrappers.
However, brands face many challenges in creating biodegradable packaging for food products. Most notably, they must find materials that are both eco-friendly and durable enough to protect the candy. Biodegradable materials like paper, cardboard or bioplastics may not have the same protective qualities as traditional packaging materials, such as plastic or foil, which could lead to damage or spoilage of the candy.
Brands also face hurdles in fighting to keep production costs low while producing expensive biodegradable packaging. A high price tag for sustainably packaged goods could increase the overall cost of the product and potentially decrease sales if this cost is passed onto the consumer. This is of particular concern while grocery inflation continues to rise and food costs remain the biggest pain-point for many households.
Despite these challenges, some candy companies are seeing success in switching to biodegradable packaging alternatives. In Australia, for example, all Mars Wrigley chocolate bars are set to be packed in recyclable, reusable or compostable packaging by 2025 following a successful trial of compostable packaging. However, it may be some time yet before we see biodegradable packaging initiatives roll out into the mainstream candy brands in the US.
Improving labeling
Wishcycling – the act of consumers putting items in a recycling bin in the hope they can be recycled – is one of the biggest hindrances to a brand’s sustainability efforts. But there are ways candy companies can help educate consumers and avoid wishcycling through strategic packaging design.
Firstly, brands should consider redesigning their packaging to make it more recyclable. Mixing packaging materials is common across the food packaging industry, with aluminum or plastic coatings regularly used to keep food fresher for longer. However, packaging materials must be isolated to be effectively processed in the recycling process, making most candy packaging unrecyclable.
A simplified approach to one type of packaging material or easily separable packaging components can help make it easier for consumers to recycle product packaging.
Packaging can also play an important role in educating consumers. Improving labeling to make it clearer what can and can’t be recycled will help reduce confusion among consumers and encourage them to successfully recycle items.