The case for the prosecution, on the face of it, appears quite strong. There is too much packaging for everyday products and the usual suspects include shrinkwrapped vegetables, confectionery, DVDs, pizzas, new-fangled detergents and breakfast cereals. Most of the cardboard, clingfilm and plastic involved is unnecessary, say packaging’s detractors, and simply adds to excessive waste.

Press campaigns
The Independent’s ‘Campaign Against Waste’, which began in January, claims that excess packaging is doing “tremendous damage to the environment” as the UK is “fast running out of landfill sites in which to bury such unnecessary waste”. And in the run-up to Easter, the Daily Mail put its considerable weight behind a drive to reduce the amount of packaging used for Easter eggs. However, the prime charge is that today packaging is used more to market products than to protect them. To be fair, though, this is hardly a new phenomenon – it actually started in the 1960s.

But this negative publicity doesn’t reflect well on the much-maligned packaging industry and although plastics and clingfilm are given the worst press, cartonboard and paper are also frequently dragged into the debate. So, is there any comeback for the packaging industry and, if so, what is the case for the defence?

Packaging Federation chief executive Dick Searle argues that materials used in the production of carton or paper packaging are sustainable – after all, paper and board is manufactured primarily from soft wood pulp. The claim that ancient forests are chopped down for packaging is well wide of the mark, he says.
“I wish people would get things into perspective,” he argues. “There is so much nonsense talked – people listen too much to ill-informed green groups and end up attacking their own way of life. Packaging is there for a reason.”

The three Ps are the key reasons for packaging, according to Benson Box Group managing director Mark Kerridge. He argues that packaging plays an invaluable part in protecting, preserving and promoting food. And, contrary to popular belief, he says, packaging has many green credentials.

“Cartons are made from a naturally renewable source, with over 90% of all fibres used in Europe coming from sustainably managed forests,” says Kerridge. “The pulp used is actually a by-product of the timber trade and no tropical hardwoods are used in the manufacture of folding cartons.”

Indeed, Kerridge argues that packaging actually prevents more waste than it generates. He cites reports from the World Health Organisation that show wastage rates in the supply chain in developing economies can be as high as 50%. In developed countries it is as low as 3%, as packaging creates micro-climates in the supply chain to help keep food and drink fresh up to the point of consumption. He adds that packaging going to landfill is falling, and that the UK has one of the lowest rates of household packaging waste in Europe.

Key accreditations
It’s a side of the argument you rarely, if ever, hear about. Packaging manufacturers are now showing their environmental credentials by gaining key accreditations. Benson Box was the latest packaging firm to gain FSC and PEFC accreditations, while others to have gone down that route include Field First Newcastle and Potts.

The latter holds five accreditations, including ISO 14001, and the push to become more environmentally friendly isn’t simply a means to combat negative media coverage.

The company aims to develop long-term relationships with clients through research and development.
“The trend now is ‘less is more’ and innovative design,” explains Potts marketing director John Conway. “Clients are looking at a pack that does it all – appealing on-shelf graphics, eco-friendly materials, essentially making the carton work harder, all for a good unit price. We’re embracing this culture and developing great new ideas with our clients.

“[However,] the industry still needs to further promote the innovation and eco-positive initiatives to a wider audience to change the negative perceptions people may have.”

Potts project manager Tony Mullarkey adds: “We take an existing or new product and see how best we can make the product work by minimising the use of packaging material. The next stage is to see how feasible this will be in a production process. We then research environmentally friendly boards and test biodegradable materials and print finishes.”

Benson Box sales director David Devenport adds: “Our customers are also very aware of their responsibilities. So when we design packaging, we look to minimise the amount of materials used while ensuring it serves its role: to protect, promote and carry essential legal information.”

Devil’s handiwork
But try telling that to the national press, who are convinced that packaging is the devil’s handiwork. Battling against such campaigns and getting an alternative point of view across     t isn’t easy. “Sadly, while the press campaign has generated the opportunity for the packaging industry to respond, we are generally not very effective at getting our message across,” says Benson’s Kerridge. “We need to do more to promote our industry and, if we can’t, the campaign will be damaging.”

The problem for the packaging industry is that it doesn’t have the financial clout to get its message across to a national audience. “I think the industry should get out of its victim mode,” says the Packaging Federation’s Searle. “In a perfect world, we would carry out a PR campaign, but the industry is working at margins of less than 5%, so where would the money come from?”

This may sound defeatist, but it is also the view of a realist. However, not all is lost for the packaging sector – it still has a potential ally, and a powerful one at that.

“What we really need is for the retailers to sell the public on the positive benefits of packaging rather than the packaging industry alone having to defend itself,” argues BPIF Cartons president John Monks. “They are actually the ones under attack for using too much packaging. The public is more likely to listen to, and believe, the retailer than what they perceive as profit-driven manufacturers, trying to sell their wares.”

But many supermarkets are actually turning their backs on the packaging suppliers and siding with the campaigns.

Without the resources to go it alone, Searle has asked the big names in retail to lead the backlash. So far, only two have responded: Tesco and Marks & Spencer. The others, Sainsbury’s, Morrisons, Asda and Waitrose, are strangely mute.

“We have got to the stage where supermarkets have to engage, whether they like it or not,” he says. Searle is in the process of meeting those who responded and, while he admits that sometimes his job is to be “bloody unpopular”, two responses is better than none.

The evidence from the defence suggests that packaging manufacturing isn’t an environmental disaster and that it doesn’t create the kind of waste that many national newspapers claim. But it’s a message that the retailers need to take forward as the packaging industry alone can’t punch above its weight against the might of the press.

And if that happens, then perhaps the packaging industry’s ‘usual suspects’ will at least have the right to a fair trial.