Packaging sustainability is a broad and very complex topic. As such, it is understandable that it is often boiled down into much simpler discussions around single-use plastics and recycling.

In fact, a Deloitte survey[1] found that, when consumers were asked what sustainable actions they have taken in the last 12 months, 73% said they had recycled household waste (the top answer in the survey) and 61% said they had limited their use of single-use plastics. Meanwhile, a 2024 Ipsos study[2] found that 85% of consumers worldwide would support a ban on single-use plastics.

At the same time, regulators are also working to shape the discussion around sustainability through their policies. Many plastic reduction regulations have been passed around the world, ranging from the EU’s broad Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulations (PPWR) to bans on many categories of single-use plastic in India, Spain, France, and several US states.

However, while plastic reduction and recycling are important facets of a wider discussion around packaging sustainability, they should not take over that discussion entirely. It is imperative to take a more holistic view of sustainability – one that is led by the principle of product protection and minimising resource use i.e. carbon.

A holistic view of plastic use

While it makes sense to simplify discussions around packaging sustainability to some degree, at some point it becomes important to rip the plaster off and introduce some uncomfortably complex truths.

While unnecessary plastic use is a problem that needs to be resolved, plastic itself is not the villain it is often made out to be. There is simply no other packaging material on the planet that combines the low cost, light weight, durability, barrier performance, and sealability of plastic. This means that to adequately protect certain perishable products – such as soft fruits, dairy, or fresh meat – it may be necessary to use some amount of plastic. The alternative is an increase in product waste – especially food waste – throughout the supply chain. And, in the case of food waste, the emissions it develops dwarf those created by plastic waste.

UN data estimates that roughly a third of all food produced worldwide is wasted, and up to 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions are the result of producing food that is never eaten[3]. Just 1kg of food waste sent to landfill has the same emissions footprint as 25,000 500ml plastic bottles[4].

It is important to remember packaging’s main role is to prevent waste by protecting and preserving its contents through the supply chain, not to generate waste itself. All of this means that replacing a plastic pack with an alternative that does not perform adequately through the supply chain can be counterintuitive.

Alternative materials are improving

While this means we may never achieve the complete elimination of plastic in packaging, our reliance on it is being gradually lessened by the development of new innovations. And there are many more aspects to ‘sustainability’ than plastic reduction. For example, it’s possible to reduce the overall amount of material used to make a pack by swapping a rigid design for a flexible pack. Flexible packaging inherently uses fewer materials than rigid formats and makes it easy to fit more products into a single shipping consignment to improve supply chain efficiency, reducing energy use and emissions.

In the category of flexible materials, there are many options for businesses looking to improve the sustainability of their portfolios. Bioplastics, for example, use organic materials like cellulose that can be built into long polymer chains. These materials do not use fossil fuels and can sometimes be made to be compostable or biodegradable, helping to reduce the risk they will end up in landfill.

Monopolymers present another plastic-based option for businesses looking to improve sustainability across their portfolio. As polypropylene (PP) is increasingly accepted alongside polyethylene (PE) in mainstream UK recycling, businesses can make use of PP’s strong barrier performance – plus its excellent sealability – while still producing a flexible pack that can be recycled in today’s front-of-store recycling schemes.

For applications that require a higher oxygen barrier, it is possible to augment PP or PE with lamination and barrier technologies. However, this cannot come at the cost of compromised recyclability, or it defeats the point of investing in monopolymer packaging in the first place.

The same also applies to paper-based laminates, which use a flexible paper-based material combined with barrier coatings to create a functional pack. Again, paper-based packs must balance recyclability with barrier performance – a balancing act that is getting easier as new innovations and techniques are developed, but one that must be executed flawlessly nonetheless. While water-based barrier coatings have improved, meaning they are suitable for more applications than ever before, there are still some highly sensitive applications that require a more secure barrier against moisture and oxygen.

Overcoming challenges using innovation

So, which of these materials is best? That depends entirely on their application. There is no one-size-fits-all solution for every packaging application.

Each material has its own unique properties and can react differently when utilised in a packaging production process. This poses unexpected challenges depending on the application. For example, when tasked with creating a paper-based pouch for frozen seafood, we had to deal with a number of things – notably, creating a pack with barrier performance that prevented grease and aromas from leaking out of the pack without compromising its recyclability. However, the requirement to make the pack freezable meant it also had to deal with the problems caused by ice crystals.

As the pack moves through the cold chain, ice crystals naturally form and melt on its surface. This excess moisture finds its way into creases and folds in the pouch, degrading the performance of the barrier coating and, ultimately, the pack itself. As such, we added a further barrier coating that inhibited the formation of ice crystals on the pack, ensuring the other barrier coatings remained intact, and ultimately enabled the creation of functional, freezable, fully recyclable paper flexible packaging for challenging applications like seafood.

This is an example of how material innovation can unlock new possibilities for businesses looking to reduce their plastic use. However, it does so while still being guided by the needs of the product to be packed. As barrier technology innovation continues to drive improvements in the functionality of paper packaging, the global supply chain’s reliance on plastic to protect goods lessens – but it may never fully go away.

By taking a holistic, application-driven approach, sustainability and functionality cease to be a balancing act and can instead be made to work hand-in-hand.



[1] https://www.deloitte.com/uk/en/Industries/consumer/perspectives/the-sustainable-consumer.html  
[2] https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/85-of-people-want-global-ban-on-single-use-plastics  
[3] https://www.unep.org/resources/report/unep-food-waste-index-report-2021 
[4] https://www.zerowastescotland.org.uk/resources/rankin-turning-lens-true-impact-food-waste