Blogs aren’t a great way to discuss a topic like sustainability. There are many facets to sustainability that require a nuanced approach about trade-offs and externalities, topics that frankly are better left to more… independent institutions. In this blog we discuss questions that businesses, and consumer, should keep in mind when making decisions about sustainable flexible packaging and single use bags.
Rigid or flexible
Rigid packaging generally refers to packaging that keeps its shape regardless of its content like bottles, cartons, boxes, tubs, trays etc. Rigid packaging is great for fragile goods and liquids, but tends to suffer loss in transport efficiency, and due to its bulky and rigid form, takes a lot of space in consumers’ garbage and recycling bins.
Flexible packaging, packaging that can easily be shaped or folded, is exceptionally lightweight and space-efficient for transport, storage and end-of-life disposal or recovery. We frequently limit the amount of goods that go on a single pallet over concerns about weight limitations; safety first folks. That being said, flexible packaging is more vulnerable to puncturing and bursting compared to rigid packaging, but is ideal for a broad range of consumer goods that are not particularly sensitive to losses and waste.
Many consumers associate the Resin Identification Codes (RICs) with rigid packaging, since that’s where the system was first used. RICs were introduced in 1988 under the “Voluntary Plastic Container Coding System”, to help workers in materials recovery and recycling facilities separate items according to their resin type.
To the layman, plastic is a generic material that can have slightly different characteristics, but to manufacturers and recovery & recycling facilities, one type of plastic resin can pose a significant contamination risk to other types of plastic resin since they can have completely different physical and chemical properties.
Today many producers choose to print, or emboss in the case of rigid materials, the RIC on their packaging, but some jurisdictions lack legislation regarding RIC use. In the absence of a universal standard for flexible packaging, producers are left to coordinate amongst themselves and recovery & recycling facilities on curbside programs.
Single or compound materials
Retail packaging tends to be content specific. What goes inside, how it’s stored, transported, displayed, and used will inform the choice of packaging material. Often, no single material checks all the boxes but a combination of materials will. However, companies on occasion make design choices that adds other types of material to the packaging.
In general, when it comes to what primary material(s) to use, good packaging design tends to consider:
- function and performance requirements -how will the contents react in, and to, the packaging when exposed to different environments.
- source -where the materials come from and what it’s made of; and
- recovery at end-of-life -what happens to the materials after its job is done.
Pressure from consumer groups have pushed regulation, like Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and Product stewardship programs, on brand owners, importers and franchisors (usually referred to as stewards) to assume responsibility for the management of their packaging materials, focusing heavily on recovery at end-of-life. The regulations attempt to capture the financial, and physical, externalities of packaging materials to try and ensure responsible design.
Using fewer types of materials tends to make the manufacturing, and recovery at end-of-life, processes simpler and more efficient, but priority is given to meet functional and performance needs. Referring back to RICs, part of the reason flexible packaging is slow to adopt RICs is due to the use of compound materials, both co-extruded and laminated films, to ensure functional requirements are met. This prioritizes protection of the product, the primary item for sale, before considerations on sustainable flexible packaging and single use bags.
Printing or labeling
Some packaging materials, particularly smooth rigid materials like glass, face more drawbacks on packaging printing than labeling, due to print scuffing and chipping. Items using such packaging materials are a shoe in for labeling.
For goods that primarily require functional information; like the product name, net quantity, expiration dates, etc.; labelling is a practical option. Labelling can also be a great option for companies that are trialing products, or companies that produce in smaller quantities. Typically, the minimum order quantities for labels are lower than packaging printing.
For companies that have the scale and means to use packaging printing, the benefits are significant for branding and visual appeal. Unlike labeling, packaging printing can use the entire package as a canvas for branding. It allows for the combination of attention-grabbing imagery, vivid and deep Pantone colors that make brands instantly recognisable, and designs that make a product stand out on the wall of goods on displayed.
Bulldog Bag’s flexible packaging printing also has the benefit of film layering and film coating to prevent scuffing and fading in harsh conditions. This is a very attractive attribute for products that have critical information on the packaging like safety warnings, storage and handling instructions, and disposal and recovery instructions that are required for the duration of the product’s life cycle.