We asked respondents again this year who they felt was the most important stakeholder in limiting environmental damage.
Manufacturers need to lead
Once again manufacturers came out top with 37.3%. While only 22% of people can name a brand that is doing a good job, this is up from last year when we asked more specifically about plastic waste. This broader definition of environmental damage may have played a role as labels such as Fairtrade were mentioned a lot.
At the opposite end of the spectrum, retailers were considered the least important with only 4.2% of respondents naming them as the most important stakeholder, a fall of 2.9%. From an FMCG perspective, it is clear that consumers expect a lot from manufacturers.
Packaging top of mind
We asked specifically which solutions would be most helpful for individuals to reduce waste across a range of FMCG categories, including fresh, homecare, personal care, confectionery, beverages and dry goods. This shows that even when given a wider range of choices, consumers focused on packaging, with half opting for 100% recyclable followed by biodegradable and non-plastic options.
Plastic still has an important role to play for most people, but what is important is that it is not going into landfill or the oceans.
However, 100% recyclable packaging as a global strategy has real challenges. In Western Europe, the majority felt this would be effective, with the number peaking in Ireland (72%). In Asia, however, the opposite is true with a significantly lower response rate, in fact as low as 28% in Vietnam.
There appears to be a link between those wanting 100% recyclable and the quality of local recycling facilities. Ireland had one of the lowest percentages (29%) of people saying it was inconvenient and unclear where to hand items in for recycling. Vietnam, on the other hand, had nearly double this number (52%) saying there was confusion around where to get their waste recycled. This led to Vietnamese respondents selecting a different biodegradable option as the preferred solution that would work for them.
The implication is that manufacturers need to be more involved in creating and supporting better collection and recycling infrastructures. Several partnerships are springing up across Asia with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) partnering with manufacturers to collect and recycle plastic, and also with local plastics organisations, such as Abiplast in Brazil working with Unilever to generate a greater supply of recycled plastic in order to make products.
There are two further examples from Mexico, including local brand Herdez, which has set up stations in 52 locations to exchange used cans of sweetcorn for digital tokens and turning them into wind turbines. This is aiming to raise awareness and incentivise recycling in a country where a lack of facilities means 33% of Mexicans consider recycling inconvenient. The sales impact for the Herdez brand was also positive as it continues to gain volume share.
Another example is Coca-Cola, the most chosen FMCG brand in the world, with the brand spending $152 million in Mexico on infrastructure for bottle recycling. This was recognised by our respondents, and Coca-Cola was the most mentioned brand ‘doing a good job’ in limiting environmental damage in Mexico.
Thinking beyond recyclable plastic
Biodegradable was the second most chosen option for solutions that would work for shoppers. However, a lack of facilities can mean that the packaging is not able to degrade or can contaminate the recycling streams. This has led to the UK’s leading retailer Tesco advising manufacturers not to use it to comply with its green policies.
Technology is moving fast however and the variety of products (both FMCG and non-FMCG) that can be made with biodegradable solutions is increasing rapidly. Despite the negative associations, there are examples of manufacturers exploring biodegradable options.
Major food manufacturer Bimbo is introducing 100% biodegradable or compostable packaging. Bimbo was the number two most mentioned brand that is doing a good job in Mexico and is also growing its consumer base strongly this year.
The third most chosen option that worked for people was packaging in materials other than plastic, something we expect to see a sharp rise in for future product launches. Pulpex is a packaging producer that is partnering with Diageo, Unilever, and PepsiCo to produce new packaging derived from wood pulp and 100% recyclable. One of the first products to hit the market next year will be Johnny Walker whiskey available in a paper bottle.
Paper has also been replacing plastic in other cases. Subscription laundry and dish care company SMOL produces plastic-free packaging that also has a safety feature to stop young children eating the tablets. L’Oréal has launched a new sunscreen in France, using cardboard to replace nearly half the plastic in the packaging for its brand La Roche-Posay.
One area where we have seen a lot of corporate announcements is in going carbon neutral. Carbon neutral means that for any carbon you put into the atmosphere you need take out again (for example by planting trees). Microsoft announced this year that it will be carbon negative and pay back all of the carbon used in its history by 2050. This appears to have a lower cut through with our respondents, with only 19% opting for more carbon neutral products, falling as low as 11% in LatAm. Germany is one of the more progressive countries in its engagement around sustainability with 42% saying it would be helpful and suggesting we could see this area grow in the future.
Category differences
We found significant differences in what people wanted by category. Fresh food was highlighted as the category where half of all consumers felt they could make a difference in their purchasing. There was a lot more demand for more local products to be available, with 38% overall wanting this, peaking at 67% in Germany and 65% in Italy.
Homecare was the second most selected category where people believed they could make a difference. Whilst 100% recyclable packaging was the first ask, there was a much higher number of people saying refillable options would also help (vs other categories).
A few brands are adopting this. A great example is Algramo in Chile, which provides refills for a range of products and offers cost savings for doing so. Neat is a new brand in the UK, which is super premium and emphasises sleek packaging alongside the fact that it is non-plastic. In the last year, we have seen an increase in product launches providing options to help shoppers avoid plastic. However, this does not necessarily lead to success. In many cases, we found products that were highlighted as being major sustainability-first launches had limited impact.
Fab in Colombia marketed as “cleaning that takes care of the planet” only reached 0.2% penetration. Its limited success was down to being available only in some modern trade retailers, having a premium price point, and no mass advertising. In the UK, Colgate launched a bamboo toothbrush and toothpaste in recyclable packaging, but the combined sales were around £1m with price points over four times the market average.
Whilst all initiatives in this space add choice and help test capabilities, it shows that the traditional levers of success, such as mental and physical availability while remaining competitively priced, remain as true in this space as the rest of the FMCG market.
