The simple questions reshaping packaging design

There is perhaps an uncomfortable truth facing the packaging sector and its ambitions for a more sustainable future: the solutions exist, the technology works, but cost remains the defining barrier between ambition and reality. Increasingly it’s becoming clear that innovation in sustainable packaging is no longer optional, it's economically imperative.

"Sustainability never ends, so innovation never stops," declared an attendee at Innovation Forum’s 2025 sustainable packaging conference in Amsterdam, capturing the relentless momentum driving the sector. The event, and the US equivalent in Chicago, brought together brands, manufacturers, and policymakers, tackled everything from flexible packaging challenges to the economics of reusable systems, while wrestling with a persistent question: can the industry transform consumer behaviour as rapidly as it's transforming materials?

Throughout the conferences, case studies suggested consumers may be ready for change when presented with genuinely better alternatives. "It's not better for the planet. It's better all around," one delegate noted, describing those revelatory moments when reuse systems prove superior on every metric, not just environmental ones.

The beverage sector is emerging as a leader. With major players including Heineken, Asahi, Coca-Cola, Diageo and PepsiCo all advancing closed-loop systems, the industry is demonstrating that circular packaging is achievable at scale. The crucial insight? When businesses get the customer story right, the business case follows naturally. However, these successes largely operate in business-to-business contexts, where logistics prove more manageable than consumer-facing retail environments.

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes are emerging in many jurisdictions. PackUK, which launched in January 2025, aims to shift the cost of managing household packaging waste from taxpayers to businesses using the “polluter pays” principle. While corporate communications teams may instinctively resist such regulations, there is a counterintuitive perspective – for leading companies already investing in sustainability, EPR levels the playing field by incentivising competitors to follow suit.

The UK government's  commitment to establishing a Producer Responsibility Organisation by March 2026, for example, does appear to signal serious intent. The scheme is expected to support 25,000 jobs and stimulate over £10bn in investment. For brands operating in the UK, this represents both challenge and opportunity – the chance to influence how the organisation operates by engaging actively with industry bodies.

If reuse systems showed promise, flexible packaging is proving the sector’s most vexing challenge. With no silver bullet solution, a potential three-pronged approach emerged at the forum in Amsterdam: optimising materials in the short term, supporting robust recycling infrastructure, and investing in reuse systems for the long term. One speaker offered memorable practical guidance: when designing packaging, simply ask “which bin will this go in?”

The discussions in Amsterdam and Chicago acknowledged uncomfortable realities. Incineration remains necessary in the short term, though many sector experts urge vigilance against building new capacity. Meanwhile, innovations in sorting technology, potentially enhanced by artificial intelligence, offer hope for handling today's complex waste streams more effectively.

Perhaps the Amsterdam forum's most striking revelation came from Belgian retailer initiatives demonstrating how competitors could share intellectual property and navigate competition law to achieve collective sustainability goals. While the example cited – which was collaborative work around mushroom packaging – might seem modest, it illustrated the persistence required to solve seemingly intractable problems one by one.

Standardisation emerged as a critical enabler for reuse systems. Shoppers won't arrive at stores "with all their reusable bags and 40 empty containers", as an attendee in Amsterdam observed. The industry must design systems around practical consumer behaviour, not idealised versions of it. This realisation sparked discussion about "EPR 2.0", using EPR infrastructure and funding to support collection points and make reuse more convenient than single-use shopping.

Yet cost remains the elephant in the room. Packaging may be cheap, but logistics are expensive. A saving of fractions of a penny on materials may add significant distribution complexity. Innovative solutions around cleaning shortcuts and reverse logistics offer some hope, though the mathematics remain challenging even at scale.

Consumer demand could partially offset these costs in certain categories. Discussions emphasised the importance of two-way communication between brands and consumers to ensure packaging solutions resonate, particularly in premium segments where sustainability aligns with brand values.

A practical approach could be to think in terms of horizons: what can be achieved immediately, what requires mid-term planning, and what long-term investments must begin today precisely because transformation takes time. The European Commission's active engagement in Amsterdam suggested regulatory support from the EU for "innovative regulation", a partnership approach between government and industry to enable rather than merely police sustainability transitions. The picture in the US is more fragmented, but examples are emerging of some state and municipal level innovation. 

The consensus? Pilot programmes must focus on testing logistics and acceptability, not market research. Volumetric modelling and customer insights matter more than consumer surveys in single locations. And critically, the industry must resist incremental thinking when transformational change is required.

For an industry long dominated by one-way efficiency, the challenge of reverse logistics and circular systems demands nothing less than wholesale reinvention. Appetite for change exists, collaboration is possible, and solutions are emerging. Whether momentum can overcome cost barriers remains the defining question.