Poor packaging design undermines waste-picker earnings, industry report finds

A recent report by the Consumer Goods Forum, a global industry organization, has revealed the importance of recyclable packaging design for waste pickers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). 

In many LMICs, informal waste pickers collect and sort millions of metric tons of plastic waste annually. The report highlights how their livelihoods are linked to the value of the materials they collect, meaning materials that are difficult to recycle are likely to reduce earnings. 

Packaging Insights speaks to Cédric Dever, director of the Plastic Waste Coalition of Action at the Consumer Goods Forum and Dr. Sonia Dias, waste specialist at Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO). 

“The paper provides evidence that packaging characteristics can influence the value of material collected for recycling, which in turn can affect the economics for waste workers,” says Dever. 

He highlights that collaboration with waste-picking stakeholders — a historically overlooked sector of the waste management chain — is important to conversations regarding circular packaging design. 

Dias adds: “Packaging design is relevant for sure, but it is not a panacea for solving plastic pollution.” 

WIEGO is a global policy and advocacy network that supports informal workers, especially women and people living in poverty, to improve their rights, incomes, and working conditions. 

“It is important to invest in design innovations that combine recyclability and biodegradability requirements,” Dias continues. 

The Consumer Goods Forum report estimates that more than US$150 million in potential earnings are lost across LMICs from poorly designed PET bottles, explains Dever. He highlights that the figure is derived from a modeled estimate based on PET price differentials and market-volume assumptions rather than a measure of waste picker incomes. 

The purpose of the report, Dever continues, is to provide a common set of good-practice principles that companies and policymakers can adapt to local infrastructure, market conditions, and stakeholder needs. 

Tricky to recycle formats 

The report suggests manufacturers strengthen the recyclability of PET by using uncolored or transparent blue or green PET where appropriate. Materials in these colors are more widely recyclable than other, more heavily colored packaging solutions. 

As an example, Dever highlights that in Indonesia, waste pickers receive on average of Rp5,000 (US$0.28) per kilogram for clear PET waste, compared with Rp3,000 (US$0.17) per kilogram for colored PET. In Colombia, recovered clear PET sells for roughly three times the price of green or amber PET. 

In addition to the impact of coloring on PET recyclability, the report outlines how labels, adhesives, closures, liners, and seals must also be designed for recyclability. It suggests that packers use “minimal or moderate” direct printing for essential information only. 

“[For example] the balance between manual and NIR sorting can influence which colors, labels, and inks work effectively within the local system,” explains Dever. 

The conversation about how packaging labels and adhesives impact recyclability rates is not new, but the Consumer Goods Forum report emphasizes the systemic pressures that inefficient packaging design places on working lives. 

“There is no single recycling system across LMICs, so packaging design changes need to be considered in the context of each market,” underscores Dever, adding that infrastructure, technologies, and end-markets vary. 

In some low- and middle-income countries, limited waste collection and recycling infrastructure leave plastic packaging waste vulnerable to dumping and open burning. 

Last month, we spoke to the US National Association for PET Container Resources (NAPCOR), an industry-funded trade association, about its latest report on the significance of investing in PET recycling processes. 

Beyond packaging design 

Dever and Dias elaborate that it is more than a packaging design that impacts the lives of waste pickers, with infrastructure, consumer behavior, and gender differences playing a part. 

“Packaging design is only one factor influencing waste-worker livelihoods,” says Dever, adding that “material prices, collection systems, local recycling capacity, and market demand all play a role.” 

Dever also outlines that consumer disposal behavior can also vary by region, with the report advising that packaging must include clear recycling instructions. 

A recent study published in Resources, Conservation & Recycling Advances, revealed that consumers are more likely to correctly sort packaging when the design provides clear disposal guidance or simplified sorting processes. 

In addition to consumer behavior and local infrastructure potentially impacting waste pickers’ earnings, Dias previously told Packaging Insights that there is also gender disparity. 

“Men consistently earn more than women waste pickers. A gender analysis of official data in Brazil’s annual social information survey database concluded that men in waste picking earn much more than women.”

Improving working conditions 

Dias links improved recycling infrastructure to better working conditions for waste pickers — male and female. 

“It is crucial to invest in the establishment of inclusive recycling systems that support informal waste pickers with infrastructure, decent work conditions and fair remuneration, given they play a critical role in waste recovery systems,” she explains. 

At the UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties, Doun Moon, policy and research officer at the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, told us about how packaging companies can support a “just transition” for waste workers whose livelihoods depend on the current linear waste economy. 

Dever concurs with Dias, suggesting that while manufacturers can adapt packaging for recycling, local stakeholder and community engagement is equally important. 

“Waste-picker associations can provide practical insights into collection, manual sorting, and material markets,” adding that circularity requires a full value chain collaboration, including recyclers and manufacturers. 

However, Dever notes that the Consumer Goods Forum’s report does not prescribe a “brand-level measurement framework.” 

He concludes: “Companies wishing to assess the impact of design changes could work with local waste-picker organizations, recyclers, and other partners to understand changes in indicators, such as material value, collection volumes, rejection rates, and worker incomes over time.”