Earth Day 2020: Pinpointing responsibility for the plastic pollution crisis

22 Apr 2020 --- The 50th celebration of Earth Day brings environmental protection concerns to the top of mind today. Plastic packaging waste continues to litter streets, sully access to clean and safe water, while the debate on recyclability versus reusability continues to sizzle. Last week, PackagingInsights published responses from PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, Nestlé and Unilever on recent allegations posed in a Tearfund report that the FMCG giants were relying too heavily on single-use plastic packaging that often goes unrecycled. This week, the development agency has returned to the stage to respond.

The initial Tearfund report highlights that the four global FMCGs sell billions of products in single-use packaging in China, India, the Philippines, Brazil, Mexico and Nigeria. They do so despite knowing that packaging waste is not always effectively managed in these regions, consequently leading to pollution, notes Tearfund. 

Given that such pollution causes serious harm to environmental and human health, the development agency calls upon the FMCG giants to scale up their efforts in refillable and reusable packaging, not just on plastic recyclability.

Commenting on the Tearfund report, PepsiCo had responded that the company is reinventing the packaging it uses by looking “beyond the bottle” through reusable platforms like SodaStream that would eliminate the use of approximately 67 billion plastic bottles through 2025. In Brazil, Coca-Cola has introduced and expanded a “universal” refillable PET bottle that will prevent over 200 million new PET bottles from entering the market each year, the company estimates. 

Click to EnlargePepsiCo's acquisition of SodaStream will help drive reuse and refill of its products, but just in richer countries, notes Green.Joanne Green, Senior Policy Advisor at Tearfund and co-author of the report, tells PackagingInsights that these efforts are insufficient to keep environmentalists’ concerns at bay in light of too much focus on single-use packaging and not enough on reusable packaging, particularly in the developing world.

“The bottom line is that Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have not made any public commitments to refill and reuse models in the developing world. PepsiCo's acquisition of SodaStream will help drive reuse and refill of their products, but just in richer countries. Coca-Cola's commitment in Brazil is encouraging but they need to commit to roll this out elsewhere,” she affirms.

Compared to PepsiCo and Coca-Cola, Nestlé and Unilever are “doing much more,” Green continues, identifying both their commitments to reducing virgin plastic by a third by 2025 as a “good step in the right direction.”

Reusable packaging: An ideal solution?
Recycling is a, but not the, solution to the plastic pollution crisis, Tearfund highlights. Rich Gower, Senior Economist at Tearfund, shares with PackagingInsights how alternative delivery models, such as refillable bottles, boast several advantages over single-use packaging. 

“Coca-Cola and PepsiCo operate in an industry where refillable plastic bottles are already a proven solution with far lower human and environmental impacts than single-use plastic. They simply need to be adopted more widely,” Gower explains.

Reuseable packaging does not compromise food hygiene or create food waste. In fact, it has been used for years for soft drinks in many developing countries, predominantly in Latin America, he notes.

However, metal packaging (often used in refillable applications), for example, is far more energy intensive to make than plastic. “Clearly, we don't want to solve one problem by creating another. However, at present, people in poverty face unacceptable health impacts from the burning and dumping of plastic packaging, which also creates climate emissions. These effects must also be considered in comparisons between packaging types.”

Click to EnlargePeople in poverty face unacceptable health impacts from the burning and dumping of plastic packaging, says Gower.Plastic alternatives, such as biobased and compostable plastics, leave Gower untouched. “Biobased plastics are not the answer. At the end of their life, they have the same impact as conventional plastic and their use could also compete with land for food crops. Compostable packaging looks attractive in theory, but in practice, it often requires collection and composting at an industrial facility. The main thrust of work toward a solution should be a shift toward refillable and reusable packaging,” he maintains.

The distribution of responsibility
The question of where responsibility falls in such a long-term, multifaceted, intertwined crisis is difficult to determine. Or is it? According to Green, wealthier customers and citizens – whose continuous purchases keep the four companies in business – hold some responsibility, but they are enmeshed in a system created by companies which outsource the costs of plastic pollution on communities and the environment. 

“Many of the poorest people have little choice, but yet they are the ones bearing the brunt of this crisis. Companies have a moral responsibility for their packaging and they have the know-how, the resources and the ability to change course, if they want to.”

The UK aimed at holding itself more accountable for its plastic waste in January with new legislation set to ban polluting plastic waste export to developing countries in a bid to ensure their protection against remaining the dumping grounds of unsolicited waste.

Green emphasizes that PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, Nestlé and Unilever do not march down this path alone. “We are very much aware that there are other companies out there doing less than the companies included in our report. The Break Free from Plastic Audit shows that Proctor and Gamble, Mondelēz International, Danone and Perfetti Van Melle are all companies with a significant global plastic pollution footprint. They should also be taking note of our report and doing much more to reduce their plastic footprint in the developing world.” 

Shareholders, fund managers, government and customers all have a role to play, says Green, but the primary onus remains on companies. “Hopefully, our report will influence the companies directly and via those other stakeholders. Unless companies take transformative action, pulling all levers, the problem will get worse not better. It isn't going away because of recycling initiatives alone.”

“Ultimately, they will have to change, but the question is, will it be too late?”

By Anni Schleicher

To contact our editorial team please email us at editorial@cnsmedia.com