Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
PB 1
Sect
ion
03
Insights Report
Consumer Perceptions of the Role of Packaging in Reducing Food waste
Industry Think Tank Results
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
2 3
Sect
ion
02
The CRC Program supports industry-led collaborations between industry, researchers and the community.
The Fight Food Waste Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) gratefully acknowledges the Australian Government Cooperative Research Centre Program financial contribution through the Cooperative Research Centres program as well as the participants of this project.
This document should be cited as Ryder, M., Brennan, L., Parker, L., Lockrey, S., Verghese, K., Francis, C., Hill, A., Langley, S., Alessi, N., Phan-Le, N T., Jackson, M., Sherman, A., and Chorazy, E. (2021) Consumer Perceptions of the Role of Packaging in Reducing Food Waste. Industry Think Tank results, Fight Food Waste Cooperative Research Centre, Adelaide. Australia.
© Fight Food Waste Limited 2021Level 1, Wine Innovation Central BuildingCnr Hartley Grove and Paratoo RoadURRBRAE SA [email protected]+61 8 8313 3564
All information, data and advice contained within the report is provided by FFW CRC in good faith and is believed to be accurate and reliable as at the time of publication. However, the appropriateness of the information, data and advice in the report is not guaranteed and is supplied by FFW CRC ‘as is’ with no representation or warranty.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
4 5
Sect
ion
02
Benefits of packaging aiming to reducing food waste (features, format, size, materials).
Tips and tricks for product use, storage options to extend shelf life after a pack is open.
Recycling of packaging after use.
This report is a brief overview of the findings from Project 1.2.2 Think Tanks whereby input from industry was sought using an online qualitative survey and a seminar discussing the results and implications of the findings from the consumer research modules. An overview of Project 1.2.2 can be provided on request. Project 1.2.2. aligns with the REDUCE and the ENGAGE programs of the FFWCRC’s activities. The aim is to understand consumer’s perceptions of food waste with a view to finding opportunities for packaging to reduce food loss and waste.
The concept of consumer education and communication of food packaging benefits and food waste was dominant throughout the participants’ responses. Key Insights include:
Executive Summary
Portion size
Cost (Investment vs return)
Recyclability
Household food waste reduction needs better portion-controlled packaging.
Portions should be based on household size and consumer use/behaviour research.
Cost of sustainable packaging options and new/alterations to existing machinery is regarded as too expensive.
Support from government and retailers is required.
Ensure all packaging is recyclable and do not use the recycling symbol on packaging that is not actually recyclable in Australia.
Government targets are not feasible without a whole-of-system approach to reducing food waste
More consumer education is required to build awareness of:
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
6 7
Sect
ion
02
Table of Contents
Previous reports from project 2.1.1
1. Introduction
2. Background
3. Insights and Discussion
4. Conclusion
5. Acknowledgments
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
Participants
Consumer education and awareness of save food packaging (SFP)What to educate consumers aboutBenefits of food packaging designPurchasing, storing and using food consumer behavioursPurchasing behaviours:Storage behaviours: Date labelling confusionFood waste impacts (environmental and financial)How and where to educate consumersOn-pack communicationUnderstanding consumer behavioursPackaging designBenefits of food packaging design Recycling/DisposalIndividual organisation operations and internal systemsDesign for storageSupply chain systems and their role in reducing consumer food wasteGovernment actions to help industry reduce consumer food waste
3.1 3.1.13.1.23.1.33.1.3.13.1.3.2 3.1.3.3 3.1.3.43.1.43.23.33.43.4.13.5 3.6 3.6.1 3.73.8
2.1
4.1
1.1
10
13
14
18
20
2324262728293031
343639424851
545962
6467
70
86
88
90
92
Directions and future research
Publications of contributing team members*
Stakeholder online survey design
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
8 9
Sect
ion
02
9
01Introduction
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
10 11
Sect
ion
01
Food waste is a significant issue, both environmentally and economically. An associated issue is the packaging in which food is stored and presented. Packaging is often viewed as having a negative impact on the environment as the packaging remains once the product is consumed.
This requires the customer to dispose of the packaging either in the bin or through recycling, if facilities are available. The negative perception of packaging and the lack of understanding of its purpose by households is likely to contribute to the less-than-ideal packaging use within households.
However, in many cases packaging protects food and prolongs shelf life, with an overall reduction in environmental impact by reducing food waste.
Food packaging can contribute to household food waste reduction by being designed to extend the shelf-life of food products, being available in numerous sizes for different sized households, communicating on pack the best way to use and store food item, assisting households to use date labels to better manage their food and slowing the degradation of minimally processed vegetables.
Understanding, perception and use of packaging by consumers also plays a role in household food waste generation.
The focus of Project 1.2.2 is food consumption in the home. Ideally, the result of this research will enable the team to posit packaging solutions that will result in reductions in food waste. In this study food waste is defined as food that is fit for human consumption and which is disposed of instead of being used.
This report comprises insights from industry participants about the results of the consumer perceptions of packaging research (Stages 3 and 4). Previous reports containing the results of the consumer perceptions research can be accessed via the FFWCRC website.
This report refers to consumer research that has been conducted by the Project 1.2.2 team over the last decade. Opinions are based on our collective expertise and a further reading list of our research can be found in Appendix A.
Previous reports from Project 1.2.2.
1.1.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
12 13
Sect
ion
03
12 13
02Background
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
14 15
Sect
ion
02
Insights from industry were gathered in two stages:
1) an online qualitative survey and, 2) an insights gathering workshop of 1.5 hours duration.
The online survey was conducted via Qualtrics – a cloud based online survey platform. The design of the online survey was twofold: participants were shown the insights gathered from previous works including the Baseline Literature Review, Journey Mapping, Existing Perceptions of Packaging Survey and Packaging Design Interviews (all reports are available from the CRC website). Next, participants were asked to assess the information provided and comment on the data, specifically their (and their companies’) ability to act on the issues of consumer food waste.
This section of the project was driven by the following research question:
Participation was voluntary and was sourced via email invitation amongst leading industry stakeholders within five food categories: fruit and vegetable, bakery, packaged and processed foods, dairy and eggs, meat and seafood. A total of 155 participants completed the online survey. 75 of these responses were omitted due to partial completion and refusal of consent, resulting in the analysis of 80 responses in total.
The survey comprised of 18 questions (outlined in Appendix B); three multiple choice organisational demographic questions and 15 short answer questions. The survey was conducted from the 29th of October to 11th December 2020. Participants
What are the potential solutions and what is the potential impact of these solutions - what are the returns to waste and industry?
were also asked whether they would be interested in attending the workshop to be held in 2021.
The industry workshop was conducted on 18 March 2021, and was attended by industry partners, and individuals who expressed interest via the online survey. The 1.5 hour workshop was conducted online using the Zoom platform. Notes were made during the workshop, but transcripts were also produced. As data was potentially identifiable, participants’ roles and/or job titles were not included in any verbatim comments.
Transcripts were analysed by multiple investigators (MR, LB, LP, SL) using an informal content analysis to identify key themes. Themes were then investigated in terms of contribution to packaging and food waste. Some themes that were not about food waste per se were included because of the extent and importance of discussion.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
16 17
Sect
ion
02
Participants
2.1
Of the 80 participants in the online survey, large businesses (identified as employing 200 or more employees) represented over half of respondents. Roles included CEO/MD executive level (17), marketing (15) and sustainability managers (10). All food waste categories were represented, which included meat, seafood, fresh produce, dairy and eggs, bakery, food and/or beverages, ready meals, processed foods, packaging supplier/designer/consultant.
Participants who currently do not or are unsure whether they consider consumer food waste when designing packaging represented over one fifth of the sample collected, highlighting the need for further implementation of save food strategies that impact consumer food waste within the supply chain.
There were 14 participants who attended the workshop from a wide range of industry organisations including, government, food packaging and a variety from all five food categories described above. The majority were in decision-making roles within their organisations and could respond at an organisational level.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
18 19
Sect
ion
03
18 19
03Insights and discussion
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
20 21
Sect
ion
03
Industry feedback on consumer research regarding food waste were synthesised into seven categories:
Overall, industry participants were not fully cognisant of consumer perspectives on food packaging. Participants also felt that consumers needed more education about how to save food. This is in direct contrast to the consumer results which suggest that consumers buy what isavailable to them, rather than making demands of retailers or producers.
Reconciling industry and consumer expectations of food waste and the role of packaging in reducing food waste is a potential direction for future research.
Consumer education and awareness of Save Food Packaging (SFP)
3.1
Across the survey and the workshop, participants highlighted the importance of consumer education and awareness of food waste as a vital way to reduce food waste within the home. Currently, the benefits of food packaging are not being communicated to consumers efficiently, if at all. In the participants’ view, the most practical way to educate consumers is through a broad marketing strategy, targeting multiple and specific target groups through on-pack communication, school education, local council initiatives, retail and government campaigns, and through social media platforms. No suggestions were made as to how this broad reaching campaign would be funded. However, it is clear that a system-wide multi-level approach is necessary if food waste is to be reduced.
1. Consumer education and awareness of Save Food Packaging (SFP)
2. On-pack communication
3. Understanding consumer behaviours
4. Packaging design
5. Recycling & disposal
6. Supply chain systems and their role in reducing consumer food waste
7. Government actions to help industry reduce consumer food waste.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
22 23
Sect
ion
03
What to educate consumers about
3.1.1
In participants’ views, the food packaging industry has a responsibility to communicate the benefits of their packaging design; especially by providing information on how to store and use foodstuffs correctly to ultimately reduce food waste at home. Successfully educating consumers about packaging, storage and use may increase acceptance of food-saving packaging technologies and raise awareness of food waste within the home. This will help from both environmental and financial perspectives.
“As consumers we can all make more use of the information provided on packaging, particularly as much of this is being updated, and the packaging itself, to ensure that the way we store food at home keeps it fresher for longer. FMCGs and packaging organisations need to assess whether they can do more to inform consumers about the innovations they are making around food labelling and packaging, to raise awareness of the benefits and encourage consumers to make use of these, and encourage / undertake further innovation.” Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Industry have identified these communication points are lacking in the current food packaging landscape and acknowledge that they are accountable when it comes to providing this education. Participants in the industry workshop made the following comments:
“it is hard to educate consumers… [we feel that] every single day”
“It is really, really important that we explain to people if we don’t package things, or we don’t package them appropriately, and we don’t extend shelf life, then the amount of energy wasted, not just in growing the animal, but transporting the animal [is significant].”
“industry can make it easier for consumers to make those choices that they do want to make,”
“And that maintaining freshness and preserving food is about good design, rather than educate [only about waste]”
“providing something that is usable for the consumer will automatically get them to do more of it is educational it comes to cognitive too cumbersome to too much work.”
“It takes a while to educate the consumer”
Consequently, consumer education must be multifaceted and extend over relatively long periods of time, especially as the industry is changing.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
24 25
Sect
ion
03
Benefits of food packaging design
3.1.2
Our previous research shows that the primary function of food packaging is to protect and preserve the food it contains throughout the supply chain – from producer to plate (see Appendix A: Publications). Therefore, the design of packaging is vital for saving food, as well as to ensure that a quality and safe product reaches consumers. Previous research also demonstrates that most consumers are aware that packaging is vital for shelf-life extension, yet there is still the perception that no packaging is best, specifically with fresh fruit and vegetables. Participants were aware of the disconnection between what consumers say and what they do.
“It is consistent [with our knowledge] that consumers say one thing and then do another. The perception that fruit and vegetables don’t need packaging, yet consumers understand that packaging extends shelf life and reduces waste is common. More education is required on the beneficial role of packaging vs food waste. No-one seems to question the amount of packaging in the other aisles of the supermarket.” - Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Across the range of industry participants, there were two packaging formats that dominated suggestions of the ‘ideal packaging solution, when considering household consumer food waste’. These features were resealability and portion control, which also aligns to other industry engagement research within Fight Food Waste CRC Save Food Packaging Project. The dominance of these features was not exclusively related to a single food category, rather these suggestions
“[Consumer education on the] benefits of design features like portion control and resealability [and] awareness of investment by industry in innovations” - Government / Industry Association / Researcher
Industry have identified the need for consumer education on the benefits of save food packaging (SFP) to increase awareness and accept innovative packaging by understanding how and why selected materials, format design and innovative technologies can reduce food waste. This aims to encourage consumers to perceive packaging as a necessary food saving device.
Industry also felt that consumer education about innovative technologies was also necessary, especially when it came to Modified Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) and vacuum packs, as well as the use of nanotechnologies. It was felt that consumer reception of these technologies was low because of their inability to engage with the technical aspects of the designs.
Purchasing, storing and using food consumer behaviours
3.1.3
Industry participants were also asked about what they felt could be done about consumer behaviours regarding purchasing, storing and using food.
spanned across meat, processed foods, food and beverages
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
26 27
Sect
ion
03
Purchasing behaviours
Storagebehaviours
3.1.3.1 3.1.3.2
Another food saving technique highlighted by participants was the need for consumers to adopt optimal shopping and purchasing behaviours. Simple techniques such as writing a shopping list acts to discourage impulse purchases that are subsequently wasted within the home. One participant even suggested that removing the need for primary packaging through scoop and weigh stations may support appropriate quantities to be purchased for what is required, rather than relying of pre-packaged and portioned products.
“Scoop and weigh’ or ‘pay by weight’ style frozen food where a consumer brings their own container. Would allow consumers to only purchase what they need, use it as required, and gives a lot of flexibility in the style of packaging.”- Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Another participant spoke about consumers’ experiences within the retail space, specifically how correctly packing food at the store to transport home can act to reduce food waste. However, given that consumers are increasingly packing their own groceries, this is likely to remain an issue.
“Communication between retailers and consumers can help to understand the needs and habits of consumers and how to pack the food appropriately to avoid waste.”- Packaging Supplier / Designer / Consultant
Industry is also calling for education on food saving techniques to communicate the simple ways in which food waste can be avoided before food even reaches the home.
Packaging’s ultimate purpose is to protect and preserve food, however once a pack is opened within the home, protection features are severely compromised. Therefore, the importance of correct storage behaviours becomes paramount to avoid food waste within the home. One solution to improve food storage behaviours is to educate consumers via on-pack messages of the best practices for the product.
“Provide more information about storage and shelf life after opening”. - Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Ideas of what to educate consumers about included stock rotation within the fridge and freezer, recipe ideas to use leftovers and the encouragement of self-portioning, storing and freezing of meat products. However, there was also resistance from industry participants who maintain that packages and labels are already ‘cluttered’ and adding more information is going to be difficult. Design ideas that include clear visual ‘instructions’ that do not require reading of small text will be necessary.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
28 29
Sect
ion
03
Date labelling confusion
Food waste impacts (environmental and financial)
3.1.3.3 3.1.3.4
Participants also acknowledged the need for clearer date labelling which is accompanied with education on the difference between ‘best-before’ and ‘use-by’ labels. Such education should aim to describe the difference between safety and quality of food to ensure that food that is still safe for consumption is not wasted.
“...better understanding of food waste avoidance behaviours such as... portion control, using leftovers, correct storage and understanding best before vs use by”- Government / Industry Association / Researcher
Clear date labelling can also be used to educate consumers on the shelf life of fresh food products purchased loose compared to those packaged. One participant describes this concept below:
“[FMCGs and packaging organisations] could also offer updated guidance around the best way to buy food with the appropriate packaging to keep it fresher for longer, for example if it will be eaten straight away buying loose, if you want to keep it for longer buying packaged.”- Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
This concept gives a further use for date labelling and in turn encourages the consumer to not disregard packaged fresh food products due to their prolonged shelf life. Another suggestion was to have instore signage that provided food storage and packaging advice for buyers while shopping. An alternative idea was for major retailers to use their magazine to advise on reducing food waste alongside the promotion of products.
The types of impacts of consumer behaviours was also a topic covered in the survey and workshop. A major concern is that consumers do not understand the impact of food waste on the environment. However, they have a strong belief in the undesirability of packaging. Furthermore, consumers do not do what they say they do and there is a considerable gap between stated intentions and behaviours.
Packaging waste vs. Food waste:
Packaging, especially plastic packaging, has been vilified by consumers and is a growing global issue with a strong anti-plastic social movement. Packaging of all types is seen as unsustainable, and in the consumers’ view the deficits of packaging outweigh the benefits when it comes to saving food. A common suggestion from consumers is that packaging cannot breakdown and filter back into the natural environment, when compared to food waste, an organic material, it is perceived to be the lesser of the two evils when it comes to negative environmental impact. However, our research also shows that consumers are not aware of the extent of household food waste and the role packaging has to play in saving food. Importantly, our research also shows that consumers feel that they do not waste food at all even if that means redefining the meaning of waste (see other reports from this group on the FFWCRC website).
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
30 31
Sect
ion
03
In response to these insights, the food packaging industry called for education about the impacts of food waste compared to that of packaging waste, in order to highlight the devastating effects of food waste from an environmental perspective. When food is wasted it is not only a waste of the food itself, but also a waste of the energy and resources to grow, harvest, transport and sell the product to consumers.
“I think the war on plastics (and packaging in general) mentality does more harm than good when we are talking about food waste. It would be great for consumers to really understand what would be the outcome in terms of waste if we didn’t have all the packaging formats we do that extend shelf life markedly. That may seem as over packaging or unnecessary serves a greater goal.”- Packaging Manufacturer / Supplier
One participant called for the narrative of plastic packaging to change, reframing the discussion from the negatives of plastic to the beneficial food saving ability of the material as food packaging.
“Opportunity exists to change the discussion from no plastic to the correct use of plastic” - Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Another suggestion was to reduce the amount of single use packaging and extend the use of BYO packaging to stores, as well as extend the use of biodegradable or compostable plastics. These plastics save food but do not end up in landfill or the oceans, and if they do, these plastics degrade when in the right degradation contexts and conditions. However, a caution here is that consumers are very susceptible to the look and feel of the packaging and interpret thin plastic as being of low quality. Consequently, solutions need to look and feel similar to other forms of packaging
to be acceptable. The cost of food waste:
Some participants indicated that consumers are strongly price driven when it comes to grocery shopping and that this might be an opportunity to educate about the benefits of reducing food waste. This theme is also supported by previous research.
“Consumer driven by pack size and price point. Consumers say they want locally made, safe, and long shelf life, but when in the supermarket they are price driven first and foremost. Consumers also don’t always get the portion requirements right and or don’t have plans how to use up ‘left over’” - Food/beverage Manufacturer
By creating more awareness of the financial impacts of food waste, particularly personal and household savings by avoiding food waste within the home, participants believe that consumers will be more likely to adopt packaging with save food features. Consumer acceptance of new packaging technologies may create demand for SFP designs on supermarket shelves, making food saving techniques within packaging a marketable selling point, which will be vital for packaging and food manufacturers. There is also a rise of popularity of single serving sized packaged for smaller household structures. However, manufacturers do not have an incentive to create smaller packages because it decreases overall volume of their sales. Consumers may be motivated to pay higher prices for environmentally friendly packaging if they believe that it will save money in the mid-longer term.
“Continued education, better explain cost of food waste, as ultimately cost will drive consumer demand” - Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
32 33
Sect
ion
03
Benefits of food packaging design
3.1.4
Although education about SFP features is partly the responsibility of food and packaging manufacturers, participants of the Think Tank have suggested further ways these important messages can be communicated to consumers. For example, using the retail space and existing marketing and media elements, such as recipe magazines can provide education and boost awareness of food waste. Food saving tips presented alongside the fresh food bay or at the end of the aisle would help with unpackaged food and could support food which is packaged. It was suggested that there are more creative ways to present consumer education than are currently deployed.
Participants also called for the expansion of food waste education across a broad range of platforms, including social media, television advertisements and local government and community engagement programs. One participant explains this retail engagement and how implementing food waste education into the schooling system can act to raise consumer awareness.
“Retailers could publish articles in their free magazines to help consumers reduce food waste, by planning, food rotation, tips on extending shelf life of fresh food, ideal storage etc. Minimising food waste could be taught in Home Economics [food technology] classes in schools. The students would bring their learnings home to their families.”- Packaging Manufacturer / Supplier
Participants felt that a consistent message across multiple platforms both within the food retail space, online and educational institutions can begin to educate the wider population on the issues of food waste and create awareness campaigns aiming to reduce food waste post-purchase and within the home. Campaigns of this nature would have to be funded by industry in order to be effective and sustainable. Participants felt that a core message from this campaign would be to educate consumers that SFP can reduce household expenditure on food and therefore is worth any additional costs incurred in purchasing produce using innovative SF packaging.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
34 35
Sect
ion
03
On-pack communication
3.2
The packaging of a food product is the first point of reference when consumers are grocery shopping. Packaging must be both attractive to gain the attention of the consumer and informative of the food product within. Throughout the Think Tank, participants presented a variety of elements they felt should be presented on pack. These include but are not limited to, food waste reductions tips, recipe ideas, tips for using leftovers, packaging benefits, packaging disposal information, helpful storage, use and shelf life after opening information. However, participants also bemoaned the amount of information that needs to be included on a sometimes very small package. In some cases, packaging is increased beyond that necessary to protect the contents to ensure that sufficient information is available on the pack.
These education pieces can be used as ‘callouts’ on pack to engage with the consumer and communicate any food saving features of the product. An example of packaging ‘callouts’ are demonstrated by this participant:
“Have more claims (where justified) on packs that ‘keep food fresh for longer’ or ‘split packs’ for convenience”- Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Date labelling was also a dominant theme in the results. On-pack communication must ensure that date labelling is clear, straightforward and easy to read and act upon. This may also be accompanied by freshness indicators (intelligent packaging) to further communicate the safety of the product, aiming to reduce wastage of safe food due to date labelling confusion.
However, industry also expressed concerns about the limited space on pack to communicate all the ideas. Especially with the demand for smaller portioned packs, which further compromises the available space needed for food waste awareness and avoidance communications.
“Limited space on pack to include information regarding correct storage, balance between plastic/packaging reduction and food waste (e.g. portion-controlled packs might reduce food waste for smaller households, but will be seen as ‘over packed’ by the non-target market)”- Wholesaler / Retailer
Described by a Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer, as the “fight for ‘real estate’ on packaging labelling is a challenge” for the industry. However, this also presents opportunities for innovative communication technologies to be implemented on pack, to maximise efficiencies and allow further information to be easily accessed off-pack.
“Safe food messages on packaging, including the role packaging plays to extend shelf life and minimise food waste. Maybe links (QR code to website) to information on storage once original packaging is opened, particularly important for Modified Atmosphere packaging.” - Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
36 37
Sect
ion
03
Using existing technologies such as QR codes or smart phone apps to transport consumers to additional information, frees up real estate and allows for clear and prominent labelling on-pack. This might also be accompanied by instore signage that supports the manufacturers’ information provided on the packaging. The technologically filtered information consumers see when purchasing can be tailored to encourage the sale of the product, by highlighting the food saving benefits of the pack. However, some packaging manufacturers state that these packaging benefits can become lost, as it is up to the discretion of the food manufacturer to include these communications on-pack and/or within marketing campaigns. This dilemma highlights the need for a systemwide approach, as well as the need for more collaboration between packaging manufacturers and brand owners to ensure packaging benefits reach consumers.
Date labelling was a contentious issue with participants suggesting that some consumers take the use-by date too literally, and that the food, if stored properly, is most likely still suitable for human consumption. However, participants also warned of potential food safety concerns if unfit food was consumed during the in-date period, consequently they used the shortest possible date to ensure that food was safe to eat regardless of storage conditions in the home.
Understanding consumer behaviours
3.3
Our previous research shows that consumers are unpredictable. They commonly say they want one thing but then do the opposite. For example, our research has discovered that consumers who are anti-plastic still commonly purchase food in plastic packaging. This contradiction is a well-known challenge for the food packaging industry.
“The contradiction in consumers is not new. The challenge is how do we, as an industry, proactively manage packaging responsibility with consumer expectations of freshness, quality & shelf life.”- Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Some participants were surprised by theconsumer behaviour insights presented through the Think Tank. Many found it surprising that 82% of consumers are not active in reducing household food waste (see reports from this group on the FFWCRC website).
Gaining an understanding of how consumers use food packaging within the home can inform brand owners and packaging manufacturers to design according to these behaviours and enhance food saving capabilities that already suit consumers actions and needs.
“More of understanding on how our products are used by the consumer and how much is wasted per pack would be of great benefit. We have looked into carrying out detailed LCAs but it is extremely expensive”- Food or beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
38 39
Sect
ion
03
Bridging this gap between the unknowns of how consumers use food packaging within the home and industry’s capacity to respond, is an urgent priority for Project 1.2.2. The following stages of this research will attempt to ascertain the acceptability of SF packaging designs from the consumers’ point of view.
A request for future research made by participants was to generate some baseline knowledge about how people use food packaging in the home. Prior research shows that managing food waste is not a key priority for consumers, however there is much that could be done to enhance storage of food once purchased. For example, decanting into SFP containers which are made available in store alongside the produce, especially when the produce is a low-or no-packaging option. Or by providing SFP alternatives at point-of-purchase which at least serves as an immediate reminder that food waste should be a priority. Providing alternative storage options that will slow food degradation once the packaging is opened will require partnering across the supply chain as manufacturers are not (usually) packaging designers or packaging producers.
Participants were surprised that consumers did not store their food in the original containers. They were also surprised that households were not as active in saving food in the home as they thought they should be. Participants felt that future research into the reasons for food waste could be helpful in determining why people waste food. However, there is a significant body of research already available, so some open access and freely available education for industry might be useful to assist them in understanding consumer perspectives.
Participants acknowledged that consumers like to see the contents of the packaging but also suggested that the use of multiple materials within the package design costs more to produce and is likely to lead to more food waste if the contents are temperature or light sensitive. Further to this is that the use of more materials also adds to the volume of packaging overall, which would be an undesirable outcome.
Other suggestions for future research into consumer needs and wants were to: 1) survey consumers on appropriate portion sizes in each of the food categories; 2) obtain from industry any non-confidential consumer research data that could be used to provide ideas to reduce packaging waste; and, 3) understand consumer preferences for packaging alternatives.
When it comes to the role of industry, suggestions were: 1) support consumer research and development of packaging guidelines aiming to reduce food waste; 2) provide input into the challenges that industry face in reducing food waste throughout the supply chain.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
40 41
Sect
ion
03
Packagingdesign
3.4
Survey data revealed that when designing packaging, more than one-fifth of industry participants do not or are unsure whether they consider consumer food waste. Subsequently, workshop participants were asked to respond to consumer perceptions of packaging options. There were two main categories of commentary. The first revolved around the issue of packaging design that would optimise household storage, especially after opening of the package. The second set of comments were to do with portion control.
Benefits of food packaging design
3.4.1
Participants suggested that more effort was required in understanding home storage solutions so that packaging could potentially be designed with storage in mind. When the portion control is unable to be managed, incorporating resealability into the pack design is important. Appropriately designed packaging for at home storage may allow consumers to store food products once opened correctly. Meaning that there is no requirement to rely on the consumers’ food saving knowledge or require the product to be decanted into other containers or sealed with plastic wraps and other enclosing wraps or seals.
“Offer packaging that is ideal for storage and shelf life next to the products, to a) educate consumers and b) make it easy to choose a good alternative.”- CEO/MD – Executive Level
“Ensure packs can be opened without damaging the pack or product thereby allowing easier storage of food and less waste.”- CEO/MD – Executive Level
“Produce different pack sizes that are more suited to the size of the household and the consumption occasion. Ensure date coding and storage instructions are clear. Make food packs that are more easy to store”. - Food or Beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Opportunities and challenges associated with packaging design
While Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) was considered to be a helpful tool for assessing the sustainability of packaging, it was also seen to be a very expensive option with few manufacturers having the means to invest in it. Participants felt that detailed LCAs are not feasible when designing potential packaging solutions because LCAs appear to be designed for existing systems where data is already available.
Participants also suggested that much packaging was designed for marketing purposes and not necessarily with the environment in mind. They suggested that industry bodies such as the Australian Institute of Packaging (AIP) could add issues such as overpackaging into the guidelines, providing parameters whereby marketing and the environment could work alongside each other. Other suggestions were to look at removing unnecessary packaging from all categories of food. However, what was and was not considered necessary is dependent on the goals of the packaging in the first place – food waste may not be a key consideration in packaging design as it currently stands.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
42 43
Sect
ion
03
In response to the consumer research, participants advocated for more features of the packaging such as resealability, portion sizes designed for small and large households, reusable packaging, recyclable packaging, easy to open and easy to use the entire contents, as well as packaging designed to ensure that food was not wasted at all.
The recommendations differed according to category of food waste:
Bread and bakery: smaller package and portion sizes, resealability and freeze-by on pack communication.
Liquid products: jug and pouring options, ability to completely empty the package, leak proof packaging.
Fresh produce: Modified Atmosphere Packaging, Intelligent packaging, no packaging at all with the option to BYO container, no cardboard sleeves between products.
However, the majority of the ideas ranged around the reduction of packaging, not the use of packaging to reduce food waste, suggesting that there is a need for industry education about using packaging to reduce food waste as well as informing consumers about food waste. For example, it was suggested that manufacturers cannot use recycled materials for food packaging as it is deemed unsafe for food. However, this issue is more to do with reducing packaging than it is in reducing household food waste. This indicates that ‘packaging is evil’ rhetoric is pervasive and is overwhelming potential responses to reducing food waste if it becomes the key priority.
Participants were asked about their personal capacity to reduce food waste in their industry. Answers ranged from advocating to include re-closable and food saving packaging in the design of all new products, eventually rolling this out to all products over time. Participants recommended that more consideration of food waste needed to be put into new product design, including packaging and labelling designs. Without the idea of reducing food waste at the centre of the product innovation process, it was felt there was limited opportunity to substantively reduce food waste across the system.
Participants also felt that more could be done to keep up with the latest trends and packaging technologies across the industry, instead of relying on existing (unsustainable) technologies and processes which may not be fit for purpose in the current era. The proviso for these ideas was that consumers are likely to respond negatively to changes that increase costs for them. In this case, costs are intangible as well as monetary. For example, requiring decanting shifts the responsibility and effort to the consumer.
Industry structures also limited participants’ capacity to respond to consumer demands. For example, retail planograms can be extremely limiting in terms of introducing new package designs, as it may require the renegotiation of the layout of an entire aisle of products,
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
44 45
Sect
ion
03
from several manufacturers may be required. Given the nature of the Australian grocery and food retailing industry, more powerful retailers dictate what is and is not going to be introduced in-store, making decision making about packaging design and formats more complex than if the manufacturer was only aiming to please their consumers.
Another challenge in responding to consumer demands is the complex system of rules and conventions surrounding food and food packaging. While the Australian Government has sustainability targets, there is little alignment between these targets and consumer food waste reduction because consumers are not required to reduce food waste; they are encouraged to but there is no legal requirement (and of course, no possibility of enforcement even if such a law existed). This shifts the onus onto others in the supply chain, possibly unfairly, considering how much waste is located in the consumers’ homes.
Participants also asked for more clarity and consistency from government or industry peak bodies with regard to date labelling to reduce consumer confusion and to provide a fair and transparent communication system that would reduce food waste. This new system would have to consider food safety as a key priority. However, participants also recognised that food quality and food safety were interdependent issues. According to participants, standards for packaging designs could include issues such as country of origin indicators, food miles barometers, and have requirements for reusable packaging to reduce single use packaging.
Portion Packs:
Portion packs were a contentious issue. In some countries portion packs increase the use of packaging as there are multiple portions sold within the pack. Consequently, there are moves to ban the use of single serve packages as a means to reduce packaging overall. Participants are therefore reluctant to move towards single portion packaging solutions in case they then have to pivot back to larger packaging sizes later. Furthermore, consumers value perceptions are an issue: smaller packages more expensive to produce than larger ones, even if the product is the same. Consequently, consumers perceive they have to pay more for smaller packages, so they pay less per unit of volume of the product and waste more because they buy more than they can eat in the time frame.
While portion packs represent an opportunity to address the household size issue, they are not necessarily designed around the amounts that people use in a single meal preparation. Hence, they may not be convenient for the consumer to buy or use. Unless consumers are demanding specific portion sizes, manufacturers have to guesstimate the amount to place in each portion pack with the potential for food loss waste that occurs as a result. However, consumers are unlikely to make such demands as they buy what is available; this then becomes a conundrum for the manufacturer.
The issue of portion sizes also links to the concern identified earlier, where the request was for more consumer research into potential packaging sizes suitable for modern household structures and that would reduce food waste. Participants believe that some of this research
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
46 47
Sect
ion
03
is being done but it is not publicly available and so cannot be used by smaller manufacturers or retailers in their decision making. Participants would like to see research into preferred packaging sizes with a view to understanding if portion packs would be more effective at reducing food waste than resealable packaging.
Recycling/disposal
3.5
Participants were concerned that recycling of packaging materials was a continuing problem. They opined that consumers are not knowledgeable about the recycling potential of the packaging. They were also concerned that the impact of food waste was also not widely understood by consumers.
“Recycling education is poor, impact of food waste problem is also not clear”- Food or beverage Manufacturer
The chief concerns of participants revolved around recyclability of packaging and compostability of food. They also mentioned that there are significant trade-offs to be made between increased recyclability and shelf life in that increasing the potential recyclability of the packaging sometimes results in a lesser shelf life for the product. It was felt that all packaging, including food should be either home compostable or recyclable if packaging waste was to be effectively reduced. Important to this idea is that all packaging should have clear disposal instructions for when it has reached the end of its useful life.
With regard to packaging of foods to reduce food waste, there were also concerns that a majority of materials that were useful for reducing food waste were actually unable to be recycled
or composted or sustainably disposed of. Consequently, some materials research into more sustainable packaging alternatives is required. Ideas suggested here were to consider cellulose, compostable plastic made from organic materials and materials that can be composted at home. Increasingly, local councils are offering composting facilities for food waste, so bio-degradable packaging solutions can be incorporated into existing end-of-life food waste solutions. However, compostable packaging, especially plastics, must not contaminate landfill and degrade rapidly so that it does not reach waterways or oceans. At this stage, compostable plastics are designed to break down relatively slowly or to be broken down in industrial waste facilities, not home compost facilities. Participants suggested that more home compostable packaging solutions would help with the packaging dilemma.
Participants made suggestions about the necessity for appropriate, clear and easy to interpret image-based recycling information on packaging. They suggested that there could be an industry wide (consistent) system of logos on the packaging that provided consumers with information about the recyclability of the packaging. The current system whereby everything, including plastics that are not actually recyclable in Australia, has a symbol is problematic as consumers will (naturally) think that a recycling symbol will mean that the packaging can be put in the recycling bin.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
48 49
Sect
ion
03
Participants also suggested that it might be appropriate to shift to higher recycling-value plastics in order to ensure that the packaging materials were of sufficient economic value to make recycling worthwhile. This might involve the development of recycling pipelines with multiple partners each gaining differential value from the packaging waste. For example, black meat trays that currently cannot be recycled could be included in curb-side recycling pickups, but it would mean further sorting and that would require that all partners agreed to how that could work. Another suggestion to reduce packaging waste was to extend the ability to recycle flexible packaging waste to more locations and outlets. Alongside this, participants suggested that more uses of flexible packaging recycled product could be found, increasing demand for flexible plastics and therefore decreasing flexible packaging waste overall. This might mean partnering with recycling companies to brainstorm uses for packaging waste materials and developing solutions in conjunction with industry and industrial designers.
When it came to reducing food waste, participants felt that not enough was being done to find suitable alternatives to plastic. They felt that there was a need for increased investment in the search for different materials. For example, if the food type
permits, paper or organic material packaging might be suitable, especially if the packaging is providing a base or tray to support the food. Using recyclable glass for liquids would also be a solution, although that would increase the weight of the product and therefore distribution costs. Packaging that allows fresh produce to respire was also a suggestion to save food.
Individual organisation operations and internal systems
3.6
Among changes that the industry needs to make to reduce food waste, organisational dynamics were a commonly cited factor. The new product development process and procedures for embedding innovation were cited as reasons for not developing ways to reduce consumer food waste. However, participants also suggested that there were ways to overcome some of these concerns. In sharing the following, it should be noted that some suggestions apply both to individual organisations, and to the industry as a whole. Suggestions included:
Include the reduction of food waste as an objective within every innovation process. This would also mean that when manufacturing lines are updated, they are restructured to ensure that household food waste is reduced.
This may mean introducing design elements that reduce volume sales (e.g. smaller packaging sizes).
Design packaging with the consumer and food waste reduction in mind rather than designing to achieve only business priorities. This might mean changing existing policies and organisational practices.
This leads to contamination of the plastic and limits the capacity to recycle the entire bin load. Considering that different local areas have different recycling requirements, a system wide consumer information campaign is unlikely to resolve this issue unless there is some standardisation of what is and is not recyclable across the system. Consumers need simple instructions if they are to comply with recycling requirements. At the moment, it is complex, and it is often easier not to comply than it is to interpret the instructions.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
50 51
Sect
ion
03
Provide information about packaging design, innovations and changes on company websites.
Provide education and training for industry (in-house or online) to align with the sustainable packaging goals and increase the focus on reducing household food waste. This will increase awareness of household food waste as a priority requiring action from all levels of the system (macro to micro). It may also provide opportunities for development of partnerships for change (see previous section). In some cases, partnerships between food producers or manufacturers and packaging suppliers might be necessary to enable conversations about the ‘best’ way to reduce food waste across the supply chain, especially in households. Education should be linked to the best practice guidelines that are easily accessible to all, including the public, as well as food standard codes.
Establish a system whereby research into consumers and households can be shared across the industry. This system should also be regularly updated with available global research into food waste reduction. This could take the form of a regular update in one or more industry trade journals.
Establish a set of criteria for sustainable packaging design that can be used in new product development and innovation.
Develop system wide capacity to capture various aspects of food waste life cycle assessment that enables organisations to make a-priori assessments of the implications of packaging design alternatives (rather than wait until the design is already in production before undertaking an assessment). Provide information to enable the measurement of the impact of food waste freely to all who require so they can enhance their business practices and reduce food waste.
Make better use of available technologies such as intelligent and active packaging, smart packaging and nanotechnologies. Given the expense involved in implementing these, some financial assistance (e.g. government tax incentives) might be required.
There is an opportunity to influence decision making via collaborative efforts. For example, the AIP is currently working on guidelines for industry. However, more needs to be done to take action and make things happen across the system. Organisations and individuals can engage with other organisations and access research and resources (e.g. the FFWCRC and the AIP have resources available).
Having shorter production cycles might reduce waste as there is less need for a volume throughput. This might mean accepting that some food products are not large markets and therefore a large volume of sales is not feasible.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
52 53
Sect
ion
03
Design for storage
3.6.1
There were many barriers and limitations for industry when it comes to helping consumers save food and reduce food waste. These have been categorised under the following headings: Cost of investment and the availability of suitable materials and technologies.
Cost of investment:
Participants outlined in general terms that new packaging innovation was very expensive to implement. They suggested that the relatively small market size in Australia precluded the implementation of some of the most effective options because there was not enough volume to justify the investment. Additionally, they suggested that margins on produce were already very ‘tight’ and that further investment in packaging would erode margins even further.
The purchase and installation of new equipment was particularly problematic and retooling manufacturing lines to include new packaging was also very expensive and “the business case just doesn’t stack up”. New equipment would be necessary if portion-controlled packaging or multi-pack options were to be produced. Legacy equipment that is not able to produce smaller portions is also a concern, as this would need to be replaced entirely if portion-control was to be implemented. Consequently, this type of innovation is not a minor readjustment to the packaging or production lines and considerable financial investment would be required.
“Changing packaging is hard… it requires the communications, the machinery, the supply chain, the retail approach everything changes, when you change packaging, not to mention if you change, food formats so.” - Work shop participant
“…so sustainability needs to be thought about in totality across the supply chain.” - Work shop participant
While consumers can and do ask for improved packaging and labelling, this may involve more than a simple adjustment to the outer layer of packaging (as requested). Innovation in packaging and labelling can be as expensive, especially if it requires retooling the entire plant. For example, smaller portions are as costly to produce and package as larger portions, but do not provide as much financial return. This may mean that by producing smaller portions, the manufacturer is also reducing their profit margins. Relabelling can involve multiple partners (e.g. food manufacturer, labelling supplier, packaging materials suppliers, etc.) each wanting to ensure that they maximise profits. Consequently, any shift in requirements can lead to increases in costs or decreases in profit. The cost of innovations in this area need to be shared by system actors if reductions in household waste are to be a reality.
Plastic is cheap to buy and use. Sustainable and non-plastic materials are very expensive and/or do not provide the same protections for the food. Consumers do not understand the cost of sustainable packaging can be significant and therefore they do not understand that the price of the packaged food will be more expensive than alternatives that use plastic.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
54 55
Sect
ion
03
Consequently, they are unwilling to pay for more costly sustainable packaging.
While there are many alternative packaging designs that can save food (see earlier section), these are more expensive than plain packaging. Consumers are unwilling to pay the additional cost of features in packaging such as intelligent and active packaging. Further, the lead times for producing packaging innovations are extensive and in the fast-moving consumer goods market, especially the grocery trade, “time is money”.
Availability of packaging materials and technologies:
Australia is a relatively small market on the global scale. While there are options available, they are limited in terms of what is financially feasible for the Australian market and which can be produced locally. Some packaging innovations (e.g. nanotechnologies or smart packaging) that are available overseas (e.g. WRAP and INCPEN reports) are not available in Australia. Additionally, participants said that many materials designed to save food are not readily available in Australia and the cost of importation is not recoverable from the consumer, thereby negating any returns on investment.
An additional limitation is that packaging designs have to serve a brand purpose as a priority, and this can be problematic if more sustainable packaging designs are perceived by the brand owner to decrease the brand value of the product. As consumers perceive biodegradable plastics as being ‘cheaper looking’ packaging, matching sustainability goals to consumer expectations will require some shifts in current practices. Further, retailers have significant influence on packaging designs and sometimes demand less sustainable packaging for a variety of reasons. For example, extending shelf-life is a priority and it can require the use of unsustainable packaging. This is an area where whole-of-system packaging guidelines will be very helpful to ensure that all partners have an incentive to reduce packaging and food waste. Care must be taken in the design of guidelines that the reduction of household food waste is at least an equivalent priority to the reduction of unsustainable packaging. Otherwise, reducing plastic packaging may result in an increase in food waste.
Participants also mentioned that packaging designed to reduce food waste can take up more space than standard packaging, thereby increasing the requirement for shelf ‘real estate’ (a different form of real estate to packaging labelling real estate). As mentioned previously, reorganising retailers’ planograms can take time and money. Hence, packaging redesign is undertaken both cautiously and incrementally so as not to upset retailers’ plans and to comply with retailer specifications for the produce. Furthermore, participants also suggested that retailers do not have an appetite for packaging designed to reduce food waste or which can be more sustainable. In the opinion of participants, unless retailers are prepared to demand more sustainability options, there is unlikely to be much change in current practices.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
56 57
Sect
ion
03
Retailers on the other hand, expressed concern that consumers were unwilling to pay for packaging innovations designed to save food, therefore there was no demand for SFP from consumers and retailers were simply being responsive to consumer demands for cheaply available products.
Participants wanted to see more innovation being undertaken by local packaging suppliers that would allow producers more off-the-shelf packaging options that could reduce food waste as well as decrease reliance on plastics. Producers are not in a position to be packaging designers, even if they have the option to make recommendations to their suppliers. Again, a whole-of-system approach to the issue of using packaging to save food will require extensive industry-wide commitment, systemic consultations, and provision of incentives for change. The role of government in this approach will be to provide regulatory support but also underpin necessary changes with financial support if required. Important to this view was that the Australian industry needed to be less self-referencing when it came to introducing change. It was felt that there is not enough reference to other markets that have been successful at implementing packaging design changes. It was also felt that the Australian industry is behind the times, as well as too conservative in their thinking.
“We are lagging behind Europe by at least 10 years” - Workshop participant
Supply chain systems and their role in reducing consumer food waste
3.7
Participants identified a series of issues that could be addressed at various points in the food supply chain. One key issue was the need to ensure product integrity from farm to household. This would require collaborative efforts from all the service providers in the system, from farmer or producer to retailer. For example, maximising pallet configuration and ensuring that the packaging is robust enough to maintain food quality during transport, handling and storage. Developing ‘robust’ and sustainable packaging should be a priority of industry research and development.
“[we must] look at the value chain and try to bring parties together with a common view on the cause, but different contributions. Because I think no one alone [will] be able to really change this, but when you bring different points together to collaborate…” - Workshop participant
Participants also suggested that retailers need to comprehensively understand the drivers for food waste within households and be prepared to adjust their strategies to achieve a reduction in food waste. Concomitant with this is a need for retailer collaboration with manufacturers and wholesalers to ensure that food waste reduction is at the centre of decision making about packaging design. Such collaborations could facilitate a shift towards more innovative packaging designed to reduce food waste.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
58 59
Sect
ion
03
In addition to understanding household food waste and strategizing accordingly, participants mentioned that retailers could provide more control over the ‘cold chain’. More control from retailers could ensure that the temperatures at which food is shipped and stored at the retailing end of the supply chain optimises the quality of the food. Retail staff also need to be educated on how to reduce food waste, not just in the store but also by optimising food storage and stock rotation to ensure that optimal food quality was continued into households.
Beyond retail stores, supply chain partnerships and logistics throughout the system was seen to be an issue by participants. For example, cold chain insufficiencies were a serious issue for participants. It was felt that cold chain disruptions were a major source of food loss and that at present, there was very little accountability for the loss. More focus on cold chain concerns would reduce food waste overall. Best practice and correct storage are relevant throughout the food waste system. However, not all stakeholders, up to and including household buyers, are familiar enough with the requirements needed to reduce food waste.
Participants felt that the current system is too focussed on costs and not enough on the reduction of waste throughout the supply chain. Consequently, there is little incentive in the system to reduce food waste because some loss may be acceptable if it keeps overall costs down. Participants also wanted to see a system that diverted food wasted from landfill and ensured that edible food was not wasted. Suggestions were made that future research could map losses throughout the supply chain with a view to ascertaining where, when and why food losses
occur, and importantly what might be done to divert the food prior to it being lost. This would enable greater accountability by system actors as they would understand their role in creating and reducing losses.
The current practice of tendering for supply of services such as transport, also leads to a focus on costs as a principal criterion for decision making. Participants suggested that food loss and waste could be established as another criterion for choosing between suppliers. This would provide an incentive for investment into innovative technologies and also provide some transparency and accountability for food loss waste throughout the supply chain.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
60 61
Sect
ion
03
Government actions to help industry reduce consumer food waste
3.8
Although not the core focus of this research, participants made several requests for government assistance in reducing food waste. First of these was partially or wholly funding the consumer education campaign needed to communicate the benefits of reducing household food waste. This campaign would need to be multi-faceted; including ways to store, cook and reuse food rather than wasting it.
Second, governments need to play a greater role in providing food saving behavioural infrastructure throughout the supply chain, for example providing composting and organic recycling facilities across all local government areas, improving recycling facilities, regulating the use of the recycling symbol to ensure that only recyclable plastic is put into recycling containers, and ensuring that there is consistency in kerb side recycling practices. Any education campaign would be subsequent to the provision of the regulatory framework or consumers will continue with current unsustainable practices.
Despite these suggestions, it was felt that there was unlikely to be any real change in current industry practices unless the government intervened by way of providing a regulatory framework with potential for enforcement including penalties where action is not taken. In the opinion of participants, voluntary industry-wide change was highly unlikely.
Reducing taxes for long life shelf products to ensure that these were price competitive with other forms of produce.
Increasing taxes for high waste industries and those with unrecyclable packaging.
Ensuring that the new product development process within organisations is aimed at reducing food waste, especially within households, potentially by providing tax or other incentives for innovation, including research and development.
Legislate targets for packaging suitability, recyclability and reuse.
Comprehensively consult with industry to design a whole of system FLW reduction road map.
Provide legislation on sustainable packaging requirements.
Providing funding and support for business equipment upgrades designed to reduce food waste and to reach food waste prevention targets.
Other government interventions suggested were:
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
62 63
Sect
ion
04
04Conclusion
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
64 65
Sect
ion
04
This report has provided insights into industry feedback on consumer research undertaken in Project 1.2.2. Informed by the results of an online qualitative survey and a workshop that discussed the results and implications of consumer research modules, it aimed to find opportunities for packaging to reduce food loss and waste.
While consumer education and communication of food packaging benefits and food waste was dominant throughout industry participants’ responses, this report highlights the importance of adopting a system-wide, multi-level approach if meaningful reductions in food waste are to be achieved. From growers, food manufacturers, through cold-storage systems, to the retailers who display and sell foods to consumers, the industry can play a meaningful role in reducing food waste, should a whole-of-supply chain perspective be embraced. However, the current situation is complex, with competing and contrasting expectations, gaps in consumers’ awareness around the extent and impacts of food waste and the role of packaging in saving food, and the reality that food is not currently packaged with the specific intent of reducing waste.
As a society-and-system-wide issue, reducing food waste requires joint responsibility from governments, retailers and consumers, as well as the food industry—be it outlining acceptable regulatory frameworks and waste reduction infrastructure, to readjusting consumer expectations. However, perhaps the most urgent priority is bridging the gap between how consumers use food packaging within the home and industry’s capacity to respond. Determining the scope, nature and timing of industry’s response is a logical next step.
Participants suggested that it was necessary to close the gap between what industry expects and what consumers expect when it comes to food waste. This would require research into consumer expectations of packaging with a view to informing industry. The research would also feed into any consumer information or education campaigns about food waste and food packaging.
There is a need to establish open access information about how people use food packaging in their homes. Videos would be helpful in this regard. While there is market research available, it is currently in the hands of commercial interests and is not available for general use. This would be helpful for input into packaging designed to reduce food waste.
It is important to understand the reasons and excuses behind food waste. Firstly, to ensure that communication campaigns can be effectively targeted towards these behaviours, and secondly to potentially intervene in the behaviours by providing behavioural infrastructures designed to help consumers reduce food waste.
Directions for future research
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
66 67
Sect
ion
04
Portion sized packaging has the potential to reduce food waste but is a significant increase in costs. It is not known what is an appropriate portion size for specific segments of the Australian market, although there may be commercial research, it is not widely available. Research into portion sizes in each of the major food categories is required.
How people respond to on-pack information is not currently well understood. It is necessary to research into packaging design elements, including labelling, as well as on pack information and how people engage with each element.
Consumer preferences for packaging alternatives is an emergent field and further research into how people choose between products and packages is needed.
The collation and collection of available open access packaging and related consumer research would be helpful for decision makers in industry.
It is important to understand how and where food is wasted in the supply chain with a view to intervening where possible to reduce waste.
To effectively tackle food waste in Australia, system wide change is necessary. This research shows that necessary changes cannot be successfully undertaken by individuals or organisations. Although individuals and organisations have a role to play, collaborations and coalitions will be required to effect change. Any proposed changes will need an overarching strategy with a long time-horizon and will require government support, including state and local governments.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
68 69
Sect
ion
03
05Acknowledgments
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
70 71
Sect
ion
02
Associate Professor Karli Verghese, Dr Simon Lockrey, Professor Linda Brennan and Associate Professor Lukas Parker are Chief Investigators on the Consumer perceptions of the role of packaging in minimising food waste project, which is funded by the Fight Food Waste Cooperative Research Centre, Sustainability Victoria and Woolworths with additional investigators Sophie Langley, Nhat Tram Phan-Le, Allister Hill, Dr Caroline Francis, Maddison Ryder, Sr Ella Chorazy, Dr Michaela Jackson, Anouk Sherman and Natalia Alessi.
The team would like to thank Dr Eloise Florence for her extremely helpful comments in reviewing and editing this report.
The team would also like to thank the anonymous peer reviewers for their comments and suggestions for improving the content of this report.
Find out more about the Fight Food Waste CRC.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
72 73
Sect
ion
03
06References
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
74 75
Ap
pen
dix
A
Brennan, L. (2020). What to do with humans in the food waste system. 2020 AIP Australasian Packaging Conference, Virtual.
Brennan, L., Binney, W., McCrohan, J., & Lancaster, N. (2011). Implementation of environmental sustainability in business: suggestions for improvement. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 19(1), 52-57. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view citation&hl=en&user=5kuZpmMAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=5kuZpmMAAAAJ:eQOLeE2rZwMC
Brennan, L., Francis, C., Alessi, N., Verghese, K., Lockrey, S., Parker, L., & Jackson, M. (2020). Consumer perceptions and understanding of packaging: Survey data set. https://fightfoodwastecrc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/FFWCRC_JourneyMapping_Recommendations_5pp.pdf
Brennan, L., Langley, S., Verghese, K., Lockrey, S., Ryder, M., Francis, C., Phan-Le, N. T., & Hill, A. (2021). The role of packaging in fighting food waste: a systematised review of consumer perceptions of packaging. Journal of Cleaner Production, 281(125276). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652620353208
Brennan, L., Lawry, J., Holland, E., Horoi, R., Chand, R., & Franquet, R. (2015). Communication, communities and climate change: Designing a leadership program for community-based climate change practitioners in the Pacific region.
Brennan, L., Masterson, A., L., R., & Kabay, V. (2016). Risky business or worried well? The science of what and why we fear [Panel Discussion]. In. Kaleide Theatre, RMIT, Melbourne: Environment Protection Authority.
Brennan, L., Watne, T., Parker, L., Duong, H., & Doan, M. (2013). Pro-Environmental Purchase Intentions: Young People in Vietnam 3rd World Social Marketing Conference, Toronto, Canada. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=5kuZpmMAAAAJ&cstart=100&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=5kuZpmMAAAAJ:_Qo2XoVZTnwC
Chu, W., Wever, R., Verghese, K., & Williams, H. (2019). Thinking on the box: design on-pack information attributes to influence consumers’ food waste behavior 29th IAPRI symposium, https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:NaGl4SEjCO4C
Chu, W., Williams, H., Verghese, K., Wever, R., & Glad, W. (2020). Tensions and opportunities: an activity theory perspective on date and storage label design through a literature review and co-creation sessions. Sustainability, 12(3), 1162-1162. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:lSLTfruPkqcC
Clune, S., Crossin, E., & Verghese, K. (2017). Systematic review of greenhouse gas emissions for different fresh food categories. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 766-783. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:HDshCWvjkbEC
Crossin, E., Verghese, K., & Lockrey, S. (2015). Review of emerging packaging technologies and trends for red meat. https://www.mla.com.au/research-and-development/search-rd-reports/final-report-details/Develop-New-Products/Review-of-emerging-packaging-technologies-and-trends-for-red-meat/2971#
Doan, M., Parker, L., Brennan, L., & Watne, T. (2012, 15-18 October). Encouraging Responsible Environmental Behavior within the Family Unit in Vietnam EcoHealth 2012: Biannual Conference “Sustaining Ecosystems, Supporting Health”, Kunming City, China. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=5kuZpmMAAAAJ&cstart=100&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=5kuZpmMAAAAJ:Ri6SYOTghG4C
Dong, T. H., Parker, L., & Brennan, L. (2012). Values, Environmental Attitudes and What That Means For Environmentally Sustainable Behavior In Vietnam International Conference on Vietnamese Studies, Hanoi. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=5kuZpmMAAAAJ&cstart=100&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=5kuZpmMAAAAJ:tuHXwOkdijsC
Fitzpatrick, L., Lewis, H., & Verghese, K. (2012). Implementing the Strategy. In K. Verghese, H Lewis, & L. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Packaging for Sustainability (pp. 285-328). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-988-8
Publications of contributing team members*
APPENDIX A
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
76 77
Ap
pen
dix
A
Fitzpatrick, L., Verghese, K., & Lewis, H. (2012). Developing the strategy. In K. Verghese, H. Lewis, & L. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Packaging for Sustainability (pp. 1-39). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-988-8
Francis, C., Ryder, M., Verghese, K., Lockrey, S., & Kelton, N. (2021). Save Food Packaging Design Criteria: Stakeholder Online Survey of Product-Packaging Design Processes. Industry Insights Report. https://fightfoodwastecrc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/02 FFWCRC121_SFPDC_OnlineSurveyReport_final-25.11.20_v3.pdf
Frewer, L., Fischer, A., Brennan, M., Bánáti, D., Lion, R., Meertens, R., Rowe, G., Siegrist, M., Verbeke, W., & Vereijken, C. (2016). Risk/Benefit Communication about Food—A Systematic Review of the Literature. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 56(10), 1728-1745.
Langley, S., Francis, C., Ryder, M., Brennan, L., Verghese, K., & Lockrey, S. (2020a). Consumer perceptions of the role of packaging in reducing food waste. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=5kuZpmMAAAAJ&cstart=100&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=5kuZpmMAAAAJ:kVjdVfd2voEC
Langley, S., Francis, C., Ryder, M., Brennan, L., Verghese, K., & Lockrey, S. (2020b). Consumer Perceptions of the Role of Packaging in Reducing Food Waste: Baseline Industry Report. https://fightfoodwastecrc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/FFWCRC_IndustryReport_TEXT_FINAL_low-res-july2020.pdf
Langley, S., Hill, A., Lodge, S., Young, G., Mulherin, P., Verghese, K., & Leenders, M. (2020). Opportunities for packaging and processing machinery and technologies to tackle food waste. Baseline Review Insights. https://fightfoodwastecrc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FFWCRC_APPMA_TEXT_design_final.pdf
Lewis, H., Downes, J., Verghese, K., & Young, G. (2017). Food waste opportunities within the food wholesale and retail sectors: Final Report. https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/115674
Lewis, H., Fitzpatrick, L., Verghese, K., Sonneveld, K., Jordon, R., & Alliance, S. (2007). Sustainable packaging redefined. Melbourne, Australia: Sustainable Packaging Alliance. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:UeHWp8X0CEIC
Lewis, H., Verghese, K., & Fitzpatrick, L. (2010). Evaluating the sustainability impacts of packaging: the plastic carry bag dilemma. Packaging Technology and Science: An International Journal, 23(3), 145-160. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:u-x6o8ySG0sC
Lockrey, S. (2018). How people enact environmental strategy within organisations. RMIT University School of Management. Melbourne Australia RMIT University. PhD.
Lockrey, S., Brennan, L., Verghese, K., Staples, W., & Binney, W. (2018). Enabling employees and breaking down barriers: behavioural infrastructure for pro-environmental behaviour. In V. Wells, D. Gregory-Smith, & D. Manika (Eds.), Research Handbook on Employee Pro-Environmental Behaviour (pp. 313–346). Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786432834.00022
Lockrey, S., Hill, A., Langley, S., Ryder, M., Francis, C., Brennan, L., & Verghese, K. (2020). Consumer Perceptions and Understanding of Packaging Journey Mapping: Industy Report-Insights. https://fightfoodwastecrc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/FINAL_FFWCRC_JourneyMapping.pdf
Lockrey, S., Hill, A., Ryder, M., Francis, C., Brennan, L., & Verghese, K. (2020). Role of packaging in consumer’s foodwaste journey. https://fightfoodwastecrc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/FFWCRCJourneyMapping_Recommendations_5pp.pdf
Lockrey, S., Verghese, K., Danaher, J., Newman, L., Barichello, V., & Gama, L. D. (2020). The role of packaging for Australian fresh produce. http://www.freshproduce.org.au/__static/449af15b4799bd9b16dcafbf32b57eb1/afpa-rmit-report-2019-pamphlet_web(5).pdf?dl=1#:~:text=A%20primary%20objective%20of%20food,over%20Australia%20with%20minimal%20waste.
Lockrey, S., Verghese, K., Langley, S., & Brennan, L. (2020). Coke and the environment. In R. Crawford, L. Brennan, & S. Khamis (Eds.), Decoding Coca-Cola: A Biography of a Global Brand (Vol. 140, pp. 140-156). Routledge. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=5kuZpmMAAAAJ&cstart=100&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=5kuZpmMAAAAJ:wMgC3FpKEyYC
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
78 79
Ap
pen
dix
A
Lewis, H., Fitzpatrick, L., Verghese, K., Sonneveld, K., Jordon, R. (2010). Sustainable packaging redefined: draft. Sustainable Packaging Alliance–SPA. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:70eg2SAEIzsC
Nguyen, A. T., Parker, L., Brennan, L., & Lockrey, S. (2020). A consumer definition of eco-friendly packaging. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252, 119792. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119792
Parker, L., Watne, T., Brennan, L., Duong, H., & Nguyen, D. (2014). Self expression versus the environment: attitudes in conflict. Young Consumers, 15(2). https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=5kuZpmMAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=5kuZpmMAAAAJ:TFP_iSt0sucC
Parker, L., Watne, T., Brennan, L., Duong, H. T., & Doan, M.-A. (2012, 3-5 December). Young adults’ environmental attitudes and purchase intention in Vietnam ANZMAC, Adelaide, South Australia. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=5kuZpmMAAAAJ&cstart=100&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=5kuZpmMAAAAJ:IWHjjKOFINEC
Ryder, M., Verghese, K., Ryding, L., Francis, C., Lockrey, S., & Kelton, N. (2021). Save Food Packaging Design Criteria: Stakeholder Interviews of Product Packaging Design Processes. Industry Insights Report. https://fightfoodwastecrc.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/FFWCRC121_SFPDC_InterviewIndustryReport_V2_reduced.pdf
Slatter, J., & Verghese, K. (2006, 22-24 November). Using Life Cycle Assessment to meet your obligations under the National Packaging Covenant ALCAS Conference, Melbourne. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:_FxGoFyzp5QC
Verghese, K. (2008). Environmental assessment of food packaging and advanced methods for choosing the correct materials. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:KlAtU1dfN6UC
Verghese, K. (2012a). Appendix A Application of a Sustainable Packaging Framework. In K. Verghese, H. Lewis, & L. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Packaging for Sustainability (Vol. 331). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-988-8
Verghese, K. (2012b). Appendix B Labels and Logos. In K. Verghese, H. Lewis, & L. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Packaging for Sustainability (Vol. 335). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-988-8
Verghese, K. (2012c). Appendix C Matrix of International Regulations, Policies and Standards. In K. Verghese, H. Lewis, & L. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Packaging for Sustainability (Vol. 341). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-988-8
Verghese, K. (2013). Is packaging the answer to food waste? MHD Supply Chain Solutions, 43(5), 30-31. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:GnPB-g6toBAC
Verghese, K., & Carre, A. (2012). Applying life cycle assessment. In K. Verghese, H. Lewis, & L. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Packaging for Sustainability (pp. 171-210). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-988-8
Verghese, K., Clune, S., Lockrey, S., Lewis, H., Crittenden, P., & Business, S. (2012). Future of Packaging White Paper. http://helenlewisresearch.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/AFGC-White-Paper-7Mar2012.pdf
Verghese, K., Crossin, E., Clune, S., Lockrey, S., Williams, H., Rio, M., & Wikström, F. (2014, 15 to 18 June ). The greenhouse gas profile of a “Hungry Planet”; quantifying the impacts of the weekly food purchases including associated packaging and food waste of three families 19th IAPRI World Conference on Packaging 2014: Responsible Packaging for a Global Market, Melbourne, Australia. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/42416443.pdf
Verghese, K., Crossin, E., & Jollands, M. (2012). Packaging materials. In K. Verghese, H. Lewis, & L. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Packaging for Sustainability (pp. 211-250). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-988-8
Verghese, K., Horne, R., & Carre, A. (2010). PIQET: the design and development of an online ‘streamlined’LCA tool for sustainable packaging design decision support. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 15(6), 608-620. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:9yKSN-GCB0IC
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
80 81
Ap
pen
dix
A
Verghese, K., Horne, R., Fitzpatrick, L., & Jordan, R. (2006). PIQET—a packaging decision support tool 5th Australian life cycle assessment conference. Australian Life Cycle …, https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:IjCSPb-OGe4C
Verghese, K., & Lewis, H. (2007). Environmental innovation in industrial packaging: a supply chain approach. International Journal of Production Research 45 (18-19), 4381-4401. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:u5HHmVD_uO8C
Verghese, K., Lewis, H., & Burritt, R. (2008). Sustainable Packaging and Sustainability Accounting: Exploring Links and Synergies. Journal of the Asia Pacific Centre for Environmental Accountability, 14(3), 18-33. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:0EnyYjriUFMC
Verghese, K., Lewis, H., & Fitzpatrick, L. (Eds.). (2012). Packaging for Sustainability. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-988-8.
Verghese, K., Lewis, H., Lockrey, S., & Williams, H. (2013). The role of packaging in minimising food waste in the supply chain of the future: Prepared for: CHEP Australia. RMIT University Report. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=56F_8T0AAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=56F_8T0AAAAJ:u-x6o8ySG0sC
Verghese, K., Lewis, H., Lockrey, S., & Williams, H. (2015). Packaging’s role in minimizing food loss and waste across the supply chain. Packaging Technology and Science, 28(7), 603-620. https://doi.org/10.1002/pts.2127
Verghese, K., & Lockrey, S. (2012). Selecting and applying tools. In K. Verghese, H. Lewis, & L. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Packaging for Sustainability (pp. 251-283). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-988-8 Verghese, K., Lockrey, S., Clune, S., & Sivaraman, D. (2012). Life cycle assessment (LCA) of food and beverage packaging. In K. L. Yam & D. S. Lee (Eds.), Emerging Food Packaging Technologies: Principles and Practice (pp. 380-408). Woodhead Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-84569-809-6.50019-1
Verghese, K., Lockrey, S., Rio, M., & Dwyer, M. (2018). DIRECT, a tool for change: Co-designing resource efficiency in the food supply chain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 3299-3310. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=56F_8T0AAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=56F_8T0AAAAJ:3fE2CSJIrl8C
Verghese, K., Lockrey, S., & Williams, H. (2014). Districts, Lifestyles and Avoiding Food Waste: Prepared for Banyule City Council. Version 6.0. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=56F_8T0AAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=56F_8T0AAAAJ:zYLM7Y9cAGgC
Watne, T., & Brennan, L. (2011a). Behavioral change starts in the family: the role of family communication and implications for social marketing. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 23(4), 367-386. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=5kuZpmMAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=5kuZpmMAAAAJ:Se3iqnhoufwC
Watne, T., Brennan, L., Binney, W., & Parker, L. (2012, 3-5 December). The use of the NEP scale as a measure of environmental attitudes Proceedings Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference-ANZMAC, Adelaide, South Australia. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=5kuZpmMAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=5kuZpmMAAAAJ:TQgYirikUcIC
Wikström, F., Verghese, K., Auras, R., Olsson, A., Williams, H., Wever, R., & ... (2019). Packaging strategies that save food: A research agenda for 2030. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 23(3), 532-540. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:NMxIlDl6LWMC
Wikström, F., Williams, H., Verghese, K., & Clune, S. (2014). The influence of packaging attributes on consumer behaviour in food-packaging life cycle assessment studies-a neglected topic. Journal of Cleaner Production, 73, 100-108. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=E97GRugAAAAJ&pagesize=100&citation_for_view=E97GRugAAAAJ:_kc_bZDykSQC
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
82 83
Sect
ion
03Appendix A
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
84 85
Sect
ion
03
Q2(a)
Q1(a)
Q1(c)
Q2
What is your company Size?
What is your ‘main’ Role in your organisation?
What Sector best represents your organisation within the food supply chain?
Does your organisation ‘currently’ consider consumer food waste, when designing packaging?
Section Question
Large business - employing 200 or more employees
Small business - employing between 2 to 19 employees
Micro-business - employing between 1 and 4 people
Non-employing business - sole proprietorships and partnerships without employees
Medium business - employing between 20 to 199 employees
Multiple choice (select one answer), 'other' text option provided
Multiple choice (select one answer), 'other' text option provided
Multiple choice (select one answer), 'other' text option provided
Multiple choice (select one answer), 'other' text option provided
Packaging Manager
Packaging Technologist / Designer
Innovation Manager
Marketing
Sustainability Manager
Operations Manager
Corporate Affairs
Research & Development
CEO/MD – Executive Level
Food or Beverage Manufacturer / Producer
Packaging Manufacturer / Supplier
Wholesaler / Retailer
Consultant
Packaging Design Agency
Catering and Hospitality
Government / Industry Association / Researcher
No
Yes
Unsure
Response option
Selection
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
86 87
Sect
ion
03
Appendix B
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
88 89
Sect
ion
03Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
When considering the video, how does the information Align / Not Align with your experience(s)? Did anything surprise you?
When considering the video, please list any Actions individual organisations can take in response to the information.
What are some packaging issues that your organisation faces when considering consumer food waste?
When considering the video, what new Opportunities present themselves?
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Priming Video
Q8
Q9
Q10
Q7
When considering the video, please list any ‘Rules’ that Inhibit packaging ideas that aim to minimise consumer food waste. N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Short answer response in bullet point/s
When considering the video, did any product / packaging ideas come to mind that could reduce consumer food waste? If so, please describe.
When considering the video, what ‘Rules’ Advance packaging ideas that aim to minimise consumer food waste?
When considering household consumer food waste, what would be your ideal packaging solution within your main food category? Be as specific as possible.
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
90 91
Sect
ion
03Q11
Q12
Q13
Q14When considering the video, what new Opportunities present themselves?
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Priming Video
When considering the video, how can the following Groups best respond to these insights on consumer food waste and food packaging?
Your Organisation
You
Government
The Supply Chain
When considering the previous listed groups, what Partnerships are needed to see change occur?
In your opinion, what consumer education is necessary for consumers to adopt Save Food Packaging Designs?
Q16
Q17
Q18
Q15 N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Short answer response in bullet point/s
Short answer response in bullet point/s
What are any barriers / limitations to adopting Save Food Packaging Designs within your organisation, if any?
How could organisations, like yours, overcome these barriers / limitations, if any?
Do you have any additional comments before the survey concludes?
Would you be interested in participating in a 30 - 60 minute Design Think Tank, occurring between February and August 2021?
Yes, a one-on-one interview is preferable
No, I am not interested
Yes, a group workshop is preferable
Con
sum
er P
erce
pti
ons
of t
he
Rol
e of
Pac
kag
ing
in R
edu
cin
g F
ood
was
te
Ind
ust
ry T
hin
k Ta
nk
Res
ult
s
Fig
ht
Food
Was
te C
RC
92 93
Ap
pen
dix
A
About this project
The project Partners are
Understanding the perception and use of packaging by consumers and how this plays a role in household food waste generation is an important first step in this project. With a greater understanding of how people appreciate and use packaging, along with the food waste they generate, we can design improved packaging and communications on food waste avoidance that will ultimately reduce food waste.
This project aims to understand consumer perception of the role of packaging in reducing food waste by:
discovering target areas that will help drive packaging design decisions.
discovering key consumer behaviours that may be adapted to reduce food waste.
determining potential consumer responses to labelling and packaging alternatives in relation to food packaging.
providing formative information for partners’ new product development processes.
designing packaging to reduce food waste.
designing more effective consumer education campaigns to reduce food waste.
