In the UK, Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) shifts the financial responsibility for managing packaging waste from taxpayers to producers. This is based on the “Polluter Pays” principle, whereby producers cover the costs of sorting, recycling, and disposing of the packaging they place on the market. By making producers liable for the complete lifecycle of their packaging, EPR encourages sustainable innovation, decreases pollution and advances a circular economy.

While frequently used interchangeably, Carbon Neutral and Net Zero are two distinct approaches to addressing carbon emissions. Carbon neutrality, criticised for not mandating emission reductions, can be seen as a greenwashing tool. In contrast, embracing Net Zero creates long-term resilience for companies, positioning them ahead of regulatory changes and enabling success in a low-carbon future.

Circularity refers to the concept of designing, producing, consuming, and disposing of goods and services in a way that minimises waste and maximises the continual use of resources. It is a key principle of the circular economy, which aims to move away from the traditional linear economic model.

It’s clear that choosing the right packaging is a complex task, with no ‘one size fits all’ solution. Increased awareness regarding the potential harm of microplastics has led to heightened demand for paper products, but are paper products always better for the environment?

The debate around the pros and cons of paper versus plastic packaging has intensified in the last few years. Widespread headlines questioning the use of plastics have encouraged businesses to review their sustainability policies and look at ways of moving to more eco-friendly packaging solutions. Interestingly, such reviews have caused many to question whether paper is always a more environmentally friendly solution to plastic.