Thinking inside the box

As pay-by-use schemes force households to examine their waste, will manufacturers be forced to reduce packaging, asks Liam Reid.

Wrapped in foil, covered in plastic, and encased in their own weight of cardboard, they are perhaps the most over-packaged item a consumer can buy. And when the Easter eggs hit the supermarket shelves in just a few weeks, we will buy them in their millions.

This year, because of the packaging, these little luxuries have a hidden cost. Because of pay-by-weight charges, householders will have to pay for each piece of plastic and cardboard they place in their bin. The problem of superfluous packaging is expected to become a wider issue as consumers begin to baulk at the costs of waste disposal, and hassle of recycling extra packaging, which is often used to entice them to buy the products in the first place.

The question is whether there is anything they can do to combat excessive packaging. Eamon Quinn, marketing director of Superquinn, believes that, regardless of legal rights, consumer power could lead to companies cutting back on the amount of packaging they use. "We do get quite a lot of queries from our customers," he says.

Superquinn stores try to provide unpackaged alternatives when possible, and he believes people are rightly annoyed at packaging waste they cannot recycle. As people become more sensitive to this, they will force manufacturers to change, he says.

"The biggest impact will be if people stop buying something. You'll find that will focus minds and you will see rapid change when the consumer demands it."

In the meantime, would it not be logical and fair for shoppers, who in some cases are charged for recycling services, to take a stand and simply leave the excess packaging and refuse to take it away? The simple answer is that, while tempting, it would be almost certainly illegal, save for a few notable exceptions.

Although there is a raft of legislation protecting consumer rights, including an extensive set of regulations on packaging waste, customers who refuse to take their packaging from a shop are more likely to face prosecution for littering than an award for environmental awareness.

The issue of excessive packaging is already dealt with in European and Irish law in the form of packaging regulations. The legislation requires large shops and companies to ensure the waste they put on the market is recycled.

Shops and factories are also required to take back similar types of packaging waste from consumers. In its purest form, the idea is that a shopper can leave the wrappings behind them, and the shop or business is obliged to take them.

In Ireland, a company can avoid this requirement if they sign up to the industry compliance scheme, Repak. Essentially, Repak undertakes to do their recycling for them. Companies pay fees to Repak, based on the amount of packaging waste they produce. Repak in turn uses that money to subsidise recycling schemes. The major benefit for Repak members - and that includes all the major retail outlets in Ireland - is that they do not have to accept packaging waste back from their customers.

According to the Race Against Waste campaign, the Government-funded initiative aimed at reducing waste in Ireland, most consumers would be breaking the law if they tried to leave their packaging behind in most shops. Smaller shops with turnovers of less than €1 million have no obligation, while a company that is a member of the Repak scheme also has no obligation to accept the waste, and could pursue a customer for littering or illegal dumping if they left their packaging behind.

The only exceptions are the large companies that are not members of Repak and are registered as "self compliant". These companies are obliged to accept packaging from the general public, and not just the packaging it produces, as long as it is similar to the packaging waste they are producing themselves. For example, Coman's Wholesale Ltd, one of the largest drinks distributors in the country, is obliged to accept all sorts of drink cans, glass and plastic bottles, and cardboard. Brennan's Bakeries Ltd is obliged to accept back all forms of bread packaging.

Overall, the Repak system has ensured a massive rise in the recycling of packaging waste, from bottles to cardboard, nearly 500,000 tonnes or half of all packaging waste last year.

Darrell Crowe, marketing manager of Repak, believes the scheme works, in that the industry is funding much of the recycling infrastructure in the country: "It must be remembered that recycling services are free to householders as industry is picking up the cost."

The Repak system has its critics because it provides little incentive for companies to reduce the amount of packaging waste they produce - in fact, the amount of waste the country is producing continues to rise.

Dermott Jewell of the Consumers' Association of Ireland is concerned that by becoming a member of Repak, a company is "absolved" from having to look at the amount of packaging waste it produces. "I think there has to be a case for looking at the current system again. There is no incentive for companies to reduce packaging. There are no penalties, and that's perhaps one of the first things we should be looking at."

Eamon Quinn of Superquinn rejects the suggestion that retailers have not been doing their bit to reduce packaging. He says many products it stocks have packaging for food hygiene purposes, and the chain offers unpackaged alternatives whenever possible. He also believes the current scheme has encouraged a system of recycling to be put in place, a major improvement from five years ago, when almost no recycling was taking place in Ireland. The alternative system of shops accepting back waste would not work, he believes. "I've visited Sweden, where they have that type of system, and half of the shop is given over to it."

So what would Superquinn, a member of Repak, do if a customer turned up with a load of packaging waste? "We are not obliged to, but would probably take the cardboard, as we have a system for recycling it, but we wouldn't take the plastics - we just don't have the facilities to deal with it."