Mypack

Sustainability perception

Address consumer barriers

Sustainability perception differs from measured sustainability - packaging aspect and related communication must be adapted to find good accordance between perception and reality.

Make compatible sustainability and sustainability perception.

Scientific based reccomendations and insights for practical applications
Comments, links

The distinctive sensory features of eco-materials can be used by companies as effective reminders for sustainability rather than hidden in the overall design.

Granato, G., Fischer, A. R., & van Trijp, H. C. (2021). A meaningful reminder on sustainability: When explicit and implicit packaging cues meet. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 101724.

Rather than adopting generic claims that risk to be interpreted as forms of greenwashing, marketers should consider formulating specific and associative statements that link the distinctive properties of sustainable packaging with the higher sustainability and provide “a reason to believe” (e.g., “This is a new type of packaging, can you hear/feel its sustainability?”, “Can you hear the new sound of green/ sustainability”).

Municipalities could consider encouraging sustainable disposal behavior through advertisements in which governmental agencies or experts on the subject provide information on new packaging technology, linking to its sensory features.

Explicit cues, like logos and explanation of the packaging technology, helps to increase sustainability perception of the packaging.

It is better to add an explanation of the packaging technology (explanation of biodegradable material, for example) if the packaging has a material with a new sound (as PLA) or tactile properties as these implicit cues (auditory and tactile element) do not hold a well-embaddied association with sustainability (yet) and cannot increase the sustainability perception of the packaging by themselves.

On the contrary to the previous point, adding an explicit cue (explanation, text ) when the implicit cues can already signal sustainability, as in the case of green color or opaque packaging, does not have the same effect: sustainability perception does not increase so much.

Granato, G., Fischer, A. R., & van Trijp, H. C. (2021). A meaningful reminder on sustainability: When explicit and implicit packaging cues meet. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 101724.

It is important to consider whether the sensory properties of sustainable packaging (particular sound as PLA, opaque material as biodegradable...) can signal sustainability to consumers by themselves or not.

When we tested two different strategies of explicitly communicating sustainability to consumers, one significantly increased consumer sustainable responses --> consumers not only perceived the packaging as more sustainable but also disposed of it more sustainably (in the correct bin and separating the paper from the plastic part). The other strategy, instead did not have this effect. The strategy that had an effect was the following: "associative information" were provided, namely the sustainability of the packaging was explained linking the enhanced sustainability with the different sensory properties of sustainable packaging. Here is an example: A recycled material is basically a material that has been processed and therefore, can have different sensory features than conventional packagings, such as a different appearance, color, sound or tactile sensation”. Instead, the other strategy simply explains the sustainability of the packaging without creating any association between the sensory properties of recycled materials (e.g., a distinctive look than conventional plastic) and their enhanced sustainability. Here is an example “A recycled material is basically a material that has been processed to be re-used and function as a new packaging”. This strategy was ineffective in increasing sustainability perception and even sustainable disposal behaviour, while the first strategy was effective.

When consumers must sacrifice a single benefit for greater sustainability, they tend not to perceive the potential drawbacks, such as an objectively inferior performance in terms of convenience, preservation or attraction. Thus, a higher sustainability level seems to “absorb” some drawbacks until a certain threshold, beyond which the losses are perceived. Therefore, while developing eco-packaging alternatives, it should be considered that a higher sustainability level tends to mitigate or even absorb the drawbacks (e.g. opacity level) when these are limited (e.g., when a single benefit is compromised), leading consumers to still hold positive attitudes toward the sustainable packaging. On the other hand, the sacrifice asked consumers is greater; packaging designers should carefully consider which benefits consumers are most willing to compromise.

Changing an opening/closure mechanism from a non-re-closable packaging to re-closable (with a zip lid) is likely to increase the perceived sustainability for certain products, like baby food and fresh salad, but significantly decrease it for others (as biscuits). In this case, it might be worthy of considering whether the balance between food waste and packaging waste is equally or differently relevant across product categories.

Similarly, packaging designers might consider that the benefits that packaging cues might signal to consumers differ across countries. For example, our results showed that, for German consumers, convenience in mainly signalled by material type, for the French by packaging format and the Dutch by the opening/closure mechanism.

Granato, G., Fischer, A. R., & van Trijp, H. C. (2021). When sustainability comes at the expense of other benefits: an integrated model to explain the intention of European consumers to purchase sustainable food packaging alternatives. (under review).

The material type has a strong effect on perceived sustainability and substantially affects other benefit perceptions, like the aesthetic quality or the perceived ability to preserve and protect the content.

Our results showed that the presence of a biodegradable/compostable material (with its logo) leads consumers to form favorable evaluations on other packaging benefits (e.g. convenience or attraction) besides sustainability. Consumers indeed tended to perceive the more sustainable option as superior on the other benefits as well. This might be caused by a sustainability halo effect or “spill-over” (Chandon & Wansink, 2007; Schuldt et al., 2012; Sundar & Kardes, 2015), through which consumers’ positive impressions based on one (packaging) aspect, sustainability, in this case, tend to “spill-over” to other unrelated packaging benefits, as convenience (Steenis et al., 2017).

The type of material primarily influences the perception of the sustainability benefit: a change in material type from plastic to biodegradable/compostable or paper increases the perception of sustainability by 1.49.

Changing material type from plastic to biodegradable/compostable or paper increases the sustainability perception of the biscuit packaging by 1.57, the baby food packaging by 1.39 and the salad packaging by 1.51.

Opening type is particularly important for baby food products where re-closable packaging can increase the perception of convenience (0.92) and attraction (0.40).Opening type is also important for salad production in affecting the perception of convenience (0.70) and preservation (0.58).

The transparency level of the packaging increases the perception of attraction for biscuits (0.32) and salad (0.42).

About different perceptions on the same packaging innovation between designers and consumers (misalignment): designers should reflect together on misalignments, not from the perspective of “failure” but rather as business potential. It is important to reflect on their causes, implications for the NPD process, as well as on how to strategically handle each of them: reflect on the necessity of reducing the misalignments in cases where they represented a barrier to market success or missed marketing opportunities, to maintain them when they are essential for the product functioning, and to further explore them when they may represent innovation opportunities. The MUD method that we have developed and validated offers a tool for this.

The identification of specific misalignments at the levels of goals, benefits and cues provides companies with specific insights (e.g., at which goal–benefit link designers and users start to disagree), which are informative and useful for the implementation of precise and relevant strategies on how to handle the misalignments.

The MUD method that we have developed helps companies identify misalignments between companies and consumers and manage them.

The cues–benefits–goals links of the means-end chain structure are useful for comparing companies’ and consumers’ perspectives on the same innovation.

Granato, G., Fischer, A. R., & van Trijp, H. C. (2021). Misalignments between users and designers as source of inspiration: A novel hybrid method for physical new product development. Technovation, 102391.

Granato, G., Fischer, A. R., & van Trijp, H. C. (2021). A meaningful reminder on sustainability: When explicit and implicit packaging cues meet. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 101724.

Granato, G., Fischer, A. R., & van Trijp, H. C. (2021). Misalignments between users and designers as source of inspiration: A novel hybrid method for physical new product development. Technovation, 102391.

Granato, G., Fischer, A. R., & van Trijp, H. C. (2021). When sustainability comes at the expense of other benefits: an integrated model to explain the intention of European consumers to purchase sustainable food packaging alternatives. (under review).