Solent: Packaging breakthroughs blocked, says University of Portsmouth

Major packaging breakthroughs, such as the Tetrapak and the ring-pull can, are in danger of never being seen again, according to new research.

New ideas for packaging are given the cold shoulder by ‘all-powerful’ buyers and frowned upon by increasingly-green consumers who consider packaging wasteful, the studies found.

Research by Dr Chris Simms and Paul Trott, both of the University of Portsmouth, highlights other problems for the industry, including the prohibitive cost of innovation and a myopic view of what packaging is or could be. There are also too few champions for packaging improvements within so-called Fast Moving Consumer Goods firms, those which sell products with a short shelf life or a high turnover.

The research, published in the Journal of R&D Management, calls for meaningful discussions between suppliers and customers if they wish to see innovation within the industry and to prevent packaging becoming the ‘whipping boy’ in industry.

Simms said: “Packaging has become a victim of tunnel vision.

“Those making products don’t want to invest in packaging changes because it’s seen as expensive and unnecessary.

“Those buying the packaging on behalf of brand owners earn bonuses for keeping the costs down, so the last thing they want to do is discuss innovations which might add a few pennies to the cost of a product.

“And consumers are either unaware of what technological developments are possible or are hostile to the industry in general because they see packaging as anti-green.

“You could say the packaging industry is caught between a rock and hard place.”

In 2010, the global packaging industry was valued at £258 billion, with the UK earning a £9.5b share. It is responsible for an enormous range of products including recloseable packaging, microwaveable plastic trays and breathable food bags.

As an expert in strategy, enterprise and innovation, Simms was asked to examine the challenges facing the industry by packaging manufacturer Chesapeake.

Packaging and innovations in packaging matter, he said, because innovations make products more convenient and cut food waste, a significant problem in the supply chain and in individual homes.

Packaging is also an integral part of a product, and developments in packaging alone can be responsible for the success of some products.

Tetrapak, PET bottles and in-can systems are all examples of iconic breakthroughs in packaging but future breakthroughs are now under threat because they demand big set-up costs, long changeover times which threatens turnover, and business risk.

Dr Simms said three key barriers are stopping packaging forms from standing out or making advances.

“The emergence of powerful buyers means innovations are frequently blocked. It isn’t in their interests to champion innovations given the fact their bonuses are linked directly to keeping down the costs of packaging,” he said.

“The second problem is the language barrier. In some sectors packaging development is taken to mean only labelling or aesthetic design changes and this means technological packaging changes are overlooked.

“And third, packaging is seen by many within industry as ‘just a cardboard box’ and innovations are undervalued.”

Those within a company with an interest in innovation and packaging tend to not have decisionmaking power and producers of some products work to such small margins they are unwilling to invest in innovation. Even trialling new methods is seen by many as high-risk.

The main products currently used in all packaging are: paper and board (37%), followed by metal (14%), glass (12%) and other materials (2%).