Precise wording, reliable evidence and market-specific checks help packaging businesses communicate environmental improvements credibly.
Environmental claims help packaging manufacturers, material suppliers and brand owners demonstrate progress. For these claims to be useful, customers must understand the benefits and businesses must be able to substantiate them.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
Terms such as ‘green’, ‘eco-friendly’ and ‘sustainable’ can imply more than the evidence supports. A recyclable material does not guarantee that the finished pack can be collected and recycled in every market. Recycled content does not guarantee recyclability, while compostable packaging may require facilities unavailable to the intended user.
For global packaging businesses, credible communication starts with a defined improvement, a clear scope and evidence relevant to the markets where the claim appears.
Describe the improvement precisely
Specific packaging sustainability claims give customers and procurement teams a clear basis for comparison.
‘Bottle body contains 50% recycled plastic by weight’ identifies both the characteristic and the component concerned. By contrast, ‘made with sustainable materials’ leaves the benefit unclear.
Similarly, a claim that a redesign uses 20% less packaging by weight should identify the previous format or another suitable comparator. Supporting records should establish the weights, calculation method and whether the designs perform equivalent functions.
Reduced material use, increased recycled content and lower greenhouse gas emissions are separate benefits. Each requires evidence suited to the claim.
The UK Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) Green Claims Code emphasises accuracy, clarity, fair comparisons, substantiation and consideration of a product’s wider life cycle. It also warns against omitting important information. These principles offer a useful reference for packaging businesses, although legal requirements vary between markets.
Assess recyclability at package level
Recyclability claims must account for the complete pack and the systems expected to handle it.
Containers, closures, labels, adhesives, coatings and inks can affect sorting and reprocessing. Individually recyclable components may still create difficulties when combined.
Packaging teams should establish whether a format can be collected, identified, sorted and processed through relevant systems. Assessments should also consider material recovery, contamination and the quality of the resulting recycled material.
Conditions and exclusions need to be clear. A claim covering only the main container should not imply that every component is recyclable. Where separation is necessary, instructions should explain what users need to do.
Local infrastructure also matters. A format accepted in one country or region may lack an established recovery route elsewhere. Technical test results should therefore be considered alongside collection access and processing capability in destination markets.
For businesses supplying the European Union, the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) establishes requirements concerning packaging design, recyclability and waste prevention, with obligations taking effect according to the regulation’s timetable. A general recyclability statement does not, by itself, demonstrate compliance.
Verify recycled content and its scope
Recycled-content claims should identify the percentage, calculation basis and components covered.
A statement about a bottle body should not imply that its cap and label contain the same proportion. A claim covering the complete package needs a calculation that accounts for all relevant components.
Supplier declarations, purchasing records, production data and material-accounting records can support substantiation. The documentation must match the wording used.
Businesses should also distinguish physical recycled content from content attributed through an accounting system. Under some mass-balance approaches, recycled inputs are allocated to outputs according to defined rules. That allocation does not necessarily establish the physical quantity of recycled material present in each individual pack.
Where an attribution method is used, the claim should explain the approach accurately and comply with the rules in the target market.
ISO 14021:2026 provides principles, requirements and guidance for self-declared environmental claims, including documentation and assessment methods. Businesses should consult the standard’s published requirements when developing claims for packaging labels, product literature, advertising and digital communications.
Applying a standard does not replace compliance with applicable law.
Explain compostability conditions
‘Biodegradable’ and ‘compostable’ describe different characteristics and require careful qualification.
Biodegradation concerns the breakdown of a material through biological activity under particular conditions. Its rate and extent depend on the material and environment.
Compostability relates to defined requirements under specified composting conditions. Industrial and home composting involve different environments, so evidence for one should not be assumed to support the other.
Neither term establishes that packaging will break down quickly in soil, water, landfill or the wider environment.
Businesses should verify the complete packaging structure against the conditions being claimed. Certification or test evidence should cover the relevant components, including coatings, adhesives and printing where applicable.
Practical disposal matters too. A technically compostable pack may offer limited practical benefit if suitable collection and treatment facilities are unavailable. Instructions should identify the required disposal route and reflect local acceptance requirements.
Define the boundaries of carbon claims
Carbon claims need a clear measurement basis, including the emissions covered and the comparison being made.
A packaging carbon footprint assessment may include raw materials, converting, transport and end-of-life treatment. Including or excluding different stages can materially change the result.
Comparisons should reflect equivalent functions, such as the packaging required to protect and deliver a defined quantity of product. Comparing material weights alone may overlook differences in protection, damage rates or shelf life.
Businesses should document data sources, assessment periods, assumptions and system boundaries. ‘Lower carbon’ claims should identify the comparator, reduction and scope.
Absolute statements such as ‘zero emissions’ require particularly strong support. Businesses must distinguish reductions within the assessed system from emissions offset elsewhere and check whether the proposed wording is permitted in each market.
A reduction in greenhouse gas emissions should not imply improvements across unrelated environmental impacts.
Consider the wider environmental consequences
An improvement in one attribute can introduce trade-offs elsewhere.
Lightweighting may reduce material consumption but increase damage if protection becomes inadequate. A material substitution may change manufacturing energy requirements, transport needs or recovery options.
Product protection belongs within the assessment. Spoilage, breakage and replacement shipments can affect the environmental performance of a packaging system, particularly where the contents have substantial environmental impacts of their own.
Life-cycle assessment (LCA) can help examine these relationships. Comparisons need an appropriate scope, reliable data and transparent assumptions, with important limitations explained.
Where the evidence supports only one attribute, the claim should remain limited to it. A reduction in packaging weight, for example, does not establish a lower overall environmental impact.
Check the rules in each market
Global suppliers should review claims, artwork and supporting information for each destination market.
In the UK, the CMA’s guidance on environmental claims across supply chains explains that businesses making or passing on claims need to take steps to ensure they are accurate and supported. Companies should not assume that responsibility rests solely with the original supplier of the information.
In the EU, Directive (EU) 2024/825 strengthens consumer protection against misleading environmental practices. Member States were required to adopt and publish implementing measures by 27 March 2026, with those measures applying from 27 September 2026. Businesses should check the relevant national legislation and its implications for packaging communications.
Claims approval and packaging compliance require separate checks. Evidence supporting a marketing statement does not establish compliance with every applicable design, composition or labelling requirement.
Build an evidence trail before publication
Substantiation should be available before a claim appears on packaging, in specifications or in promotional material.
An internal review should establish five things:
- The exact claim: its wording, product, component, market and period.
- The evidence: relevant tests, calculations, supplier records and assessments.
- The scope: whether the evidence supports every benefit communicated.
- The presentation: how words, symbols, imagery and qualifications work together.
- The review process: who maintains the records and what triggers reassessment.
Packaging development, procurement, sustainability, legal and marketing teams each hold relevant information. Clear ownership helps ensure that changes in materials, suppliers, specifications or regulations prompt a review.
Where claims rely on supplier information, businesses should establish how it was produced, what it covers and when it needs updating.
Organised records also make it easier to answer procurement questionnaires, customer audits and technical enquiries.
Make the message useful
An accurate statement can still create a misleading impression through its presentation.
A prominent symbol may appear to cover the whole package while small print refers to one component. Nature imagery and broad wording can suggest benefits beyond those measured.
Essential qualifications should be clear and easy to find. Websites and digital information can provide supporting detail, but should not conceal limitations needed to understand the main claim.
Consumers need a clear explanation of the benefit and any action required for disposal. Business buyers may need detailed specifications, assessment methods and supplier records. Information should remain consistent across packaging, sales literature and digital channels.
Credible packaging sustainability claims follow measurable improvements. By defining benefits precisely, verifying them and keeping evidence current, packaging businesses can communicate progress with greater confidence and give customers a stronger basis for purchasing decisions.
