The paperisation of packaging: navigating the sustainable design decisions
As sustainability climbs higher on both consumer and regulatory agendas, brands are increasingly rethinking their packaging. A notable trend? The shift from plastic to paper, often referred to as the paperisation of packaging.
Driven by widespread single-use plastic bans and the consumer demand for ‘more sustainable materials’, this transition seems like a win. But not all paper-based packaging is created equal. While paper often carries the perception of sustainability, making the switch without understanding potential trade-offs can lead to unintended consequences.
From plastic to paper- but what’s best?
In Australia, the movement away from plastic has been accelerated by a patchwork of single-use plastic bans, which vary by state. Many FMCG brands and quick-service retailers have responded with paper and paperboard alternatives. But making the switch without assessing trade-offs can lead to unintended consequences.
According to APCO’s 2022–23 Packaging Consumption & Recovery Data, paper and paperboard have a national recovery rate of 63.2%, compared to just 6% for plastic. However, 43% of paper-based packaging still ends up in landfill, highlighting how poor design, contamination, and infrastructure limitations can undermine recyclability.
Photo by Filip Baotić on Unsplash
Key considerations when shifting to paper
As a leading sustainable packaging consultant, here’s some of the key considerations we look for when assessing packaging:
Recyclability and recoverability
Paper can be highly recyclable, if designed properly. Highly laminated paperboard, small-formats, or heavily coated wrappers may be rejected at MRFs (Material Recovery Facilities). Adding barrier layers may improve performance but reduce recyclability. Its important to ensure when using paper or cardboard that design elements do not hinder the recyclability.
User experience and functionality
Replacing flexible plastic with paper may affect shelf life, integrity, and ease of use. Packaging still needs to perform, logistically and visually.
Lifecycle impacts
Paper and plastic each carry distinct environmental impacts across their lifecycle. Paper production involves considerable water use and must be carefully managed to ensure responsible sourcing. Plastics, while generally lighter, are derived from fossil resources and can be more challenging to recover depending on available systems.
With the increasing focus on Scope 3 emissions and the introduction of mandatory climate disclosure reporting, businesses are under growing pressure to understand the carbon footprint of their packaging choices. Lifecycle assessments (LCAs) are key to capture these impacts across sourcing, production, logistics, and end-of-life, helping businesses make informed decisions and avoid unintended consequences.
Mandates and global packaging regulations
Globally, eco-modulation fees are rewarding recyclable packaging. In Australia, APCO’s 2030 Strategy signals movement towards EPR (Extended Producer Responsibility) and fee structures linked to recyclability. EPR fees will be a key factor to consider when future-proofing planning but must be considered in parallel to lifecycle impacts as well as wide-scale material recovery options.
Supply and quality of recycled content
Integrating recycled content is critical to reducing reliance on virgin materials. Maintaining a consistent, high-quality recycled stream can be difficult in regions with low collection and recovery rates.
How brands and designers can respond
Conduct a packaging impact assessment
Before switching materials, assess performance, recyclability, environmental impacts and compliance. At philo & co, we provide evidence-based insights using tools like PREP, life cycle assessments, and market-specific packaging reviews to help you understand your real impact.
Understand the recoverability and regulatory landscape
The goal is to align with real-world recovery. Design teams must evaluate how packaging performs within current collection, sorting, and recycling systems, which can vary by state or region. Add to this a complex and evolving regulatory environment- like the EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation- and it’s clear that aligning design to both recovery infrastructure and legislation is critical.
Design for circularity
Keep formats simple and avoid problematic components or features. Use materials that can be recovered through standard paper streams. And don’t forget consumer-facing cues, on-pack instructions like the Australasian Recycling Label (ARL) or QR codes improve disposal outcomes and reduce contamination.
Consider the trade-offs
No material is perfect. Understand your packaging’s role, and weigh recyclability against environmental impacts, cost, and performance. An informed, balanced approach builds both sustainability and brand credibility.
Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash
Take the next step in sustainable packaging
The paperisation trend isn’t inherently good or bad, it’s all about context. With thoughtful design, responsible sourcing, and a firm grasp of your regulatory and recovery landscape, paper can play a key role in many brands’ sustainable packaging strategies. But it must be assessed through an evidence-based lens.
At philo & co, we specialise in helping brands and packaging design agencies navigate material choices with clarity. We provide packaging recyclability assessments, sustainability claims reviews, and strategic guidance to align your packaging with future-ready expectations.
📞 Book a free discovery call
🌿 Visit our brand and design agency services to learn more
📦 Let’s build packaging solutions that reduce impact and reflect your brand’s values.