Ellen MacArthur Foundation has gathered together the world’s most comprehensive dataset for assessing corporate progress on plastic abatement, but its first report on progress fails to layout basic progress insights or address core questions. It’s a shame. We prepared a company by company analysis that assesses progress and put a few highlights below. Contact us for more…
First data on progress
On November 5, 2020 the Ellen MacArthur Foundation along with the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), published its second annual New Plastics Economy
Global Commitment Progress report, including
detailed data on the progress of individual business and government signatories.
This is the first opportunity to assess how well signatory companies are doing in their effort to reduce plastic use. As EMF says, “
After a quantitative baseline was set by the first report in 2019, this 2020 report provides the first insight into the trajectory of progress against that baseline.”
EMF’s failure to be clear
But EMF fails to make clear “insight into the trajectory of progress”. A basic and critical insight is that many leading signatory companies are now using more plastic than the 2018 baseline, and are using it at a higher rate per unit of sales.
At no point in EMF’s report does it layout whether each company is using more or less plastic. None of its 5 ‘Key progress metrics’ look at how much plastic each of its signatories is using, whether plastic use is going up or down or how efficiently companies use plastic.
Instead,
EMF focuses on often peripheral points. Its first ‘Key progress metric’, for instance, highlights that 100% of governments have “measures in place to stimulate elimination of plastic packaging”. The second metric highlights that the share of reusable plastic packaging of CPG and retail signatories is 1.9%, up 0.1pp.
EMF seems fearful of offending its (money paying) signatories, preferring to focus on inoffensive and often congratulatory general commentary.
Data
We took published EMF plastic usage data for 2018 and 2019 and prepared a comparison that shows how signatories are performing. Where possible, we filled any EMF data holes with plastic usage data published in corporate CSR and sustainability reports, accepting these may have been prepared under different definitions.
Plastic use flat or rising at most companies
This data shows that for 13 large CPG companies that provided data for 2018 and 2019:
-
Just 4 claim to have reduced overall plastic usage (Colgate, Danone, L’Occitane and Nestlé)
-
Three companies claim, somewhat surprisingly, to have used exactly the same amount of plastic in both 2018 and 2019 (McCormick, Unilever and PepsiCo)
-
The remaining five companies all used more plastic in 2019 than the 2018 baseline (Barilla, Coca-Cola, Henkel, L’Oréal, Mars and SC Johnson)
On average, reductions in plastic use are greater than increases and, overall, the total amount of plastic used by these 13 companies fell by 177k tonnes (0.01% lower than 2018).
However, almost all of this is due to a notable reduction in plastic use by Nestlé, which lowered plastic use by 176k tonnes (10.4% of its 2018 baseline), nearly 9x the amount reduced by the next best performer. Nestlé’s reduction in plastic use is especially impressive since it exceeds the total amount of all packaging it avoided since 2015.
On its
website, Nestlé says,
“Through our eco-design process, we managed to avoid the use of more than 142,000 metric tons of packaging materials by the end of 2019, compared to a baseline of 2015”.
In its
2019 Creating Shared Value Progress Report, the company gives a more precise figure: “
In 2019, the volume of packaging avoided since 2015 rose to 142663 tonnes”.
We have contacted Nestlé to better understand what it did to lower plastic use so dramatically and to understand how its plastic packaging used can decline in one year by a higher amount than the total packaging it avoided using over five years.
Excluding Nestlé, in case its figure is in error or the result of a methodological change, the overall plastic consumption by these 12 companies fell 1k tonnes, or about 0.01%.
Companies using plastic less efficiently
A key aim of plastic abatement strategies is to enable companies to use plastic more efficiently, which we measure with our plastic intensity index. This shows how much plastic each company uses for each unit of $ sales. Sales tend to rise so stable plastic use would mean more efficient use of plastic, but even on this measure CPGs are failing.
Of the 13 companies, just 4 have a better plastic index performance. The remaining 8 perform worse. In other words, these companies – Barilla, Danone, Henkel, L’Occitane, Mars, McCormick, SC Johnson and Unilever – use more plastic per unit of sales than their baselines.
A look at HPC
Four companies centered on home and personal care (Colgate, Henkel, SC Johnson and Unilever) provided 2018 and 2019 data and allow a comparison across broadly similar businesses.
-
Overall, these four companies increased plastic usage by 132 tonnes
-
Both SC Johnson (+9,700 tonnes) and Henkel (+2,000 tonnes) increased plastic usage
-
Unilever reported exactly the same each year
-
Colgate decreased plastic usage by 11,568 tonnes
The picture is worse looking at plastic intensity and how efficiently these companies use plastic:
-
Only Colgate improved its plastic index (by 5%)
-
The remaining three used plastic less efficiently in 2019
-
Overall, for these four companies, plastic use increased nearly 3% faster than sales
Contact us for further details and analysis, including a review of corporate strategies and specific plastic abatement actions taken by brands at each company.
[Image Credit: © Business360]