A conversation summary from the Reuse Solutions Network and its subgroups

Upstream’s Reuse Solutions Network (RSN) and its subgroups—the Government Reuse Forum, Local Deep Dive, and Conservative States & Provinces—provide valuable convening spaces for NGOs, entrepreneurs, local organizations, community leaders, and governments working to catalyze reuse. Besides accessing a digital forum for resource sharing and brainstorming, each group meets quarterly to focus on topics relevant to the moment in the world of reuse. 

This quarter’s topic was “addressing perceived barriers to change (myth busting).” Though these meetings are only for members of the RSN (info on joining below!), we are happy to share the key learnings and takeaways since they are so useful for the movement as a whole. (The Conservative States & Provinces subgroup is on a slightly different track, and we’ll be sharing insights from that group at the end of the year). 

Anyone working on reuse solutions is welcome and encouraged to sign up to join these networks. Our next meeting is on July 25th and is going to feature a conversation about reuse as a climate solution and its intersection with environmental justice. 

Unlocking a Reuse Revolution

The April RSN meeting focused on busting the myth that consumer demand must come before scaled reuse systems. Christiana Dujardin of Systemiq presented a new report, “Unlocking a reuse revolution: scaling returnable packaging,” co-created by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Eunmoia, and Systemiq. The report aims to answer how we might design a returnable packaging system that can compete economically, environmentally and experientially with current single-use paradigms—while also demonstrating that scaled systems are needed before we will see consumer demand for reuse. 

The report focuses on returnable packaging—both “return from home” and “return on the go”—and models 4 packaging applications across 3 scenarios: a full system change, a collaborative approach, and a fragmented approach. 

The results 

The report shows substantial GHG emissions savings and a reduction in plastic usage from all packaging types in each scenario—with the exception of dry food cupboard packaging in the fragmented scenario due to higher packaging weight. Reusables also save water due to single-use packaging production being more water intensive than washing reusables in centralized facilities.   

While the environmental benefits are clear, the economic impacts are more nuanced. Two of the packaging applications—personal care and beverages—can reach cost parity when the systems change scenario is implemented, but otherwise they do not see cost savings with reusables in this modeling scenario. Because packaging production is one of the highest costs, high return rates are crucial for the economics to work in favor of reusables.  

So where should we be focusing our efforts to make reusable packaging efficient and competitive with single-use? The report recommends three interconnected key drivers:

1. Scaled and shared infrastructure for increased convenience and reduced costs, as well as to avoid redundant systems 

2. High return rates

3. Packaging standardization and pooling to reduce transport distance and streamline sorting and cleaning. 

Through these key drivers working simultaneously with coordinated action from businesses, citizens, financial institutions, and policy makers and governments, we can drive these systems forward so consumers can understand, engage with, and adopt reuse systems.

Key takeaways from the RSN

The primary takeaways from Christiana's presentation were: 

1. Consumer demand for reuse will not come until we provide consumers with a functional, scaled, convenient system that allows them to choose and use reusables. Consumers must be able to see reuse in action in order to understand its benefits and demand more of it. 

2. When packaging is designed to be standardized and pooled, and infrastructure is shared at scale, reuse systems will work best for consumers and yield high return rates.  

3. While the economics of reuse can be challenging at the start, when a system is created collaboratively and at scale, reuse can compete economically.

In the conversation that followed, participants were keen to learn more about material choices for reusable packaging, as well as the decision to focus on urban reuse systems for the modeling in this report. The packaging materials selected were based on expert insight and took into account the fact that packaging is specific to the product. Interestingly, learnings from the report are not very impacted by material type; it was found that a much bigger factor are the system drivers (e.g. return rates, scale of the system, and if the packing is pooled or bespoke). Christiana also advised that if you are going to develop a scaled system, it makes sense to look to urban centers because the population density makes the system most efficient.

Participants found this report very compelling, and there were far more questions than time, so we will soon be having Christiana on the Indisposable Podcast to dig in deeper—stay tuned!  

A closer look  

Following the RSN, individuals, coalitions, and groups working on local policy and implementation met in the Local Deep Dive subgroup to discuss the reuse myths they face in their day-to-day work. Among the many myths discussed, the four most common included:

1. Reuse leads to a lack of brand awareness

2. Reusables can be dangerous in certain contexts (i.e., can be used as weapons)

3. Reuse isn’t hygienic

4. Compostables are the solution to single-use. 

Responses used to debunk each of these myths were workshopped in small groups, and we look forward to sharing them publicly soon, as we’re sure these are challenges that many in the movement face when making the case for reuse. 

The Government Reuse Forum also met after the RSN and spent time considering the top policy recommendations from the “Unlocking a reuse revolution” report—e.g., Deposit Return Systems (DRS) and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation with reuse targets. Representatives from Go Green Illinois and the League of Women Voters shared insights about efforts to get reuse integrated into the Illinois DRS bill (SB 85). They were faced with challenges including a lack of support for reuse targets among certain packaging industry groups and general opposition from retailers and waste haulers. Though these challenges are very real and quite common, the fact that the bill is still alive leaves a window of opportunity to continue to build interest and momentum—and there is hope that it will move forward in the next legislative session, with strong reuse targets included. 

The group also discussed other efforts to enact new laws with reuse targets as well as ways to introduce reuse into DRS by modernizing existing systems. The Bring Back Refill Campaign has been working to hold corporations accountable for their announced reuse targets. At the same time, many states have introduced DRS bills with reuse targets—including NY, CA, MD, WA, NC, and RI—even while experiencing opposition from waste haulers. 

Everyone in the GRF celebrated Minnesota’s new packaging EPR law and its multi-faceted inclusion of reuse—from investment in reuse infrastructure; to an eco-modulated fee structure that will incentivize reusable packaging; to outreach and education efforts and a clear definition of “reusable” to differentiate it from refill. Reuse targets — and associated target return rates — will also be coming after the needs assessment is completed. Unfortunately, Minnesota was unsuccessful in passing DRS as a complementary law to EPR (more on why this is important here).    

What’s next?

Across all three network meetings this quarter, it is clear we have some difficult, widespread myths to overcome in the reuse movement, but we are also well resourced to do so. While we face these challenges in different sectors and at different levels, it is necessary that we have a place for everyone to come together to work through them—because we all know reuse wins.