For one—remembering reuse is about systems before packaging

Life Cycle Assessments (also known as Life Cycle Analysis), or LCAs, have always been a hot and often controversial topic—and have been used both to dispute and to celebrate the merits of reuse. But if we are to take a proven, effective, and data-driven approach to scaling reuse, now is a particularly important time to uncover the layers and nuances. Depending on the boundaries set, the assumptions made, and source data used, LCAs can be powerful tools for change-making—or they can be highly misleading.   

The EPA defines LCA as a “cradle-to-grave” method to evaluate the environmental effects associated with any given industrial activity. Several organizations have developed methods for LCA, each using a different analytic approach to this complex activity but all subject to the same difficulties—including poor quality data, weak reasons or procedures for establishing analytic boundaries, and the fact that they are very dependent on the assumptions the user makes. 

Within the reuse movement, LCAs can help us with choosing materials based on environmental impacts. But reuse is not just a simple swap-out of material. To make a strong case for reuse and to build optimal systems, one key step we need to take is building material recovery rates into LCAs.

Reusable packaging is only as good as its system

For the consumer packaged goods sector, the aim of reuse is to significantly reduce the virgin materials being used. But an ineffective, poorly executed system can perpetuate the need for even more virgin materials by failing to recover reusables after they’ve been released onto the market. Reuse is about systems before packaging.  

Material recovery in a reuse system can be maximized using evidence-based best practices. We know that good systems design makes material recovery easy for consumers and leads to the volume of reusable packaging recovery that makes the economics - and environmental benefits - of reuse work. 

Maximizing material recovery comes from a combination of good systems design plus behavior change factors like where and how items are placed, incentives used to ensure return, and the branding and messaging that inform and motivate.

Making (properly) informed material choices 

When deciding what kind of material to use for reusable packaging, the first consideration needs to be the rate at which a reuse system recovers the chosen material. Otherwise, the decision is moot.

For example, if a reuse system has a 65% recovery rate, this can change the LCA conclusions about the material to use, as compared to a 95% recovery rate. To make the best informed decisions, companies should test first, apply best practices for material recovery, and find the expected recovery rate. This first recovery rate then becomes the baseline from which to make and measure materials choices and improve the system overall. 

Asking the right question of our LCAs 

It’s important to remember that at the end of the day, LCAs are just modeling tools, and one tool among many in gathering data. They only help make sound decisions if the assumptions that go into them are sound. Well designed LCAs have great potential to thoroughly define holistic systems and identify areas of improvement. Companies can then use data-informed decisions to become better stewards and continually improve upon their baseline metrics. 

Until now, the trend has been to use LCAs to answer the question, “should we do reuse?” We know that reuse and refill are where the world’s systems and products need to be headed. More than just being an environmental win and a good business practice, there are reasons for reuse that don’t get the spotlight they deserve:

• Reuse is an economic movement. It is a burgeoning industry that builds workforce, growing wealth and resilience in communities. 

• Reuse can eliminate our dependence on the global supply chain. Rather than depending on a volatile market, resources can circulate locally and regionally. 

• Reuse is a social justice movement. Disposable systems are more often than not exploitative and pollutive, causing the most harm to disadvantaged communities, BIPOC populations, and women. 

• Reuse is not only a plastics solution but a climate solution. We see strong evidence that when compared to disposable, reuse is carbon reductive.

The question we really need to ask of LCAs now, as we transition to a world that requires reuse at scale, is “how do we optimize reuse systems?” 

Return rates are just one of many considerations for well designed and thoughtfully interpreted LCAs, which are discussed at length in the recording of the Reuse Refill Action Forum Plenary Call: Cutting Through the Noise on LCAs, which is available for viewing here. We will also be diving more into these nuances in upcoming posts, so stay tuned!