Learn
Reuse FAQs
The reuse movement is scaling fast — and so is our collective wisdom. Through conversations with practitioners and the 1,500+ member Reuse Solutions Network, we've identified some questions that keep coming up: What are the real barriers? What actually works?
Reuse Quandaries and Frequently Asked Questions
This is our attempt to pool that knowledge — so we can stop reinventing the wheel and start accelerating solutions together.
This FAQ is a living document. We will be adding to it on an ongoing basis to capture the topmost concerns and questions from across the movement. Like any FAQ, consider this a starting point. We're scratching the surface of complex topics, but if these insights spark new questions or you have resources to add, please reach out. Let's build this together.
Contents
Getting Started: What are local strategies for encouraging or requiring reuse?
Implementation & Enforcement: We passed our policy / kicked off our pilot / project! How do we make sure it works?
Extended Producer Responsibility: What is EPR, and what does it have to do with reuse?
Reuse for Consumer Packaged Goods: How do reuse systems work most effectively for CPG, and what are the best practices?
Ware-washing reusables: Dishwashing can be expensive and use lots of water. What are we to do?!
Return Rates and Incentives:What’s the best way to get a high return rate?
A full transition to a reuse economy involves widespread, quality, shared, interoperable reuse infrastructure and efficiently functioning reuse systems. Like most systems-level change, this requires regulation and large-scale implementation. But, from municipal procurement policies to Skip the Stuff ordinances to single-use fees and reuse incentives, plenty of localized policy and non-policy models can help advance reuse.
Getting Started:
What are local strategies for encouraging or requiring reuse?
-
Municipalities can accelerate reuse by requiring or encouraging reusables in their procurement policies on food and catering, including for entities that get municipal funding, or events held on city property. Local governments can also pass policies that encourage or incentivize beverage refill over pre-bottled beverages.
When crafting local policies, like reuse for onsite dining or Skip the Stuff, make education and enforcement less work for all stakeholders, rather than more — especially for those responsible for enforcing the policy. Consider things like how to ensure county health inspectors embrace their role in enforcing city reuse ordinances, particularly by bringing them into the conversation early. Collaborate with other cities in the county to help with enforcement, especially if they’ve passed similar ordinances.
If imposing single-use cup and container fees seems like a good starting point in your jurisdiction, consider combining them with reuse-enabling policies, such as reuse for onsite dining requirements and modernized food codes that allow BYO. Fees act as a “stick,” but for consumers paying the fee and businesses enforcing it, there is no “carrot” without built-in reuse alternatives.
Incentivize or require retail businesses to offer reusable bags that customers can borrow and return to the store. Short a reusable bag system, opt for policies that put fees on all single-use disposable bags — rather than a ban on plastic bags. Research shows that plastic bag bans may be ineffective at catalyzing reuse and reducing waste, and sometimes even increase plastic waste due to loopholes that allow for thicker “reusable” plastic bags. Single-use bag fees work better for encouraging customers to carry reusable bags.
Many reuse-oriented policies address concerns across multiple interest groups, from plastic pollution, to public health, to small business economics. Creating coalitions and collaborations across organizations and student groups — and leveraging the media to tell the story of how, for instance, Skip the Stuff can help with litter, microplastics, and procurement costs simultaneously — can go a long way in advancing a policy.
Using direct, tangible examples and case studies helps stakeholders connect the dots and get on board more quickly and willingly. In New Jersey, for example, when advocates were vying for a statewide Skip the Stuff law (which passed in Spring, 2026), they created a case study from a town that had already passed a local accessories on request ordinance and had seen a 96% reduction in single-use waste as a result. The more local the example the better — but if you are leading the way in your area, find case studies from similar jurisdictions.
-
Upstream’s Skip the Stuff toolkit (this page also point to partner organizations’ toolkits)
Best Management Practices for Reusable Takeout Containers at Food Establishments in Massachusetts (template example)
-
Implementation & Enforcement:
We passed our policy / kicked off our pilot / project! How do we make sure it works?
Implementing voluntary or mandatory reuse programs requires strong consideration of community stakeholder needs and concerns, employee and consumer education, and enforcement. Design and activities that make reuse — and the switch to reuse — as easy as possible for as many stakeholders as possible increase success.
-
Engage diverse interest groups in the community early to understand the benefits and challenges a reuse system may provide, and how stakeholders may perceive and react to proposed changes. Use these insights to construct policies or programs that address their various concerns proactively.
Education is the most powerful tool for compliance and enforcement. Enforcement protocols differ from place to place, but generally speaking, municipalities want to be business-friendly and no one wants to call out their favorite local coffee shop for noncompliance. Most of the time, noncompliance has more to do with lack of awareness or confusion than willful defiance — which makes interventions to achieve compliance much easier. Bring both businesses and customers on board by starting simple, engaging directly, and making educational campaigns fun and community-oriented.
For restaurant-oriented policies like Skip the Stuff, the rules of the law may be able to be written in as a line item for inspection reports. Ideally, though, the business already understands the cost savings involved in compliance and therefore complies willingly.
Preempt customer pushback on new reuse programs in restaurants through proactive outreach and education. Recruit a committed group of volunteers or advocates to create and disseminate educational materials for both restaurant employees and the broader community.
Incentive programs, like a barista or server competition, may help with staff buy-in for a reusable or BYO-cup project. Community reuse groups or volunteer-led programs with limited resources can explore collaborations like a funded research project to support the launch of a program to explore the most effective incentives. One such collaboration recently launched in Maine, in which Reuse Maine partnered with the University of Maine to launch an exploratory pilot of reusable takeout systems for cafes around the state.
Reinforce community awareness of existing reuse programs through tabling. Highly visible, short messages (like a sign held by a person) that serve as reminders but don’t require customers to stop and talk to anyone are best for busy, rush hour times in foodservice establishments. Use more traditional tabling for public education during slower times, or in high traffic areas with a more leisurely atmosphere (like a park or plaza), to engage first-time and potential customers.
-
Challenges in Implementing Reusable Foodware Policies in N. America and how to Overcome Them
The MNimize Initiative — a model out of Hennepin County, MN that supports businesses in minimizing waste, particularly those affected by local waste reduction mandates
Extended Producer Responsibility:
What is Extended Producer Responsibility, and what does it have to do with reuse?
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) means a producer is responsible, or accountable, for the post-consumer management of the product and/or its packaging that they put on the market. The producer’s obligation generally comes in the form of a fee that is collected by a third-party Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) and redistributed into waste management, reduction, research and development, and ideally reuse programs — in accordance with the law. With the shift of responsibility away from consumers and municipalities back to producers, EPR packaging laws with strong reuse provisions can compel or incentivize producers to implement reuse in explicit and implicit ways.
-
EPR statutes or laws that require a certain percentage of packaging on the market to be reusable over a certain period of time necessitate that some producers must choose reusable packaging.
EPR statutes or laws that subsidize greener materials through “eco-modulation” financially incentivize producers to shift to reusables because they become cost competitive with or cheaper than single-use.
Different EPR laws include different covered materials — the products producers are required to pay for under the program. Reusables are not always “covered” materials (e.g., in Colorado and California), meaning they exist fee-free outside of the EPR program. This may seem like a financial incentive, but it is actually a missed opportunity to catalyze reuse. Instead, EPR laws should include reusables as a covered material while also ensuring they only pay into the program once upon first market entry. Including reusables in EPR programs makes it easier to advocate for and dedicate funds to reuse.
The funds collected from EPR programs can be earmarked to contribute directly to the buildout of reuse infrastructure and systems. Statewide (or national) EPR laws can therefore enable the regional, interoperable systems that are key to scaling reuse.
EPR is not intended to “fix” recycling and eliminate the need for reuse: instead, it should optimize recycling and open the door for reuse.
Economies of scale prevent producers from passing the costs of conforming to EPR down to consumers. There is no evidence from existing packaging EPR programs around the world that prices of goods have changed due to EPR.
-
image: Returnity
Reuse for Consumer Packaged Goods:
How do reuse systems work most effectively for CPG, and what are the best practices?
Effectively implementing scaled reusable packaging in the Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG) or retail sector involves setting up pooled, standardized packaging and interoperable infrastructure. How best to build the on-ramps and funding for such a system is a question the entire industry continues to explore as reuse grows. But we are learning from projects, pilots, and case studies and are garnering evidence of best practices.
-
For reuse systems in the CPG sector, tests and studies by reusable packaging company Loop showed that returnable reusable packaging prefilled by the supplier is the most viable option. Other systems include in-store bulk refill stations and concentrates that can be diluted (like window cleaners). Prefill systems encompass the widest variety of products, are most convenient for consumers, and work at scale.
Brands may like the standout appeal of custom packaging, but experience has shown that the path of least resistance — e.g. standardized, pooled packaging — allows for smoother operations.
Partnership is critical: reuse systems experts working alongside CPG companies. Experts can act as system administrators to instruct on packaging design, but retailers take the lead in selling the products and installing return bins.
Extended Producer Responsibility for packaging is an effective policy lever for funding and scaling interoperable reuse systems that can serve the CPG sector.
-
Ellen MacArthur Foundation: Unlocking a Reuse Revolution: Scaling Returnable Packaging
Interview with Christiana Dujardin, lead analyst for the report
The Bottom Line on Reuse: Why Smart Companies Will Make the Switch
image: Loop
Ware-washing reusables:
Dishwashing can be expensive and use lots of water. What are we to do?!
For small foodservice establishments and often, schools, dishwashing poses the biggest challenge in transitioning to reusables because it requires an investment in machinery and staff time. Large venues that were built on a single-use system also often do not have wash operations in their facilities. In the near term for large venues, and over time for smaller venues, reuse service providers and wash hubs can remedy these challenges. In terms of water usage, the reality is that over their life cycle, reusable foodware and packaging washed in commercial dishwashers uses far less water than disposable alternatives.
-
Reuse service providers (RSPs) can pick up, wash, and return dishware, often replacing expenditures on waste hauling, staff time, and dishwasher installation or maintenance.
While RSPs require large anchor contracts or up-front financing for the necessary infrastructure buildout, eventually even small restaurants can benefit from the centralized wash hub RSPs bring to an area. This would allow small establishments to overcome challenges like space restrictions and the need to shift operational systems in a high-pace environment.
While reuse infrastructure is still scaling, many in the movement agree that it would be sound policy to require dishwashers in any new dine-in restaurant. Ultimately, both the restaurants and the municipalities would save money from waste hauling and single-use procurement.
With high turnover of businesses, restaurants typically rent dishwashers, which can cost $125/month, including the machine, free servicing, and parts. This may be more economically feasible for small businesses. There are even space-saving machines for small spaces.
A more expensive machine up-front often produces a faster ROI. For high-volume venues, efficient commercial dishwashers that can handle more volume and require less staff time will save money more quickly.
Collaborating with concessionaires and vendors can help scale washing operations. For example, nutrition vendors for schools are starting to promote their sustainability initiatives, as are many other corporate entities. Making the case to them that switching to reuse can enhance their impact reports may catch their interest and motivate them to provide wash facilities — or contracts with RSPs — for schools and other organizations they serve.
-
Messaging:
Myths about reuse abound. What are the truths we need to push to overcome misperceptions — before they become barriers to adoption?
When it comes to transitioning to reuse, risk aversion among decision makers is common, and their hesitations often come from misperceptions and misunderstandings about what reuse is, how it works, and the most effective way to integrate it into markets. For example, it is a business opportunity and people do like it. Evidence-based, widespread communication will influence the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors that drive a cultural shift toward reuse. At the same time, it is incumbent on influential brands and entire sectors — like retail, food and beverage, and school systems — to lead the transition rather than wait for demand. Advocates should lead with the facts before assumptions about reuse create unnecessary barriers.
-
Reuse is a holistic economic system that replaces the single-use status quo. The onus is not on the consumer to take responsibility for their waste — it is on systems not to create waste in the first place.
Reuse systems emphasize returning packaging to the distributor for refilling and redistribution. Though it is a step in the right direction, packaging that a consumer can refill at a store is not the same as returnable reusable packaging that is part of a circular system.
Consumer resistance is commonly, but wrongly, cited as the barrier to adoption of widespread reuse. It is incumbent upon governments and the private sector to build systems that consumers will easily adopt.
The biggest barrier to widespread adoption of reuse is funding. Upstream and partners are working on mechanisms to mitigate the high upfront costs of reuse infrastructure, but no matter what, in the long run — reuse saves money and is an economic imperative.
It is critical to acknowledge how complex, expensive, and heavily subsidized single-use systems are. Businesses often do not realize how much they pay for single-use procurement and waste management, and tax payers do not think about how much funding goes into recycling and waste hauling.
-
Return rates and incentives:
What’s the best way to get a high return rate?
The only way for a reuse and return system to operate efficiently is a high container return rate. The rate required to achieve “efficiency” may vary slightly depending on container materials and cost, and whether you’re measuring against the environmental or financial break-even point. Regardless, the more containers returned, the fewer that need replacing — which saves money and resources since every container replaced has environmental and financial costs.
Different venues and sectors have trialed different techniques, and there is not — yet — one proven method that ensures the highest return rate. Quite likely, different systems will always work best for different scenarios and customer bases.
Options include requiring an up-front deposit that is refunded when the container is returned; imposing a fee if the container is not returned after a certain period; container tracking with no fee attached; subscription services; or simple, zero strings attached borrow-and-return. The more return rate data we can amass, the more informed decisions we can make for ensuring high returns.
-
Return rates are far more dependent on systems design and consumer behavior cues than on whether or not a deposit is required. Behavior science principles like choice architecture, material incentives, emotional appeals, and social influence are key to shifting norms and reframing reuse as modern, identity-aligned, and above all — convenient.
Leveraging tracking data within any reuse system allows an operator to create a “performance improvement plan.” Tracking data can show percentages of container loss and where that loss is happening within a system. Return infrastructure can then be strengthened in that “weak spot” in the reuse loop.
Starting to scale reuse infrastructure via closed-loop systems (like those found in sports and entertainment venues) will lead to higher return rates while the practice is normalized. Contained spaces where people funnel out via a limited number of exits allows for better control of collection.
In closed-loop venues, manual waste sorting can greatly increase the harvest rate of reusable containers and is often worth the staffing cost.
For open-loop systems, some companies have found that while an app is a handy piece of technology for tracking reusables, it causes too much friction for both consumers and restaurants. One solution that has been implemented is to add RFID tracking to the container instead.
Open-loop systems greatly benefit from incentivizing returns monetarily — whether as a deposit that is refunded upon return of the packaging, or a fee imposed if packaging is not returned. Education and widespread adoption of a consistent system is key in open-loop settings.
Incentives — like entering those who make a return into a raffle or sending a gift certificate after a certain number of returns — can help influence consumer behavior and provide an extra nudge in an open-loop system. Businesses participating in a municipal reuse system, like the one in Ottawa, can be encouraged to offer consumer incentives. These serve more as a “cherry on top” of imposing a fee or deposit rather than an independently functioning system — particularly because incentive programs tend to be time-limited.
Though it can offer a sponsorship or promotional opportunity, attractively designed reusable packaging can cause customers to keep a container as a “souvenir” rather than return it so it can be recirculated as part of an efficient system. At the same time, if it is made of low-quality materials, packaging can be mistaken as single-use and thrown away.
-
Making the Switch: How Venues Decide to Integrate Reuse Into Their Business Operations
Rent Your Cup: A Consumer-focused Behavioral Approach to Reducing Single-Use Plastics in Lao PDR
How McMenamins Achieved a 94% Cup Return Rate in Their First Month: Five Lessons for Reuse Success
Reusable Packaging Has a Behavior Problem: The Effort Tax on Reuse
Stay tuned for more! We will continue to add to this page.