font size="3" face="Arial">Those that skipped from the top paragraph to this one have missed all the fun! We are talking about reusing packaging or even doing away with it. So how can this be done with smaller items? There is no doubt that it would not be possible to reuse smaller varieties of packaging such as candy wrappers where there is only a small amount of flimsy packaging.

But why, if the packaging is so small or flimsy, do we need packaging at all? I'll play devil's advocate here: we need packaging on these items to i) reduce damage and ii) help the customer and retailer identify the brand, iii) improve the presentation of the product. I'll agree (with myself) that packaging helps contain a product, and thus - even flimsy packaging - can prevent damage. I am not convinced about the other two arguments. Products can be marketed in a variety of ways. The images on the wrapper are only one of many outlets for the marketing message; and presentation - what better presentation than to seeThe candy box is a container for all your favourite chew bars, gum and all your other favourite candy. A must-have for all kids and a great fashion accessory! The marketers are desperate for kids to user their box - so much so that they will soon be giving them away!

There will be more about this new development later in this article, but before we get there, please consider HOW we get there:

Pressure to Recycle

The pressure for us to recycle and reuse goods has been steadily building these past few years and shows no sign of abating. Producers can no longer simply place goods on the market and then forget about them.

In many parts of the world, legislation is being introduced that will obligate producers and users to reduce packaging waste.

If companies are to comply with these rules and remain efficient and competitive, they must seriously and actively consider Reverse Logistics. In other words, as well as sending materials to customers they will need to take some of them back, even some waste materials.

What a Waste...

Whether you agree with this approach or not, this is the way that the world is heading. So, if you can't fight it, why not embrace it? Get the most from these changes.

Take Reusable Transit Packaging. "What is that?" I hear you ask. Well, take baked beans as an example. The beans are carried in Primary Packaging - the tin can. The tin cans arrive at a store in a box - this is secondary packaging, but can also be termed Transit Packaging as it is the main unit handled by the warehouses and trucks. At least that is how things used to be. Nowadays there is a tertiary level and that is the pallet on which the boxes are carried - this is also transit packaging. Just go back to the box that the tins are carried in. Is it logical that the producers continuously purchase corrugated boxes and shops throw them away?

This is not just a waste of the earth's finite resources - it is also a waste of money for everyone apart from the box producer.
RTP is typically a container that is filled with products and once emptied at a store, is sent back again to be re-filled.

Now, packaging may not be the most exciting thing to ponder over, but just imagine what kinds of packaging could be reused. In fact, think of any packaging item, box, bag, bottle etc. Is there any that cannot be reused?

The box your PC came in? Yes! If you took the box and any filling back to the store, they could send it back, using Reverse Distribution, so that it gets back to the point where new PCs are packed into it.

Plastic Detergent bottles? Yes! They can be refilled. There may need to be some changes in the materials used, but in principle, this can be done.

Containers for Drugs? In many countries, the medical services offer to take back unwanted drugs. It is surely conceivable that the packaging could be returned for reuse.

Bottles? Well a few years ago, it was common for us to re-use milk bottles - in fact we still do in many places. In fact, many bottles, used for all sorts of products, used to be returned regularly. It was done, is still done in some places, and can be done in the future.

Jars and pots? Take them back to the shop - reverse distribution again. Yes, many will need to be sterilised and we may need to revert to glass instead of plastic in some instances - but it can be done.

What about that Candy?

Those that skipped from the top paragraph to this one have missed all the fun! We are talking about reusing packaging or even doing away with it. So how can this be done with smaller items? There is no doubt that it would not be possible to reuse smaller varieties of packaging such as candy wrappers where there is only a small amount of flimsy packaging.

But why, if the packaging is so small or flimsy, do we need packaging at all? I'll play devil's advocate here: we need packaging on these items to i) reduce damage and ii) help the customer and retailer identify the brand, iii) improve the presentation of the product. I'll agree (with myself) that packaging helps contain a product, and thus - even flimsy packaging - can prevent damage. I am not convinced about the other two arguments. Products can be marketed in a variety of ways. The images on the wrapper are only one of many outlets for the marketing message; and presentation - what better presentation than to see

sers to reduce packaging waste.

If companies are to comply with these rules and remain efficient and competitive, they must seriously and actively consider Reverse Logistics. In other words, as well as sending materials to customers they will need to take some of them back, even some waste materials.

What a Waste...

Whether you agree with this approach or not, this is the way that the world is heading. So, if you can't fight it, why not embrace it? Get the most from these changes.

Take Reusable Transit Packaging. "What is that?" I hear you ask. Well, take baked beans as an example. The beans are carried in Primary Packaging - the tin can. The tin cans arrive at a store in a box - this is secondary packaging, but can also be termed Transit Packaging as it is the main unit handled by the warehouses and trucks. At least that is how things used to be. Nowadays there is a tertiary level and that is the pallet on which the boxes are carried - this is also transit packaging. Just go back to the box that the tins are carried in. Is it logical that the producers continuously purchase corrugated boxes and shops throw them away?

This is not just a waste of the earth's finite resources - it is also a waste of money for everyone apart from the box producer.
RTP is typically a container that is filled with products and once emptied at a store, is sent back again to be re-filled.

Now, packaging may not be the most exciting thing to ponder over, but just imagine what kinds of packaging could be reused. In fact, think of any packaging item, box, bag, bottle etc. Is there any that cannot be reused?

The box your PC came in? Yes! If you took the box and any filling back to the store, they could send it back, using Reverse Distribution, so that it gets back to the point where new PCs are packed into it.

Plastic Detergent bottles? Yes! They can be refilled. There may need to be some changes in the materials used, but in principle, this can be done.

Containers for Drugs? In many countries, the medical services offer to take back unwanted drugs. It is surely conceivable that the packaging could be returned for reuse.

Bottles? Well a few years ago, it was common for us to re-use milk bottles - in fact we still do in many places. In fact, many bottles, used for all sorts of products, used to be returned regularly. It was done, is still done in some places, and can be done in the future.

Jars and pots? Take them back to the shop - reverse distribution again. Yes, many will need to be sterilised and we may need to revert to glass instead of plastic in some instances - but it can be done.

What about that Candy?

Those that skipped from the top paragraph to this one have missed all the fun! We are talking about reusing packaging or even doing away with it. So how can this be done with smaller items? There is no doubt that it would not be possible to reuse smaller varieties of packaging such as candy wrappers where there is only a small amount of flimsy packaging.

But why, if the packaging is so small or flimsy, do we need packaging at all? I'll play devil's advocate here: we need packaging on these items to i) reduce damage and ii) help the customer and retailer identify the brand, iii) improve the presentation of the product. I'll agree (with myself) that packaging helps contain a product, and thus - even flimsy packaging - can prevent damage. I am not convinced about the other two arguments. Products can be marketed in a variety of ways. The images on the wrapper are only one of many outlets for the marketing message; and presentation - what better presentation than to see

ehouses and trucks. At least that is how things used to be. Nowadays there is a tertiary level and that is the pallet on which the boxes are carried - this is also transit packaging. Just go back to the box that the tins are carried in. Is it logical that the producers continuously purchase corrugated boxes and shops throw them away?

This is not just a waste of the earth's finite resources - it is also a waste of money for everyone apart from the box producer.
RTP is typically a container that is filled with products and once emptied at a store, is sent back again to be re-filled.

Now, packaging may not be the most exciting thing to ponder over, but just imagine what kinds of packaging could be reused. In fact, think of any packaging item, box, bag, bottle etc. Is there any that cannot be reused?

The box your PC came in? Yes! If you took the box and any filling back to the store, they could send it back, using Reverse Distribution, so that it gets back to the point where new PCs are packed into it.

Plastic Detergent bottles? Yes! They can be refilled. There may need to be some changes in the materials used, but in principle, this can be done.

Containers for Drugs? In many countries, the medical services offer to take back unwanted drugs. It is surely conceivable that the packaging could be returned for reuse.

Bottles? Well a few years ago, it was common for us to re-use milk bottles - in fact we still do in many places. In fact, many bottles, used for all sorts of products, used to be returned regularly. It was done, is still done in some places, and can be done in the future.

Jars and pots? Take them back to the shop - reverse distribution again. Yes, many will need to be sterilised and we may need to revert to glass instead of plastic in some instances - but it can be done.

What about that Candy?

Those that skipped from the top paragraph to this one have missed all the fun! We are talking about reusing packaging or even doing away with it. So how can this be done with smaller items? There is no doubt that it would not be possible to reuse smaller varieties of packaging such as candy wrappers where there is only a small amount of flimsy packaging.

But why, if the packaging is so small or flimsy, do we need packaging at all? I'll play devil's advocate here: we need packaging on these items to i) reduce damage and ii) help the customer and retailer identify the brand, iii) improve the presentation of the product. I'll agree (with myself) that packaging helps contain a product, and thus - even flimsy packaging - can prevent damage. I am not convinced about the other two arguments. Products can be marketed in a variety of ways. The images on the wrapper are only one of many outlets for the marketing message; and presentation - what better presentation than to see

, so that it gets back to the point where new PCs are packed into it.

Plastic Detergent bottles? Yes! They can be refilled. There may need to be some changes in the materials used, but in principle, this can be done.

Containers for Drugs? In many countries, the medical services offer to take back unwanted drugs. It is surely conceivable that the packaging could be returned for reuse.

Bottles? Well a few years ago, it was common for us to re-use milk bottles - in fact we still do in many places. In fact, many bottles, used for all sorts of products, used to be returned regularly. It was done, is still done in some places, and can be done in the future.

Jars and pots? Take them back to the shop - reverse distribution again. Yes, many will need to be sterilised and we may need to revert to glass instead of plastic in some instances - but it can be done.

What about that Candy?

Those that skipped from the top paragraph to this one have missed all the fun! We are talking about reusing packaging or even doing away with it. So how can this be done with smaller items? There is no doubt that it would not be possible to reuse smaller varieties of packaging such as candy wrappers where there is only a small amount of flimsy packaging.

But why, if the packaging is so small or flimsy, do we need packaging at all? I'll play devil's advocate here: we need packaging on these items to i) reduce damage and ii) help the customer and retailer identify the brand, iii) improve the presentation of the product. I'll agree (with myself) that packaging helps contain a product, and thus - even flimsy packaging - can prevent damage. I am not convinced about the other two arguments. Products can be marketed in a variety of ways. The images on the wrapper are only one of many outlets for the marketing message; and presentation - what better presentation than to see

font size="3" face="Arial">Those that skipped from the top paragraph to this one have missed all the fun! We are talking about reusing packaging or even doing away with it. So how can this be done with smaller items? There is no doubt that it would not be possible to reuse smaller varieties of packaging such as candy wrappers where there is only a small amount of flimsy packaging.

But why, if the packaging is so small or flimsy, do we need packaging at all? I'll play devil's advocate here: we need packaging on these items to i) reduce damage and ii) help the customer and retailer identify the brand, iii) improve the presentation of the product. I'll agree (with myself) that packaging helps contain a product, and thus - even flimsy packaging - can prevent damage. I am not convinced about the other two arguments. Products can be marketed in a variety of ways. The images on the wrapper are only one of many outlets for the marketing message; and presentation - what better presentation than to see the product itself, rather than an image of the wrapper?

So how would the customer get these naked products from the store to their home? Well, why not have a little box for these items? Rather than take the empty used pack to the store for the producers to re-use why not let the customer reuse their own box? This could be their own personalised container? Why not a pasta box, a cheese box and ..... a candy box of course.

OK, so the candy box does not exist. However, if it did, just think of the benefits:

i) Zero packaging means lower costs for the producer. They would pack these items loose into reusable transit packaging to the store

ii) The store could sell or even give away their own candy boxes branded with their logo, or a candy producer could do the same

iii) The candy boxes could be used as a de facto redemption voucher as an encouragement for the customer to return to the same store

iv) Of course, the first company to do this will have a wonderful PR coup.

v) Less trash to be collected, less street litter and a better environment

The best people to help get this idea off of the ground will be kids who simply love new ideas and novelties and are not daunted by change - so, bring on the candy box and next time you throw a candy wrapper away, just think of the alternative.