In today’s complex and highly scrutinised packaging landscape, we are in desperate need of an honest and informed debate about what we tell consumers – and what we don’t – on food and drink packaging.
The rise of health-conscious shoppers, new waves of regulatory pressure, and a deeper public interest in health and sustainability has put a new spotlight on the industry. Health information is now on par with expiry dates for shoppers.
As this scrutiny grows, the choice of packaging itself becomes part of the transparency conversation. Glass, for example, is a non-reactive material that doesn’t leach chemicals, giving consumers added confidence in both product purity and safety.
Calls for change are already echoing across the sector. From Oatly campaigning for mandatory carbon labelling, to British farmers pushing for clearer UK origin markings, and scientists at the WHO demanding greater clarity on the health impacts of food, this is the start of a much wider conversation our industry needs to have.
Our recent research found consumers care deeply about this issue, and want to know much more about the product they pick up, and just how healthy it really is. Almost nine in 10 (88%) of the British public now back the introduction of “chemical” labels on food and drink packaging – clear indicators of whether packaging may contain potentially harmful substances. This is a powerful signal.
This speaks volumes about a disconnect between what consumers want to know, and what the packaging actually tells them. So how much is too much? And are we striking the right balance?
What’s in the box?
Let’s be clear: not all packaging is inert and offers the benefits of materials such as glass or cloth. Many materials can contain or leach chemicals into foods such as phthalates, bisphenols, or other microplastics that have raised concerns around potential long-term health effects. While regulatory thresholds exist, they often lag behind emerging science and, crucially, public perception.
Consumers increasingly want to know not just what’s in their food, but what’s around it.
Transparency doesn’t mean fearmongering. It means giving people the information they need to make their own informed decisions. Whether that’s carbon data, country of origin, chemical disclosures, or recyclability ratings, consumers are telling us they care, and we must listen.
Are we ready for radical transparency?
Of course, there’s a balance to strike. Labelling real estate is limited. Too much data risks overwhelming shoppers and detracting from the essentials. But that’s not a reason to avoid the discussion altogether. It’s a reason to come together as an industry and define how this debate should be addressed.
Whether it’s chemicals lurking in our favourite drinks, or the environmental impacts of a product, these are complex issues, and there are no easy answers. But ignoring them only invites consumer mistrust and mandated regulations that may not suit the industry, or the customer. As an industry, we have an opportunity – and a responsibility – to lead this debate before it’s dictated to us.
Let’s not shy away from this
Our industry is rightfully proud of its innovation, safety standards, and environmental ambition. But if we’re serious about empowering consumers and creating genuinely healthy and sustainable products, packaging can no longer be treated as a silent partner in the supply chain.
Glass, in particular, offers a clear advantage here – it’s endlessly recyclable, free from harmful additives, and supports a more honest, circular approach to both labelling and packaging.
It’s time for an open conversation about what we put on our labels – and why. It’s not just what’s in the box that matters any more. It’s the box itself.
Sean Murphy, MD, Encirc
1 Readers' comment