Report to the National Packaging Covenant Council as part of the Evaluation of the National Packaging Covenant

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Centre for Design at RMIT University undertook to review action plans and annual reports from signatories to the National Packaging Covenant (NPC) as part of the performance review and benchmarking aspects of the evaluation of the NPC. The review was undertaken during October and November 2003. A total of 95 action plans and 39 annual reports were reviewed from a total of 54 signatories.

Positive outcomes

·Action plans demonstrate a significant amount of activity occurring within the packaging supply chain to reduce environmental impacts, from purchasing through to operations and product design.

·The Environmental Code of Practice for Packaging is now being incorporated into product development processes by many signatories, particularly by packaging companies and brand owner / fillers.

·Many brand owners / fillers are developing packaging material databases.

Areas for improvement

·Many plans include commitments that are expressed in general terms using vague or non-committal language, without providing detailed lists of actions.

·There is an almost universal lack of measurable (quantified) targets in action plans.

·Most action plans do not indicate how data will be collected to measure progress.

·Most action plans do not include resources allocated to implementation of specific activities.

·Many of the Annual Reports do not specifically report against the original actions and measures.

·Some reports include a list of achievements, but many do not, and some report on activities rather than outcomes (e.g., reports, feasibility studies, meetings etc).

Recommendations

Public disclosure

·All signatories should produce publicly available action plans and annual reports. Any confidential information should be included in an appendix for viewing by the Covenant Council only.

·Following approval by the Covenant Council, all action plans and annual reports should be published on the PCA web site, as soon as possible.

·Documents on the database should be clearly labeled, e.g., ‘Company X first year action plan 2001 – 2002’.

Submission of action plans and annual reports

·Additional resources should be allocated to allow for effective monitoring and follow-up, to ensure that action plans are submitted annually (or for longer periods of time but with annual updates in reports) and that annual reports are provided within 3 months of the end of each financial year.

·Signatories that do not meet these requirements despite follow-up by the Covenant Council should be considered for follow-up under the NEPM.

Corporate entity submitting plans and reports

·Clear guidelines should be provided on whether or not large corporations are required to submit one coordinated plan across all business units, rather than providing separate plans for each business unit.

Content of action plans

·There is a need for a standard checklist indicating what an action plan and annual report should contain, taking into account different expectations depending on the size of the company and their place in the supply chain (raw material supplier, packaging manufacturer, brand owner / filler, retailer, industry association).

All action plans should include detailed actions, targets or outcomes, timelines, responsibilities, funding allocations and an indication of how data will be collected to measure performance.