SCMAP Perspective is our fortnightly column on PortCalls, tackling the latest developments in the supply chain industry, as well as updates from within SCMAP. On this column, Henrik Batallones looks at other aspects of sustainability throughout the product cycle that we may be overlooking.
A matter of design
Since being immersed in recent months in the world of plastic recycling, I noticed I’ve made a new habit: checking plastic containers to see what kind of plastic they are. Most of them should have it. You’ll see, at the bottom, a triangle logo – the familiar recycle icon – with either numbers, corresponding to a type of plastic, or letters that might be more familiar to us. For example, PET bottles would have either the number 1 or PET written inside the triangle. This is to guide recyclers in sorting the same plastics together – you can’t, say, mix PET and HDPE plastics together.
One day, I discovered that Starbucks uses PET for their drinks. Yes, your frappuccino comes in PET plastic ware, unless you opted for what they call “for here ware” or bought your own tumbler – but you wouldn’t be able to really drink blended drinks off that, yeah? Anyway, I digress. At least it’s a recyclable plastic, but I remembered something I learned during our visit to the PETValue plastic recycling facility in General Trias as part of our conference last year: it’s difficult to recycle colored plastics, since it’s difficult to remove whatever is printed on the plastic itself. (It’s why Coca-Cola products shifted to clear bottles for all of their products.)
The cup I’m holding? PET, with the Starbucks logo printed on it, as well as the other familiar markings. Yup, this would be difficult to recycle.
Now, I suppose it would be easy for Starbucks to make it so that their plastic cups are easy to recycle. You can, say, have your logo embossed instead of printed on. But I imagine it would be a more expensive process – you’ll need to create molds with the logo, and you’ll need to dedicate production time to these cups rather than just printing a logo on generic ones. I also imagine it would be a challenge from a marketing perspective, because it wouldn’t be easy to see the Starbucks brand in a cup that does not show the logo clearly. This seems important considering there’s a lot of competition in the coffee space these days. (Also, customers are still keen to show off the fact that they’re drinking Starbucks.)
But then, when I recently went to Hong Kong, I ordered my usual frappuccino – grande, dark mocha, no whip – and they gave it to me on a paper cup instead. Not see-through, so no one can see what I’m drinking, but the Starbucks logo is printed large, so that solves the potential marketing concern. But it doesn’t make it as easy to recycle. Cups like these aren’t usually made purely of paper: there’s usually a plastic lining to give it strength, especially when holding liquids. (You would notice this if you bought a hot drink.) Recycling this means separating the paper and plastic layers, and that could be a long and expensive process.
My point in the last five paragraphs is to outline a key challenge as stakeholders get serious in their sustainability goals: how do we balance our responsibilities to the planet with our customers’ expectations, as well as that of different teams within our organization? How do we make sure our products and services continue to meet the needs of those availing it, while recognizing your long-term impact to the community and planet you are in? What seems to be a straightforward solution – you’re just changing the cups, not the coffee – entails a lot of coordination and collaboration within the organization, not just in the initial implementation of the strategy, but all throughout the product’s lifespan, building on what works and correcting what doesn’t.
But then, there are two challenges. On one hand, anyone who works in planning would tell you that change does not happen in an instant, especially if you’re coming from a large organization; you’ll need to plan it out, find suitable suppliers (both primary and secondary) and ensure it does not cost more to maintain the new product than just sticking with the status quo. On the other hand, the eyes of the world are on companies and how they respond to pressing challenges to our environment, especially with the impact of global warming being felt more keenly than before. The negative publicity of looking like you’re not doing anything – that you don’t care – could hurt.
We all know sustainability is no longer just a buzzword, but an essential – much like “supply chain” really – and we all should work together to provide urgent and long-term solutions. If anything, we should all be aware of the different needs of each player across our value chain – different departments, different suppliers, different partners – and consider them as we look for the sweet spot, so to speak. In this matter, now is not the time for turf wars. We should all come together, genuinely and earnestly, not just to solve these challenges, but to together build the ecosystem that will ensure our sustainability efforts are indeed sustainable in the long run.
As for me, as a consumer, I suppose we can begin by being more mindful of what we consume, to do our part to reduce waste. Maybe I should learn to drink my usual frappuccino from a tumbler…