What Deloitte sustainability research means for packaging strategy
Why Deloitte sustainability research matters to packaging teams
Deloitte sustainability research is useful for packaging companies because it shows how corporate buyers are reframing environmental work as a business, risk and reporting issue, not only a marketing topic. For packaging suppliers, converters, brands and distributors, this means material choices, recyclability claims, supplier requirements and emissions data are becoming part of commercial decision-making.
The main takeaway is not that every company should move to the same material or format. Packaging strategy now needs evidence: material data, clear design choices, realistic end-of-life assumptions and documentation that customers can use in their own sustainability reporting.
This applies across the packaging value chain. A buyer evaluating cartons, films, molded pulp, labels or protective packaging is increasingly asking not only whether a format looks sustainable, but whether it can help reduce waste, improve recovery, manage regulatory exposure and support measurable targets. For more packaging-focused updates, see our SUSTAINABILITY coverage.
What Deloitte’s 2025 C-suite findings say
Deloitte Global’s 2025 C-suite Sustainability Report surveyed more than 2,100 executives across 27 countries. The useful signal for packaging businesses is that sustainability remains a C-suite concern, although executives appear to be prioritizing actions more selectively. According to the report, 45% of respondents identified climate change or sustainability as a top-three challenge for the coming year, placing it alongside technology adoption and artificial intelligence.
The same report said 83% of executives increased sustainability investments in the prior year. Most of that increase was moderate rather than dramatic: 69% reported an increase of 6% to 19%, while 14% reported an increase of 20% or more. For suppliers, that suggests sustainability budgets are not disappearing, but they are being judged through a more disciplined business lens.
For packaging companies, several findings stand out:
| Deloitte signal | Packaging implication | Evidence to prepare |
|---|---|---|
| 45% of executives said sustainability or climate was a top-three challenge | Packaging decisions are likely to remain visible in procurement, brand and operations discussions | Material specifications, recyclability rationale, emissions assumptions and waste-reduction logic |
| 45% reported using more sustainable materials | Material substitution remains important, but it must be technically and commercially credible | Material origin, recycled content, performance testing and compatibility with filling, shipping and shelf-life needs |
| 38% reported requiring suppliers or business partners to meet sustainability criteria | Packaging suppliers may face more questionnaires, scorecards and documentation requests | Supplier policies, chain-of-custody records, certificates where applicable and data collection processes |
| 38% reported reconfiguring operations, infrastructure or supply chains for climate resilience | Packaging resilience includes supply continuity, material availability and regional compliance | Alternative material options, supplier diversification and risk review by market |
| Difficulty measuring environmental impact was the most cited obstacle in the report | Claims without measurement will become less persuasive | Life cycle thinking, consistent metrics and clear boundaries for any comparison |
These numbers do not prove that every buyer will pay more for sustainable packaging. They do show that sustainability-related questions are increasingly connected to value creation, compliance, resilience and customer expectations. That is a more durable signal than a short-term material trend.
Packaging is where sustainability becomes visible
Packaging often becomes the public face of a company’s sustainability promise. Consumers see it, retailers handle it, waste systems receive it and regulators can define it. That visibility makes packaging both an opportunity and a risk.
Deloitte US has noted in its paper and packaging analysis that the sector is being shaped by digital transformation, sustainability expectations and changing consumer behavior. It also highlights reusable packaging, recyclable or biodegradable materials, reduced excess packaging and production processes with lower carbon impacts as areas companies are exploring.
None of these options is a simple switch. A pouch, tray, box or bottle still has to protect the product, move efficiently, meet safety requirements and fit available recovery systems. Strong packaging strategies therefore do not start with a slogan such as paper is better or plastic is worse. They start with function: what the pack must do, which impacts matter most, where waste occurs and how the package will actually be collected, sorted, reused or recycled in the markets where it is sold.
Global plastics data explains why the pressure is high. The OECD’s Global Plastics Outlook projected that, without stronger policy action, global plastic waste could rise from 353 million tonnes in 2019 to 1,014 million tonnes in 2060. The OECD also said short-lived items, including packaging, low-cost products and textiles, would account for almost two-thirds of plastic waste in 2060 under that scenario. UNEP’s 2023 report Turning off the Tap framed the solution around systems change: reducing problematic and unnecessary plastic use, redesigning products and packaging, scaling reuse and improving recycling economics.
For packaging decision-makers, the lesson is practical. Circular packaging is not achieved by changing one material label. It requires design for the intended recovery route, reliable infrastructure, buyer participation, consumer clarity and data that can withstand scrutiny.
Regulation is moving from disclosure to design
Sustainability reporting and packaging regulation are converging. Companies are being asked to disclose more environmental information while packaging laws are becoming more specific about design, recycled content, labelling, reuse and producer responsibility.
In financial and sustainability reporting, the IFRS Foundation issued IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 in June 2023, with the standards effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2024 where adopted or applied. The EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive first applied to certain companies for the 2024 financial year, with reports published in 2025. These reporting frameworks increase attention on value-chain information, which can include packaging-related emissions, materials and waste impacts.
In packaging-specific regulation, the European Union’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation entered into force in February 2025, with rules beginning to apply on a phased basis from August 12, 2026. The European Commission states that the regulation covers the packaging life cycle and addresses eco-design, recycled material content, waste prevention, reuse formats, collection and recycling. It also aims to make all packaging on the EU market recyclable in an economically viable way by 2030, with harmonised labelling rules from 2028 and circular economy measures including recycled plastic requirements from 2030.
For U.S.-oriented companies, the regulatory picture is more fragmented. Producer responsibility and packaging requirements are developing at the state level, with California’s SB 54 standing out as a major example. Because definitions, exemptions, reporting duties and timelines differ by jurisdiction, companies should avoid assuming that one compliance approach covers every market.
The practical implication is clear: packaging design can no longer be separated from regulatory monitoring. A format that works well in one market may face different labelling, recyclability, recycled-content or producer-responsibility requirements in another.
How to turn Deloitte sustainability insights into a packaging roadmap
The useful response to Deloitte’s findings is not a broad sustainability statement. It is a packaging roadmap that links business value, material decisions and measurable evidence. The following structure can help packaging teams move from aspiration to execution.
1. Build a material and format baseline
Start by listing current packaging formats, weights, materials, coatings, inks, closures, labels and secondary packaging. Include transport packaging, not only consumer-facing packs. This baseline helps teams identify high-volume formats, difficult-to-recycle combinations and avoidable material use. See also: BOX DESIGN.
2. Define what “better” means before choosing materials
A switch from plastic to paper, virgin to recycled content, rigid to flexible or single-use to reusable can create trade-offs. The relevant question is better against which metric: carbon, waste prevention, recyclability, water use, transport efficiency, product protection, food loss prevention or customer acceptance. Without a defined metric, teams risk choosing a material that improves one impact while worsening another.
3. Design for the real end-of-life system
Claims such as recyclable, compostable or reusable should match actual collection and processing conditions. A package that is technically recyclable but rarely collected may not deliver the intended benefit. Compostable packaging can be useful in specific systems, but it may create confusion where industrial composting is not available. Reuse can reduce waste, but it depends on return rates, cleaning systems, logistics and customer behavior.
4. Make supplier criteria specific
Deloitte’s survey shows supplier sustainability requirements are already part of the corporate toolkit, but broad supplier pledges are not enough. Criteria should specify data needs, material documentation, recycled-content verification, restricted substances, emissions factors where available and procedures for updating information. This is especially important for multi-material structures and imported packaging.
5. Connect packaging data to customer reporting
Corporate customers often need packaging data for Scope 3 emissions estimates, waste metrics, regulatory filings, internal scorecards or annual sustainability reports. Packaging suppliers can create value by presenting data in a consistent, reviewable format. Even when precise life cycle data is not available, clearly stated assumptions are better than unsupported claims.
6. Review claims before they reach the market
Environmental claims should be specific, qualified and evidence-based. Claims such as “recyclable where facilities exist,” “contains 30% post-consumer recycled content” and “designed to reduce material weight by 15% compared with the previous format” are more defensible than vague language such as “eco-friendly” or “green.” Legal review may be necessary for consumer-facing claims, especially in regulated markets.
Where companies can misread the trend
The first mistake is treating sustainability as a packaging aesthetics project. A natural color, a kraft texture or a green icon can communicate a message, but it does not prove lower impact. Packaging performance still needs evidence.
The second mistake is assuming that consumer interest automatically converts into willingness to pay. Deloitte and other market research often show that consumers express interest in sustainable products, but purchase behavior can change when price, convenience, product performance or availability are affected. Packaging teams should test trade-offs rather than rely only on stated preference.
The third mistake is using a single global claim across different recovery systems. Recyclability and compostability are local outcomes. Infrastructure, labelling rules and collection systems vary by market. A responsible packaging strategy should adapt claims to market reality.
The fourth mistake is underestimating data work. Deloitte’s 2025 report identified measurement difficulty as a leading obstacle. That aligns with the packaging experience: material data, supplier data, waste data and emissions data often sit in different systems. A credible sustainability program requires governance, not just design creativity.
What this means for packaging companies now
Deloitte sustainability research points to a more mature phase of corporate sustainability. Companies are still investing, but they want actions that are measurable, commercially relevant and resilient under regulatory and stakeholder scrutiny. Packaging is directly exposed to that shift because it touches materials, logistics, product protection, consumer perception and waste systems.
The most practical move for packaging companies is to build a clear evidence base. Know the materials. Understand the markets. Document claims. Prepare supplier data. Compare options honestly. Design packaging that works in the real world, not only in a presentation. That approach will be more useful than chasing every new material trend or relying on broad sustainability language.
Frequently asked questions
What does Deloitte sustainability research mean for packaging?
It means packaging decisions are increasingly connected to executive priorities such as business value, risk, compliance, resilience and measurable environmental impact. Packaging teams should expect more requests for material data, supplier documentation and evidence behind sustainability claims.
Does Deloitte recommend one sustainable packaging material?
No single Deloitte finding proves that one packaging material is always preferable. The better approach is to compare options by function, market, recovery route, emissions, waste impact and regulatory requirements. Material selection should be evidence-based rather than slogan-based.
Why is sustainability reporting relevant to packaging suppliers?
Corporate customers may need packaging data for sustainability reports, Scope 3 calculations, waste metrics and regulatory disclosures. Suppliers that can provide consistent and well-documented information may be easier for customers to evaluate and retain.
How should companies avoid greenwashing in packaging claims?
They should make claims specific, measurable and qualified. Instead of broad words such as “green” or “eco-friendly,” companies should state the exact attribute, such as recycled content percentage, material reduction, reuse system conditions or market-specific recyclability.
What is the most important first step for a packaging sustainability roadmap?
The first step is a packaging baseline. Companies need to know what materials, weights, formats and suppliers they currently use before they can set priorities, compare alternatives or support claims with credible data.
