I fully understand P&Gs reluctance to update their mainly multilingual packs with a set of UK specific logos when they legally don’t have to - maybe this is showing one of the flaws of the BRCs scheme.  They are the British Retail Consortium and this scheme (understandably) is focused solely on the British market.  With the economic climate as it is, many multinationals will be or should be looking at ways to cut costs and multilingual packs can certainly help this cause – but the BRCs logos don’t help with creating multilingual packs.  If it was simply a case of saying what the packaging material was and whether it was possible to recycle it then I believe it wouldn’t be too much of an issue.  I believe the problem arises when you have to state whether the material IS widely recycled by the local councils or not, that statement limits it’s area of use significantly and also discourages even UK residents from looking for ways to recycle the more odd ball material.  I also don’t believe it encourages the local councils to increase the range of materials they recycle – after all if the BRC states that a material isn’t widely recycled why should they bother? (Jane)

Procter & Gamble has ruled out signing up to the British Retail Consortiums on-pack recycling logo after the BRC revealed it was currently being introduced to about 50,000 product lines.

via P&G rules out BRC recycling logo after 50 brands sign up | packagingnews.co.uk.

Tags: environment, packaging, Recycling, Retailers, waste

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 17th, 2009 at 1:34 pm and is filed under Design, Environmental Issues, Recycling. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.