REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
3.8. Package Design
Chapter 3 – Packaging in the supply chain: Review of the literature
102 product itself, ii) protection of the product from moisture, gas and external odours and flavours and iii) protection from micro-organisms.
103 this trend, substituting materials to satisfy and cover the needs of their customers16. Additionally, as cited by Young (2009) this trend has further advantages since for example the use of flexible, resealable containers apart from their lower weight appear to have –according to LCI17- lower energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions compared to various packaging types.
However, it should be noted that sometimes the industry loses the balance between marketing, convenience and environmental protection. As cited in the South China Morning Post (2009) in an effort to attract potential customers, many publishing houses use excessive packaging for their samples in so far as sometimes the packaging weighs as much as the books that are contained. On the other hand Qing and Guirong (2012) describe that green packaging contributes to environmental protection by favouring the use of lighter, recyclable and in many cases biodegradable materials and preventing the use of non-ecological packaging.
Furthermore, according to Richardson (2010) “…lightweighting or reducing the weight of the pack, is a key strategy in sustainable packaging”. Additionally, recent technological findings enable the production of plastics packaging with unique characteristics such as the need for less refrigeration and the ability to extend the shelf life of the contents (Wood, 2012).
At this point it is useful to determine the concept of a sustainable product. An analytical description is given by Lunati (2013):
• It is safe and healthy for the communities throughout its life cycle.
• It provides a rational combination between performance and cost.
• It is manufactured using “green” production technologies.
• Is composed by healthy materials throughout the life cycle.
• It is designed to optimize materials and energy.
• It is effectively recovered and processed in efficient and effective reverse channels.
16 According to a survey conducted in the United States (Young, 2008) most consumers believe that a manufacturer has more environmental responsibilities than the consumer. Moreover 85% of the respondents support that the industry should beresponsible for the production of more
environmental friendly packaging without pushing the cost generated by such an act to the final consumer.
17 LCI: US Life Cycle Inventory. Data collection portion of LCA (Life Cycle Assessment).
Chapter 3 – Packaging in the supply chain: Review of the literature
104 Here, it is relevant to mention other factors such as the informative role of packaging (contents, language, handling instructions etc.) that should be taken into consideration or the increasing use of automations in warehousing systems (Figures 3.10 and 3.11). Such systems entail the optimisation of package design for the facilitation of handling operations or best use of place into warehouse facilities.
In addition, factors of great importance are the:
1. type, 2. size, and 3. length,
of the channel of distribution used by the company. In general, the possibilities of damage for global shipments are higher than domestic shipments. For this reason, global shipments require more or better packaging compared to the domestic ones (and in some cases the packaging should be redesigned from scratch), due to:
Figure 3.11. Common Packaging Marks and Labels
Source: INAMAR/ACE USA, viewed 11 May 2011,
<www.inamarmarine.com/pdf/LossControl/Marks%20and%20Symbols.pdf>
105
• the number of times products are handled,
• climate factors,
• possibilities of pilferage,
• local legislations, and
• customer’s requirements.
As described by Bowersox and Closs (1996): “the physical environment of a product is the logistical system”. For this reason, package damage mainly results from the movement, handling and storage operations. If a
company owns the
transportation operations then it controls the overall logistical environment. On the other hand, the use of external carriers increases the possibility of damage since the logistical environment is totally uncontrolled. In that case, the company may be compelled to redesign at least one part of its packaging, using for example strapping, tie-downs, edge-boards etc. (See Figure 3.12)
In general, handling and movement operations throughout the supply chain (global or local) increase the possibility of damage such as:
• Mechanical sock, impact vibration, compression or abrasion,
• Environmental factors, humidity, pressure and temperature changes, light and other forms of radiation, contamination and exposure to air,
• Potential causes of damage including infestation or bacteria,
• Pilferage. (Rushton et. al. 2000)
However, from a marketing perspective, a matter of great importance that underlines the significance of the packaging design is the desired image of the product. Milton (1991) states that packaging can add value to the brand and strengthen the relationships between the customer and the retailer or manufacturer and adds that: “the visual signals and codes that attract the consumer and affect an actual purchase must continue working in the home”. Moreover, it should be noted that the image of the product’s packaging is important and should stay attractive Figure 3.12. Edge-boards with strapping
Source: Hellagro, viewed 12 May 2011,
<http://www.hellagro.gr/Product/43/Page/164/el/>
Chapter 3 – Packaging in the supply chain: Review of the literature
106 during its usage as well. Rundh, (2009) supports that in many cases packages are so attractive that consumers keep using them as containers for other purposes long after their opening. On the other hand as Styring (2013) notes it is not unusual for many packages (due to hard usage) to become scratched and soiled over time, with spoiled labels and even faded brands.
It should be recognised that despite its vital role in the supply chain, the industry always tries to restrain packaging cost in order to keep the commercial profit intact. So the designer is pushed to keep a really fragile balance between packaging cost and efficiency, in an effort to get the most benefit with the lowest cost so that at last, packaging represents a small proportion of the overall unit cost of the product of which it is part (Mason, 2001).