There is a belief among some that companies are responsible for cutting down on the amount of packaging on items and goods they produce and market, while others lay this responsibility on consumers who should opt out of purchasing products with a great deal of packaging. Although these two concepts are sensible when approached separately, I believe that to minimize packaging drastically, both parties should be involved.
Proponents of obliging enterprises to diminish packaging may have valid reasons to support their claims. Firstly, manufacturers can optimize their packaging through opting for sustainable materials and compact designs, both of which could significantly slash the volumes of packaging per each product. To maximize the efficacy of this policy, retail stores can collaborate producers and promote consumer goods with minimum packaging, simultaneously raising consumer awareness. In the long run, these two measures are bound to reap tangible results if implemented properly and overseen wisely, as it is done with some of jam producers in the USA.
However reasonable these arguments may seem, compelling consumers to hold themselves accountable for using their influential power also bears great weight. As consumer make up the targeted audience of supermarkets and producers, they can shift their interests towards items and goods that involve less packaging, a change that could potentially lead manufacturers and stores to adopt the new trend and reduce the quantity of mass packaged products. Also, the power of this shift can be leveraged if celebrities – like Christiano Ronaldo, Johny Depp, or Denzel Washington – are to promote the initiative via endorsements and educational campaigns, reaching a wide range of audiences, and causing consumers to make more informed decisions.
To sum up, despite the fact that I acknowledge encouraging both supermarkets, producers and consumers is productive and rational when realized apart, I hold the stance that, if combined, the two groups would yield more sensible outcomes.