Search

Packaging waste makes up more than 10% of the landfilled waste in the United States. While consumers often want to make environmentally friendly product choices, we find that their perceptions of the environmental friendliness of product packaging may systematically deviate from its objective environmental friendliness. Eight studies (N = 4,103) document the perceived environmental friendliness (PEF) bias whereby consumers judge plastic packaging with additional paper to be more environmentally friendly than identical plastic packaging without the paper. The PEF bias is driven by consumers' "paper = good, plastic = bad" beliefs and by proportional reasoning, wherein packaging with a greater paper-to-plastic proportion is judged as more environmentally friendly. We further show that the PEF bias impacts consumers' willingness to pay and product choice. Importantly, this bias can be mitigated by a "minimal packaging sticker" intervention, which increases the environmental friendliness perceptions of plastic-only packaging, rendering plastic-packaged products to be preferable to their plastic-plus-paper-packaged counterparts. This research contributes to the packaging literature in marketing and to research on sustainability while offering practical implications for managers and public policy officials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Polyethylene-, polyvinylidene chloride-, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance-coated paper generate microplastics or fluorochemicals in the environment. Here, we report an approach for the development of oil-resistant papers using an environmentally friendly, fluorine-free, water-dispersible poly(dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS) coating on kraft paper. Carboxylic-functionalized PDMS (PDMS-COOH) was synthesized and subsequently neutralized with ammonium bicarbonate to obtain a waterborne emulsion, which was then coated onto kraft paper. The water resistance of the coated paper was determined via Cobb60 measurements. The Cobb60 value was reduced to 2.70 ± 0.14 g/m2 as compared to 87.6 ± 5.1 g/m2 for uncoated paper, suggesting a remarkable improvement in water resistance. Similarly, oil resistance was found to be 12/12 on the kit test scale versus 0/12 for uncoated paper. In addition, the coated paper retained 70–90% of its inherent mechanical properties, and more importantly, the coated paper was recycled via pulp recovery using a standard protocol with a 91.1% yield. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research explores the challenges and limitations faced at the basic level for the recycling of paper in an academic institute. It focuses on encouraging recycled paper use rather than bringing traditional virgin paper to prevent the rate of deforestation for reducing global warming. Data was collected from the academic institute via questionnaire and on-site observation and found that the institute was producing approximately 16 tons of wastepaper in a year. Besides that, another purpose of this research is to estimate the energy and assess the environmental effect by using the life cycle assessment as a tool. The results of this study revealed that traditional virgin paper derived from wood proves to be costly and less environmentally friendly than recycled paper. It also revealed that Traditional virgin paper has greater global warming, human toxicity, smog, acidification, and eutrophication potential than recycled paper. This study concludes that recycled paper does not only prove economically beneficent for any institution, but also beneficial for environment as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]