European and Global Markets for Flexible Packaging Stefan Glimm FPE Executive Director Annual Conference 2009, Florida
Content FPE Flexible Packaging Markets Food Contact regulation Sustainability
EAFA / FPE in figures Revenue: $15 billion Members: 120 companies Employees: 45,000 Extract of membership: Countries with EAFA/FPE members
Key activities Benchmarks / Statistics Management ratio Cylinder and Printing Plate costs recovery Safety Raw material costs index Lobbying Environmental Food contact Sustainability Material neutral
FPE / FEDES Newsletter
Content FPE Flexible Packaging Markets (with kind support of Paul Gaster, PCI Films Consulting) Food Contact regulation Sustainability
World Flexible Packaging Market 2007* Middle East & Africa 3% Europe 32% Asia Pacific 28% Central & South America 5% North Am erica 32% World Flexible Packaging Market = $52.2 billion Source: PCI / Industry estimates *Converted and unconverted materials
World Flexible Packaging Market 2007* COUNTRY / REGION Flexible Packaging Consumption $bn. % Share Growth Rate % change Europe 16.6 32% 2% N America 16.5 32% 4% C & S America 2.9 5% 4 5% Asia Pacific 14.7 28% 8% Africa / Middle East 1.5 TOTAL 52.2 3% 100% 5% 5% *Converted and unconverted
European Flexible Packaging Market 2007* COUNTRY / REGION Flexible Packaging Consumption m Western Europe 9,945 Flexible Packaging Consumption US$m $14,620 % Share 88% C & E Europe 1,355 $1,990 12% TOTAL 11,300 $16,610 100.0% *Includes both converted and unconverted materials Converted at $1.47 = 1
European Flexible Packaging Market Trends 2007 European demand for converted materials grew by just over 2% in value terms in 2007. Sales increased by 1.5% in a mature West European market, mostly due to increased prices. In Central and Eastern Europe sales increased by 8% on average, most of which represented real volume growth in still fast developing markets. Total European usage in area terms estimated at around 36 billion m². Of the major markets, highest growth in value terms was seen in Russia (+9%), Ukraine (+9%) and Turkey (+8%). Most disappointing performance was in the UK, where the market continued to decline as a result of converting plant closures and customers switching production to lower cost locations, especially Eastern Europe and Turkey.
Content FPE Flexible Packaging Markets Food Contact regulation Sustainability
Food Contact regulation REACH FACET GMP IFS
Good Manufacturing Practice Commission Regulation (EC) No 2023/2006 on good manufacturing practice (GMP) for food contact materials applies as of 1 August 2008 Publication of revised FPE GMP document in December 2007 to adapt it to latest legislative changes Council of Europe makes reference to FPE GMP document in CoE Policy Statement on packaging inks Attempt to get scientific blessing from EU Commission s Joint Research Centre Plans in Germany to create European standard on GMP for food packaging producers FPE s GMP document is benchmark
International Food Standard (IFS) 5 th Version New customer requirements according to IFS Owners of IFS standard are German and French retail associations / Standard targeted to customers of flexible packaging industry (e.g. food producers) Flexible packaging producers confronted with exaggerated requirements of customers, i.e. food producers based on the IFS document version 5 Obligatory since 1st Jan 2008 Aim to include FPE position paper in next version
Content FPE Flexible Packaging Markets Food Contact regulation Sustainability
Sustainability - Activities Key messages - positioning flexible packaging within sustainable development Life cycle analyses & permanent improvementperformance and relevance of flexible packaging within the value chain Food wastage and spoilage - quantities and opportunities Dissemination and capacity building spread messages internally and externally
Key Messages Under Development Waste prevention = 1 st priority of EU waste legislation Packaging = prevention of food waste Flexible packaging = resource efficient prevention of food waste Flexible packaging saves much more resources than it consumes (lightweighting, )
Sustainable Consumption Objective of sustainable food consumption is an increase in yield: consumed food product produced food product
Opportunities Even more packaging may be justified in view of saving food resources along the food supply chain Portioned packs Reclosable Easy to empty
Permanent Improvement Improvement of production processes, materials and of packaging systems is a permanent challenge and contributes to sustainable developement Resource efficiency and sustainability as integral part of production and R&D (reducing internal scraps, closing loops for auxiliaries, )
Product to Packaging Ratio FPE focus on key indicator (also used by FPA) Different approach: life cycle framework, weight, energy and product comparisons (FPA) versus full life cycle including filling (FPE)
Flexible packaging Unique Feature saves much more resources than it consumes (for its own production) means resource efficient prevention of food waste = most resource efficient ratio of product to package for preservation of valuable fillings and of all resources related to their provision
Fillers/retailers in US and Europe go for holistic approach PepsiCo is a world leader in convenient snacks, foods and beverages Global manufacturer of home care & cosmetics Leading frozen food manufacturer in Europe Association of food and beverage producers in Europe Leading drugstore in Germany Leading retailer group in Germany/Europe Leading coffee manufacturer in Europe
Chocolate in Alufoil/Paper Wrap 1kg chocolate in 100 milk chocolate bars Cacao cultivation overseas Chocolate produced and consumed in Europe No storage in refrigerator (at home) Avarage shopping scenario DRAFT
Chocolate - Standard Case 100% 80% 60% 40% DRAFT 20% 0% CED nonrenewable [MJ-eq] Global Warming [kg CO2-eq] Ozone Layer Depletion [kg CFC-11-eq] Acidification [kg SO2-eq] Eutrophication [kg PO4-eq] Chocolate Distribution and Selling Retail Packaging Shopping Based on: LCA of Swiss Chocolate packed in Aluminium Based Packaging, ESU-Services Ltd
Relevance of Chocolate Type Global Warming [kg CO2-eq] 4 3,5 3 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0 DRAFT Milk Chocolate Dark Chocolate White Chocolate Chocolate with Sultanas Chocolate Distribution and Selling Retail Packaging Shopping Based on: LCA of Swiss Chocolate packed in Aluminium Based Packaging, ESU-Services Ltd
Conclusions Chocolate Most relevant factors for the environment are the type of chocolate and the agricultural production of raw materials The impact of the choice of the chocolate type is much larger than the relevance of all other life stages including packaging. Investment in flexible packaging saves resources Flexible packaging is net saver of resources
Food Waste Project Key question: who is wasting which amounts of food why when and where? Based on literature studies and interviews Budget: Foil Roller, Commissioned: FPE, Results: shared Partners: Dr. Christina Skjöldebrand Prof. Ingo Büren Per-Stefan Gersbro International Packaging Institute
Food Waste Europe Weight Food produced Food waste Household food waste Cost We pay but don t eat Avoidable food waste 622 million tonnes 245 million tonnes 71 million tonnes EUR 90 billion EUR 500/household Environmental impact¹ At least 157 mt CO2 equivalents Plus methane emissions from landfill CO2 emission = 1 in 5 cars on the roads ¹Assuming 50% could have been eaten, avoidable food waste equates to effects above Source : Awarenet handbook 2007, confirmed by WTO numbers
Estimated Avoidable Waste Top 10 food items by weight 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 tons p.a. % of avoidable waste 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% thousand tons p.a. 2.0% 0.0% Potatoes Bread slices Apples Meat meals World breads Vegetable mixed meals Paste mixed meals Bread rolls / Baugettes Rice mixed meals Mixed meals Source: numbers estimated upon WRAP/EUROSTAT data
Where Are We Wasting? Supermarkets Restaurants Households 6.5 Million tonnes per year 13 Million tonnes per year 71 Million tonnes per year Households throw out more than supermarkets, restaurants and the food processing industry combined Source: Food Waste Reduction and Recycling Market Study (2002)
Why is Food that Could Have Been Eaten Thrown Away? 100% 80% 29 5 16 38 46 60% 40% 20% 62 85 77 77 50 46 Excess cooked food Not used in time 0% Total Fresh fruit Bread Rice Meat & fish Sauces 16 Source: WasteWorks 2006
Why Are We Wasting? Buying too much Buying more perishable food Poor storage management Ad hoc spring cleaning High sensitivity to food hygiene Preparing too much food Not liking the food prepared Not having the time to plan meal Fluid work and social patterns Lifestyle factors plays a major role in food wastage! Source: Wrap, The Food We Waste 2007
Food Losses in the Supply Chain Dairy products under further investigation
Validation by Interviews Retailers Ahold Coop Edeka ICA Marks & Spencer Metro Migros Producers Atria (Meat) Ewerman (Fruit & Veg) Skånemejerier (Dairy) Unilever (Dairy) Lantmännen (Bread) Pågen (Bread)
What can Packaging do to Prevent Food Waste? Adequate size/portion packs Reclosable packs Packs easy to empty Active packaging Mod atm and vacuum packs Adequate barrier shelf life Information about storage, preparation, waste prevention Preservation of left overs
Conclusions Food Wastage and Spoilage is a relevant issue in terms of lost resources (food + costs) lost embedded resources (water, fertilizer, production) carbon emissions It is strongly related to societal development & life style Flexible packaging plays an essential role to prevent food wastage directly (e.g. barrier) and indirectly (e.g. portioned packaging, dispensing) Identification of success stories as link between the system view and food facts is a key objective.
Future FPE sustainability communication campaign under preparation
www.flexpack-europe.org