Consumers now want a greater commitment from retailers in cutting food waste, refilling stations, sustainable packaging, and partnering with social purpose organisations, states a recent research, which also highlights that a good majority (69 per cent) of younger consumers are more likely to shop with what they see as socially responsible retailers though price sensitivity still plays a crucial role.
According to the findings, published in Vypr’s Consumer Horizon Report, reducing food waste is the most important factor for the majority of UK consumers (29 per cent), especially for Gen Z women aged 18-24 (38 per cent). More than a third (37 per cent) of men aged 18-24 said they needed food storage advice. A similar number of women aged 18-24 (33 per cent) want meal kits with the exact amount of ingredients included for them to cut down on food waste.
Refill stations for personal care, cleaning products, dry goods, and beverages are also in high demand. Consumers, particularly Gen Z women, are keen to use these stations, provided they offer a cost-saving of 6-10 per cent compared to packaged goods. The study indicates that older shoppers are less likely to use refill stations unless prices are reduced by 15 per cent or more, which Vypr said shows the importance of price in driving consumers to adopt sustainable shopping habits.
The third priority for brands and retailers is to adopt sustainable packaging. Awareness of eco-friendly packaging is high, especially among younger generations. Two-thirds of UK consumers say they expect to pay more for sustainably packaged products, and that figure rises to 86 per cent among Gen Z and Millennials. However, Vypr’s research suggests that while shoppers express willingness to pay more, price sensitivity still plays a crucial role.
Ben Davis, founder of Vypr, said: “There’s often a disconnect between consumer intentions and actions. Brands need to understand that simply offering sustainable options may not be enough if price points don’t match consumer expectations.
“For Gen Z and Millennials, sustainable products need to be competitively priced or risk losing long-term loyalty. We tested this by presenting products with and without the label ‘100 per cent Recycled Packaging’ and found price remained the key purchase decision-making factor for most consumers.”
Another factor in building loyalty among younger consumers is to showcase social responsibility. The research reveals that 60% of shoppers are more likely to shop at retailers that partner with food rescue organisations or promote a charitable cause. Among Gen Z and Millennials, this figure jumps to 69%, showing a strong preference for brands that demonstrate a social purpose.
The report also reveals that 85% of shoppers are willing to pay a deposit for reusable products, though it is younger consumers, particularly those aged 18-24 who express the strongest support for such initiatives.
The Consumer Horizon report which provides insights shaping retail, product innovation, and consumer behaviour going into 2025, can be seen here.
UK supermarkets are not on track to meet crucial environmental targets, according to WWF’s latest report, What’s in Store for the Planet 2024.
Published on Tuesday (3), the annual report reveals piecemeal progress since last year and clear areas of concern – with supermarkets a long way off meeting the goal of halving the environmental impact of the average UK weekly shop by 2030.
Despite a welcome increase in data voluntarily submitted by the supermarkets, the report – an in-depth review of the UK grocery market’s impact across seven key areas – warns that supermarkets are off track on a number of measures, with some lagging behind in key areas such as climate and deforestation.
The way we produce food, the report says, is ultimately failing not just the environment but consumers and farmers too.
WWF warns supermarkets are “way off track” to meet the “critical and urgent” 2025 target to ensure that the products on their shelves aren’t destroying tropical forests that teem with life and help absorb carbon.
Despite engagement from the supermarkets to tackle deforestation and the loss of wild places – through industry coalitions and calls for robust due diligence legislation to ensure that commodities such as beef, cocoa, palm oil and soy entering the UK are not causing nature loss – progress has stalled, with dominant international traders refusing to respond to calls for effective origin control on all supplies and the last government failing to deliver promised legislation.
Yet irresponsible palm oil production, for example, has been – and continues to be – a major driver of deforestation of some of the world’s most biodiverse forests. Palm oil is found in nearly 50 per cent of the packaged products we find in supermarkets – from pizza, doughnuts and chocolate, to deodorant, shampoo, toothpaste and lipstick.
Without urgent action, warns the report, the retailers’ 2030 science-based climate targets are highly likely to be missed, putting the future of our food system – and planet – at risk.
The data does reveal some positive steps forward this year, indicating that progress is possible:
Climate: Mostsupermarkets that submitted data have made progress towards near-term Scope 1 (direct) and Scope 2 (indirect) emissions reduction targets, and in setting 1.5°C-aligned Scope 3 (value chain) targets in line with the Science Based Targets Initiative’s (SBTi’s) Forestry, Land-use, and Agriculture (FLAG) guidance.
Marine: For the first time, four supermarkets have shared some data on wild-caught seafood species adhering to all aspects of the Seafood Jurisdictional Initiative (SJI), while reported figures for certified seafood are at 88%.
Agriculture: Supermarkets that submitted data are, on average, sourcing more than 50% of their UK-sourced produce from land within robust schemes to manage soil health and biodiversity. However, only half of the retailers provided data, so the sector-wide picture is unclear.
Improved transparency: 10 out of 11 major UK food supermarkets – representing 90% of the grocery market – shared more data this year than ever before. Continuing to improve levels of transparency is vital for informed decision-making, building resilient supply chains, and tracking progress toward sustainability goals.
The report highlights that while some retailers are leading the way and making necessary changes in some areas, collective and accelerated action is urgently needed: governments must regulate, commodity traders must reform, and supermarkets must help consumers to make healthy sustainable choices.
Tanya Steele, chief executive at WWF, said:“Consumers should not have to worry about whether their food shop is fuelling the climate crisis or pushing precious wildlife closer to the brink.
“How we produce food remains one of the biggest threats to our planet. And while it's positive that UK supermarkets have pledged to source their food responsibly, they must now follow through.
"Supermarkets depend on nature and a stable climate for the food they sell, and most people want to buy sustainably. Unless supermarkets prioritise this, we will all suffer the consequences.
“The UK government must now step in and urgently introduce the long-awaited due diligence regulations to prevent further destruction of our forests and natural habitats. Without them, supermarkets will continue to pay lip service while the planet pays the price for their inaction – putting us all at risk.”
Sir Dave Lewis, chair of trustees at WWF, said: "Supermarkets have a crucial to play in the sustainability of our food system and therefore the climate, but they are falling short of their climate and nature targets and missing them isn’t just bad for business – it’s a recipe for disaster.
"If supermarkets fail to act now, the impacts of environmental crises will only worsen, with even more consequences for supply chains, prices, and the ecosystems they rely on.
"With supply chains already on the brink and customers demanding change, it’s time for supermarkets to lead the charge toward a sustainable future.”
WWF is calling on the supermarkets to hold firm to their commitments and face the challenges ahead with renewed determination and collaboration, sharing solutions within the sector to support a fair transition to sustainable food production.
In the report, WWF warns that a repeated failure by governments and businesses to address deforestation and the destruction of wild places is putting the climate, nature and food security at risk. Globally, food production uses 40 per cent of habitable land and is responsible for a quarter of greenhouse gas emissions.
Yet the devastating effects of the climate and nature crises – from unpredictable weather patterns, droughts and declines in pollinators, to disasters that flood fields and ruin produce – are heavily disrupting production and reducing food security, presenting a major challenge for the sector and leading to shortages and rising prices.
Shockingly, since the WWF Basket launched in 2021, the world has lost over 7.9 million hectares of tree cover – an area almost the size of Austria.
Get the latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Climate activists march on a street to demand stronger global commitments to fight plastic waste at the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5), in Busan, South Korea, November 23, 2024
Countries negotiating a global treaty to curb plastic pollution failed to reach agreement on Monday, with more than 100 nations wanting to cap production while a handful of oil-producers were prepared only to target plastic waste.
The fifth UN Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) meeting intended to yield a legally binding global treaty in Busan, South Korea, was meant to be the final one.
However, countries remained far apart on the basic scope of a treaty and could agree only to postpone key decisions and resume talks, dubbed INC 5.2, to a later date.
"It is clear that there is still persisting divergence," said Inger Andersen, executive director of the UN Environment Programme.
The most divisive issues included capping plastic production, managing plastic products and chemicals of concern, and financing to help developing countries implement the treaty.
An option proposed by Panama, backed by more than 100 countries, would have created a path for a global plastic production reduction target, while another proposal did not include production caps.
The fault lines were apparent in a revised document released on Sunday by the meeting's chair Luis Vayas Valdivieso, which may form the basis of a treaty, but remained riddled with options on the most sensitive issues.
"A treaty that ... only relies on voluntary measures would not be acceptable," said Juliet Kabera, director general of Rwanda's Environment Management Authority.
"It is time we take it seriously and negotiate a treaty that is fit for purpose and not built to fail."
A small number of petrochemical-producing nations, such as Saudi Arabia, have strongly opposed efforts to reduce plastic production and have tried to use procedural tactics to delay negotiations.
"There was never any consensus," said Saudi Arabian delegate Abdulrahman Al Gwaiz. "There are a couple of articles that somehow seem to make it (into the document) despite our continued insistence that they are not within the scope."
China, the US, India, South Korea and Saudi Arabia were the top five primary polymer-producing nations in 2023, according to data provider Eunomia.
Entrenched divisions
Had such divisions been overcome, the treaty would have been one of the most significant deals relating to environmental protection since the 2015 Paris Agreement.
The postponement comes just days after the turbulent conclusion of the COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan.
At Baku, countries set a new global target for mobilizing $300 billion annually in climate finance, a deal deemed woefully insufficient by small island states and many developing countries.
The climate talks were also slowed by procedural manoeuvres by Saudi Arabia – who objected to the inclusion of language that reaffirmed a previous commitment to transition away from fossil fuels.
Some negotiators said a few countries held the proceedings hostage, avoiding compromises needed by using the UN's consensus process.
Senegal's National Delegate Cheikh Ndiaye Sylla called it "a big mistake" to exclude voting during the entire negotiations, an agreement made last year during the second round of talks in Paris.
"This outcome underscores the complexity of addressing plastic pollution on a global scale and the need for further deliberations to achieve an effective, inclusive and workable treaty," said Chris Jahn, council secretary of the International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA), representing plastic makers.
"There is little assurance that the next INC will succeed where INC-5 did not," environmental group GAIA said.
Plastic production is on track to triple by 2050, and microplastics have been found in the air, fresh produce and even human breast milk.
Chemicals found to be of concern in plastics include more than 3,200 according to a 2023 U.N. Environment Programme report, which said women and children were particularly susceptible to their toxicity.
Despite the postponement, several negotiators expressed urgency to get back into talks.
"Every day of delay is a day against humanity. Postponing negotiations does not postpone the crisis," said Panama's delegation head Juan Carlos Monterrey Gomez on Sunday.
The government has on Friday published a policy update on recycling, introducing significant changes for businesses to streamline recycling practices and improve sustainability. Effective by 31 March 2025, these reforms set new standards for waste collection across England, aiming to create a consistent system that benefits the environment and reduces confusion.
Businesses and non-domestic premises, including schools and hospitals, must arrange for the collection of the following recyclable waste streams:
Glass such as drinks bottles and rinsed empty food jars
Metal such as drinks cans and food tins, empty aerosols, aluminium foil, aluminium food trays and tubes
Plastic such as rinsed empty food containers and bottles
Paper such as old newspapers and envelopes
Cardboard such as delivery boxes and packaging
Food leftovers or waste generated by food preparation
Businesses with fewer than 10 full-time equivalent employees (micro-firms) are exempt from these requirements until 31 March 2027.
Environmental charity WRAP has published a guide for the retail and wholesale sector, available here, to help implement recycling in the workplace.
Claire Shrewsbury, director of insights and innovation at WRAP, termed the incoming requirements on business recycling as a “hugely important step.”
“There are enormous environmental and financial gains to be realised by encouraging the 2.2 million business in England to separate food and recyclables from refuse. The two-year delay for micro-sized businesses will give smaller businesses more time to implement recycling into smaller or shared premises,” Shrewsbury said.
“WRAP is working with Defra and industry to develop new support tools and guidance to help all businesses with the transition. We will continue to work with trade bodies and local authorities to make transition as seamless as possible through our tools, technical support, and resources,” she added.
Faced with a pile of loose, unsold single bananas, retailers can motivate customers to buy overlooked fruit by giving it emotional appeal, according to new research from the University of Bath’s School of Management.
A simple sign showing a banana with a downturned mouth, and the message ‘We are sad singles and want to be bought as well,’ encouraged compassion in customers, who were moved by the idea of abandoned bananas longing for a home.
The study, published in the journal Psychology & Marketing, compared the effectiveness of ‘sad singles’ signage versus ‘happy singles’, for loose bananas and tomatoes. Although both sentiments proved more effective than a sign that showed no emotion (‘Here are single bananas that want to be bought as well’) it was the signs conveying the sad emotions that proved the most effective.
On average, the number of single bananas sold per hour increased from 2.02 (when the emotionless banana sign was displayed) to 3.19 (with the sad banana sign) – an increase of 58 per cent.
In comparison, the happy banana signage increased hourly sales of single bananas from 2.02 to 2.13 (5.4%), making the sad banana signage almost 50 per cent more effective than the happy banana signage.
“As far as we know, this is the first study comparing happy and sad expressions on bananas separated from their bunch to look at the impact on sales,” said Dr Lisa Eckmann from the Bath Retail Lab at the University of Bath. “The plight of the single bananas is really relatable and the findings have very practical applications for boosting sales and reducing food waste from our supermarkets.
“The need to belong is one of the most basic human motivations, and applying sadness to single, stray bananas evokes a compassionate response from shoppers. Labelling bananas with sad facial expressions sounds cute, but there’s very much a serious purpose. The study shows it’s an easy, low cost, effective intervention for retailers and policymakers.”
Separated from their bunch by shoppers discarding one banana too many, or by transport, single bananas are part of the problem of picky consumer preferences that helps to account for 131 million tons of waste in the retail sector (UN Environment Programme 2024).
Previous research has shown single bananas have been shown to account for the highest amount both of climate impact and of food wasted at retailers. Current food waste avoidance practices explicitly list single bananas as a source of avoidable food waste (BCG 2024; EcoWorlder 2022; Rees 2023).
The researchers, from the University of Bath, RWTH Aachen University and Goethe University Frankfurt, carried out the experiment in the German supermarket chain REWE, observing purchasing behaviour of single bananas of 3,810 customers over 192 hours. The supermarket chain had previously labelled bananas as singles wanting to be bought but had not added the emotional element.
The in-store study was adapted to an online experiment that asked 745 shoppers to imagine they were going to the supermarket intending to buy bananas. A further online study with 1,990 participants replicated the set-up for tomatoes, and 995 online participants took part in a final study to investigate the effect of price discounts on bananas.
Previous research has looked at the impact of anthropomorphism to increase consumer acceptance of imperfect produce, such as food that deviates in shape from expectations or reduced freshness, but it has not been applied to presentation – bananas separated from a bunch or tomatoes loose from a vine.
The impact of the sad bananas did not outweigh a drop in price – discounting the produce was more effective at driving people to choose single bananas. The researchers say that when retailers cannot or do not want to reduce the price, using sad anthropomorphism could be an effective strategy to boost sales of single produce.
“Food retailers could apply a step-wise intervention approach where they first use anthropomorphism as a sales-boosting strategy before turning to price discounts,” said Dr Eckmann. “We don’t know whether consumers might get emotionally numb to sad bananas in the long term, but it’s an idea that certainly draws people in, and is easy to act on. I wasn’t aware of how single bananas accumulate to such a big food waste problem, and now I always look out for loose, single bananas when I’m shopping.”
The researchers say that future research could examine under which conditions sad expressions are not more effective than happy expressions, for example when produce is deformed or slightly damaged.
The UK Vaping Industry Association (UKVIA) has called on regulators to come down hard on vaping businesses who are not meeting their environmental obligations, after a Freedom of Information (FOI) request revealed none have been fined or prosecuted for failing to meet their WEEE responsibilities.
In it’s FOI response, the Environment Agency explained there are no ‘civil sanction response options’, including monetary penalties, for the WEEE regulations, but said producers may be liable to an unlimited fine if they are found guilty of an offence. According to the agency, no EEE producers – which would include vape producers – have been fined or prosecuted between 2022 and May 2024.
The EA also said there is no obligation for vape producers to identify themselves as a retailer, distributor, manufacturer or other type of producer when registering or reporting data.
The Office for Product Safety and Standards, responsible for environmental regulations relating to retail stores selling vapes, said it ‘did not hold’ information on the number of specialist and non-specialist vape businesses who have been fined or prosecuted for failing to meet their obligations.
The regulator said the data has not been collected due to the ‘changing scope of the landscape’ and growth of the sector but explained that it has undertaken a programme of education activities, which included:
Publishing a video for vape retailers informing them of their takeback requirements.
Working with independent not-for-profit, Material Focus, on a retailer briefing guide which has been downloaded over 3,000 times.
Providing technical input in Association of Convenience stores (ACS) guidance on vape takeback requirements, distributed to 49,000 members in 2024.
Providing intervention in the form of advice and guidance to 23 national businesses with large numbers of outlets between 2022 and May 2024.
“It’s great to see that the OPSS is working hard to educate vape retailers on their environmental responsibilities, and this is something that needs to continue, but businesses in breach of their obligations need to face the consequences,” John Dunne, director general of the UK Vaping Industry Association, said.
“We are seeing the same enforcement issues when it comes to retailers selling vapes to minors. The Environment Agency tells us that the amount of fines that can be handed out are unlimited, so let’s put this policy into practice.”
Dunne welcomed the introduction of vape licensing in the new Tobacco and Vapes Bill and said they would continue to campaign for the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to have powers where they only grant vape product notifications for brands who can prove they are registered with one of the producer compliance schemes.
“One of the challenges that we face is that the organisation registering for a Producer Compliance scheme may be a distributor or an importer on behalf of a number of brands, making it difficult to see which manufacturers maybe breaking the law. It’s therefore key we understand who they’re representing,” Dunne added.
“We will be working with the regulators and our members to identify those businesses who are compliant and those that are not so appropriate action can be taken."
The FOI investigation follows the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ consultation on ‘reforming the producer responsibility system for waste electrical and electronic equipment’ – the recommendations from which are expected to be released in the coming months.
It also comes ahead of the ban on disposable vapes, which will take effect from June 2025 and is predicted to have major implications for the waste management chain.