Sustainable Packaging in the U.S.: A Practical Guide for Procurement Teams

In the United States, sustainable packaging is no longer driven solely by brand values or consumer perception. It has become a procurement-level responsibility, shaped by tightening regulations, rising material costs, and growing pressure to reduce supply chain risk【1】.

U.S. procurement teams today must answer difficult questions:

• How do we meet emerging EPR and state-level packaging laws?

• How do we adopt sustainable packaging without increasing total cost?

• How do we avoid performance failures or greenwashing risks?

This guide breaks down what sustainable packaging really means for U.S. procurement teams—and how to implement it in a way that is compliant, cost-effective, and scalable.

Sustainable Packaging Is a System, Not a Single Material

One of the most common misconceptions in the U.S. market is that sustainable packaging is simply about switching to a “green” material. In reality, sustainability must be evaluated across the entire packaging lifecycle, including material sourcing, manufacturing, logistics, and end-of-life management【2】.

For procurement teams, this means shifting from a unit-cost mindset to a lifecycle-based decision framework. Packaging choices that appear sustainable in isolation may increase emissions, waste, or cost elsewhere in the supply chain.

Key takeaway: Sustainable packaging decisions should be based on performance, compliance, and lifecycle impact—not material labels alone.

Understanding U.S. Packaging Regulations and Compliance Risk

Unlike the EU, the United States has a state-driven regulatory landscape, which creates complexity for national and multi-state brands【3】.

Key regulations procurement teams should monitor include:

• Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) laws adopted by multiple U.S. states【4】

• California SB 54, requiring recyclable or compostable packaging and aggressive waste reduction targets【5】

• FTC Green Guides, governing environmental marketing and sustainability claims【6】

• FDA regulations for food-contact packaging materials【7】

For procurement professionals, the risk is not only regulatory penalties, but also repeated packaging redesigns as regulations evolve.

Best practice: Design packaging to meet the most stringent applicable standards to reduce long-term compliance and redesign costs.

Material Choices: Balancing Sustainability and Performance

U.S. brands are increasingly exploring recycled-content plastics, mono-material structures, paper-based packaging, and bio-based materials. However, inadequate performance validation remains a leading cause of sustainable packaging failure【8】.

Common challenges include:

• Reduced barrier protection

• Shortened shelf life

• Structural weakness during shipping

• Incompatibility with existing filling or packing lines

Procurement teams should work with packaging partners that emphasize testing, validation, and phased implementation, rather than rapid full-scale material changes.

Recommendation: Pilot sustainable materials on lower-risk SKUs before expanding to core product lines.

Lightweight Packaging Without Increasing Product Damage

Lightweighting is one of the most effective ways to reduce material usage and transportation emissions【9】. However, excessive lightweighting can increase product damage, returns, and reverse logistics costs.

Successful lightweight packaging strategies focus on:

• Structural engineering rather than simple material reduction

• Testing under real shipping conditions

• Alignment with e-commerce and retail distribution requirements

For U.S. procurement teams, the goal is not the lightest package—but the most efficient package that protects the product throughout the supply chain.

Applying Circular Economy Principles in the U.S. Market

Circular economy principles are increasingly influencing U.S. packaging policy and corporate sustainability strategies【10】. For procurement teams, practical implementation is essential.

A realistic framework includes:

• Reduce: Eliminate unnecessary material through optimized design

• Reuse: Evaluate refill or return systems where logistics allow

• Recycle: Ensure compatibility with existing U.S. recycling infrastructure

Procurement decisions should be grounded in actual recovery systems, not theoretical recyclability claims.

Sustainable Packaging and Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)

Evaluating packaging based solely on unit price often leads to higher long-term costs. A comprehensive Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) analysis should include material cost, logistics efficiency, product damage, compliance expenses, and reputational risk【11】.

Many U.S. companies find that optimized sustainable packaging delivers measurable cost savings over time, despite higher initial material costs.

Procurement insight: Sustainable packaging is frequently a cost-optimization strategy when evaluated holistically.

Avoiding Greenwashing and Certification Risks

Environmental claims in the U.S. are increasingly regulated and enforced【6】. Vague or misleading sustainability claims can expose brands to legal and reputational risk.

Procurement teams should:

• Verify certifications through official registries

• Understand the scope and limitations of each certification

• Avoid generic claims such as “eco-friendly” without substantiation

• Audit packaging suppliers for ongoing compliance

Clear documentation and traceability are essential for risk management.

Sustainable Packaging as a Competitive Advantage

For U.S. procurement teams, sustainable packaging is no longer optional—it is an operational and strategic necessity driven by regulation, cost pressure, and supply chain resilience.

Companies that adopt a data-driven, compliance-ready, and performance-focused approach can reduce risk, control costs, and strengthen long-term brand value.

Sustainable packaging decisions require more than good intentions—they require the right strategy, data, and execution partner.

If your team is navigating U.S. packaging regulations, material transitions, or cost optimization challenges, contact UBL Packaging to discuss a customized sustainable packaging assessment tailored to your operational and compliance goals.

References

【1】 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – Sustainable Materials Management
【2】 ISO 14040 / 14044 – Life Cycle Assessment Principles
【3】 National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) – Packaging and EPR Laws
【4】 Maine DEP / Oregon DEQ / Colorado Department of Public Health – EPR Programs
【5】 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) – SB 54
【6】 U.S. Federal Trade Commission – Green Guides
【7】 U.S. Food & Drug Administration – Food Contact Substances Regulations
【8】 McKinsey & Company – Sustainable Packaging Performance Studies
【9】 EPA SmartWay Program – Transportation Emissions and Packaging Efficiency
【10】 Ellen MacArthur Foundation – Circular Economy and Packaging
【11】 Harvard Business Review – Total Cost of Ownership in Procurement