How Many Times Should I Use My Reusable Packaging? Exploring the Role of an Environmental Break-Even Point in Shaping Consumers’ Intention to Reuse

Abstract

Abstract With growing awareness of packaging waste and pollution, reusable packaging systems (RPSs) appear to be a solution to mitigate the environmental impact of single-use packaging. Nevertheless, RPSs only become less environmentally harmful than single-use after each packaging is reused a minimum number of times, which is defined as the environmental break-even point (e-BEP). A lack of knowledge regarding this critical threshold may lead consumers to be overly optimistic about their reuse behaviour, resulting in insufficient reuse. Communicating e-BEPs can motivate conscious reuse but may also have drawbacks. We used a mixed-method approach consisting of an experiment (N = 276) with four e-BEP conditions (absent, low, medium and high) followed by open-ended questions. The quantitative findings showed that regardless of the e-BEP level, consumers neglected the efforts it implied and consistently exhibited positive perceptions. Nevertheless, the qualitative findings revealed several misperceptions of e-BEPs due to limited understanding. In a subsequent post-test (N = 208), we uncovered the role of consumers’ prior experience with reusable packaging on their evaluations and behavioural intentions. Experienced consumers who have used reusable packaging seem to be more aware of specific challenges in reuse. They exhibited heightened green scepticism and reduced perceived consumer effectiveness in response to high (versus low) e-BEPs. Conversely, inexperienced consumers appeared unaffected by e-BEP conditions. Based on these results, we proposed the potential effect of e-BEPs on consumer evaluations and derived theoretical and practical implications to encourage sustained reuse behaviour in the long run.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.