ÃÛ¶¹ÊÓƵ

We wrote a 90-page report (& video) on the potential investment impact of a demandÌýdecline in low value, high volume plastic. One of our key conclusions was thatÌýcompanies were facing growing pressure from a combination of campaign groups,Ìýconsumers & regulators to address "the plastic problem." Results of that pressureÌýincluded profit warnings, elimination of entire product lines and efforts and investmentsÌýin product or systems innovation.

COVID-19, unsurprisingly, resulted in a need to both protect and reassure with regard toÌýhygiene. Single use plastic is convenient, cheap to produce (at times even more so as oilÌýprices declined during COVID-19), easy to use, and ideally suited to COVID-19-related health &Ìýhygiene demands. Multiple sources reference significant increases in plastic waste andÌýpollution resulting from higher PPE through to food packaging use. COVID-19-relatedÌýincreases in plastic usage are, obviously, just one factor in assessing the total plasticÌýdemand picture. It is too early to determine longer term trends in PPE consumption, andÌýalso how much those might be offset by for example, changes in shopping behaviour orÌýinnovation.

In our earlier report and our Food & HPC Risk Radar we noted the consumer sector has aÌýmore visible and identifiablepollution impact vs other industries exposed to plastic. TheÌýbranding that is such a powerful benefit to staples companies, in particular, can leaveÌýcompanies vulnerable because consumers are easily able to link individual brands orÌýcompanies to specific environmental issues. Campaign groups refer to well-knownÌýindividual brands by name (e.g., "Top Global Polluters" in the new Break Free From PlasticÌýBrand Audit 2020). Also, more data identifying specific companies and their plasticÌýconsumption is being published. On the other hand, it is likely to be impossible for theÌýaverage consumer to identify who, for example, originally produced the resin used in a drinks bottle.