Why reusables alone won’t fix our waste problems

In discussions regarding waste reduction, reusables are often presented as the solution where the plastic bag ban is frequently cited as evidence that people will change their behaviour when required. Bring your own cup. Bring your own container. But in practice, behaviour didn’t change any more than the system did. Supermarkets replaced plastic bags with paper ones. For most people, the outcome was not a shift to reusables, but the acceptance of a new default which had a very small monetary cost at checkout.

In our previous post we looked at the three-year research project commissioned by the Ministry for the Environment to understand and track changes in people’s attitudes, awareness and behaviours around waste minimisation. And what you see is that concerns regarding waste and environmental impacts have declined. People have not really thought about it [waste] or they perceive that they don’t create ‘enough’ waste. But the general sentiment is one of perceived inconvenience. 

When you consider individual views, our infrastructural and economic realities, the most effective waste systems are the ones that work even when people are busy, distracted, or indifferent. 

Cost and operational realities shape what is viable

This situation and case for reusables is even more difficult than recycling or composting if we think that we have not yet developed efficient [and therefore cost efficient] reuse systems. The current economic model is still mostly linear, following a simple pattern: production -> consumption -> disposal. Reusables are often assumed to be the lowest-impact option, but that depends on how you define impact since reusable systems frequently come with higher labour, infrastructure and compliance costs. You see this in dine-in settings where businesses have an onsite kitchen and capacity to wash and reuse—cinemas, mall food courts, event venues—that in these well-resourced environments, these businesses are opting for takeaway packaging because it is cheaper and less labour-intensive than employing additional staff to manage washing and turnaround.

For many other venues, the barriers are even higher. Festivals, farmers markets and pop-ups may have no fixed wash facilities, relying instead on temporary setups that introduce food-safety and staffing challenges. These decisions are not ideological, they are actually economic. Ignoring these constraints risks designing waste solutions that only work for a narrow subset of operators. Too often, debates about waste assume ideal conditions rather than operational reality, overlooking the role that labour costs, space and infrastructure play in determining what is actually sustainable in practice.

The limits of voluntary behaviour

As we look at attitudes, awareness and behaviours around waste minimisation, this graph illustrates why policy is required, not only at a public level but also council. The highest level of commitment is taking reusable bags to the supermarket. This is because plastic bags were banned in 2019 and you have to pay for paper bags now.

Source: Waste and Resource Efficiency – Behavioural Trend and Monitoring Survey 2025, Ministry for the Environment (see p. 32).

When waste reduction relies on personal motivations, commitment scores decline significantly:

• 63% of people will never or rarely use a reusable cup for their coffee order

• 47% of people will never or rarely opt out of free cutlery, straws, napkins offered with meal deliver

• 70% of people will never or rarely take a BYO container to the supermarket deli or for their takeaways

What actually helps reusables scale

People view waste reduction as inconvenient or irrelevant to them and then there are deadlines, school pickups, that HIIT class someone is already late to and deciding what is for dinner. So people forget reusables and when decisions are considered, they are often prioritising convenience, time and cost. 

If we want reusables to scale, we need to design systems that support real-life behaviour, not idealised behaviour:

• default options - for example, Uber making straws, napkins and cutlery opt in not opt out for delivery  (useful, but not sufficient on its own)

• incentives - container deposit schemes consistently outperform education-only approaches

• workplace infrastructure - reusables only work where there are systems to support them: washing, storage, collection and clear responsibility

• hybrid models - reusables where they work well; compostables where they don’t or hybrids

The role of compostables — with realism

Reusables still come with energy inputs, transport, cleaning and operational effort. Compostables, on the other hand, only work if there is reliable collection, transportation and processing infrastructure. And as some businesses have responded, and adapted, removing fossil fuel plastics from their supply chains, and demand for packaging made from renewable materials—mostly compostable packaging has grown, compostable packaging is relatively new [versus plastics] our infrastructure, systems and policy have not responded and adapted.

In Rethinking Plastics in Aotearoa, it was recommended “immediately—to stimulate change by 2021” .. that the government should “run national public awareness initiatives on plastic  pollution,  recycling and  biodegradable or compostable plastics." These initiatives never went ahead and you see from the recycling knowledge results that people remain confused as to what can go in kerbside recycling.

Source: Waste and Resource Efficiency – Behavioural Trend and Monitoring Survey 2025, Ministry for the Environment (see p. 28).

Most continued to be cautious about putting items in recycling, with most people opting to put items in the rubbish bin (2025: 87%, 2024: 90%, 2023: 88%) rather than risk contaminating recycling. Yet knowledge gaps also remain. People know bottles and cans are accepted for recycling, however, confusion remains around items like glass jars (showing a drop in knowledge), pizza boxes, and meat trays.

Significant confusion remained around non-recyclables (particularly, coffee cups, juice cartons, lids and compostable packaging. The result is predictable: confusion, contamination, and cautious behaviour — with people defaulting to landfill to avoid “getting it wrong”.

This is a systems problem, not a values problem

Reusables are part of the solution, but they are not the solution.

Neither are compostables, in isolation.

What actually reduces waste to landfill is a dual approach:

• strong policy
  

• consistent supportive infrastructure
  

• realistic system design
  

• clear national awareness and education programmes
  

Waste reduction succeeds when people don’t have to think about it

A useful example is Duck Island’s scoop shop. There is a short write up on Instagram. The site is controlled, packaging is certified compostable, and a clearly labelled bin is provided where everything can go in the same place. Because the waste stream is designed upstream, contamination is effectively designed out. People don’t need to understand materials or make decision—the environment for success has already been created. In this context, compostables work extremely well, not because people behave differently, but because the system does. People eat their ice cream and place the napkin, tub, paddle spoon—everything in one bin. 

For those working in hospitality, events, education, or high-foot-traffic environments, what are you seeing on the ground? What’s working and what isn’t? And what policies would genuinely move the needle on waste reduction?