LONDON-- P&G Beauty unveils its newest packaging innovation across its haircare brands, set to change the way consumers buy, use and dispose of their shampoo bottles, as it continues its commitment to be a force for good and a positive force for beauty in the world.   As announced at a live panel of sustainability experts at the Reuters Responsible Business Summit, guests at The Window to Act is Now: Advancing Responsible Beauty in Europe heard that, as of 2021, Head & Shoulders, Pantene, Herbal Essences and Aussie will enable the 200 million European households1 to recycle, reduce and reuse. The leading beauty brands will launch a refill system for their shampoo, thanks to a new reusable 100% aluminium bottle and recyclable2 refill pouch, made using 60% less plastic (per mL versus standard brand bottle). P&G Beauty is on track to reduce virgin plastic usage by 50% in shampoos and conditioners bottles by the end of 20213, where through collective efforts to reduce, reuse and recycle it will result in 300 million fewer virgin plastic bottles being produced yearly. peaking at the event, Artur Litarowicz, Senior Vice President and General Manager of Haircare for P&G Europe said; “We need to start turning the tide on the plastic waste crisis and there is no time to waste when it comes to protecting our planet. That is why I’m thrilled to announce a new packaging innovation called the ‘good refill system’. This will allow consumers to have the product they love now in a beautiful, reusable aluminium bottle and refill pouches as of 2021. This will be launched across Head & Shoulders, Pantene, Herbal Essences and Aussie. We know this is just the start. There is so much more to do, and I am passionate about P&G Beauty being a force for good across Europe as we step towards achieving our 2030 Responsible Beauty goals at pace.” Virginie Helias, P&G’s Chief Sustainability Officer added; “We have committed to enable and inspire responsible consumption through innovation on our product and packaging. Our leading beauty brands in Europe touch millions of lives. This new packaging innovation will contribute to making the reuse of packaging irresistible, while enabling a reduction of virgin plastic as per P&G’s Ambition 2030 commitment. It’s no longer about if or what we can do, but how quickly we can do it - the window is now for embracing new sustainable lifestyles.” Litarowicz and Helias were joined at the interactive panel discussion by founder and CEO at TerraCycle, Tom Szaky, Head of Plastic Waste and Business at WWF, Erin Simon and climate activist, Clover Hogan, who provided their perspective on the role of brands to help turn the tide of the plastics crisis. Tom Szaky commented; “I’ve long been a believer that a refill behaviour is a big part of the future of sustainable packaging and the innovation announced by P&G Beauty today is a positive step in the right direction for the many millions of households Head & Shoulders, Pantene, Herbal Essences and Aussie serve. While there is of course more to be done, it’s great to see large companies such as P&G Beauty taking the issue seriously and using their scale to drive change quickly and impactfully.”

P&G Beauty strikes a major blow to plastic waste with its new refill system including a reusable aluminium shampoo bottle and recyclable¹ pouch that uses 60% less plastic²

LONDON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Today, P&G Beauty unveils its newest packaging innovation across its haircare brands, set to change the way consumers buy, use and dispose of their shampoo bottles, as it continues its commitment to be a force for good and a positive force for beauty in the world. As announced at a live panel of sustainability experts at the Reuters Responsible Business Summit, guests at The Window to Act is Now: Advancing Responsible Beauty in Europe heard that, as of 2021, Head & Shoulders, Pantene, Herbal Essences and Aussie will enable the 200 million European households1 to recycle, reduce and reuse. The leading beauty brands will launch a refill system for their shampoo, thanks to a new reusable 100% aluminium bottle and recyclable2 refill pouch, made using 60% less plastic (per mL versus standard brand bottle). P&G Beauty is on track to reduce virgin plastic usage by 50% in shampoos and conditioners bottles by the end of 20213, where through collective efforts to reduce, reuse and recycle it will result in 300 million fewer virgin plastic bottles being produced yearly. Speaking at the event, Artur Litarowicz, Senior Vice President and General Manager of Haircare for P&G Europe said; “We need to start turning the tide on the plastic waste crisis and there is no time to waste when it comes to protecting our planet. That is why I’m thrilled to announce a new packaging innovation called the ‘good refill system’. This will allow consumers to have the product they love now in a beautiful, reusable aluminium bottle and refill pouches as of 2021. This will be launched across Head & Shoulders, Pantene, Herbal Essences and Aussie. We know this is just the start. There is so much more to do, and I am passionate about P&G Beauty being a force for good across Europe as we step towards achieving our 2030 Responsible Beauty goals at pace.” Virginie Helias, P&G’s Chief Sustainability Officer added; “We have committed to enable and inspire responsible consumption through innovation on our product and packaging. Our leading beauty brands in Europe touch millions of lives. This new packaging innovation will contribute to making the reuse of packaging irresistible, while enabling a reduction of virgin plastic as per P&G’s Ambition 2030 commitment. It’s no longer about if or what we can do, but how quickly we can do it - the window is now for embracing new sustainable lifestyles.” Litarowicz and Helias were joined at the interactive panel discussion by founder and CEO at TerraCycle, Tom Szaky, Head of Plastic Waste and Business at WWF, Erin Simon and climate activist, Clover Hogan, who provided their perspective on the role of brands to help turn the tide of the plastics crisis. Tom Szaky commented; “I’ve long been a believer that a refill behaviour is a big part of the future of sustainable packaging and the innovation announced by P&G Beauty today is a positive step in the right direction for the many millions of households Head & Shoulders, Pantene, Herbal Essences and Aussie serve. While there is of course more to be done, it’s great to see large companies such as P&G Beauty taking the issue seriously and using their scale to drive change quickly and impactfully.”

Virginie Helias remembers the 2017 World Economic Forum well. At that time, the American consumer goods group Procter & Gamble (P&G), together with the disposal specialist Terracycle, presented a new bottle for its Head & Shoulders shampoo. The special thing about it: It was largely made from recycled plastic bottles that had been collected on ocean beaches. The internal reactions from management were extremely positive, says the top sustainability manager in the group. “Many thought the idea was great, because no one initially asked whether it would pay off.” The bottles were then initially sold in supermarkets of the French Carrefour chain and later expanded to a total of 20 countries. To date, around a million bottles have been sold. Another project is currently being implemented: When the winners of the Olympic Games in Tokyo receive their medals this summer, they will stand on pedestals that are also made of ocean plastic. P&G is collecting the material.

Such successes are lighthouses, which also get a lot of attention thanks to skilful marketing. Virginie Helias knows that the real problem of plastic waste in the world’s oceans cannot be solved. But a new dynamic has developed in recent years. “The question today is no longer whether something needs to be done, but what.” In the meantime, the companies no longer tried to do it alone, but rather, competitors increasingly worked together. This is the only way to ultimately come up with market-oriented solutions that the consumer also accepts. Because only around 15 percent of consumers are willing to accept noticeable price increases for environmental protection without complaint. The rest are very sensitive to higher expenses. Procter & Gamble has joined an alliance against the waste of plastic. The London-based organization includes Henkel and BASF from Germany. The aim is to get meaningful and coordinated projects on the way. “Because it is not the money that is lacking, but the projects,” says Helias. The fight against plastic waste is one of the major sustainability issues in Davos. For example, the beverage company Coca-Cola and the Chinese online retailer JD.com launched a joint initiative in the Middle Kingdom to recycle single-use bottles. A pilot project for 50,000 households is already underway in Shanghai: When JD employees deliver the ordered goods, they also collect old plastic bottles for reprocessing. An expansion to other cities is planned. Coca-Cola announced two years ago that it wanted to recycle all of its packaging by 2030. The World Economic Forum also provided a large stage for the 19-year-old Indonesian Melati Wijsen, who founded the “Bye bye plastic bags” initiative with her sister in Bali in 2013. Thanks not least to the commitment of the two sisters, plastic bags have been banned on the island since last year. In Davos she belongs to a group of young people who have achieved a lot through their commitment.

600,000 tons of plastic on the Ganges

The plastic problem of the oceans has to be tackled at the root, says P&G manager Helias. And that is mainly in Asia, since most of the sea sculpture comes from the five countries of China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand and the Philippines. 93 percent of this waste is flushed into the oceans from ten rivers, almost all of which are in Asia. That is why the Plastic Alliance started its first project in 2019 on the Ganges, the third longest river in the world, in which an additional 600,000 tons of plastic end up every year. The river residents are to be informed about the consequences of the littering by means of targeted campaigns. In addition, municipalities along the river will be helped to fish the plastic from the river and recycle it thanks to modern technology. This can be worthwhile because it is a coveted resource.    

Virginie Helias remembers the 2017 World Economic Forum well. At that time, the American consumer goods group Procter & Gamble (P&G), together with the disposal specialist Terracycle, presented a new bottle for its Head & Shoulders shampoo. The special thing about it: It was largely made from recycled plastic bottles that had been collected on ocean beaches. The internal reactions from management were extremely positive, says the top sustainability manager in the group. “Many thought the idea was great, because no one initially asked whether it would pay off.” The bottles were then initially sold in supermarkets of the French Carrefour chain and later expanded to a total of 20 countries. To date, around a million bottles have been sold. Another project is currently being implemented: When the winners of the Olympic Games in Tokyo receive their medals this summer, they will stand on pedestals that are also made of ocean plastic. P&G is collecting the material. Such successes are lighthouses, which also get a lot of attention thanks to skilful marketing. Virginie Helias knows that the real problem of plastic waste in the world’s oceans cannot be solved. But a new dynamic has developed in recent years. “The question today is no longer whether something needs to be done, but what.” In the meantime, the companies no longer tried to do it alone, but rather, competitors increasingly worked together. This is the only way to ultimately come up with market-oriented solutions that the consumer also accepts. Because only around 15 percent of consumers are willing to accept noticeable price increases for environmental protection without complaint. The rest are very sensitive to higher expenses. Procter & Gamble has joined an alliance against the waste of plastic. The London-based organization includes Henkel and BASF from Germany. The aim is to get meaningful and coordinated projects on the way. “Because it is not the money that is lacking, but the projects,” says Helias. The fight against plastic waste is one of the major sustainability issues in Davos. For example, the beverage company Coca-Cola and the Chinese online retailer JD.com launched a joint initiative in the Middle Kingdom to recycle single-use bottles. A pilot project for 50,000 households is already underway in Shanghai: When JD employees deliver the ordered goods, they also collect old plastic bottles for reprocessing. An expansion to other cities is planned. Coca-Cola announced two years ago that it wanted to recycle all of its packaging by 2030. The World Economic Forum also provided a large stage for the 19-year-old Indonesian Melati Wijsen, who founded the “Bye bye plastic bags” initiative with her sister in Bali in 2013. Thanks not least to the commitment of the two sisters, plastic bags have been banned on the island since last year. In Davos she belongs to a group of young people who have achieved a lot through their commitment.

600,000 tons of plastic on the Ganges

The plastic problem of the oceans has to be tackled at the root, says P&G manager Helias. And that is mainly in Asia, since most of the sea sculpture comes from the five countries of China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand and the Philippines. 93 percent of this waste is flushed into the oceans from ten rivers, almost all of which are in Asia. That is why the Plastic Alliance started its first project in 2019 on the Ganges, the third longest river in the world, in which an additional 600,000 tons of plastic end up every year. The river residents are to be informed about the consequences of the littering by means of targeted campaigns. In addition, municipalities along the river will be helped to fish the plastic from the river and recycle it thanks to modern technology. This can be worthwhile because it is a coveted resource.

No one ever had trouble finding examples of corporate hypocrisy. Recent months seem to have brought a bounty. The same companies who submit to Chinese authorities have no problem resisting American ones. Corporations threaten boycotts against states whose legislatures pass laws restricting abortion and affirming sex differences and religious freedom. Wealthy CEOs join letters opposing the Trump administration’s efforts to limit illegal immigration. Technology giants that collaborate with China and inherently the Chinese military on AI and Internet censorship express qualms over working with the Pentagon.   The U.S. industries most obsequious to Chinese audiences present themselves as socially, culturally, and economically progressive at home. The National Basketball Association, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and major financial institutions are exemplars of the “woke capitalism” that has transformed the business landscape in recent years. GM cannot meet the demands of 48,000 striking workers, but it wants you to know that it supports wind power and gender equity. GE suspended pension benefits, but remains a signatory to the U.N. Global Compact, is a highly rated workplace according to the Human Rights Campaign, and received a State Department award for “inclusive hiring in Saudi Arabia.”   What might look like a contradiction is actually a concurrence. Corporations are terrified by the specter of controversy that attracts scrutiny and regulation. Supporting Hongkongers invites rebuke. To be “woke” in America today does not. That is the difference between the celebration of Nike and the demonization of Chick-fil-A. Given the cultural power of the new progressivism, protests from conservatives weigh little in the balance.   Whether they are collaborating with the People’s Republic of China or publicizing efforts to achieve social justice in the United States, America’s woke capitalists are operating according to the instinct of self-preservation. This is not simply about the bottom line. It is about the legitimacy of the corporation in the global economy.   Cynics might ascribe the corporate embrace of woke capitalism to self-seeking. Social justice, they say, is merely a veneer that masks profits. That might be true. On September 5, “Activate: The Global Citizen Movement” premiered on the National Geographic channel. Produced in partnership with Procter & Gamble, and featuring Hugh Jackman, Gayle King, Pharrell Williams, Usher, and Darren Criss, the program is a parody of advertising masquerading as activism.   The episode on the “clean water crisis,” according to a multi-page advertorial in National Geographic, highlighted the fact that “844 million people around the world lack access to clean water.” Fortunately, “P&G, makers of Tide, introduced its ‘Children’s Safe Drinking Water” program in 2004 and since then, with the help of over 150 partners around the world, has provided more than 15 billion liters of clean water to people in need.” The episode “Ending Plastic Pollution” mentioned, “For over a decade, P&G, the makers of Head & Shoulders (H&S), has partnered with TerraCycle, a global recycling company on a mission to eliminate waste.” The episode “Social Justice Reform” is premised on the idea that “while some racial bias is conscious, much is unconscious and can be shaped by images in entertainment, advertising, and media.” That’s why “P&G believes in using their voice in advertising as a force for good by addressing important societal issues while ensuring positive, accurate portrayals of all people.” By contributing to P&G’s $68 billion in annual revenue, you too can help clean water, reduce plastic consumption, and foster racial justice.   Yet the cynics ignore the context in which businesses operate. Corporations don’t generate revenues automatically. They must provide a good or service that consumers want. And they must be relatively unmolested by the heavy hand of government. Procter & Gamble’s “Activate” may be well intentioned. It is also a form of insurance.   Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey probably didn’t think he was about to start a diplomatic incident when he Tweeted support for the Hong Kong protests on October 4. More fool he. Chinese social media accounts denounced him within moments. The Chinese Basketball Association, whose president Yao Ming played on the Rockets for about a decade, cut ties with the club. The Chinese consulate-general in Houston instructed the Rockets to “correct the error.” Morey deleted the Tweet.   The episode was an ugly demonstration of the insidious nature of corporate America’s relationship to Beijing. To guarantee safe returns, moguls, companies, and industries with investments in China are more than happy to toe the party line. A week before Morey made the “error” of advocating democracy, Michael Bloomberg, who holds an annual “New Economy Forum” in the Chinese capital, denied that Xi Jinping is a dictator. Earlier, when the trailer for the forthcoming Top Gun sequel made its debut, it did not take long for people to notice that the filmmakers had removed images of the Japanese and Taiwanese flags from the hero’s bomber jacket. The global box office now counts for more than the accurate representation of democratic allies.   Note, however, that the outrage over Morey’s Tweet started online. It then migrated to officialdom. The Chinese public is nationalistic. It becomes outraged at any perceived offense to national honor. American corporations have to take into account the attitudes, sympathies, and sensibilities of the Chinese consumer as much as the wishes of the Chinese government.   Consumer preferences also matter in the United States. Over the summer, Nike removed certain shoes in its Chinese stores because the designer expressed solidarity with Hongkongers. Around the same time, it withdrew from the market shoes carrying images of the Betsy Ross flag because Colin Kaepernick said they promoted white supremacy. In both cases the apparel company was acceding to consumer demands rather than risk government rebuke.   America’s corporations, forever in search of yield, cannot afford to ignore the reality that young consumers are drifting left. The Millennial generation is politically moderate compared to the rising Generation Z. The ideologies of diversity, equity, and inclusion, of intersectionality, of gender fluidity, and of environmentalism, secularism, racial justice, and assaultive speech have become the cultural mainstream (to the degree one exists). Woke capitalism isn’t a passing fad. It’s a sign of things to come.   Corporate behavior evinces the dominant beliefs of society. In China, those beliefs are not pluralistic. And that is increasingly the case in the United States.  

Consumers are choosing brands they think are better for the planet, so it’s important they know what they’re getting. How often are you overwhelmed or confused by labels at the store? Organic, non-GMO, fair trade, cruelty-free ... the list goes on. With mounting concerns about what’s in our products, where they come from, and how they are made, more and more people are craving transparency and sustainability with the things they buy. And it doesn’t stop at the products inside. In a world dialed into the impacts of single-use packaging and disposability on the environment, what’s on the outside counts as well. Brands and manufacturers know if they don’t stop producing widely non-recyclable items, they will be left in the dust. It’s important that packaging labels inform and educate so the public can choose more sustainable brands. However, lack of clear definitions can make it difficult to know what exactly these labels mean, confusing the buyer and opening things up for greenwashing.   Let’s take a closer look:  

Bioplastic

Often represented on packages (as well as other commonly disposable items, such as beverage cups and eating utensils) by leaf symbols and riffs on the recycling Mobius strip, bioplastics are simply defined as plastics derived from natural, renewable feedstocks, unlike those derived from fossil fuels like many of the plastics consumers enjoy today.   Corn, potatoes, rice, tapioca, wheat fiber, and sugar are among these, as are shrimp shells, seaweed, and algae. While the capacity of agricultural land to sustain a robust age for bioplastics is questionable, the sustainable “edge” is that they offset dependence on finite oil reserves. To be called a “bioplastic” in the United States, a material need only be composed of a percentage of renewable material. Defined on a product-by-product basis, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) BioPreferred seal only requires product packaging to contain a minimum of 25 percent bio-based content, and the majority percentage may be fossil fuel-based plastic resins and other synthetics additives.  

Biodegradable or compostable plastic

Subsets of bioplastics are biodegradable or compostable plastics, which are often incorrectly conflated with all bioplastics. Many consumer goods companies are beginning to use "biodegradable" plastic in their packaging as a sort of silver bullet to the plastic pollution issue. The challenge, however, is that this packaging does not actually break down in the real world settings where it is likely to end up.   If a biodegradable package enters a trash bin and ends up in a landfill, it will be covered with other garbage and stripped of its access to sunlight and airflow. In the environment (i.e. roadside, forest, or even the ocean), there is plenty of evidence to suggest this material does not degrade the way it was intended to in an industrial compost facility. Compostable plastics will only break down in a compost site at a rate consistent with other known compostable materials, such as paper, food waste, and yard trimmings, in a highly controlled industrial facility with just the right temperature and microbes, not your backyard pile. There are few (but growing) numbers of composting facilities around the world and many view bioplastics as contaminants. Plus, most biodegradable bioplastics (categorized as ‘other’ plastic #7) are not municipally recyclable. The compostability of plant-based plastics is akin to the recyclability of petroleum-based plastics; they will only be processed if the solutions are accessible. So, improving their viability will require consumer support and more collaboration in the industry.  

Ocean-bound plastic

A number of consumer goods companies have been introducing products and packaging that use what is known as ocean-bound plastic. This is plastic collected within 50 kilometers of a waterway, making it a possible risk to reach the ocean, which can happen in countries with poor waste management. Often comparable to curbside-quality and plentiful to collect, ocean-bound plastic captures the value of litter that very generally might find its way into the ocean, but is not necessarily found in marine environments at all.   Slightly different is the material our beach and ocean plastic division collects directly from marine environments such as oceans, beaches, rivers, and lakes with the help of volunteer NGOs and clean-up organizations. The plastic collected is usually degraded and therefore non-recyclable municipally. Through partnerships with consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies around the world (including the first fully recyclable shampoo bottle made with beach plastic for Head & Shoulders), this, too, has been integrated into products available to consumers.  

Single-material

Most packaging today is not traditionally recyclable because of its complexity. Some flexible packages (pouches, shelf-stable cartons, and the like) are considered recyclable, but an average consumer with access to a recycling option may not be able to tell what type(s) of plastic the packaging is made from. So, packaging producers are attempting to simplify the construction of the packaging to allow for it to be accepted at grocery store drop-points.   While this development makes it much easier to recycle from a technical standpoint, practicality is questionable due to constraints around accessibility and participation. This material is not curbside recyclable and only accepted at the few drop-off points funded by law and intended to recycle plastic bags; consumers hear “recyclable” and think they can recycle at home. This causes confusion at the store and contamination in streams with already weak end-markets. +++ The world is waking up to the fact that essentially any plastic not reused or captured for recycling is at risk for joining the 10-20 million tons that pour into oceans annually. Steering more material away from filling the bellies of fish or turning into microplastics is an effort companies and consumers can get behind, so they need to be informed. We can think about it this way: the next time you go shopping, whatever you buy, two more will be created. One to replace the one you bought, and one to signify the trend. For everything you don’t buy, one less will be there because there is nothing to replace. If you choose brands doing the work to manage resources more wisely, you vote for a future with less waste.

“About nine million tons of plastic end up in the ocean each year,” explains Tom Szaky, CEO of TerraCycle, a global recycling company on a mission to eliminate waste. “Every year more people are producing more waste. According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, by 2050 there will be more plastic by weight in our oceans than fish.”

You want to look great while respecting the planet, right? April Long Mar 15, 2019       Beauty products can have some ugly effects on the environment, choking landfills with trash and polluting our waterways. Thankfully, companies large and small are stepping up their sustainability game, prioritizing the responsible sourcing of ingredients, implementing earth-friendly manufacturing processes, and experimenting with inventive recycling programs. But we all have a role to play. Even the tiniest gestures make an impact, right down to the number of styling products we use in our hair. Here, how you can help.  

The issue: squandering our resources.

  The way plant ingredients in your creams and shampoos are farmed affects local communities and ecosystems—and a product’s overall carbon footprint. One of the most egregious examples is palm oil, whose derivatives appear in a whopping 70 percent of cosmetics. Indiscriminate building of palm oil plantations in Indonesia and Malaysia has decimated rainforests, and research indicates that deforestation releases more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than all the cars and trucks in the world combined. Also, most personal care products use water in manufacturing and as a main ingredient—and the availability of clean, drinkable water is expected to nose-dive by 2050, thanks to climate change, pollution, and increased demand.  

What’s being done?

  Mega-companies are making major changes. L’Oréal, which has committed to being deforestation-free by 2020, and Estée Lauder are working closely with the global nonprofit Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil to ensure that their cultivation methods and sourcing have minimal negative environmental impact.   So is Unilever—the parent company of Dove, St. Ives, and Pond’s—which released its entire supply chain to the public, promising to source all its palm oil sustainably. That’s a big deal, given that Unilever brands go through more than a million metric tons of the stuff per year. In addition, Unilever and L’Oréal are putting resource efficiency front and center, devising innovative ways to use less water in production and with products themselves (low-water-use shampoo, fast-rinse conditioners).   One of the most exciting developments, though, is brought to us by biotechnology, which companies are using to create environmentally responsible ingredients. The skincare line Biossance makes its squalane, a naturally occurring oil traditionally derived from shark livers or olives, from renewable sugarcane, and the brand Algenist’s key anti-agers, alguronic acid and microalgae oil, come from sustainable algae.  

What can you do?

  At home is start by being mindful of your water use. Turn off the shower while shaving, and skip a shampoo occasionally. If you want to go full-on farm-to-face, choose green beauty standouts like Jurlique, Juice Beauty, Dr. Hauschka, and Tata Harper—they all grow botanicals on their own farms. Otherwise, look for labels such as Ecocert, which guarantees the use of renewable ingredients.           Seed Phytonutrients founder Shane Wolf, who worked to develop the first-ever shower-friendly paper bottles, made from 100 percent recycled material and used for the brand’s shampoo, conditioners, cleansers, and hand wash. More than 60 percent of paper is recycled, while less than 10 percent of plastic is, “Any move away from plastic toward paper is a move in the right direction,” says Wolf. And hidden inside each bottle is a packet of seeds, which can be planted to grow heirloom herbs.    

The issue: emissions and pollution.

  Global fossil fuel–related emissions of carbon dioxide reached an estimated record high of 37.1 billion metric tons in 2018, which is putting us on course for a very hot and smoggy planet. Consumers—that’s us!—are calling for accountability and action, and brands are responding.  

What’s being done?

  The big guys are effecting big change. Several items in Garnier’s SkinActive linehave earned Cradle to Cradle certification, which measures environmental impact over the life of a product, and parent company L’Oréal USA has pledged to achieve carbon neutrality for its plants and distribution centers this year by switching to renewable energy. (Fun fact: The Maybelline Great Lash mascaras sold in America are made with 100 percent renewable electricity.)   And remember those plastic microbeads from face scrubs and cleansers that were turning up in lakes and oceans (and fish bellies) a few years ago? They’ve been banned from rinse-off personal care products in the U.S. Small brands are making a difference, too. Most of Tata Harper’s packaging is made from easily recyclable glass (more than one ton of natural resources, like sand or limestone, is saved for every ton of glass recycled), and the plastic used for its tubes is derived from corn rather than petroleum.  

What can you do?

  Try an eco-audit of your own daily beauty regimen, assessing the number of products you buy and how much waste is produced as a result. The Nature Conservatory’s carbon calculator (nature.org) helps you determine your footprint, then offers tips on what you can do to decrease it. One thing you shouldn’t do: Clean your face with a non-biodegradable wet wipe—and you really shouldn’t flush it down the toilet. Why? Just Google “fatberg.”   Former fragrance exec Marcella Cacci launched the skincare line One Ocean Beauty in 2018 with a simple mission: to help protect the health of the oceans. The brand harnesses “blue biotechnology,” which involves reproducing marine extracts from algae, kelp, and seaweed in the lab rather than harvesting them from the sea. This means there’s no impact on the ocean’s natural bounty. “We never hurt the biodiversity,” says Cacci, who adds that the brand has also donated $250,000 to Oceana, the largest global nonprofit focused solely on ocean conservation.  

The issue: waste.

  A staggering eight million metric tons of plastic ends up in the ocean every year, with countless pieces of bottle caps and straws in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, which is actually two large masses between Japan and the U.S. West Coast. If current trends continue, it’s predicted that by 2050, plastic will outweigh fish in our oceans, and 12 billion metric tons of it will sit in landfills. The beauty industry, which produces billions of plastic packaging units annually, has a lot to answer for.  

What’s being done?

  Plenty! Unilever and L’Oréal have committed to using 100 percent recyclable or compostable packaging by 2025; Procter & Gamble, the übercompany behind Pantene, Head & Shoulders, and Herbal Essences, has pledged the same by 2030. Beginning this year, haircare brand Kevin Murphy is going all in, sourcing its packaging from reclaimed ocean plastic, a move that will save more than 360 tons of new plastic annually. Since 2011, Garnier has partnered with TerraCycle to tackle previously unrecyclable beauty packaging, diverting approximately 11.2 million empties from landfills. And at the World Economic Forum in January, a consortium of brands, including REN Clean Skincare and the Body Shop, announced participation in Loop, a shopping program that will offer products in durable packaging that can be returned, sanitized, and reused (like old-school milk bottles). It’s set to launch in the New York City area and France this spring.  

What can you do?

  Excuse us for shouting, but...RECYCLE! According to the Environmental Protection Agency, recycling just ten plastic bottles saves enough energy to power a laptop for more than 25 hours. Since products used in the bathroom tend to have a low recycling rate (people typically keep their bins in the kitchen), make it easier for yourself by keeping a ready receptacle next to the shower. Need more incentive? Kiehl’s, Lush, and MAC offer freebies when you bring in empties, and others, including Origins and Tenoverten (with nail salons in New York City, Los Angeles, and Austin), will accept containers from other brands as well. When shopping, gravitate toward items without excess packaging (or none at all—Lush’s new Naked concept stores offer bath products, haircare in bar form, and facial soaps with no packaging whatsoever), or look for a label that specifies 100 percent recycled content.   Since its inception in 2013, Beautycounter has become one of America’s most trusted sources for cleaner skincare and makeup. Founder Gregg Renfrew’s top goal is ingredient safety (the company’s do-not-use list includes approximately 1,500 chemicals), and she views sustainability as intrinsically linked to that mission. “We’re committed to making decisions that are based on scientific research, but given the large data gaps around safety and sustainability, it’s extremely complicated,” Renfrew says.   To help close those gaps, Beautycounter partners with researchers and universities, and has screened more than 1,000 ingredients for their effects on our health and the environment. Meanwhile, Renfrew is advocating for increased federal oversight to help clean up cosmetics: She and her team have met repeatedly with D.C. lawmakers to lobby for legislation like the Personal Care Products Safety Act, which would give the FDA the power to, among other things, regulate potentially harmful ingredients.  

The issue: animal testing.

  This practice may not be directly related to the environment, but should concern anyone who cares about our fellow living creatures. While the U.S. is inching toward a ban (California will prohibit the sale of cosmetics that have been tested on animals starting next year, and New York and Hawaii have introduced similar legislation), many companies have implemented their own prohibitions on testing. The EU has forbidden it outright, but it’s actually still required for foreign products sold in China. For an international corporation that wants to do business there, this is a problem.  

What’s being done?

  Multinationals and smaller brands alike are pushing for change in China and countries that still permit animal testing; in 2018, the Body Shop and Cruelty Free International (CFI) brought a petition with 8.3 million signatures they’d gathered worldwide to the UN, calling for a global ban.  

What can you do?

  Check labels for a little rabbit; it signifies that CFI’s Leaping Bunny program has certified a product as cruelty-free. If in doubt, check Leaping Bunny’s website or head to PETA to find the rigorously vetted Beauty Without Bunnies list, which ensures that neither brands nor their ingredient suppliers are spritzing hairspray in any animal’s eyes.