《香港連鎖超市 走塑表現評級報告》Greenpeace 綠色和平｜香港辦公室

香港連鎖超市 走塑表現評級報告 Plastics at the Checkout:

How Hong Kong Supermarkets Rank on Plastics

目 錄 Table of contents P. 1

摘要 Abstract 引言 Introduction

P. 2-4

超市走塑評級方法及概要 Plastic-free Ratings of Supermarkets in Hong Kong

P. 5-8

香港超市表現詳細分析 A list of the performance of various supermarkets

P. 9-13

全球超市現行走塑方案 Current global plastic-free projects in supermarkets

P. 14-16

生物塑膠或紙包裝非出路 Bioplastic and paper packaging are not good substitutes P. 17

P. 18

綠色和平倡議 Greenpeace recommendations 英文版 English version

P. 19-33 P. 34

參考文獻 References

Cover: © Patrick Cho / Greenpeace

摘要 這份報告由綠色和平東亞分部香港辦公室（以下簡稱「綠色和平」）評 估香港連鎖超市在塑膠包裝使用以及走塑行動的表現。依據各超市在 香港的分店數目以及市場佔有率，綠色和平於2019年8月向七大連鎖超 市品牌的管理層發出問卷，包括（依字首筆畫或首字母排序）：一田、 牛奶公司、屈臣氏集團、華潤、AEON、City’super及Marks & Spencer。 本報告根據超市於問卷所提供之資料，以及透過公開資訊，包括官方網 站、年報及媒體報道等，就四大範疇：「走塑政策」、「減塑措施」、「倡 議與創新」和「資訊透明」進行評分。調查結果顯示，全部超市的走塑表 現均不合格。屈臣氏集團及牛奶公司均為超市龍頭，但牛奶公司各方面 的走塑表現也明顯較遜色，應盡快卸走無謂塑膠包裝。

1

© Greenpeace

引言 ++++++++++++

塑膠污染日趨嚴重 ++++++++++++

全球海洋正面臨塑膠垃圾 成災的危機，估計每年約 有多達1,270萬噸的塑膠垃圾流入海洋1。然而，全球 塑膠產量在過去50年間不斷飆升，從1964年的1,500 萬噸，增加到2014年的3.11億噸，其中26%來自於塑 膠包裝2。 我們日常生活中，很多塑膠包裝和製品都設計為即用 即棄，短暫使用後便成為垃圾，卻存在於環境中長達 數百年。塑膠垃圾無處不在，遍佈世界由最高的山脈 至最深的海溝 3,4，直接威脅近700種海洋生物 5，估計 每3隻海龜，就有1隻曾誤食塑膠 6、更有90%海鳥體內 更含有塑膠7；本港有研究發現，6成本地野生烏頭樣 本含有微塑膠，平均每條野生烏頭含有4.3塊塑膠碎 片，當中一條更含多達80塊 8。綠色和平隨後解剖多 條於街市購買的海魚及烏頭，同樣發現其體內含有塑 膠碎片9。我們於2019年3月發佈的香港首個全面海岸 塑膠污染研究《塑膠圍港：香港海域塑膠分佈2018》 報告亦發現，香港水域的平均微塑膠濃度3年間更急 升超過11倍10。

© Vincent Chan / Greenpeace

2

塑膠不只污染海洋，更有可能危害人體健康。微塑膠 如落入海洋其表面會黏附如農藥、塑化劑等的持久性 有機污染物，被海洋生物誤吃後，有害物質或會累積 體內，再經食物鏈進入人體，帶來健康風險，包括干 擾內分泌系統11，孕婦及發育中的小孩尤其容易受到 影響。此外，塑膠包裝或容器本身亦含塑化劑等化學 品，容易透過直接接觸殘留在食物12，長期接觸有可 能造成人體內分泌失調，甚或損害生殖機能或引發健 康危機13。 超過9 0%塑膠來自於化石原料14，從生產製造至扔 棄，塑膠製品整個生命週期都存在對環境的威脅，例 如開採與運輸石油時，過程產生的碳排放會加劇氣候 變化，亦會破壞動植物的棲息地；使用塑膠製品時經 摩擦或清洗會釋出微塑膠污染環境，以至丟棄後亦會 成為難以分解或清理的海洋塑膠等各種問題。 ++++++++++++

回收絕非出路 ++++++++++++

1950年以來，全球共生產約83億噸塑膠，其中僅9% 被成功回收15；2013年全球使用的塑膠包裝中，僅有

© Patrick Cho / Greenpeace 超市貨品被大量塑膠包裹著，這些包裝拆後即棄，造成浪費和污染環境。

14%被回收與重用，其餘約14%由焚化爐處理、40% 丟棄至堆填區，更有近三分之一在我們的自然環境之 中16。由此可見，塑膠垃圾並未被妥善管理。 事實上，最終被焚燒的塑膠比回收的多17，而燃燒塑 膠會釋放出有毒物質（例如二噁英），從而危害人體 健康18。以台灣為例，雖然有強制回收分類政策，但大 部分塑膠的回收率偏低，每天大量的塑膠垃圾依舊被 送進焚化爐19。即使當地膠樽PET的回收率高達96% ，每年仍有1億8800萬支即棄膠樽沒被回收 20。由此 可見，「可回收塑膠」極有可能最終只會被焚燒、送至 堆填區或流入自然環境，政府與企業不應再聲稱回收 能解決問題。唯有重新全面思考產品的生產、運輸、 銷售和末端處理，包括革新物流與銷售模式，採用可 循環再用的包裝，並確保資源能在循環經濟（circular economy）內重複使用或回收，才能真正遏止塑膠進 一步污染海洋。 ++++++++++++

超市在走塑的關鍵角色 ++++++++++++

綠色和平於去年初發佈的香港首個全面海岸塑膠污 染研究《塑膠圍港：香港海域塑膠分佈2018》報告， 發現香港沿岸水域已遍佈聚苯乙烯（PS）和聚乙烯 （PE）材質的塑膠垃圾，這兩種材質常見於即棄食品 © Greenpeace

3

香港廢塑膠回收率只有約一成，每年大量 塑膠垃圾被棄置於堆填區或流入海洋。

城市、企業和社區都積極採取行動。很多政府都禁 止使用不同類型的即棄塑膠，例如中國、印度、義大 © Greenpeace 於去年9月中發起「超市收塑大作戰－行動篇」，吸引超過60個家庭參與， 一同儲起7日來自超市貨品的膠包裝，最後共收集逾2000件塑膠包裝。

利、法國以及十多個非洲國家都 採用了不同形式的 膠袋禁令 23,24。 2018年，歐盟通過了「循環經濟塑膠策略25」，以改變

包裝。要解決塑膠包裝帶來的污染，超市扮演着舉足

「塑膠產品的設計、使用、生產和回收方式」26為方

輕重的角色。

向。另外，歐盟委員會提出議案，逐步禁止海洋垃圾 中，最常見的10種即棄塑膠製品27。香港政府於2019

全港數百間超市店鋪每天售賣無數食材、零食、飲品

年10月公佈的施政報告中，亦提及會「與零售業界合

及日常用品等產品，可是大部分產品都預先被即棄塑

作，推廣及鼓勵減少使用塑膠包裝物料」。

膠包裹著，令顧客難以走塑。事實上，超市擁有對上 架貨品、其包裝方式及銷售模式的決定權，可以與生

全球多國為了源頭減廢，紛紛立法禁用不同類型的即

產商、供應商和進口代理商等溝通合作，亦可從自家

棄塑膠製品，正提醒著超市必須盡快採取行動。市場

品牌產品或卸走自行包上的塑膠開始，絕對有能力減

競爭越來越激烈，除了價格戰，若超市能創造「方便」

少使用即棄包裝。

以外的價值，例如倡議環保、提升顧客購物經驗等， 相信有助提升顧客忠誠度。超市應重新思考包裝的必

香港不少消費者也希望超市盡快走塑，綠色和平於

要性，回應顧客的走塑訴求，更可提高品牌競爭力。我

2019年4月委託樹仁大學進行民意調查 21，發現逾9成

們期待香港的超市能更有遠見，並果斷地展開行動，

消費者認為超市須卸走無謂包裝，亦有近7成人傾向

卸走無謂包裝。

光顧減用無謂包裝的超市。而6、7月期間，我們更與過 百名市民組成「全城超市查膠隊」22，一同建立超市使 用塑膠情況資料庫，發現逾八成超市貨品被包膠，當 中過半更是由超市自行加上。調查結果亦顯示，切件 裝生果貨品全部被包上塑膠，而蔬菜及熟食的整體包 膠率均超過九成，自家品牌新鮮烘培品和完整生果則 分別有74%及67%被包上塑膠，情況嚴重。 ++

源頭減塑成新趨勢消費者走塑意識抬頭++

隨著大眾對塑膠污染的關注日益增加，全球各國、

© Tai Ngai Lung / Greenpeace 於10月舉辦亞洲首個跨地域超市業界論壇，與超市管理層展開深入對話， 他們均表明有「走塑」的意願，並推出多項措施，包括開設「裸買補充站」、 加強內部培訓等，但步伐仍未追上市民對超市卸走無謂包裝的訴求。

4

超市走塑評級方法及概要

結果與主要發現

整體得分

註1

註2

（100分為滿分）

走塑政策

減塑措施

倡議及創新

資訊透明度

27.1

26%

24%

26%

36%

16.7

14%

10%

20%

32%

15.5

11%

15%

13%

23%

不願提供資料的超市： Aeon、City’super、Marks & Spencer及華潤萬家

註1 - 屈臣氏集團旗下的超市品牌包括：百佳、Fusion、Taste、International、Great等 註2 - 牛奶公司旗下的超市品牌包括：惠康及Market Place by Jasons等

整體評語 根據超市集團回答我們問卷時所提供的訊息及公開資料，全部超市的走塑表現均不合格，主要原因是因 各集團未有以源頭減廢作原則，以及針對減少塑膠包裝使用量，提出全面的走塑政策、時間表或目標。

全面淘汰即棄塑膠製品的目標或措施：

5

屈臣氏集團未有減售其他即棄塑膠產品，僅停售即棄塑膠飲管

其他超市未有淘汰任何類型即棄塑膠製品

全部超市均沒有為全面淘汰即棄塑膠製品制訂目標

減少塑膠用量的整體政策：

屈臣氏集團旗下幾間超市分店試行裸裝蔬果計劃

牛奶公司減輕塑膠包裝重量計劃仍在試行階段

部分超市以其他即棄物料取代塑膠，但並非有效減廢的方法， 例如：City’super及一田正採用生物可降解的膠袋

全部超市均沒有制訂全面走塑政策

倡議與創新措施： ✔ 創新方面，屈臣氏集團在一間分店設立裸買補充站，售賣一系列沒有預先包裝的 個人及家居清潔用品，顧客可自備容器按量購買，並聲稱將會擴展計劃 ✔ City’super、一田及屈臣氏集團提供鼓勵自備容器的誘因，例如於熟食區域提供 自備容器的折扣優惠 ✔ 一田有提供無塑購物選項，如沒有預先包裝的油、醋等，不過顧客購買時只能使 用店內提供的全新容器盛載，未可使用自備的器皿，但表示將會設立裸買補充站

其餘超市都沒有提出走塑購物選項，無意朝向「源頭減廢」的方向，改用可重用容 器、改變物流系統或轉型

資訊透明度： ✔ 一田有記錄及願意提供各項即棄塑膠包裝的使用量，資料大致齊全

屈臣氏集團及牛奶公司則提供少部分產品的塑膠包裝使用量

其餘超市皆未有提供相關資訊，亦未在來年年報的企業社會責任部分中， 公佈任何塑膠使用量以及走塑有關的行動與成效

全部超市皆未有主動全面公開塑膠使用量及相關政策

綜觀所有超市， ✔ 屈臣氏集團、一田及牛奶公司在走塑整體表現上比其餘超市較佳 City’super、AEON、華潤及Marks & Spencer表現並不理想只有極低分數 屈臣氏集團、一田在倡議及創新及資訊透明上尤其突出，但在走塑行動方面卻未如理想，屈臣氏集團雖取 得比一田較高分數，但仍未達合格水平；而牛奶公司整體表現都較遜色，在走塑政策取得最低分。 至於City’super、AEON、華潤及Marks & Spencer則未有回應綠色和平的超市塑膠使用問卷調查。不過 City’super和AEON於其官方網頁等網上資料及媒體報道中，透露極少量關於走塑的公開資料，因而仍能 勉強為其評分；其餘兩家（華潤及Marks & Spencer）則從未公開任何走塑資訊或措施，表現不可接受。

6

超市走塑評級方法及概要 評級方法

《香港連鎖 超市走塑表現評級報告》參考綠色和平應用於全球多個國家或 地區，包括美國、英國、西 班牙及台灣等超市走塑表現評分準則，並依據各超市在香港的分店數目以及市場佔有率，調整訂下適 用於香港市場的「超市塑膠使用問卷調查」及評分方法。於2019年8月向七大連鎖超市品牌的管理層 發出問卷，包括（依字首筆畫或首字母排序）：一田、牛奶公司、屈臣氏集團、華潤、AEON、City’super 及Mar ks&Spencer。問卷針對「即棄塑膠包 裝」、「即棄塑膠製品」、「供 應鏈合作」、「員工訓練、 消費者溝通及 政策倡議」及「資訊公開及 透明度」五大範疇，邀請超市用約兩個月時間回覆，其中華 潤、AEON、City’super及Marks & Spencer四間超市未有回覆。 綠色和平根據超市於問卷所提供之資料，以及透過公開資訊，包括各品牌的官方網站、年報及媒體報道等， 就四大範疇：走塑政策、減塑措施、倡議與創新和資訊透明進行評分。

評分根據各超市：

走塑政策 （得分比重20%）

1

有否制定即時及長期「減少即棄塑膠」的政策

2

長遠能否做到可持續的商業營運模式

要取得高分，超市需制定完整政策及具體的執行路線圖，包括整體走塑目標、 供應商包裝規範，以及淘汰不可回收或難以回收的塑膠包裝。

評分根據各超市： 1

有否針對即棄塑膠包裝與即棄塑膠製品 （包括飲管、餐具、含微膠珠的產品）的減塑措施

減塑措施 （得分比重35%）

2

有否訂立明確的減塑時間表

要取得高分，超市必須公開承諾逐步減少使用即棄塑膠， 並已實行循序漸進的走塑措施。

7

評分根據超市： 1

有否計劃或推行無塑購物選項，方便顧客自備可重用器皿， 按需要份量購買。

倡議與創新 （得分比重20%）

2

有否與生產商、供應商等合作，從源頭減少使用即棄包裝

要取得高分，超市需重新設計物流系統或產品設計，與自家品牌及上架 品牌供應商合作，從產品設計著手，以循環再用為原則，提供可大規模 推行的替代方案，而非單一計劃、或用另一種即棄材料。

評分根據各超市：

資訊透明 （得分比重25%）

1

有否主動公開用膠量及減塑措施相關的資訊

2

有否計劃定期主動公佈用膠量及走塑政策等資料讓大眾了解

要取得高分，超市需提供全年塑膠使用量，包括塑膠包裝以及即棄塑 膠物品的重量、數量以及類別， 並承諾未來會持續定期公佈。

綠色和平「超市塑膠使用量問卷調查」詳情 這份問卷旨在了解香港主要連鎖超市的塑膠使用情況、已推行及計劃中的減塑措施，以及目前面對的挑戰，同 時評估各超市目前採取的走塑方案是否有需要進一步改進與創新，綜合結果從而提供建議。調查主題包括： 即棄塑膠包裝註3用量

詢問各間超市於2018年售賣的貨品所使用的塑膠包裝量，以及任何走塑政策、 目標或策略。

即棄塑膠製品註4用量 供應鏈合作

詢問超市每年的塑膠使用量、減量措施，以及是否有設定全面淘汰目標。 詢問超市與自家品牌供應商、其他品牌供應商、蔬果供應商和海鮮供應商的合作 情況，有否按減少即棄塑膠包裝為目標準則，以及有否管理與農業、漁業生產活 動有關所產生的塑膠垃圾。

員工訓練、消費者溝通

詢問超市對員工關於走塑的內部培訓，例如有否指導員工減少使用包裝；如何提

及政策倡議

倡走塑，包括有否利用不同渠道教育消費者走塑；以及有否透過任何形式支持減 少塑膠污染的創新政策或行動。

資訊公開及透明度

詢問超市有否計劃定期主動向大眾公佈使用塑膠情況的細節，包括使用量和減塑 措施。

註3 - 設計為僅使用一次然後丟棄的塑膠包裝（包括可回收或不可回收類型），如塑膠袋、膠盒、網袋、膠盤、膠樽、平頭保鮮袋等 註4 - 由超市提供的如膠袋、平頭保鮮袋、即棄餐具、飲料杯、調味料盤、攪拌棒等

8

屈臣氏集團

香港超市表現詳細分析

分店

數目 全 港分 店超 過

25 0 間

主要品牌

整體得分

走塑政策

減塑措施

倡議及創新

資訊透明度

27.1 / 100

26%

24%

26%

36%

基本資料 屈臣氏集團旗下的超市品牌包括百佳、Fusion、Great、International、Taste等，市場佔有率最高。在綠色和平 早前的全城查膠結果中，百佳、Fusion、International及Taste的包膠率分別達84%、74%、80%及88%28。 已實行的政策包括：成立負責與供應商制定合適走塑包裝指引的工作小組，以及在自家品 牌設立使用對環境友善的包裝指引。可惜集團未能提供具體的全面走塑時間表和目標，或 走塑政策

塑膠使用量，因此無法估算現行政策能省去多少塑膠。 實行減少「即棄塑膠製品」的措施，包括在燒味部提供自攜容器優惠，試行共享環保購物

減塑措施

袋、以及已全面停售即棄塑膠飲管和含微膠珠的沖洗性產品。 為全港首間大型超市於旗下一間分店設立裸買補充站，讓顧客自備器皿購買洗手液、洗頭水、 洗衣液等個人護理及家居清潔用品，而且表示會擴展計劃，但暫未提供進一步的具體細節。

倡議與創新

此外，集團積極參與多個推動零售業界走塑的工作小組，包括推動膠樽生產者責任制等。 在香港多間超市中，此集團的走塑政策透明度最高，提供較多資料，包括部份即棄塑膠製 品的銷售量及主動公開裸賣蔬果試行計劃的成效等。不過即棄塑膠包裝使用量方面，只提

資訊透明

供了自家品牌的資料，未有其他品牌的資料。另外，他們表示正考慮在企業社會責任報告中 公開塑膠使用總量，綠色和平將繼續監督。

整體建議 屈臣氏集團的減塑措施工作相對其他超市較多，不過仍欠缺整體走塑政策或目標，與合格標 準尚有距離。作為超市佔有率最高的集團，為環境減廢責無旁貸，若集團願意為走塑再走前 一步，絕對有助加快整個業界的走塑步伐。綠色和平建議屈臣氏集團： • 立即承諾在2020年完成統計整體的塑膠足跡， 並於社會企業責任報告書中公佈； • 根據塑膠足跡的統計數據，設定整體走塑目標； • 擴展現時小規模試行的走塑計劃至全港更多地 區，包括裸買補充站及新鮮蔬果區裸賣項目； • 立刻淘汰不必要、難以回收以及不可回收的塑膠 包裝，如泡膠網、PVC保鮮紙、發泡膠果盤等；

• 推行以「可循環再用」為原則的走塑計劃，如：容器 租借、購物袋租借、飲料杯租借等； • 與更多不同品牌的供應商合作，或先由自家品牌著 手，從個人護理及家庭清潔用品以至食物等，以裸 買補充站形式售賣； • 長期而言，屈臣氏集團應承諾持續擴大「可重用包 裝」的規模，並積極與供應商合作，追蹤並公佈塑 膠足跡，向大眾說明走塑的成效，朝向可持續的商 業模式轉型。

9

分店數

一田

目 全 港分 店數目

8間

整體得分

走塑政策

減塑措施

倡議及創新

資訊透明度

16.7 / 100

14%

10%

20%

32%

基本資料 一田屬香港新鴻基地產旗下的百貨公司，設有超市部，全港共有8間分店。 在綠色和平早前的全城查膠結果中，包膠率達99%。

有單一的減塑措施，如在熟食部提

在 店內不 擺 放平頭保 鮮膠袋，並

供自攜容器優惠，但無提出整體的 走塑政策

走塑計劃。

減塑措施

在店外設有紙包飲品回收箱。

唯一有提供全面塑膠包裝使用量

倡議與創新

提供裸裝貨品銷售，如油、醋、果仁

的超市，並且表明願意配合每年回

等，表示將會設立裸買補充站，但

應相關問卷，希望一田往後能進一

是沒有提供計劃的相關資料。

資訊透明

步提升資訊透明，主動向大眾公開 用膠量及走塑進度。

整體建議 相比其他超市聲稱未能整理內部的塑膠使用量，一田的資料則大致齊全，並願意配合， 已領先業界一步，亦是制訂全面走塑目標的好開始。綠色和平建議一田： • 利用資料齊全的優勢，進一步審視不同貨品使用

• 一田的購物袋添加了「P-Life」，聲稱為生物可降解

即棄塑膠情況，列出所面對的走塑挑戰後，決定

的膠袋。然而，這些添加劑只會令一般膠袋更易碎

從哪種貨品開始減塑，例如可先從自家品牌的產

裂成微塑膠，帶來更嚴重的環境污染，適得其反。

品卸下包裝，再與供應商合作走塑，繼而制訂包

一田不應打算以其他即棄物料（包括生物可降解膠

含時間表的整體走塑計劃；

袋）取代塑膠，而應發展「裸賣」的銷售模式，讓顧

• 一田的包膠率達99%，塑膠包裝情況最嚴重，但 仍未有全面走塑政策，應盡快檢視可立刻淘汰 的即棄塑膠包裝，並回應顧客的訴求，逐步發展 以「可循環再用」包裝為主的銷售模式；

客使用可重用的器皿購物，以及訂立全面的走塑時 間表及目標； • 立刻淘汰不必要、難以回收以及不可回收的塑膠包 裝，並增設不同商品的「裸賣」銷售選項以鼓勵可 重用容器，例如擴展裸買補充站、擴大新鮮蔬果區 裸賣項目。

10

香港超市表現詳細分析

牛奶公司集團

分店

主要品牌

數目 全 港分 店超 過

32 0 間

整體得分

走塑政策

減塑措施

倡議及創新

資訊透明度

15.5 / 100

11%

15%

13%

23%

基本資料 牛奶公司旗下的超市品牌包括惠康及Market Place by Jasons等，分店總數目是全港之冠，市場佔有率則排名 第二。在綠色和平早前的全城查膠結果中，惠康及Market Place by Jasons的包膠率分別達82%及83%。

走塑政策

已制訂內部員工使用包裝指引，但無提出

在店內停止提供即棄塑膠餐具，以及

整體減少即棄塑膠使用量的計劃；著重減

停售含微膠珠的沖洗性產品；正研究

輕某些類別產品的即棄塑膠包裝重量，例 如蔬果的包裝，但仍處於試行階段。

減塑措施

針對其他即棄塑膠製品及塑膠包裝

但缺乏實際的創新政策與塑膠足跡紀 錄。

全面減塑計劃。 只提供自家品牌的飲品包裝使用量，

參與膠樽生產者責任制的業界討論， 倡議與創新

如何減少部分蔬果包裝，卻未有提出

資訊透明

的使 用量，牛奶公司僅稱 難以取得 數據。

整體建議 為減少塑膠包裝使用量，牛奶公司向員工提供包裝指引，為各產品訂下包裝數量準則，值得其他超市效法。不 過綠色和平早前實地考察，發現此集團旗下多間超市分店所使用的塑膠包裝方法及數量大有不同，難以評估 其其員工有否實際執行指引，建議牛奶公司加強培訓及配套，確保指引得以落實。 牛奶公司作為全港超市市場佔有率第二的集團，分店數目最多，卻少有公開與走塑相關的資訊，措施亦較少， 遠遠比不上競爭者如百佳及一田進取。為了在行業中維持競爭力，並且負起減少製造即棄塑膠垃圾的責任，綠 色和平建議牛奶公司： • 全面審查所有貨品（包括自家品牌與其他品牌）的 塑膠包裝使用量，並且定期向大眾公佈； • 盡快訂下各方面走塑相關的短期及長遠政策，包括 減量、創新及公開資訊三大範疇，更具策略及完整 地減少塑膠包裝，而非靠單一或不定期走塑措施； • 需積極關產品包裝所帶來的環境問題，並向公眾提 升資訊透明度。 • 作為行業龍頭，除了負起企業責任外，更應善用其在 消費者間無可取代的廣泛影響力，傳遞走塑訊息； • 立即著手優先淘汰難以回收及對環境較易帶來污 染的即棄塑膠產品及包裝，例如飲管、PVC保鮮 紙、發泡膠等；

11

• 牛奶公司作為擁有最多超市分店的集團，卻仍未有 計劃引入「可循環再用」的銷售模式，應當急起直 追競爭者，盡快試行裸賣形式，讓顧客可自備容器 按量購買； • 應參考其他大部分連鎖超市已推出走塑折扣優惠 的做法，鼓勵客人自備容器，相信在其他大規模的 減塑政策落實前，這是最快可以推出的減塑措施； • 在走塑環節中，集團應就員工、供應商或自家品牌 的製造商，提供清晰並以源頭減廢作原則的包裝 指引。

分店數

City’super

目 全 港分 店數目

4間

整體得分

走塑政策

1.9 / 100

2%

減塑措施

倡議及創新

2%

資訊透明度

3%

1%

基本資料 屬City Super Group旗下，在香港共有4間分店。在綠色和平早前的全城查膠結果中，包膠率達82%。 沒有公開資訊顯示有全面的走塑

部分分店設有發泡膠果網回收點，

政策，只有數項單一計劃，包括熟 食部提供自攜容器折扣優惠。

走塑政策

City’super於售賣熟食及沙律方

未能於公開資料中找到任何整體

面，提供自備容器的折扣優惠，鼓

塑膠足跡的資訊，或整體減少即棄

勵顧客走塑。

倡議與創新

但其他相關的公開資訊非常有限。

減塑措施

塑膠的措施或承諾。

資訊透明

整體建議 City’super並沒有回覆本次綠色和平發出的超市塑膠使用量問卷調查，本報告的資料大部分來自於公開 可取得之資訊。另外，從媒體報道所見，City’super以生物可降解的塑膠作店內蔬果的包裝物料，以及添加 「P-Life」於膠袋。可是，此兩種方式都並非真正解決塑膠問題的方法，不但提高營運成本，更有可能帶來另一 場環境危機。因此，綠色和平建議City’super在減量措施及走塑政策上要盡快起步，推行實際的走塑工作，包 括朝著改用「可循環再用」容器的方向，而非純粹改用其他即棄物料。 AEON

分店

數目 全 港分 店數目

11 間

整體得分

走塑政策

1 / 100

2%

減塑措施

倡議及創新

0%

資訊透明

0%

3%

基本資料 AEON屬永旺（香港）百貨有限公司旗下的超市，總部設於日本，目前在香港有11間超市分店。在綠色和平早前 的全城查膠結果中，包膠率達89%。

走塑政策

AEON在店內張貼海報向顧客宣傳走塑，並不

無 公 開的 減 塑 措 施 相 關

定期舉行活動鼓勵顧客自攜環保袋及器皿購

資料，在走塑的議題上相

物，但沒有整體淘汰即棄塑膠的策略或目標。

減塑措施

AEON從未發佈整體塑膠

綠色和平在公開資訊中並未發現其有任何全面 倡議與創新 整體建議

或具規模的走塑計劃。

對被動。

足跡的資訊，或整體減少 資訊透明

即棄塑膠的措施或承諾。

AEON並沒有回覆本次綠色和平發出的超市塑膠使用量問卷調查，本報告的資料 大部分是來自於公開可取得之資訊。面對當前的塑膠危機，並無資訊顯示AEON 積極關注或投入資源應對，應加快腳步跟上。

12

香港超市表現詳細分析

華潤

分店

數目 全 港分 店數目

64 間

整體得分

走塑政策

0 / 100

0%

減塑措施

倡議及創新

0%

0%

資訊透明度

0%

基本資料 華潤萬家是由華潤集團擁有，Uselect則由華潤集團及英國超市聯營，各擁有17及47間分店。 在綠色和平早前 的全城查膠結果中，華潤萬家及Uselect的包膠率分別達79%及78%。

走塑政策

綠色和平在公開資訊中並未找到

華潤沒有任何現行或即將推行的走塑

華潤有公佈任何走塑相關的現行

行動，綠色和平亦找不到其減塑措施相

或長期政策。

減塑措施

綠色和平在公開資訊或華潤店鋪

無任何關於塑膠足跡的公開資訊，或整

內，均未發現其有任何走塑倡議， 倡議與創新 整體建議

關資料，在走塑的議題上相對被動。

或創新的走塑計劃。

資訊透明

體減少即棄塑膠的做法或承諾。

華潤並沒有回覆本次綠色和平發出的超市塑膠使用量問卷調查，本報告的資料大 部分是來自於公開可取得之資訊。集團擁有的超市分店數目排全港第三，而且整 體業務多元，有責任亦有充裕的資源，一起解決當前的塑膠危機。華潤應該立刻 加快腳步，回應顧客走塑的意願。

Marks & Spencer

分店數

目 全 港分 店數目

7間

整體得分

走塑政策

減塑措施

倡議及創新

資訊透明

0 / 100

0%

0%

0%

0%

基本資料

Marks & Spencer原屬英國Marks & Spencer百貨，現在香港的7間分店由中東 公司Al-Futtaim特許經營。在綠色和平早前的全城查膠結果中，包膠率達79%。 英國Marks&Spencer公佈的走塑

在公開資訊中並未發現任何減塑

計劃及時間表，並未有表明適用於 走塑政策

倡議與創新 整體建議

香港，而在香港的官方渠道上亦沒 有任何相關資訊。

措施，香港的Marks&Spencer在 減塑措施

走塑的議題上相對被動。

綠色和平未找到香港的Mar ks&

不論在官方網站或媒體報道等公

Spencer為走塑有創新的嘗試或計

開資訊，M ar ks &S p encer 無公

劃，也未見到其打算投入資源發展 無塑購物選項的規劃。

資訊透明

開其走 塑政 策、措施，或總體 塑 膠足跡。

Marks&Spencer沒有正式回覆本次綠色和平發出的超市塑膠使用量問卷調查，本報告的 資料大部分是來自於公開可取得之資訊。面對當前的塑膠危機，既然英國Marks&Spencer 已制訂長遠走塑政策及相應行動，香港分公司亦應盡快投入資源，加快腳步跟上。

13

全球超市現行走塑方案 要解決即棄塑膠包裝帶來的環境問題，超市應以「減少即棄、提倡重用」為原則，為顧客提供 無塑購物選項及配套。至於如何實踐，綠色和平有以下建議： 1

新鮮食材需要標籤辨識和保鮮期的問題，可使用創新技術來代替即棄塑膠包裝，例如： Laser food labeling（西班牙）

西 班 牙公司 L a s e r Fo o d率先開發了鐳射 標 籤 系統，稱為「N a t u r a l Branding」，利用鐳射技術，將產品訊息的標籤直接打印在蔬果的表 皮，以代替貼紙及減少使用塑膠29，亦不用耗費其他物料。2014年，該公 司與在100多個國家銷售食品加工設備的JBT Corporation公司合作。荷 蘭蔬果供應商Nature&More 30、瑞典超市ICA和比利時超市Delhaize 31 等也正在使用這項技術。ICA業務部門經理Peter Hagg表示：「在一整年 出售的全部有機牛油果上使用Natural Branding，我們能節省長200公

© Shutterstock

里、寬30厘米的塑膠，加起來的數量很驚人。32」 Food in the nude（紐西蘭）

零售商Foodstuffs啟動了一個名為「裸食」 （Food in the nude）的計劃，與 供應商合作，從供應鏈卸走大部分水果和蔬菜上的即棄塑膠包裝。他們安 裝冷藏系統，使用含維他命的噴霧來保持產品新鮮，從而確保無需使用即 棄包裝，也可維持產品的保鮮期。此系統啟用以來，部分蔬菜的銷量增加了 三倍33。此系統成為全球新興的即棄塑膠替代方案，並可以在供應鏈的每個 © Patrick Cho / Greenpeace

2

階段（包括收成後）使用，延長產品的保存時間。

乾貨及日常護理產品（包括米、堅果以及洗頭水等），超市可安裝食物分配器和簡易秤重系統， 讓顧客自備容器或使用商店提供的可重用容器，按需要購買合適的份量，例如： 聯合利華洗護髮補充站（菲律賓）

聯合利華的裸賣補充站，讓顧客可自備其品牌的洗髮水和護髮素樽，添 購補充旗下產品，如Dove、Sunsilk和TRESemmé34等，售價按克計算。 因為只計算所產品淨重量，顧客無需額外支付包裝費用，比購買預先包 裝的產品便宜。這個補充站在當地購物中心試行一個月，展示了國際品 © Dennis Reher / Greenpeace

牌絕對有能力減少即棄包裝。 Unpackaged（英國）

Unpackaged始於2006年的一個市集攤位，隨後在倫敦開設一間概念 店，消費者可以在那裡購買散裝產品。該公司開發了一種自助式的公秤， 可以減去容器的重量，方便消費者自備容器盛載購買。店內設有簡單的說 © Isabelle Rose Povey / Greenpeace

明，讓顧客理解走塑購物的過程和好處 35。Unpacked最近更與英國主 要零售商 Waitrose合作36，計劃經營大型超市規模的走塑商店。

14

3

除了膠袋徵費外，超市亦可為忘記自備購物袋的顧客提供 「租借」方案，減少即棄塑膠的使用量，例如： Boomerang Bags（在13個國家運營）

Boomerang Bags是一個始於澳洲的民間專案，目前在全球952個社區 運作。這個計劃將民眾捐贈的布料製成環保袋，然後分發給參與的零售 商。忘記自備購物袋的顧客可以借用袋子，用完之後將其歸還商店。該計 劃若要大規模實行，可加設小額按金，更能有效確保顧客歸還購物袋。 該公司表示已手工製作20多萬個袋子，等於減少堆填區近8萬公斤的垃 圾，包括本來會變成垃圾的布料及省掉的膠袋37。 家樂福與愛買（台北） 家樂福和愛買與台北市環保局合作，於參與店鋪出租環保袋。如果顧客 忘記自備袋子，可支付小額按金租用環保袋，並可在30天之內於指定商 © Patrick Cho / Greenpeace

店退還。其後購物袋會由洗衣公司清洗，再送回超市備用38。

循環再用包裝的經營模式及效益 面對九成港人希望超市走塑的意願，超市可再進一步推廣「循環再用」概念，例如要求供應商 配合，改良包裝設計。這不僅是蔚為潮流的趨勢，更為企業和消費者帶來好處。「循環再用」的 模式不僅可以為企業降低成本、改善物流與營運，還可以滿足顧客個人化需求，有助提高客人 對品牌忠誠度和消費體驗，更可以同時幫助企業收集顧客喜好。設立可重用的包裝的經營模式 有以下兩種： ++++++++++++

按量售賣散裝貨品 ++++++++++++

顧客自備容器到商店購買食品或家用清潔劑等產品（例如米、堅果、油或洗髮精等），類似的商 店有Unpackaged、Home Work等。此模式讓顧客按需要購買，企業可從中收集他們的喜好資 訊。 如果忘記自攜容器，店鋪亦可提供即場的容器租借服務，並收取按金鼓勵客人歸還。 按量售賣散裝貨品

1

產品放在可重複 使用的容器中出售

15

2

店內有秤重或量器 以方便定價

3

顧客以自備容器購物 或向店鋪租借容器

++++++++++++

重新設計產品，換上可循環再用的包裝 ++++++++++++

店鋪以「可循環再用」的容器，預先包裝產品，並讓顧客可透過兩種方式歸還容器 ： 1

利用物流服務，歸還產品包裝，讓企業可

2

顧客在甲地購買產品後，能在甲／乙地歸還，或透過郵

以清洗與補充產品（例如LOOP平台，與

遞、回收機歸還「可循環再用」的包裝。此模式的關鍵

知名品牌合作，他們把 顧客訂 購的食品

在於按金機制的設計，鼓勵用戶歸還包裝，但按金又不

或個人用品盛載於可重用的容器中，再郵

至於過高令顧客難以負擔。此外，企業需確保收集站的

遞至顧客）。此模式的成功關鍵是建立物

數量和密度充足，方便歸還。包裝的標準化、與不同品

流、清洗與重複補充的基礎系統。

牌共享物流和清洗設施，有助於擴大循環再用的規模。

重新設計產品，換上可循環再用的包裝

1

產品盛載在可重複

2

使用的容器

顧客將產品盛載

3

於家中容器

顧客把補充裝產品的容器退還， 並由第三方清潔（退還的地方可以 是店鋪、收集點或店家上門回收）

循環再用模式對企業的六大效益 1

濃縮型的補充產品，降低成本：

4

推行可循環再用包裝的按金和獎勵計劃，能夠

行補充，可降低運輸成本。以個人清潔用品牌

提高品牌忠誠度。例如，RePack提供線上購物

Blueland，便節省近九成物流開支 。

按金，鼓勵顧客歸還可重複使用的包裝42。

39

2

3

按金制度和獎勵計劃，提升品牌忠誠：

經濃縮的補充產品，供顧客以可重用的容器自

滿足顧客個人化需求：

5

優質設計，提升消費體驗：

不將產品預先包裝，能更滿足消費者的個人化

Loop平台為知名品牌產品重新設計可循環再用

需求。例如，百事可樂Spires飲品機，讓顧客使

包裝，其設計可同時提升質感及功能（例如，雙層

用自己攜帶的容器，自行混合和搭配不同口味，

金屬桶讓冰淇淋離開冰箱後保持數小時不融化）

並選擇所需份量40。

，吸引消費者，並可以重複多次使用攤分成本。

共享設計，改善物流與營運：

6

運用智能系統，收集顧客喜好：

跨品牌和產業鏈統一可重用的包裝設計，有助

可循環再用的包裝，能夠配合 RFID 智能標籤、

大規範生產，令企業的物流與營運成本降低。例

傳感器和 GPS 追蹤等技術，以深入收集商業

如，可口可樂在巴西所有旗下飲品的膠樽改為可

資訊和消費者偏好。例如，MIWA73智能供應和

循環再用和統一設計，並提供優惠吸引顧客用

零售等系統使用可重用的膠囊，可以追蹤供應

後歸還 。

鏈、監察庫存和自動排序。43

41

16

生物可降解塑膠或紙包裝並非替代方案

© Shutterstock 不論生物可降解塑膠或紙包裝，對環境 所造成的影響不比一般塑膠少。 © Shutterstock

為了 回 應 公 眾 日 益 關 注 的 即 棄 塑 膠 問 題，許 多

即使目前有許多新興的技術，例如從藻類或沼氣提取

公司 紛紛以「生物可降解 塑 膠（B i o d e g r a d a b l e

原料製作生物可降解塑膠 45，但是目前大多數的生物

plastic）」替代傳統塑膠，最普遍使用的材質為PLA

塑膠的原料還是來自於農作物 46，全球目前超過一半

（聚乳酸，Pol y lact ic acid或Pol y lact ide，簡稱

的生物基質塑膠產於亞洲47，廣泛使用生物基質塑膠

PLA），在本次的調查中也發現確實有許多的零售業

可能會使生產國大面積推廣密集型農業，進而影響糧

者採用聲稱「環保材質」作為傳統塑膠包裝的替代方

食系統發展，威脅糧食安全、導致土地衝突、影響生

案，例如一田正使用加入添加劑的「生物可降解」膠

物多樣性等問題，之後的土地變化也有可能導致溫室

袋。然而在缺乏更進一步的配套措施與走塑政策下，

氣體排放增加 48。目前還沒有完善的體系可以針對生

這可能會帶來更大的環境衝擊。

物塑膠進行溯源和追蹤去規避上述的風險，因此，企 業更應謹慎的使用，尤其避免大規模使用和推廣生

「生物可降解」並沒有明確的統一定義，一般表示這

物塑膠作為即棄包裝材質。

些物質可以在某些嚴苛的環境條件下，在一定時間內 被微生物降解，而現在市面上大部分「生物可降解塑

把塑膠包裝轉換成紙包裝，更是對經濟和環境都不

膠」其實為「可堆肥塑膠」，指需要在工業堆肥設施中

利的選擇，目前全球紙包裝的使用量正在增加 49，這

（恆定的高溫高濕）才可以在一定時間內被微生物分

已經對有限的森林資源帶來負面影響，若對包裝或其

解，而不能在家庭堆肥或自然環境中分解 。

他即棄用途的紙材料需求增加，負面影響更遠。

PLA就是一種「可堆肥塑膠」，利用粟米、馬鈴薯，及

即使是森林管理委員會（FSC）認證的材料，仍需要

其他含碳水化合物作為原料製造，經發酵後產生乳

額外分析與調查對生態的全面影響，因此更值得提倡

酸，將乳酸聚合，形成聚乳酸，PLA分解後剩下二氧化

與推行可循環再用的替代方案。就某些層面而言，使

碳、水與其他殘留物。這事情聽起來非常「天然」，但

用替代材料取替傳統塑膠可能緩解部分的環境衝擊，

其實並不會在自然環境發生，而是需要這些把塑膠運

然而通常也會帶來另一種負面的環境影響，尤其是在

送至工業堆肥設施，但香港目前並沒有渠道系統性地

企業缺乏整體減量目標、資訊透明度、明確採購原則

收集、運送和處理PL A。另外，由於生物可降解塑膠

等配套情況下。為了真正解決即棄產品和包裝的過度

外表和傳統塑膠無異，消費者難以分辨，若在回收時

消費所帶來的問題，我們需要有系統地改善以及擺脫

混入傳統塑膠，會降低回收物的品質。

即棄文化。

44

17

© Mitja Kobal / Greenpeace 從產品設計至物流系統源頭減廢，提供無塑購物選項，才能有效減少塑膠污染問題。

綠色和平倡議 面對迫切的海洋塑膠污染，我們沒有時間再躊躇不前，綠色和平鼓勵七大連鎖超市展現承擔環境 責任的決心，設定走塑目標，積極推廣和採用可重複使用的替代方案，跟消費者一起解決塑膠危機。 連鎖超市應盡快展開以下行動：

• 立刻減少無謂包裝， 增加裸賣產品比例。

• 訂下整體塑膠減量

• 設定全面淘汰即棄塑膠期限，包括

目標，並制訂明確的

不必要、難以回收以及不可回收的

路線圖與時間表。

即棄塑膠包裝以及即棄塑膠製品。

• 加強員工訓練以及與消費者積極溝通，

• 全面統計並公佈塑膠足跡，包括塑膠包裝以及

以「可循環再用」為原則，發展可大規

塑膠製品的重量、數量以及種類，並定期向大

模實行的走塑方案，並推廣替代方案。

眾公佈走塑進度，以及創新方案與成效。

18

Abstract This report is produced by the Hong Kong branch office of Greenpeace East Asia (Greenpeace) to assess the use of plastic packaging in supermarket chains and their performance in going plastic-free. In August 2019, Greenpeace distributed questionnaires to the management teams of the seven largest supermarket chains according to their market share and number of stores. The seven supermarkets (in alphabetical order) include: AEON, A.S. Watson Group, China Resources Vanguard (CR Vanguard), City’super, Dairy Farm, Marks & Spencer and YATA. The supermarkets chains were assessed in terms of four aspects, namely ‘plastic-

free policies’, ‘plastic-reducing measures’, ‘initiatives and innovations’ and ‘information transparency’ with regards to the questionnaires Greenpeace received from them and their public information such as their official websites, annual report and media reports. The research results show that the plastic-free performance of all seven supermarket chains are unsatisfactory. A.S. Watson and Dairy Farm are leading companies in the supermarket industry, but Dairy Farm’s performance is subpar in all aspects. Dairy Farm is advised to abandon excess plastic packaging as soon as possible.

Introduction ++ Worsening plastic pollution ++ Oceans around the world are facing the problem of plastic waste pollution. Approximately 12.7 million tonnes of plastic are being disposed of into the ocean each year1. However, global plastic production has surged in the past 50 years, from 15 million tonnes in 1964 to 311 million tonnes in 2014, among which 26% is used in plastic packaging2.

A lot of plastic packaging and products are designed to be disposable, becoming trash after a short use while lasting up to a few hundred years in the environment before decomposing. Plastic waste is everywhere. It can be found from the tallest mountains down to the deepest oceanic trenches3,4, where it poses a threat to almost 700 marine species5.

1 out of 3 sea turtles are estimated to have eaten plastic by accident6. 90% of seabirds have been found to contain plastic in their bodies7. Local research has shown that 60% of samples of local wild flathead grey mullets contain on average 4.3 pieces of microplastic fragments. One of the samples even contained 80 pieces of microplastic8. Greenpeace dissected marine fish and flathead grey mullets bought from local wet markets and found that there were plastic fragments in the samples as well9. Hong Kong’s first comprehensive coastal plastic pollution research, Microplastics and Large Plastic Debris in Hong Kong Waters, published by Greenpeace in March 2019, found that there was an 11-fold increase in the microplastic concentration in Hong Kong waters over the course of three years10.

Plastics not only pollute the ocean but affect bodily health as well. Persistent organic pollutants like

19

pesticides and plasticizers attach to the surface of microplastics that find their way into the ocean. Should marine creatures accidentally consume the polluted microplastics, the toxic substances will possibly accumulate and eventually be consumed by humans through the food chain, posing a threat to human health by interfering with the endocrine system11.

Pregnant women and children are particularly susceptible. Furthermore, plastic packaging or the container itself might contain chemicals like plasticizers that attach and remain directly on food12.

Prolonged exposure to these chemicals may cause endocrine disorders, damage reproductive systems and lead to other health issues13.

More than 90% of plastic is fossil-based14. The whole life-cycle of plastic products, from production to disposal, poses a threat to the environment. For example, carbon emissions caused by the drilling and transportation of fossil fuel aggravates the problem of climate change and damages the habitats of animals and plants. Washing and rubbing plastic products also produces microplastics that pollute the environment. After disposal, plastic products eventually become marine waste that very slowly decomposes and is difficult to clean up.

++ Recycling is not the way out ++ Since the 1950s, the world has produced around 8.3 billion tonnes of plastic, among which only 9% was recycled15. Among the plastic packaging used globally in 2013, only 14% was recycled and reused. Around 14% of the remaining plastic was incinerated, 40% was disposed of in landfills and almost 1/3 of it was dumped into the natural environment16. We can therefore see that the

problem of plastic waste has never been appropriately dealt with.

In fact, the amount of plastics that have been incinerated far exceeds plastics that have been recycled17. However, incineration of plastic releases toxic substances (e.g. dioxins), harming one’s physical health18. To take Taiwan as an example, the recycling rate of most plastics is relatively low despite a mandatory recycling policy. A large amount of plastic waste is still being fed into the incinerator each day19 and 188 million disposable plastic bottles are not recycled each year20. Hence, ‘recyclable plastics’ most likely end up being incinerated or disposed of in landfills or in the natural environment. The government and corporations should no longer claim that recycling solves the problem. Only by reconsidering the production, transportation, consumption of goods and post-consumption arrangements, including adopting recyclable packaging, innovating logistics and sales methods, and making sure that resources are reused and recycled in a circular economy can we truly alleviate the pollution caused by plastics.

++

The key role of supermarkets ++ in going plastic-free

Microplastics and Large Plastic Debris in Hong Kong Waters 2018, Hong Kong’s first comprehensive coastal plastic pollution research published by Greenpeace last year, found that polystyrene (PS) and polyethylene (PE) are all over the coastal waters in Hong Kong. These two substances are commonly found in disposable food packaging. Supermarkets play a crucial role in reducing pollution from plastic packaging.

Countless daily necessities, food, snacks and beverages are sold in hundreds of supermarkets everyday, but most of the products are pre-packaged with disposable plastic, making it hard for customers to go plastic-free. In fact, supermarkets have the right to decide what goods to stock, the packaging of the goods they stock and their sales methods. Supermarkets can start reducing the use of plastic by communicating and cooperating with manufacturers, suppliers and distributors or by removing excess plastic packaging on products manufactured by brands owned by the supermarkets themselves.

We at Greenpeace believe that supermarkets have the capacity to reduce the use of disposable packaging.

A number of customers in Hong Kong expect supermarkets to go plastic-free as soon as possible as well. Greenpeace had the Hong Kong Shue Yan University conduct a poll in April 201921 that found that over 90% of respondents agreed that supermarkets

should remove unnecessary packaging and nearly 70% of respondents were inclined to shop at supermarkets that reduce the use of excess packaging. During June and July, we teamed up with over a hundred citizens and formed the Plastic Investigation Squad to collect data on the use of plastic in supermarkets. It was found that over 80% of stocked goods were wrapped in plastic and, shockingly, nearly half were wrapped by the supermarkets themselves22. All sliced fruits were wrapped in plastic and over 90% of vegetables and cooked food were wrapped in plastic. In addition, 74% and 67% of fresh pastries from supermarket-owned brands and whole fruits were wrapped in plastic respectively.

Reducing plastic at the source is becoming the new trend, ++ ++ while consumer awareness is increasing Since the public is becoming more and more concerned about plastic pollution, countries, cities, corporations and communities have taken the initiative to reduce plastic consumption. Many governments have prohibited the use of different kinds of disposable plastic. Countries like China, India, Italy, France and numerous African countries have implemented plastic bag levy schemes or plastic bag bans in different forms23,24.

The European Union passed the European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy bill in 2018 to change “the design, use, production and recycling methods of plastic products”25,26. And the European Commission proposed a motion to gradually ban the 10 most commonly found disposable plastic products27. The Hong Kong government has also mentioned “cooperating with the retail industry to promote and encourage reduction in the use of plastic packaging” in the Policy Address published in October 2019.

In order to reduce waste at its source, countries have legislated new laws to ban different types of disposable plastic products, reminding supermarkets to take appropriate action as soon as possible. Since market competition is intense, customers’ loyalty to a particular supermarket may increase if supermarkets create reasons other than convenience to persuade consumers to shop with them, for example by advocating environmental friendliness or improving consumers’ shopping experience. Supermarkets should respond to customers’ demands for plastic-free shopping and increase their competitiveness by reconsidering the necessity of plastic packaging. We expect supermarkets in Hong Kong to be more prudent and resolute and to remove unnecessary packaging.

20

Plastic-free Ratings of Supermarkets in Hong Kong

Results and main discovery

Plastic-free policies

Plastic reduction measures

Initiatives and innovations

27.1

26%

24%

26%

36%

16.7

14%

10%

20%

32%

15.5

11%

15%

13%

23%

Overall score (out of 100)

訝1

訝2

Information transparency

Aeon, China Resources Vanguard, City’super and Marks & Spencer did not respond to our survey.

Remark1: Supermarkets under A.S. Watson include ParknShop, Fusion, Taste, International, Great.

Remark 2: Supermarkets under Dairy Farm include Wellcome, Market Place by Jasons.

General Comments According to the questionnaires we received from the supermarket companies and their public information, the plastic-free performance of all seven supermarkets is unsatisfactory. The main reason being that they have not considered waste reduction at the source as one of their principles nor have they proposed comprehensive plastic-free strategies, schedules or objectives to reduce the use of plastic packaging.

Measures and objectives to completely abandon disposable plastic products:

A.S. Watson has stopped selling plastic straws but not other disposable plastic products.

Other supermarkets have not stopped selling any kind of disposable plastic products.

21

No supermarkets have formulated objectives for completely abandoning disposable plastic products.

General policies on reducing the use of plastic:

A.S. Watson has tried implementing the ‘food in the nude’ policy in a few branches.

Dairy Farm’s project of reducing the weight of plastic packaging is still in its pilot phase.

Some supermarkets are using other disposable materials to replace plastic, but this is not an effective solution to reduce waste. For example, City’super and YATA are using bio-degradable plastic bags.

Transparency of information:

YATA documented its use of different types of disposable plastic packaging and is willing to provide us with the information. The data are roughly complete.

A.S. Watson and Dairy Farm provide the use of plastic packaging on only some of their products.

Other supermarkets do not provide such information nor do they intend to disclose any information on their use of plastic, actions they have taken to go plasticfree or results of those actions in the corporate responsibility section in their annual reports.

None of the supermarkets have taken the initiative to disclose a comprehensive set of information on the use of plastic or relevant policies.

None of the supermarkets have drafted or formulated comprehensive policies to go completely plastic-free.

Initiatives and innovations:

A.S. Watson has set up a refilling station where non-packaged personal and household items are sold and customers can bring their own containers. A.S. Watson claimed that they will gradually expand the idea to other branches.

City'super, YATA and A.S. Watson offer discounts to customers who bring their own containers to the cooked food section.

YATA provides their customers with plastic-free shopping options, such as non-packaged oil and vinegar. However, customers cannot use their own containers and may only use the brand-new containers provided by the supermarket. YATA has claimed that they will set up refilling stations.

Other supermarkets do not provide plastic-free options, showing no willingness to reduce waste at source, replace disposable containers with reusable ones or make changes to their logistics.

Generally speaking,

A.S. Watson, YATA and Dairy Farm performed better in going plastic-free than the four other chain supermarkets.

City’super, AEON, China Resources Vanguard and Marks & Spencer received extremely low marks.

A.S. Watson and YATA were more outstanding when it came to information transparency and innovation, though their performance in going plastic-free was subpar. A.S. Watson received a higher score than YATA but still fell short of the passing score. Dairy Farm performed poorly and received the lowest score in terms of plastic-free policies.

City’super, AEON, China Resources Vanguard and

Marks & Spencer did not respond to the questionnaire concerning the use of plastic. City’super and AEON disclosed very little information about going plastic-free.

Hence, Greenpeace was only barely able to evaluate their performance. The remaining two supermarkets, China Resources Vanguard and Marks & Spencer, have never disclosed any information on plastic-free policies or measures, which we find unacceptable.

22

Plastic-free Ratings of Supermarkets in Hong Kong Grading method The ‘questionnaire on the use of plastics in supermarkets’ and the grading method of the Report on Plastic-free Ratings of Chain Supermarkets in Hong Kong is the amended version of the grading system Greenpeace has applied when assessing the plastic-free performance of countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Spain and Taiwan. In August 2019, the questionnaire was distributed to the management teams of the seven largest supermarket companies according to their number of branches and market share in Hong Kong. The seven supermarket companies (in alphabetical order) are: AEON, A.S. Watson Group, China Resources Vanguard (CR Vanguard), City’super, Dairy Farm, Marks & Spencer (M&S Hong Kong) and YATA. The questionnaire focused on five aspects: ‘disposable plastic packaging’, ‘disposable plastic products’,

‘cooperation in supply chains’, ‘staff training, communication with consumers and the proposal of policies’ and ‘degree of information openness and transparency’. The supermarkets were invited to complete the questionnaire in two months’ time.

Four supermarkets, namely CR Vanguard, AEON, City’super and M&S Hong Kong did not respond to our questionnaire.

The supermarket chains were assessed in terms of four aspects, namely ‘plastic-free policies’, ‘plastic-reducing measures’, ‘initiatives and innovations’ and ‘information transparency’ with consideration to the questionnaires Greenpeace received from them and their public information, such as their official websites, annual reports and media reports.

Each supermarket was assessed according to:

Plastic-free policies (Scoring weight 20%)

1

Whether the supermarket has stipulated immediate and long-term policies on disposable plastic reduction.

2

Whether the supermarket has a sustainable business model.

To score high, the supermarkets have to have stipulated well-rounded policies and concrete ways to execute the policies, including setting general plastic-free objectives, requiring specifications on packaging and abandoning plastic packaging that is non-recyclable or difficult to recycle.

Each supermarket was assessed according to:

Plastic reduction measures (Scoring weight 35%)

1

Whether the supermarket has plastic reduction measures dedicated to reducing the use of disposable plastic packaging and goods (including plastic straws, eating utensils and products containing tiny plastic beads).

2

Whether the supermarket has set up a clear schedule of plastic reduction.

To score high, the supermarkets have to have publicly pledged to reduce the use of disposable plastic and to have gradually put the plastic-free measures into practice.

Each supermarket was assessed according to:

Initiatives and innovations (Scoring weight 20%)

23

1

Whether the supermarket intends to provide or has already been providing plastic-free shopping options so that customers can bring their own reusable container and purchase according to their demand.

2

Whether the supermarket has cooperated with manufacturers and suppliers to reduce the use of disposable packaging at the source.

To score high, the supermarkets have to have redesigned their logistics or product design and cooperated with their own brands and suppliers. The supermarkets may start from the re-designing of packaging and provide a substitute that can be recycled, reused and adopted in large scale, instead of implementing a one-time policy or adopting another disposable material.

Each supermarket was assessed according to:

Information transparency (Scoring weight 25%)

1

Whether the supermarket has taken the initiative to disclose information on the use of plastic and policies related to plastic reduction.

2

Whether the supermarket intends to regularly disclose information on the amount of plastic used and plastic reduction policies for the public to learn more.

To score high, the supermarkets have to have provided the annual amount of their plastic consumption (including the weight, quantity and category of plastic packaging and disposable plastic goods) and to have pledged that they will continue to disclose the data regularly.

Details of Greenpeace’s ‘questionnaire on the use of plastic in supermarkets’ This questionnaire was aimed at understanding the use of plastic, plastic reduction measures that have been implemented or still under planning in major Hong Kong supermarkets and challenges the supermarkets are facing. The questionnaire also helps evaluate plastic-free policies supermarkets have adopted and whether there is room for improvement so that appropriate suggestions and advice can be given. Major aspects examined include: Amount of disposable plastic packaging used Remark 3

Requesting information from supermarkets on plastic-free policies, objectives, strategies and the amount of plastic packaging used in the goods sold during 2018.

Amount of disposable plastic products used Remark 4

Requesting information from supermarkets on their annual consumption, measures to reduce consumption and whether they have considered going completely plastic-free their goal.

Cooperation in the supply chain

Requesting information from supermarkets on cooperation between the supermarket and suppliers from their own brands, suppliers from other brands, the vegetable and fruit suppliers and seafood suppliers, as well as whether they have considered reducing disposable packaging as company principle and whether they have appropriately dealt with the plastic waste produced from agricultural and fishing activities.

Staff training, communication with consumers and policy proposals

Requesting information from supermarkets on internal staff training concerning going plastic-free (e.g. whether they have taught the staff how to reduce the use of packaging), how the supermarket has promoted going ‘plastic-free’ (e.g. whether the supermarket has made use of different platforms to educate consumers on how to go plastic-free) and whether the supermarket has supported innovative policies or campaigns on plastic waste pollution in any way.

Information openness and transparency

Asking the supermarket whether they intend to take the initiative to disclose information on the use of plastic, including the amount used and plastic reduction policies.

Remark3: Disposable plastic packaging: plastic packaging that is designed to be disposed after a one-time use, whether recyclable or not, including plastic bags, plastic boxes, mesh bags, plastic bowls, plastic bottles and self-seal bags.

Remark4:

Plastic bags provided by the supermarket including plastic bags, self-seal bags, disposable eating utensils, cups for beverages, containers for seasonings and mixing rods.

24

A list of the performance of various supermarkets A.S. Watson Group

M ore

2 50

than br in H o a n c h e s ng K ong

Main brands

Overall score

‘Plastic-free’ policies

Plastic reduction measures

Initiatives and innovations

Information transparency

27.1 / 100

26%

24%

26%

36%

Basic Information

ParknShop, Fusion, Great, International and Taste are some of the brands of A.S. Watson Group, which has the largest market share among all supermarket owners. In Greenpeace's recent Survey on Hong Kong Plastic Use, 84%, 74%, 80% and 88% of products in ParknShop, Fusion, International and Taste are packaged with plastic, respectively28 .

Plastic-free policy:

Policies that have already been implemented include establishing a working group that is responsible for designing appropriate instructions for plasticfree packaging, as well as creating environmentally friendly packaging instructions for its own brands. However, there is no concrete overall timetable or goal regarding the elimination or reduction of plastic use. Therefore, it is hard to estimate how useful the current policies are in reducing plastic use.

Initiatives and innovations:

A.S. Watson Group is the first hypermarket in Hong Kong that has set up supplementary sections for unpackaged products including personal care and household cleaning products such as hand wash, shampoos and detergents. Extra plans will be made but no concrete details can be provided at this moment. In addition, the Group actively participates in various working groups that promote plastic-free practices among the retail industry, including pushing for Producer Responsibility Schemes on plastic containers for beverages.

Overall Suggestions

Plastic reduction measures:

Measures aimed at reducing the use of disposable plastic products have been implemented, including special discounts offered to customers who bring their own containers for roasted meat, trying out the shared reusable shopping bag scheme, as well as a complete halt to the sales of disposable plastic straws and any rinse-off products that contain microbeads.

Information Transparency:

Among a number of supermarkets in Hong Kong, A.S. Watson Group has the highest information transparency regarding its plastic-free policy.

It also provides more information than others, including part of the sales volume of disposable plastic products, and it has taken the initiative in disclosing the effectiveness of its ‘selling of unpackaged vegetables and fruits trial scheme’. However, concerning the amount of disposable plastic used in packaging, the Group only provides information related to its own brands but not other brands.

Fortunately, it is considering including the total amount of plastic use in its corporate social responsibility reports, which Greenpeace will continue to follow closely.

A.S. Watson has relatively more plastic-free measures and initiatives in comparison with other supermarkets. Yet a comprehensive plastic-free policy and goal are still missing and it is still far from meeting the standard. As a group with the highest market share of supermarkets, the Group has its own responsibility in reducing waste for the environment.

If it is willing to play a part in eliminating the use of plastic, the whole industry will be influenced by it and will quicken the pace of adoption of plastic-free policies and initiatives. Greenpeace suggests that A.S. Watson: • Commit immediately that it will finish calculating its overall plastic footprints in 2020 and publish the results in its corporate social responsibility report;

• Implement plastic-free policies based on the ‘reusable’ principle, such as container rental, shopping bag rental and cup rental;

• Establish comprehensive plastic-free goals based on the data of its plastic footprint;

• Sell unpackaged personal care, household cleaning products and even food. The Group can consider cooperating with more suppliers or starting from its own brands;

• Extend the current limited plastic-free trial schemes, such as the supplementary sections for unpackaged products and the sections of unpackaged fresh vegetables and fruits to more of its stores in Hong Kong; • Immediately remove all unnecessary, difficult-to-recycle and non-recyclable plastic packaging, such as styrofoam fruit nets, PVC plastic wrap and styrofoam plates;

25

• In the long term, A.S. Watson should promise that it will continue to expand the use of reusable packaging and actively cooperate with suppliers, trace and publish its plastic footprint, as well as disclose the effectiveness of its plastic-free policies in order to work toward a sustainable business model.

Num ber of b ra n ches :

YATA

8

Overall score

‘Plastic-free’ policies

Plastic reduction measures

Initiatives and innovations

Information transparency

16.7 / 100

14%

10%

20%

32%

Basic information

YATA is a department store and supermarket chain owned by Sun Hung Kai Properties Limited.

There are eight branches in Hong Kong. In Greenpeace's recent Survey on Hong Kong Plastic Use, 99% of its products are packaged with plastic.

Plastic-Free Policy:

A one-dimensional plastic reduction policy has been adopted. For example, a special discount will be given if customers bring their own containers for food from the deli. However, no comprehensive plastic-free policy has been proposed.

Initiatives and innovations:

Some unpackaged products such as oil, vinegar and nuts are sold in the supermarket.

Supplementary sections for unpackaged products will be set up, but there is no further information regarding this.

Plastic reduction measures:

Plastic bags are not offered at the stores and recycling bins can be found outside the stores.

Information Transparency:

YATA is the only supermarket that provides comprehensive plastic packaging usage reports and has indicated its willingness to respond to relevant questionnaires every year. We hope YATA can further improve the transparency of its information and actively disclose the amount of plastic used and the progress of reduction of plastic to the public.

Overall Suggestions

Compared with other supermarkets who claim that the internal amount of plastic used cannot be organised, YATA provides us with almost all its information. It is also willing to cooporate with us, which has already given it a head start over other companies, and the fact that it has already set comprehensive plastic-free goals shows it is taking this issue seriously. Greenpeace suggests that YATA: • Further investigate the use of disposable plastic on different products. Afterwards, the company should list all the challenges it faced when carrying out plasticfree policies and decide where it should start reducing the use of plastic. For example, it can first sell its own branded products unpackaged and then discuss with suppliers regarding the plastic-free policies. If everything goes well, it can consider mapping out and including a timetable in its comprehensive plastic-free plans; • Immediately discontinue the use of disposable plastic packaging and respond to the needs of its customers by gradually adopting the use of recyclable packaging as its main sales model;

• Should not replace plastics with any other disposable material, such as biodegradable plastic, which includes additives that break down plastic more easily into microplastics, thereby exacerbating the problem.

Rather, it should start adopting ‘food in the nude’ as its sales model, encouraging customers to purchase goods with reusable food containers. It is also important for the company to set completely-plasticfree goals and a timetable; • Immediately rule out all unnecessary, difficult-torecycle and non-recyclable plastic packaging, sell more unpackaged products and encourage the use of reusable containers among its customers, such as by extending the supplementary sections for unpackaged products and the sections of unpackaged fresh vegetables and fruits.

26

A list of the performance of various supermarkets

Dairy Farm

M ore

Main brands

320

than

b ra n

in H o n

ches

g Ko n

Overall score

‘Plastic-free’ policies

Plastic reduction measures

Initiatives and innovations

Information transparency

15.5 / 100

11%

15%

13%

23%

g

Basic Information

Dairy Farm owns such supermarkets as Wellcome and Market Place by Jason. Its total number of branches ranks first in Hong Kong and second in market share. In Greenpeace's Survey on Hong Kong Plastic Use, 82% and 83% of the products in Wellcome and Market Place by Jason are packaged with plastic, respectively.

Plastic-free policy:

Packaging instructions used by the internal staff to reduce plastic have been made, but there is no plan regarding the overall reduction of disposable plastic use. The company's emphasis is on reducing the weight of disposable plastic used on a single product, such as vegetables and fruits, but the formulation of such a plan is still in the trial stage.

Initiatives and innovations:

Has participated in industry meetings of the Producer Responsibility Schemes on plastic containers for beverages. However, the company lacks practical innovative policies and a record of its plastic footprint.

Plastic reduction measures:

Stop providing plastic disposable tableware and stop selling any rinse-off products that contain microbeads. In addition, the company is planning on reducing the packaging of some vegetables and fruits, but it has not yet calculated how much plastic will be reduced overall.

Information transparency:

Provides only the use of packaging of their own branding beverages. Dairy Farm claims that the data of other disposable plastic products and plastic packaging is hard to retrieve.

Overall Suggestions

In order to reduce the use of plastic packaging, Dairy Farm provides packaging instructions to its staff and sets the standard packaging amount for each product, which is worth noting. However, when visiting some branches, Greenpeace found that the plastic packaging method and the amount had great differences among different branches.

Thus, it is hard to determine if the instructions have been practically implemented. We suggest that Dairy Farm strengthen its employee training and provide supporting measures to ensure that the instructions are carried out.

Although it ranks second in market share of supermarkets in Hong Kong and first in the number of branches, Dairy Farm seldom publishes information related to plastic-free policies and has fewer measures regarding this, which is far behind and not as aggressive as its competitors, such as ParknShop and YATA. In order to stay competitive in the field, the company should bear the responsibility of reducing the amount of disposable plastic waste. Therefore, Greenpeace suggests that Dairy Farm: • Review the amount of plastic used in packaging of all its products, including both its own brands and other brands, as well as regularly inform the general public about the results;

• Immediately discontinue the sale and use of disposable plastic products and packaging that easily pollute the environment and are difficult to recycle, such as straws, PVC plastic wrap and styrofoam;

• Draft both short term and long term policies for reducing plastic use in various aspects as soon as possible, including three aspects: reduction, innovation and publishing information. Onedimensional and irregular plastic-free measurements cannot help to completely reduce the use of plastic packaging. Instead, strategic planning helps;

• Adopt a ‘recyclable’ sales model and an unpackaged products scheme and encourage customers to bring their own containers and only buy the amount that they need:

• Pay active concern to environmental issues caused by plastic packaging and increase information transparency for the benefit of the general public; • Utilise its influence among consumers to promote the idea of plastic-free shopping; 27

• Take reference from other supermarket chains that provide plastic-free shopping and have large-scale plastic reduction policies. This measure will be the easiest to implement first; • Provide clear packaging instructions to its staff, suppliers and manufacturers of its own brands based on the principle of reducing waste at the source.

City’super

Num ber of b ra n ches :

4

Overall score

‘Plastic-free’ policies

Plastic reduction measures

Initiatives and innovations

Information transparency

1.9 / 100

2%

2%

3%

1%

Basic Information

City’super is under the management of City Super Group. It has four branches in Hong Kong. In Greenpeace's Survey on Hong Kong Plastic Use, 82% of the products in City’super are packaged with plastic.

Plastic-free policy:

Plastic reduction measures:

There is no publicly available information showing that the company is adopting any comprehensive plastic-free policy. However, it does have a few onedimensional plans. For example, customers can enjoy a special discount if they bring their own containers to the deli.

Some of the branches have set up recycling points for styrofoam fruit nets, but there is limited public information regarding this.

Initiatives and innovations:

Information transparency:

City’super offers a special discount for customers who bring their own containers to buy prepared food and salad, in order to encourage them to eliminate the use of plastic.

Greenpeace was unable to find any overall plastic footprint information or any comprehensive measures and commitments toward the reduction of disposable plastic.

Overall Suggestions

City’super did not reply to Greenpeace’s questionnaire on the amount of plastic used in its supermarkets. Most of the information in our report is based on publicly available information. According to a news report, City’super uses biodegradable plastic for the packaging of the vegetables and fruits and has also added ‘P-Life’ biodegradable additives to its plastic bags. However, both of these measures cannot tackle the root cause of the plastic issue. Furthermore, not only do these measures increase the company’s operational costs, but may also exacerbate the issue of plastic pollution, since biodegradable plastics more easily break down into microplastics. Therefore, Greenpeace suggests that City’super begin planning and carrying out its plastic reduction measures and plastic-free policies, including adopting the use of recyclable containers rather than using other disposable materials.

AEON

Num ber of b ra n ches :

11

Overall score

‘Plastic-free’ policies

Plastic reduction measures

Initiatives and innovations

Information transparency

1 / 100

2%

0%

0%

3%

Basic Information

AEON is owned by Aeon Stores (Hong Kong) Limited. Its headquarters are in Japan. There are in total 11 supermarket branches in Hong Kong. 89% of the products in AEON are packaged with plastic.

Plastic-free policy:

AEON displays posters promoting plastic-free shopping inside its stores in order to encourage customers to eliminate the use of plastic. It also holds events irregularly to encourage customers to bring their own shopping bags and containers to shop. However, there is no strategy or goal to discontinue the use of disposable plastic.

Initiatives and innovations:

According to Greenpeace's research, AEON does not provide much public information regarding its plastic-free plans.

Overall Suggestions

Plastic reduction measures:

AEON does not publish any information related to its plastic reduction measures and is relatively passive toward this issue.

Information transparency:

AEON has never published anything about its overall plastic footprint or comprehensive measures and commitments toward the reduction of disposable plastic.

AEON did not reply to Greenpeace's questionnaire. Most of the information in our report is based on publicly available data. There is no information showing that AEON is paying close attention or putting any effort into tackling the issue of plastic pollution. Greenpeace suggests that AEON immediately take steps to reduce its plastic waste and formulate a comprehensive plastic-free policy.

28

A list of the performance of various supermarkets

China Resources Vanguard

Num ber of b ra n ches :

64

Overall score

‘Plastic-free’ policies

Plastic reduction measures

Initiatives and innovations

Information transparency

0 / 100

0%

0%

0%

0%

Basic Information

Vanguard is run by China Resources Vanguard (CR Vanguard), which is owned by China Resources, while U Select is jointly operated by CR Vanguard and the British supermarket Tesco. Vanguard and U Select chains have 17 and 47 branches, respectively. In Greenpeace’s Survey on Hong Kong Plastic Use, 79% and 78% of the products in Vanguard and U Select are packaged with plastic, respectively.

Plastic-free policy:

Plastic reduction measures:

Greenpeace found no publicly available information from CR Vanguard about its current or long-term plastic-free policy.

CR Vanguard has no current or to-beimplemented plastic-free measures. It is relatively passive toward the idea of plastic-free shopping.

Initiatives and innovations:

Greenpeace found no publicly available information about the company’s promotion of plastic-free shopping or any innovative plastic-free policy.

Overall Suggestions

Information transparency:

Greenpeace was unable to find any public data about the company’s plastic footprint or any of its comprehensive measures and commitments toward the reduction of disposable plastic.

CR Vanguard did not reply to Greenpeace’s questionnaire on the amount of plastic use in supermarkets. Most of the information in this report is based on publicly available data. With the third largest number of supermarket branches in Hong Kong, CR Vanguard has both the responsibility and sufficient resources to work toward solving the plastic crisis. It should immediately respond to the needs and demands of customers to shop plastic-free.

Marks & Spencer

Num ber of b ra n ches :

7

Overall score

‘Plastic-free’ policies

Plastic reduction measures

Initiatives and innovations

Information transparency

0 / 100

0%

0%

0%

0%

Basic Information

Marks & Spencer Hong Kong (M&S Hong Kong) originated from Marks and Spencer Group plc in the UK. The seven branches of M&S Hong Kong are run by a Middle East company, Al-Futtaim, through franchising. According to a previous plastic usage survey run by Greenpeace, M&S Hong Kong’s rate of plastic packaging is 97%.

Plastic-free policy:

There is no publicly available statement from the company that any plastic-free plan and timetable issued by M&S UK are also applicable to its Hong Kong branches. No related information can be found on official channels in Hong Kong.

Initiatives and innovations:

Greenpeace has not found any innovative plastic-free trials or plans from M&S Hong Kong.

Furthermore, there is no indication that M&S Hong Kong has any intention to set up plastic-free shopping options.

Plastic reduction measures:

Greenpeace cannot find any publicly available information about M&S HK’s measures to reduce plastic waste. M&S Hong Kong is passive on the issue of becoming plastic-free.

Information transparency:

M&S Hong Kong has never disclosed their plastic-free policy, measures or total plastic footprint.

Overall Suggestions

Marks and Spencer Hong Kong did not reply to Greenpeace’s questionnaire. Information in this report is mainly from public data. Given that M&S UK has already formulated plans and actions to deal with the current plastic crisis, M&S Hong Kong should invest more to catch up.

29

Current global plastic-free projects in supermarkets To deal with environmental problems caused by single-use plastic packaging, supermarkets should adopt the principle of ‘reducing single-use, promoting reuse’ and serve customers with plastic-free shopping options and accessories. To achieve this, Greenpeace has the following suggestions:

1

For fresh foods’ labelling of product identification and shelf date, single-use plastic packaging can be replaced by innovative technology. For example:

Food in the nude (New Zealand)

Laser food labeling (Spain) Laser Food, a Spanish company, has developed a laser labelling system of ‘Natural Branding’. By using laser technology, labels with product information are directly imprinted on the surface of fruit and vegetables, replacing stickers and reducing plastic without increasing the use of other materials29. In 2014, Laser Food signed a landmark deal with JBT Corporation, which sells food processing equipment in more than 100 countries. Nature & More (a fruit and vegetables supplier in the Netherlands)30, ICA (a supermarket chain in Sweden) and Delhaize (a supermarket group in Belgium)31 have begun using this technology. “By using natural branding on all the organic avocados we would sell in one year, we will save 200km of plastic 30cm wide. It’s small but I think it adds up,”32 says Peter Hagg, ICA business unit manager.

2

For selling dry foods and personal care products, food dispensers and simple weighing systems can be introduced in supermarkets for customers to shop with their own bags and reusable containers. Customers can decide the quantity to buy according to their own demand. For example:

Unilever All Things Hair Refillery

(The Philippines)

Unilever's naked product stations allow customers to refill shampoo and conditioner across Unilever’s brands.

Customers can refill their old Unilever bottles with certain products such as Dove, Sunsilk and TRESemmé34.

Products are priced per gram and, because the total amount is based on the net weight, customers do not pay extra for the packaging, making it cheaper than buying pre-packed products. These stations have been trialed in local shopping malls for a month, showing that international brands are capable of reducing single-use packaging.

3

Retailer Foodstuffs started a plan called ‘Food in the nude’. Under this plan, Foodstuffs cooperates with suppliers to reduce most of the singleuse plastic packaging for fruits and vegetables across the supply chain. Products are kept fresh by installing air-conditioning and using sprays containing vitamins. Since implementing the system, sales of some vegetables have soared by up to threefold33. This system is already a popular alternative to single-use plastics around the world and can be implemented at every stage of the supply chain, including post-harvest, to extend the storage time of produce.

Unpackaged (the UK) Unpackaged began as a market stall in 2006. Later it opened a concept store in London where customers can buy loose produce. The company has developed a selfservice weighing scale that can remove the weight of any container, allowing customers to buy with their own container and pay only for the product and not for any packaging. Simple introductions are available in the store to help customers to become more aware of the process and benefits of plastic-free shopping35. Recently, Unpackaged collaborated with Waitrose, a major retailer in the UK, to trial a mainstream supermarket version of its plastic-free store36.

Apart from charging customers for using plastic bags, supermarkets can also provide a rental solution to customers who forget to bring their own bag in order to reduce the use of single-use plastics. For example:

Boomerang Bags (operating in 13 countries) Boomerang Bags is a civil project started in Australia now operating in 952 communities around the globe. The project produces eco-bags from quilting fabric leftovers donated by the public. Then the bags are distributed to participating retailers. When customers forget to bring their own bag, they may borrow an eco-bag and return it to the store after use. In case a participating business sees many customers daily, a small deposit can be added to ensure those bags will be returned.

Boomerang Bags has stated that they have already made by hand more than 200,000 boomerang bags, which means a reduction of about 80,000kg of garbage in landfills. This amount includes the fabrics that were going to be disposed of and the plastic bags that were not used37.

Carrefour and A-Mart (Taipei) In collaboration with the Department of Environmental Protection in Taipei, Carrefour and A-Mart provide eco-bags in their stores. In case customers forget to bring their own bags, they may rent an ecobag by giving a small deposit, then returning the eco-bag to one of the specified stores within 30 days. The returned bags will be cleaned by a laundry company and sent back to the supermarkets for future use38.

30

Business model of reusable packaging and its benefits In Hong Kong, 90% of people surveyed have expressed a desire to shop plastic-free in supermarkets. Supermarkets should take further steps to promote the model of reuse by working together with suppliers and other sectors to achieve goals such as improvements in package design. Environmental awareness is not only the new trend, but taking these steps will bring greater benefits to both businesses and customers. The model of reuse lowers costs and improves logistics and business operations. Businesses may also provide personalized services to customers to improve brand loyalty and customer experience. Furthermore, businesses can gather customers’ preferences from this model. There are two ways of setting up a reusable packaging business model:

++++ Selling loose produce per volume ++++ Customers buy food or household products with their own bags, such as is done in Unpackaged and Home Work.

Under this model, customers buy according to their demand. Meanwhile, businesses gather information on customer’s preferences. If customers forget to bring their own bag, they can borrow one from the shop and pay a small deposit to guarantee its return.

Goods sold in bulk

2 Balance and scale provided in shops makes pricing easier.

1 Products packed in reusable containers are ready to buy.

3 Customers shop with their own bags and containers or with rentals from the shop.

++++ Products redesigned with reusable packing ++++ Shops pre-pack products with reusable packing and allow customers to return containers in two ways: Reverse logistics services for returning packages, then cleaning and repacking by businesses. (The LOOP platform, whereby food and personal items are packed in reusable containers then delivered to customers by post, is used by famous brands.). The key to success is to establish fundamental systems of logistics, cleaning and refilling.

1

2 After buying in location A, a customer can choose to return reusable packaging to locations A or B, by post or at a recycle machine. The key to success is to add a reasonable and affordable deposit that incentivizes customers to return the packaging.

Apart from this, businesses should maintain their drop-off points to a certain quantity and intensity to help customers to return the packaging easily. Standard packaging, shared logistics and cleaning facilities across brands all help in expansion of the system.

Redesigned products, with reusable packing 1 Products in reusable containers.

2 Products are placed in a customer’s household container.

3 Customer returns the refill container, which is then cleaned by a third party. (locations of collection can be the stores, specified collection points or via a pick-up service provided by the business)

6 major benefits of reusable packaging to businesses 1 Products in concentrated refill packs lower costs

3 Shared design leads to better logistics and operations

5 Better design, better consumer experience

When customers buy concentrated refill pack products with their own containers, transport costs decrease. For example, Blueland, which sells personal cleaning products, has reduced 90% of its logistics costs39.

When a package design is shared across different brands and supply chains, large scale production becomes possible, thereby lowering logistical and operational costs. For example, beverage brands under Coca-Cola in Brazil have unified the design of their reusable PET bottles and customers are encouraged to return their bottles to enjoy discounts41.

The Loop platform re-designs reusable packaging for well-known brands, improving its texture and functions at the same time, while also appealing to consumers. In addition, repeated use lowers costs.

2 Customers’ individual needs are accommodated

Products without pre-packaging satisfy customers’ individual needs more. For example, with the Pepsi Spire, a soda fountain that enables customers to mix their own drinks, people can purchase beverages with their own bottles and decide how much they want to drink40.

31

4 Brand loyalty is improved through deposit systems and reward schemes

Deposit systems and reward schemes can improve brand loyalty. For example, RePack is supported with a reward system (online shopping deposit) that encourages customers to return reusable packaging42.

6 Customers’ preferences can be gathered via an intelligent system

Technologies like RFID tags, sensors and GPS tracking can be incorporated with reusable packing.

With these technologies, business information and customers’ preferences can be collected. For example, MIWA73’s smart-powered supply and retail systems use reusable capsules. These capsules can be used for supply chain tracking, inventory monitoring and auto-sequencing43.

Bioplastic and paper packaging are not good substitutes

© Shutterstock © Shutterstock

To respond to the increasingly worrying disposable plastic crisis, many companies have started to use biodegradable plastic as a substitute for traditional plastic. Among these, the most commonly used material is polylactic acid (PLA). In this survey, we found that most of the retailers adopted this so-called environmental-friendly material as an alternative to traditional plastic packaging. For example, YATA has adopted biodegradable plastic bags with additives.

However, without any further complementary measures and plastic-free policies, these actions might actually have a larger impact on the environment.

The term ‘biodegradable’ does not have a clear, standardized definition and is often used to refer to materials that can be degraded by microbes under certain strict environmental conditions during a specific time.

Disconcertingly, most of the so-called biodegradable plastics on the market are actually compostable plastic, which can only be fully decomposed under certain conditions that are met in industrial composting facilities, but cannot do so in home composting systems or in the natural environment.

PLA is also such a compostable plastic and is made of corn, potatoes and other resources containing carbohydrates.

Lactic acid is generated after fermentation. After the polymerization of lactic acid, PLA is formed. Carbon dioxide, dihydrogen oxide and other residues are left after the decomposition of PLA. However, all these seemingly natural by-products will never be released in a natural environment, as the decomposition process can only be done in industrial composting facilities. Worth noting is that Hong Kong currently has no proper channels to collect, transport and handle PLA. Despite its different chemical composition, biodegradable plastic is identical in appearance to that of traditional plastic. Therefore, consumers find it difficult to separate one from another. If traditional plastic is mixed with the biodegradable kind during recycling, the quality of the recycled product will be lowered.

The pollution created by either biodegradable plastic or disposable paper packagings will not be less than plastics.

Even though newly-emerging technologies such as extracting raw materials from algae and biogas to produce biodegradable plastic are available on the market, the majority of materials of bio-based plastic are from crops.

Asia is the major production hub, producing over 50% of bioplastics. The widespread use of bio-based plastics may push countries where they are produced to intensify agriculture, thus further affecting the global food system, threatening food security, leading to land use conflict and affecting biodiversity. The change in land use may also increase greenhouse gas emissions. There is currently no comprehensive system in place to trace and track the sources of bioplastic in order to avoid the above risks.

Therefore, enterprises should use them with more care, avoid widespread adoption of them and stop popularizing the use of bioplastics as an option for disposable packaging.

More analyses and surveys on the comprehensive impact on the environment. The escalation of the global use of paper packaging is having a negative effect on limited forest reverses49. If there is any further increase in demand for paper packaging or other disposable paper materials, the impact will be far-reaching.

Extra analysis and survey of comprehensive impact on the environment should be carried out even though the Forest Stewardship Council FSC-certified materials have been adopted. Therefore, both advocating and promoting recyclable alternatives are important. In some ways, substituting traditional plastics could help ease part of the impact on the environment, but doing so longterm will be followed by a negative impact, especially when enterprises set no overall minimisation goals, lack information transparency and apply zero eco-conscious principles upon purchases. To tackle the root of excessive consumption of disposable products and packaging, it is necessary to systematically improve business practices and replace ‘disposable culture’ with ‘reusable culture.’

32

© Mitja Kobal / Greenpeace Reducing plastic at its source, starting from product design to logistics, along with providing plastic-free shopping options, are the key to alleviating plastic pollution effectively.

Greenpeace recommendations Faced with the problem of plastic pollution in the ocean, we have no time to hesitate. Greenpeace encourages the Big 7 supermarket chains to show their determination toward taking their environmental responsibilities seriously. They should set plastic-free goals and actively promote and adopt reusable alternatives in order to solve the plastic crisis together with their customers.

Supermarket chains should take the below actions as soon as possible:

• Reduce unnecessary packaging and increase the ratio of unpackaged food for purchase immediately.

• Set comprehensive plastic reduction goals as well as specific action maps and timetables.

• Determine a deadline of the complete elimination of the use of disposable plastic, including unnecessary, nonrecyclable and difficult-to-recycle disposable plastic packaging.

• Strengthening employee training and actively • Perform comprehensive statistical analysis and publish communicating with consumers, in part by adopting the principle of ‘reusable’ to develop large-scale, feasible plastic-free schemes and by promoting this principle.

33

their plastic footprints, including the weight, quantity and varieties of plastic packaging and products. They should also publish their progress on going plastic-free as well as their own innovative schemes and achievements.

參考文獻 References 1. Jenna R. Jambeck et al, Science 347, 768 (2015),Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean, DOI: 10.1126/Science.1260352, https://science.sciencemag.org/content/347/6223/768

25. European Commission, 20180116, A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy. Brussels, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid =1516265440535&uri=COM:2018:28:FIN.

2. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 20160119, The New plastics Economy Rethinking the future of plastics, http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_ New_Plastics_Economy.pdf

26. European Commission, 20181010, “European Strategy for Plastics.”, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/plastic_waste.htm

3. 地球圖輯隊，201905，世界最高垃圾場 聖母峰淨山小隊兩周清出 3,000 公斤人為 垃圾 https://dq.yam.com/post.php?id=11057 4. National Geographic，201903，在地球最深的海溝裡，生物正在吃塑膠！ https://www.natgeomedia.com/science/article/content-7750.htm 5. Impacts of Marine Debris on Biodiversity: Current Status and Potential Solutions, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel—GEF (2012), https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts-67-en.pdf 6. Dengate, Cayla, 20160715, “University of Queensland Study Shows One In Three Turtles Have Eaten Marine Plastic.” HuffPost Australia, https:// www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/03/17/turtles-marine-plastic_n_9455496. html?_guc_consent_skip=1560565608.

7. 23. Wilcox, Chris, Erik Van Sebille, and Britta Denise Hardisty ,20150922, “Threat of Plastic Pollution to Seabirds Is Global, Pervasive, and Increasing.” PNAS, pp.11899–11904 8. Cheung, Lewis, et al. “Microplastic Contamination of Wild and Captive Flathead Grey Mullet (Mugil Cephalus).” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 15, no. 4, 2018, p. 597., doi:10.3390/ijerph15040597.

9. Greenpeace,201804,香港微塑膠含量高於國際平均值 市面6成野生烏頭中招， https://bit.ly/2HSqgsq 10. Greenpeace, 201903,《塑膠圍港：香港海域塑膠分佈2018》, https://bit.ly/2T9TwjB 11. Barboza, Vethaak, et al. , August 2018, “Marine microplastic debris: An emerging issue for food security, food safety and human health” Marine Pollution Bulletin Volume 133, Pages 336-348, doi:10.1016/j. marpolbul.2018.05.047.

12. 食物安全中心, 20191010, 測試外賣飯盒雜質釋出量, https://www.cfs.gov.hk/ tc_chi/programme/programme_rafs/programme_rafs_fc_01_03_dp.html

27. European Commission, 20180528, “Single-use Plastics: New EU Rules to Reduce Marine Litter.”, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP18-3927_en.htm.

28. Greenpeace, 201908, 過百市民組隊查膠 揭逾半包裝由超市自行加上》, https://bit.ly/2Vjl8FY 29. Laser Food, “Technology.” Accessed 27 June 2019. https://www.laserfood.es/index.php/en/technology.

30. Eosta, 11 June 2018, “Nature & More Wins International Prize with Natural Branding.” , https://www.natureandmore.com/en/news/naturemore-winsinternational-prize-with-natural-branding.

31. Ahold Delhaize, Accessed 22 August 2018, “Delhaize Introduces ‘ Natural Branding’ for Organic Produce.” https://www.aholddelhaize.com/en/ sustainable-retailing/in-action/product-safety-and-sustainability/delhaizeintroduces-natural-branding-for-organic-produce/.

32. Pullman, Nina, 16 January 2017,. “Swedish Supermarkets to Replace Sticky Labels with Laser Marking,” The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/ sustainable-business/2017/jan/16/ms-and-swedishsupermarkets-ditch-stickylabels-for-natural-branding?CMP=fb_gu&fbclid=IwAR1lpXHLLBCD0TD6a5iMFeo7PrKtPjhu8fEflgYaVpunwyfpxB3bo2xF_Lk 33. Chow, Lorraine, 29 January 2019., ‘’Nude’ Shopping Increases Vegetable Sales for New Zealand Markets.” , https://www.ecowatch.com/nudeshopping-new-zealand-markets-2627421411.html 34. Eco-Business, 22 March 2019, “5 Things You Need to Know about Unilever Philippines’ All Things Hair Refillery.” Unilever Philippines, https://www.eco-business.com/press-releases/5-things-you-need-to-knowaboutunilever-philippines-all-things-hair-refillery/ 35. Arnwell, Kate. 16 January 2017, “Where to Buy Bulk in London.” Eco Boost,. https://eco-boost.co/where-to-buy-bulk-in-london/ 36. Unpackaged. ,4 June 2019. , “Press Release: Waitrose Unpacked Launch.”, https://www.beunpackaged.com/blog 37. Boomerang Bags. Accessed 21 August 2019. https://boomerangbags.org/

13. 國家衛生研究院，201803，塑化劑高暴露族群之中長期追蹤研究 - 塑化劑事件衛 教資訊，https://envmed.kmu.edu.tw/images/About_us/%E5%9C%8B%E8%A 1%9B%E9%99%A2%E5%A1%91%E5%8C%96%E5%8A%91%E8%A1%9B% E6%95%99%E8%B3%87%E8%A8%8A.pdf

38. 臺北市政府環境保護局, ‘押金環保袋上路 減塑省錢愛地球’, 6 July 2017. https://www.dep.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=CB6D5C560DE4D2DD&sms=72544237BBE4C5F6&s=81AF78FE281A721F

14. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 20160119, The New plastics Economy Rethinking the future of plastics, http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_ New_Plastics_Economy.pdf

40. Beyond the bottle 官網，https://www.pepsico.com/sustainability/beyond-the-bottle

15. Geyer, Roland, et al, July 2017, “Production, Use, and Fate of All Plastics Ever Made.” Science Advances, vol. 3, no. 7, 19 doi:10.1126/sciadv.1700782.

16. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 20160119, The New plastics Economy Rethinking the future of plastics, http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_ New_Plastics_Economy.pdf 17. Geyer, Roland, et al. ,19 July 2017, “Production, Use, and Fate of All Plastics Ever Made.” Science Advances, vol. 3, no. 7, doi:10.1126/sciadv.1700782.

18. 世界衛生組織，20161004，二噁英及對人體健康的影響，https://www.who.int/zh/ news-room/fact-sheets/detail/dioxins-and-their-effects-onhuman-health 19. 環境資訊中心, 20180522, 無采工 ！那些上了回收車 卻進焚化爐的塑膠垃圾, https://e-info.org.tw/node/211681 20. 環境資訊中心, 20191229, 【保麗龍禁不禁？】哪種容器最環保？ 因地而異的課 題, https://e-info.org.tw/node/111880#2 21. 綠色和平, 201905, 逾9成市民認為超市須卸走無謂包裝, https://bit.ly/2Pn5k14 22. 綠色和平, 201908, 過百市民組隊查膠 揭逾半包裝由超市自行加上》, https://bit.ly/2Vjl8FY 23. Greenpeace, 20181214, 減塑風潮席捲全球！一次看懂各國、各大企業的減塑政 策, https://is.gd/oDZ0m3 24. ReuseThisBag.com, 20180830, “Where Are Plastic Bags Banned Around the World?”, https://www.reusethisbag.com/articles/where-areplastic-bagsbanned-around-the-world

39. Blueland 官網，https://www.blueland.com/

41. 可口可樂巴西官網，https://www.cocacolabrasil.com.br/historias/coca-colabrasil-unifica-formato-de-embalagens-retornaveis 42. RePack. “FAQ.” Accessed 18 September 2019. https://www.originalrepack.com/service/.

43. MIWA 官網，https://www.newplasticseconomy.org/innovation-prize/ winners/miwa 44. California Organics Recycling Council, Compostable Plastics 101, Jan 1 2011, https://cdn.ymaws.com/uscc.site-ym.com/resource/resmgr/images/ Compostable_Plastics_101_Pap.pdf 45. European Bioplastics. Bioplastics Facts and Figures. Berlin, Germany. https://docs.european-bioplastics.org/publications/EUBP_Facts_and_figures.pdf.

46. British Plastics Federation, 20180521, http://www.bpf.co.uk/plastipedia/polymers/ biobased_plastics_feedstocks_production_and_the_uk_market.aspx 47. European bioplastics report, Bioplastics market data 2017, https://docs.european-bioplastics.org/publications/market_data/2017/Report_Bioplastics_ Market_Data_2017.pdf 48. Giljum, Stefan, et al., 2016, Land Under Pressure: Global Impacts of the EU Bioeconomy. Brussels: Friends of the Earth Europe, http://www.foeeurope.org/sites/ default/files/resource_use/2016/land-under-pressure-reportglobalimpacts-eu-bioeconomy.pdf 49. FAO, 20171220, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

FAOSTAT–Forestry database: Forestry Production and Trade

34

© Greenpeace

|

綠色和平 Greenpeace

綠色和平是一個全球環保組織，致力於以實際行動 推動積極改變，保護地球環境與世界和平。 Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organisation that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.

綠色和平東亞分部 - 香港辦公室

Greenpeace East Asia - Hong Kong Office

Greenpeace 綠色和平 - 香港網站 greenpeace_hk greenpeace_hk

Design | chankawingb

(852) 2854 8300 enquiry.hk@greenpeace.org www.greenpeace.org.hk

使用再造紙及大豆油墨印刷 Printed using recycled paper and soy ink

作者 Author