Table of Contents

Table of Contents 1

Team Description 2

Executive Summary 3

Value Proposition 5

Packaging: The Ease and Wastefulness of Modern Consumer Society 6

Function of Packaging: Protection, Communication, and Convenience 8

Evolution of Problem Statement 10

Solution - Part A: Partnering With (re)zip to Make Inconvenient Reusable Containers Convenient 14

Rationale for the Packaging Design 17

Solution - Part B: Novel Bulk Dispenser System to Customize Granola 18

Feasibility of a Reusable Container and Bulk Dispenser System 20

Risk Analysis and Mitigation Strategies 22

Appendices 24

Bibliography 29

1

Team Description

2

Executive Summary

Packaging: The Ease and Wastefulness of Modern Society

As we first attempted to answer “how might we eliminate the use of disposable packaging”, we found ourselves needing to define certain terms, packaging, being the most important of them. According to Rousakis and Weintraub, authors of Packaging, Environmentally Protective Municipal ​ ​ Solid Waste Management, and the Limits to the Economic Premise, packaging represents both, “the ​ ease and wastefulness of modern consumer society” because of its short life cycle. As a matter of fact, 90% of packaging is disposed immediately after use. All the chemicals used in the production of packaging are toxic, causing air and water pollution and contributing to the overall greenhouse effect and ozone layer depletion.

Functions of Packaging

Given the negative environmental consequences of packaging, why do we keep using it? Our research showed that packaging has three main functions: protection, communication, and convenience. Packaging protects the product through all phases of distribution and ensures that chemical influences like gases, moisture, light or microorganisms, don’t damage the product. Packaging is also used as a communication tool to provide information like nutrition and ingredients as well as a form of marketing. Lastly due to changing social trends, consumers are devoting most of their time to the workforce demanding more prepared, conveniently packaged food.

Evolution of Problem Statement

As we attempted to understand why consumers would choose disposable packaging given its negative consequences on the environment, we concluded that: consumers have an on-the-go ​ lifestyle in which convenience is prioritized over protecting the environment. We attributed ​ consumers prioritization of convenience over the environment to their lack of knowledge. However, research on consumers awareness of the impact of packaging on the environment showed the opposite.

Our question then became “why do consumers keep purchasing food that comes in disposable packaging even though they are aware of its negative impact on the environment?” Research showed that while environmental concerns were considered very important, they were ranked fifth, preceded by safety, product shelf life, new labeling legislation, and consumer convenience. ​ ​ Convenience appears to be one of the most dominant forces in the food delivery system conflicting with environmental protection.

Our problem statement then evolved to: There is a gap between the perceived benefit of reusable ​ containers and the practicality/convenience of it. The impracticality of reusable containers outweighs ​ its benefits. As Stilwell claimed in Packaging for the Environment, “convenience seems to outweigh ​ ​ people’s good intentions”.

The question now became: How might Nature’s Path alter its packaging making it reusable, ​ practical, and convenient for the modern consumer?

3

Solution

Our solution consists of two parts the first one being a reusable container and the second one a bulk dispenser system.

Part A: Making the Inconvenient Reusable Containers Convenient

Our main assumption when thinking of solutions was that reusable containers are heavy, they take up space, and they are not practical to bring - a lot of thought has to be put in beforehand. We were able to dump the assumption as we found (re)zip: “reusable storage bags made out of food safe, ​ FDA-grade PEVA material and the leakproof double-lock closure seals in freshness. (re)zip replaces up to 300 disposable bags.” Overall, (re)zip bags are light, they don’t take up space and are practical to bring - can be stored in backpacks, purses, etc.

We chose (re)zip as a partner for Nature’s Path since they share the same corporate vision which is to make greater positive environmental and social impacts through their business activities. (re)zip is a certified B corporation and has partnered with Terracycle to dispose their products.

Part B: Novel Bulk Dispenser System

The second part of the solution consists of introducing a novel bulk product dispenser system to retailers for consumers to customize their own granola. Consumers will be able to find an interactive, touch display in the granola section in partnered retail stores where they will be able to build their own granola and then dispense it in their new reusable (re)zip bags.

Risk Analysis and Mitigation Strategies

The implementation of reusable containers and bulk dispensers may come with some risks thus we have highlighted some key areas to consider including customer resistance, health and safety issues, and retailer resistance and shelf space. Regarding customer resistance we have carefully chosen (re)zip because of its novel, lightweight, and easy transportability - ideal for the modern consumer. Regarding the health and safety issues we believe an effective way of preventing health concerns is by establishing a cleaning system for customers to sanitize their containers before dispensing food. As of now, we are still in the process of finding mitigation strategies for the resistance retailers may have regarding the shelf space that the bulk system may take up.

4

Value Proposition

Our solution consists of two parts the first one being a partnership with (re)zip to adopt reusable packaging and the second one a novel bulk dispenser system for consumers to customize their own granola.

By adopting the reusable (re)zip bags, we are making the inconvenient reusable containers convenient. What once seemed to be heavy, take up space and be not practical to bring like jam jars is now light and takes little to no space thanks to (re)zip.

Prototype of what partnership with (re)zip might look like

With the new reusable (re)zip bags consumers are now able to dispense their own customized granola in an interactive, touch display bulk dispenser system found in the granola section in partnered retail stores.

Our solution not only provides customers a convenient alternative to reusable containers but also a different shopping experience with a customized product. With this two-part solution we aim to minimize the natural resources used in the production of packaging to leave the environment better than we found it.

5

Packaging: The Ease and Wastefulness of Modern Consumer Society

Packaging is defined by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment as

“all materials, fabricated containers and other components used in the containment, ​ protection, movement and display of a product or commodity. The environmental effects of packaging extend beyond disposal - resources and energy are consumed and pollutants are released during production and transportation of packaging.” ​

Photo retrieved from The Weather Network ​

According to Rousakis and Weintraub, authors of Packaging, Environmentally Protective ​ Municipal Solid Waste Management, and the Limits to the Economic Premise, packaging ​ “represent both the ease and wastefulness of modern consumer society” because of its short life cycle. As a matter of fact, 90% of packaging is disposed immediately after use.

The book Packaging for the Environment estimates that packaging contributes 30% to 35% ​ ​ of municipal solid waste. This is no surprise given that in the late 1980’s Canadians consumed one ton of packaging per family per year adding up to a total of 6.6 million tones. In 1988, 5.7 million tons of this packaging were disposed in landfills, costing taxpayers over $100 million. As a result, natural resources were lost, valuable land was consumed, and pollutants were released.

Even though packaging plays an important role in waste reduction compared to fresh food (1%-5% of packaged food goes to waste while 40%-50% of fresh foods result in waste), the

6

extracting and refining that takes place to make the packaging materials have impacts that are 150 times more severe than the impacts of disposal. The chemicals used in the production of packaging are toxic, causing air and water pollution and contributing to the overall greenhouse effect and ozone layer depletion.

7

Function of Packaging: Protection, Communication, and Convenience

Given the negative environmental consequences of packaging, why do we keep using it? Packaging has three main functions; protection, communication, and convenience. ​

Protection

One of the most important and critical functions of packaging is protection. In our globalized ​ ​ modern society, products must travel long distances to reach the hands of consumers. Thus, packaging serves the purpose of protecting the product through all phases of distribution ensuring the product does not lose its value. Packaging also serves as a post-purchase protection ensuring that chemical influences like gases, moisture, light or microorganisms, don’t damage the product.

Photo retrieved from Nature’s Path

Communication

Consumers are heavily concerned about the content of their food, its origin, freshness, and safety as well as the sustainability of food production and its impact on the environment. Therefore, packaging is also used as a mean to provide information such as “nutrition, ingredients, cooking instruction, warnings, and product weight”, as well as to satisfy legal requirements such as FDA’s ingredient specifications.

8

Given that a typical grocery store offers over 10,000 products, the packaging is also used as a form of marketing. According to Packaging for the Environment by Rzepecki, the packaging ​ ​ is not only expected to sell the product, but it is also a major factor in impulse buying. Once ​ the consumer leaves the store, the visibility of the brand in the home creates and, in some cases, increases customer loyalty.

Convenience

Consumers:

“75 cents out of every dollar spent on supermarket foods is spent on convenience” (Lave et al. 1995)

The rise of convenient, single-use disposable packaging can be highly attributed to the changing social trends in the past half-century. The journal article Packaging and The ​ Environment shows that between 1972 and 1987 there was a 73% increase in single-parent ​ households and a 61% increase in the number of women in the workforce in the United States. The percentage of men and women living alone in the United States summed up to a total of 39% in 1990. Devoting most of their time to the workforce, consumers began to demand microwavable, prepared, and pre-cut convenience foods that required little to no preparation. The public acceptance of the microwave oven and food processing technology created new categories of food that emphasized on convenience for the grab-and-go consumer.

Suppliers:

For suppliers, packaging makes the shipping, storage, and display of products easier. In other words, packaging facilitates the movement of food. ​ ​

9

Evolution of Problem Statement

First Problem Statement

As we attempted to understand why consumers would choose disposable packaging given its negative consequences on the environment, we concluded that: consumers have an ​ on-the-go lifestyle in which convenience is prioritized over protecting the environment.

Retrieved from WallpaperPlay

We attributed consumers prioritization of convenience over the environment to their lack of knowledge. We believed that consumers didn’t know about the impact that their actions had on the environment (e.g. what happens to single-use disposable packaging once it’s disposed).

However, research showed the opposite. Seventy-seven percent of respondents in a Penn and Schoen, Inc survey stated that a company’s reputation on environmental issues affected their purchase decisions. As a matter of fact, seventy-nine percent of consumers stated in another survey that products use too much packaging. They considered the most over packaged foods to be, “cereal, microwave/shelf stable foods, frozen foods, over-the-counter drugs and vitamins, snacks, meats, and cookies/cracker”. A third study stated that consumers are willing to pay a premium of 5% to 15% for environmentally benign products and eighty percent of Canadians polled in a fourth survey stated they would pay more for “green” products.

10

Pivoting First Problem Statement

Even though consumers are aware of the effects of disposable packaging on the environment and are willing to pay a premium for it, evidence from supermarkets shows that if a green/environmentally friendly product is not convenient and easy to open, the ​ ​ product will not be successful. Consumers, Environment, and the Food Industry show that in ​ ​ economically hard times, price and quality are the most important considerations.

A survey conducted by Food Engineering of 500-panel members from all sectors of the food ​ ​ industry found that while environmental concerns were considered very important, they were ranked fifth, preceded by safety, product shelf life, new labeling legislation, and consumer convenience. Overall, environmental issues were still considered important but only if they were cost-effective. Despite its importance, environmental problems do not appear to be the driving force in the packaging industry. Convenience appears to be one of the most dominant forces in the food delivery system conflicting with environmental protection.

Second Problem Statement

As we attempted to understand why consumers would keep purchasing food that comes in disposable packaging despite being aware of its negative impact on the environment made us realize that: there is a gap between the perceived benefit of reusable containers and the ​ practicality/convenience of it.

For example, in the new Toronto store Unboxed consumers who want to buy milk must ​ ​ bring their own jar/container/bottle.

Unboxed has milk on tap. Customers can either bring their own containers or buy them at the store. (Darek Zdzienicki/CBC News)

11

As described on the online reusable packaging store, Dans Le Sac, there are many steps a ​ ​ consumer must go through to buy products in reusable containers, thus making reusable containers inconvenient and unpractical. If a consumer wants to buy milk from a zero-waste market like Unboxed they must first: ​ ​

1. Plan ahead and make a list of what they need. 2. Ensure you have enough jars when they are out shopping. 3. Choose the proper jars to bring. Glass jars can be heavy, so Dans Le Sac ​ recommended to use them for liquid products, spices or cleaning supplies only. 4. The consumer must then commute to Unboxed or other specific places that sell milk ​ ​ on tap. 5. Bring the heavy jars back home once done shopping.

Business Meets the Environmental Challenge: Essays with Profiles of Nova Scotia Companies claims that consumers are more willing to make sacrifices in the post-purchase stage (e.g recycling) than at the point of purchase because these changes usually only mean minor lifestyle changes. Given that consumers are busier, more, connected and switching to a more on-the-go lifestyle, bringing a reusable container to buy in bulk to eliminate disposable packaging would be a major change in consumer habits - not just a minor lifestyle change. And as Stilwell claimed in Packaging for the Environment, “convenience seems to outweigh ​ ​ people’s good intentions”.

Problem and Opportunity Statement

Given that our problem statement was: there is a gap between the perceived benefit of ​ reusable containers and the practicality/convenience of it. Our opportunity statement ​ became: how might Nature’s Path alter its packaging making it reusable, practical and ​ convenient for the modern consumer?

Constraints

When thinking of solutions on how Nature’s Path might alter its packaging making it practical and convenient to the modern consumer, we set two constraints:

1. The solution must be convenient for the consumer and the supplier (manufacturer, ​ ​ distributor, and retailer).

2. If the solution happened to be a change in habit, it must be a minor change otherwise consumers would not be willing to make the sacrifice for the environment.

12

Assumption

As we analyzed the consumer service journey - from planning ahead what jars are needed to bringing the heavy jars back home, we realized that we always assumed one thing: reusable containers are heavy, they take up space, and we must remember to bring them. But what if reusable containers were light, they didn’t take up space, and remembering to bring them did not entail a change in habit?

Dumping the Assumption

As we researched on alternative forms of reusable containers we found (re)zip:

Just like Mia who is based in Austin, Texas (Appendix A), “(re)zip are reusable storage bags ​ made out of food safe, FDA-grade PEVA material and the leakproof double-lock closure seals in freshness. Best of all one (re)zip replaces up to 300 disposable baggies.”

13

Solution - Part A: Partnering With (re)zip to Make Inconvenient Reusable Containers Convenient Disclaimer: Our solution for Nature’s Path focuses on the granola brand only.

Our solution to “How might we eliminate disposable packaging” consists of two parts. The first part of the solution is a partnership with (re)zip to tackle the issue of making inconvenient reusable containers convenient.

Why (re)zip

Corporate Vision

(re)zip shares the same corporate vision with Nature’s Path which is to make greater positive environmental and social impacts through their business activities. (re)zip is a certified B corporation which means that the business has reached “the highest standard of verified social environmental performance, public transparency, and legal accountability to balance profit and purpose”.

Retrieved from (re)zip

(re)zip Benefits

As Nature’s Path has the current challenge of eliminating disposable packaging, (re)zip already has the credibility of creating sustainable packaging. (re)zip focuses on creating packaging bags that have five features, practicality, reusability, creativity, compassion, and simplicity.

14

There are multiple reasons why consumers are already choosing (re)zip, these include the fact that (re)zip has varied bag sizes and shapes to meet users’ different demands, (re)zip bags are BPA-free and lead-free so that it is safe to carry and store food, the lightweight and durable design of (re)zip bags enables users to conveniently bring it on their way to work, ​ home, travel and grocery, and last but not least, (re)zip packaging bags can be easily filled, ​ cleaned, and stored. The users can keep (re)zip bags for other uses too such as pantry and storage.

Lastly, according to the Canadian Law Section 9 Act, packaging should be designed and made ​ ​ ​ in a way that the consumers will not be misled with respect to the product’s actual information. As our proposed partner, (re)zip storage bags are made of FDA-grade material which guarantees the packaging qualifications.

Partnership with Terracycle

(re)zip has also partnered with Terracycle. Terracycle was founded for the purpose of moving hard-to-recycle waste from linear to circular economy. Terracycle “collects used packaging and products that would otherwise be destined for landfills”. Once (re)zip reusable bags life cycle ends, users can send their bags to Terracycle via mail.

Prototype of (re)zip Bags in Partnership with Nature’s Path

Prototype A: Transparent bag

15

Prototype B: Bag with granola

16

Rationale for the Packaging Design

Mission Driven

Environmentally conscious products must guide customers to make the connection between their lifestyles and the detriment to the environment (Abraham 1992). Many customers do not feel the consequential environmental degradation from their consumption choices (Stilwell et al. 1991; Wagner 1997). If there is a visual feedback to their choices, it could aid in making the connection that packaging is bad for the environment. The corollary is if environmental appreciation through the choice of a product is visually apparent, it will help the customer make that connection between their lifestyle and the improvement of the environment and community. The way to communicate this imminently is through emphasis of the causes they can affect on the packages. Every endeavour that Nature’s Path is promoting and sponsoring will be labelled on the package. By choosing Nature’s Path, the consumer will be able to connect the result of buying a Nature’s Path product to its causes.

Voting for Change & Customer Empowerment

Whether it’s “food-raisers”, protecting rainforests, promoting organic goods or leaving a better earth for the children, making it known that by choosing a Nature’s Path’s product, a customer is making a vote through their dollars to the Nature’s Path’s endeavours, increasing the value of the product. The concept of voting with their money allows the customer to feel a sense of power and purpose. Studies show a strong correlation between consumer empowerment and product satisfactions (Shaw et al, 2006). The article also shows that if boycotting a product can impact the world in a positive manner, the customer will be inclined not to buy the product. Having the choice and seeing money as their way to vote towards a greater cause is something the customer values. Illustrating the fact that customers are not only buying granola, but also buying into the Nature’s Path missions, gives them that value.

Nature’s Path also gives them a connection to those causes. Those who did not have a convenient funnel to support the causes now do by buying the product. Through making the choice of buying Nature’s Path and making the choice to support Nature’s Path’s mission, they have made that mission their own. This choice also compliments levels of psychological ownership and sentimental attachments. The significance of which will be further discussed next.

17

Solution - Part B: Novel Bulk Dispenser System to Customize Granola

Partnering with (re)zip to adopt reusable packaging is only part of the solution. The second part of the solution consists of introducing a novel bulk product dispenser system to retailers for customers to customize their own granola.

Customization and Choice

A customer's ability to influence the end product increases their emotional attachment to it. The new dispenser system will allow consumers to choose the flavour of granola and additional fruits. On the shelves of the granola section in partnered retail stores, a customer will see an interactive interface on a touch display. The individual will be able to manifest their granola on screen with a selection of ingredients. There will be an update image simulation of what the end product will look like at each step of the choices. This creates a more vivid mental imagery than what would have been achieved in text or static pictures of an object, creating a higher level of engagement. It has been researched (Scholsser, 2006) that virtual visualization has induced a recollection that pose as real memory of the materialized product. The display enables the visual feedback. The self-selection of components, colours, and shapes allow the consumer to realize figments of their own imagination (Appendix B).

“I made it, therefore it’s mine”

Even without legal ownership, the activity induces emotions of psychological ownership. Initial ownership is granted when a customer faces the interactive dispenser. In an study conducted by Duke psychologist Dan Ariely (2011), individuals were given paper for to build origami. Results show that higher value was place on the origami that the individuals made

18

themselves. This was dubbed the “IKEA effect,” named after Swedish furniture manufacturer IKEA that sell easy to self-assemble furniture. When a customer’s granola is dispensed and actualized, the fruits of their own labour and efforts have been as well, increasing the value of the product.

“It’s mine, therefore it is better”

Ownership has strong effects of increasing value to an individual. A famous study of this phenomenon was conducted at Cornell University (Thaler et al, 1990). Students were given ​ ​ either a chocolate bar or a mug of coffee, both of which had equal market value. First surveys showed that about half students liked their current goods. The hypothesis is that half the students would trade their current holdings, but after opening to free trade only 10% of the students traded. This study demonstrated the effect that even without strong attachments to an object, their ownership to the object took precedence to their preferences. This is called the Endowment Effect.

Allowing consumers to materialize their own granola gives them that sense of ownership. Having ownership to their granola raises their sense of value of the product. The progression from imagination to customization, to visualization and to actualization, and the enablement of this through new technological advances may explain why the millennials of today love personalized products so much.

19

Feasibility of a Reusable Container and Bulk Dispenser System

The feasibility of a reusable container and bulk dispenser system was explored in Angela’s D. Bir thesis “Exploring the feasibility of a reusable container and bulk product dispense system in supermarkets” for the Master of Environmental Studies at the Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia.

In the thesis Angela conducts a study in three supermarkets in Halifax, Nova Scotia where she surveys customers, supermarket employees, managers, and food suppliers to determine if customers are willing to participate in a reusable container and bulk product dispense system and if the system is feasible from an operational perspective.

Supermarket Customers

Ninety-five of the 120 customers she interviewed could think of ways that packaging could be reduced or eliminated. The most popular solution given by the customers was by reducing the amount of double packaging (e.g a bag inside a box). Seventy of the 120 customers interviews said that they would be willing to participate in a reusable container and bulk dispense system. Out of the customers who said that they might participate ​ expressed that their reservation was that of convenience. ​

Supermarket Managers and Employees

Overall, the majority of the employees, managers, and suppliers thought the reusable container and bulk dispense system was feasible.

Most of the managers and employees who were interviewed claimed to deal with comments and concerns from customers about the waste and the environment on a daily basis. One of the managers even noted that through a reusable container and bulk dispense system the supermarket could save money because they could buy in larger units. The decrease in bags would also help reduce costs.

Supermarket Suppliers

Interviewed suppliers also noted that most companies look for alternative ways to reduce packaging because its costs them money. Packaging increases the cost of delivery because shipment payments are calculated by weight. Interestingly enough, suppliers did not think supermarket managers would be willing to operate a reusable container system, although the supermarket managers thought that supplier participation would not be a problem.

20

There was a clear lack of communication amongst the group of stakeholders. Even though 82% of surveyed customers said they would or might participate in a reusable container and bulk dispense system, employees, managers, and suppliers believed customers would be hesitant to do so. Overall, stakeholders believed integrating the system was feasible, however, there are some risks that must be mitigated first.

21

Risk Analysis and Mitigation Strategies

The implementation of reusable containers and bulk dispensers may come with some risks thus we have highlighted some key areas to consider.

Customer Resistance

The main challenge we see with implementing this system is that customers may be unwilling to make the switch to using reusable containers. Our research has shown that the inconvenience of bringing your own container is a huge driving factor for this hesitation. However, we also uncovered that when consumers do start to form environmental buying habits, they do not usually revert back to products that are bad for the environment (Wagner 1997). The system must be designed in a way that is very easy to use for customers, and it must be very evident to the customer that by using this system, they are contributing to a “better” planet. This will system will eventually be the only way to get your favorite Nature’s Path products, and because customers will already be familiar and comfortable using this machine, and are aware of the environmental benefits of using it, the inconvenience of bringing your own container will not be a consideration (Birch 2000). We also believe that with our proposed choice of container, the inconvenience of bringing your own container to the retailer will be reduced because the (re)Zip bags are very lightweight and easily transportable.

Health and Safety Issues

Currently there are no regulations that would prevent the implementation of our bulk dispenser system and the use of reusable containers. We do however realize that there is the risk of customers falling ill from unsanitary containers or contaminated food (Birch 2000). This poses the risk of legal action towards Nature’s Path and the retailers selling the products. We believe an effective way to prevent these health concerns would be to establish a cleaning system that customers could use to sanitize their containers before they dispense their food. It would have to be quick, easy to use and have minimal environmental impact to as to not cancel out the benefits of reusable packaging (Birch 2000). Another option to consider would be to educate customers about the importance of clean containers and how to properly clean them. This could be an additional step that our customers must read before their granola will be dispensed by the machine.

22

Retailer Resistance and Shelf Space

Our proposed solution may entail new responsibilities being created for the retailer. The new system will need to be constantly cleaned to ensure food is not contaminated and the bulk containers will need to be refilled. If these processes are not easy for employees to undertake, retailers may refuse to implement the system as this may cause extra work and therefore higher costs for them. As well as this, the space needed for this system needs to be justified. Retailers may be hesitant to implement these systems in their stores as they would be taking up valuable shelf space. The system would need to have the ability to create enough of Nature’s Path products that the shelve space they would normally take up could be diverted so that the machine could be implemented. This would however depend on how much shelf space is available currently in all the stores that sell Nature’s Path. Retailers that stock less of the products may not be willing to switch to this new system.

23

Appendices

Appendix A: Nature’s Path Persona

Mia is 33 years old and lives in Austin, Texas. People either get advice from her or want to be like her. She is not married (not sure she wants to be married), she is clever, has a business degree (HR) and might be VP of HR one day but she is not really interested in that now. Mia loves to travel, has a comfortable lifestyle, is a big supporter of women empowerment and cares for the environment. She dedicates most of her time to family and friends.

24

Appendix B: Software Prototype

Live link: https://invis.io/D3RAJSTEF4Q ​ ​

25

26

Appendix C:

27

Appendix D:

28

Bibliography

Abraham, M. (1992). Consumers, environment and development: an overview. In Consumers and the Environment: Proceedings of the IOCU Forum on Sustainable Consumption Rio de Janeiro 4 June 1992. International Organization of Consumers Unions: ​ Penang, Malaysia.

About B Corps. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://bcorporation.net/about-b-corps ​ ​

Ann E. Schlosser, (2006). Learning through Virtual Product Experience: The Role of Imagery on True versus False Memories, Journal of Consumer Research, Volume 33, Issue 3, ​ ​ December 2006, Pages 377–383. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1086/508522 ​

Assembling your Zero Waste kit to shop in bulk. (n.d.). Retrieved from ​ https://danslesac.co/blogs/eco-friendly-tips/zero-waste-shopping-kit

Birch, A. D. (2000). Exploring The Feasibility Of A Reusable Container And Bulk Product Dispenser System In Supermarkets. Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for ​ the degree Master of Environmental Studies

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCh4E). (1990). The National Packaging ​ Protocol. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment: Ottawa, ON. ​

Canada, H. (2019, January 22). Food and Nutrition. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/food-nutrition.html

Clayton, D. (1993). The role of the consumer in encouraging environmentally friendly business practices. In Business Meets the Environmental Challenge: Essays with Profiles of Nova Scotia Companies. Y. Friesen, R. Cote, and D. Patton (eds.). Lancelot Press: Hanisport. NS.

Deloitte. (2015). The food value chain A challenge for the next century. Retrieved from ​ ​ https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ie/Documents/ConsumerBusiness/2015- Deloitte-Ireland-Food_Value_Chain.pdf

John Rousakis & Bernard A. Weintraub, (1994). Packaging, Environmentally Protective ​ Municipal Solid Waste Management, and the Limits to the Economic Premise, 21 Ecology L. ​ Q. 947.

29

Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J., & Thaler, R. (1990). Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1325-1348. Retrieved from ​ ​ ​ ​ http://www.jstor.org/stable/2937761

Landor, W. (1966). Packaging for retail impact. In Packaging Considerations for the ​ Marketing Man. American Management Association: New York. NY. ​

LeMaire, W. (1992). A green package. Food Engineering October 1992.74. ​ ​

Marsh, K. (1991). Effective management of food packaging: from production to disposal. Food Technology May 199 1,225-235. ​

Norton, M. I., Mochon, D., & Ariely, D. (2001). The “IKEA Effect”: When labor leads to love. Retrieved from https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/11-091.pdf ​

Reddekopp, L. (2019, February 22). Why this woman's grocery store won't sell you milk ​ unless you bring your own bottle News. Retrieved from ​ https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/zero-waste-grocery-store-unboxed-toronto-1.50 30556

Robertson, J. (1991). Package Pollution and the Environment. Minister of Supply and ​ ​ Services Canada: Ottawa, ON.

Shaw, D., Newholm, T., & Dickinson, R. (2006, 09). Consumption as voting: An exploration of consumer empowerment. European Journal of Marketing, 40(9/10), 1049-1067. ​ ​ ​ ​ doi:10.1108/03090560610681005

Six Factors Driving Consumers? Quest for Convenience. (2018, August 13). Retrieved from https://www.nielsen.com/ssa/en/insights/news/2018/six-factors-driving-consumers-quest-f or-convenience.html

Sloan, E. (1993). Consumers, the environment, and the food industry. Food Technology ​ August 1993.72-75+.

Stana, E. (1994). Packaging and the Environment. Natural Resources & Environment, 9(2), ​ ​ ​ ​ 16-19. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40924291 ​

Standards. (2018, March 29). Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Standards/default.htm

Stilwell, l., C. Canty, P. Kopf, and A. Montrone. (1991). Packaging for the Environment: A Partnership for Progress. AMACOM: New York, NY.

30

Sutherland, N. (1993). The making of an environmentally friendly Company. In Business ​ Meets the Environmental Challenge: Essays with Profiles of Nova Scotia Companies. Y. ​ Friesen, R. Cote, and D. Patton (eds.). Lancelot Press: Hantsport, NS.

Thommes, G. (1991) . Plastics: properties and selection. Reprinted with permission. In Packaging and Environmental Issues. 1991. Rzepecki, E. (ed.). University of S t. Thomas ​ Technology Press: St. Paul, Minnesota.

Wagner, S. (1997). Understanding Green Consumer Behavior: A Qualitative Cognitive Approach. Routledge:New York, N'Y. ​

Williams, S. (1990). The green revolution in products and packaging. ID May/June 1990, ​ ​ 58-59+.

31