An economic perspective: ESG Risks in the Era of the "Unboxing" Arms Race
Before introducing the topic,
we will first discuss the words “package” and “excessive package”.
According to the official definition, packaging is the collective term for containers, materials, and auxiliaries used in accordance with specified technical methods, designed to protect products, facilitate storage and transportation, and promote sales during distribution. It also denotes the operational activities of applying specific technical methods when using such containers, materials, and auxiliaries to achieve the above purposes.
But I think this definition is mouthful, so here's my version:
Any external form that drives you to purchase a product is packaging.
Packaging works as an important way for the sellers to increase their profit without changing the products. The packaging can also bring consumers higher utility.
It’s a brilliant sales tactic. Without changing a single ingredient or component, better packaging increases profit margins and consumer utility. But here’s the ESG dilemma: that the "utility" is fleeting (it lasts about 10 seconds during an unboxing video), while the waste lasts for centuries.
I. The E in ESG: The Carbon and Waste Math You Can't Ignore
Let’s put it in numbers. A moderately over-packaged product creates 2.17 times the carbon footprint of packaging that provides basic protection. For the most “luxury” packs, that number increases to 3 to 5 times higher. Among all packaging stuff, decorations like stickers are responsible for 42% of that extra carbon pollution. Because of the extra packaging, the shipping boxes are required to be bigger, which also creates extra waste, which can add about 80 grams of CO₂e pollution.
And where does all this packaging end up after you rip it open? Most of them are disposable, which means they should get into the trash bin. However, despite the apparent, are they always recycled, for real?
The Recycling Myth of Paper
We often assume paper is "green." But the truth is, only around 52% of clean paper waste actually gets recycled, and the recycling process is actually messy, which means that 1 ton of recycled paper pulp generates roughly 100 tons of wastewater loaded with heavy metals and toxic chemicals. The rest gets incinerated or buried in landfills, releasing greenhouse gases and slowly contaminating soil and groundwater.
Plastic packaging is even trickier. Those tiny plastic decorations, seal tapes, and bubble wraps are barely recyclable. Over time, they break down into microplastics tinier than a grain of rice, wash into rivers and oceans, and work their way up the food chain. They will eventually end up in the food we eat.
II. The S and G: The Regulatory Blind Spot
The Social (S) and Governance (G) angles reveal an irony: large corporations are tightly regulated, but the digital marketplace is a wild west.
-
The Governance Gap:
In China, for example, laws strictly limit packaging to fewer than 4 layers, costs under 15% of the selling price, and specific void ratios. However, these rules primarily bind large enterprises. With the rise of individual sellers on social commerce platforms, we see a "packaging arms race." When product homogeneity is high, packaging becomes the only differentiator.
-
The Social Consequence:
This creates a downward social spiral. What starts as "luxury" becomes the new baseline standard. Sellers are forced to over-package just to stay competitive, passing the environmental cost onto society. It’s a classic Tragedy of the Commons—individual profit versus collective environmental health.
III. Moving from Propaganda to Pragmatism: A 3-Pronged Action Plan
To reduce this negative impact, efforts from governments, platforms, and every individual.
-
Governments: extend packaging regulations to individual online sellers; ban excessive packaging as a cheap profit-driven gimmick and applying basic standards on layers and cost to all sellers.
-
Platforms: release official in-app packaging guides; pop up friendly reminders when sellers ship orders, offer incentives, such as a "Green Ship" badge, for sellers who use certified minimal packaging.
-
Individuals: reuse intact bubble wrap and cardboard boxes, try eco-friendly decorations, leave consumer reviews on excessive packaging (sellers listen to reviews).
Excessive packaging is not just an environmental nuisance; it is a material ESG risk. It exposes companies to regulatory fines (Governance), damages brand reputation among Gen Z consumers (Social), and directly contributes to Scope 3 carbon emissions (Environmental). The solution isn't to ban unboxing joy. It's to redefine what "luxury" means.
To see more about our works on this topic...
A Business Proposal on Reducing Plastic Packaging: click here
Reference
https://baike.baidu.com/item/国务院办公厅关于进一步加强商品过度包装治理的通知/61967550#1
Time: 2026.7.5
Author: Yuetong Yin
Editor: Yuetong Yin, Tian Qiu
Layout design: Chengying Liu