Conversations with policymakers, including during recent meetings in Albany, underscore a consistent theme across states: affordability matters.
Lawmakers are navigating inflation and increasing pressure on state and municipal budgets as energy and operating costs climb. In this environment, policies that risk adding to household expenses or requiring new public spending face heightened scrutiny.
New York Governor Hochul spoke extensively of what she called the “affordability crisis” and rising costs as a “top concern for New Yorkers” in her State of the State remarks. New York is not alone. Across the country, policymakers are asking the same question: how do we advance sustainability goals without making everyday costs higher for families or more difficult for states to manage.
This moment underscores why sustainable packaging policy must reflect the triple bottom line:
- Policies need to deliver environmental progress for the planet,
- remain affordable for people, and
- be workable for businesses that invest, innovate, and operate across state lines.
Industry is working to keep packaging costs in check
At the same time, companies across the plastics packaging value chain are working to meet sustainability commitments while trying to keep costs as low as possible in a challenging economic environment. Even as tariffs and higher input costs put pressure on supply chains, brands and packaging suppliers are:
- Reducing material use through lightweighting;
- Moving toward single-polymer packaging designs that simplify manufacturing and recycling;
- Expanding bulk, refill, and reuse options where feasible; and
- Designing packaging that delivers required performance with fewer resources.
These efforts are aimed at improving sustainability outcomes while minimizing cost impacts for consumers.
Plastic packaging’s role in protecting food, extending shelf life, and reducing spoilage is a key reason it remains essential to affordability and waste reduction for consumers.
What affordability means for sustainable packaging policy
Any discussion of packaging policy must recognize the essential role plastic packaging plays in modern supply chains, from food safety and product protection to lightweighting and transportation efficiency. These benefits support the people part of the story by helping keep products affordable and reduce waste. Policies that overlook this reality, or that push material substitution without accounting for performance and cost, risk increasing consumer prices, emissions, and waste.
This balance is especially evident in discussions around extended producer responsibility, or EPR, for packaging. EPR can play an important role in improving recycling systems and delivering environmental benefits for the planet, but program design matters. Approaches that drive unnecessary cost increases or create fragmented compliance obligations can undermine the profit by discouraging investment and innovation, ultimately weakening public and political support.
We have seen this concern surface in California, where the governor paused implementation of EPR regulations citing cost impacts. In New York, an independent analysis by York University found that one version of the state’s proposed packaging EPR legislation could increase household costs by more than $700 per year through higher grocery prices.
Those findings are hard for policymakers to ignore, particularly when affordability is a dominant concern.
A more affordable EPR path forward in New York
New York currently has multiple EPR proposals under consideration, and the differences between them matter.
While the Harckham/Glick bill (S.1464/A.1749) raises significant affordability concerns, the Jackson/Martinez bill (S.5062/A.6191) offers a more pragmatic and cost-conscious alternative. The Jackson/Martinez approach is aligned with EPR frameworks adopted in states such as Minnesota and Maryland, helping reduce unnecessary complexity and compliance costs for producers operating across multiple jurisdictions.
Harmonization is not just a technical detail. Alignment across states lowers administrative burdens, supports efficient investment, and helps avoid cost increases that ultimately show up on store shelves.
Innovation and infrastructure remain the opportunity
The takeaway from ongoing conversations with policymakers is not that sustainability must take a back seat to affordability. It is that the two must move together.
The most effective packaging policies will be those that:
- Encourage private investment and innovation;
- Focus on system improvements rather than prescriptive mandates;
- Align across states to reduce fragmentation and cost; and
- Deliver real environmental progress without increasing everyday expenses.
The plastics packaging value chain has a critical role to play in shaping these solutions. Continued, constructive engagement with policymakers is essential to ensure that sustainability goals are advanced in ways that are achievable, affordable, and effective.
