Why “On-the-Go” Reuse is the Only Path Forward for Retail (and What’s Stopping Us)

Let’s start with the uncomfortable question everyone in procurement is asking but few say out loud: If reusable packaging is such a no-brainer for sustainability, why does it feel like pushing a boulder uphill every time we try to launch a pilot?

I’ve spent the last eight years managing packaging strategy and vendor relationships for a 250-person CPG company. My budget isn’t massive—we’re talking a mid-six-figure annual spend on primary and secondary packaging—but it’s enough that every sustainability mandate lands on my desk with a “figure this out” Post-it from the VP. The latest one? Scaling reuse.

When the U.S. Plastics Pact’s Reuse in Retail Initiative scoping report landed in my inbox last week, I didn’t just read it. I dissected it. Because frankly, after being part of a failed reusable container pilot in 2023 (more on that disaster later), I needed to know if the industry had finally learned from its mistakes or was just repackaging old hopes.

The Report’s Blueprint: “Return-on-the-Go” or Bust

Here’s the core finding that actually makes sense from an operations standpoint: the report, based on workshops with major players like Unilever and Kraft Heinz between October 2025 and January 2026, pushes “return-on-the-go” as the preferred model. Not refill-in-aisle, not complicated take-home systems. The logic is painfully obvious once you’ve seen a supermarket aisle after a refill station mishap—consumers get single-use convenience, retailers avoid operational chaos.

The part that surprised me? How specific they got. They’re not just saying “start with food.” They’re pointing at rotisserie chicken as the “ideal” SKU. High volume, familiar purchase, existing hot-case logistics. It’s a smart pick. Fresh produce comes next. Home and personal care? The report admits it’s trickier, hinging on co-packing facilities already being in place.

This is where my own experience screams in agreement. We tried launching a reusable condiment bottle program. The packaging design was beautiful. The consumer research was positive. What killed it? The cleaning and sanitization logistics at the vendor level added a $0.28/unit cost that our retail partner refused to absorb, and our margin couldn’t cover. The report nods at this by saying standardization across SKUs might lower costs—a lesson we learned the expensive way.

The Real Hurdle Isn’t Consumer Buy-In. It’s the Back-End Math.

Everyone talks about changing consumer habits. My reality is buried in spreadsheets. The report’s most crucial, understated point is about Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) fee structures. It explicitly says EPR should incentivize pre-competitive collaboration on reuse. Translation: if the financial penalty for single-use is high enough, and the system rewards collective investment in wash hubs and return infrastructure, suddenly those boulder-uphill projects get a winch.

They’re targeting Portland, Maine for a 2028 launch. Why? Existing robust deposit return infrastructure. It’s a plug-and-play mentality I wish we’d had. We picked a market based on “demographic alignment” without checking if the local recycling facility could even handle the polymer blend of our returnable tote. It couldn’t.

Crystal Bayliss, interim executive director of the U.S. Plastics Pact, nailed it in the report: “Isolated efforts won’t build the type of system consumers actually need.” That’s the line every packaging manager should highlight. The 2026-2028 timeline for design and pilot isn’t a suggestion—it’s the runway we have before EPR reuse mandates turn from suggestions into hard compliance costs.

So, What’s Your Next Move? A Checklist from Someone Who Fumbled

Reading this report felt less like getting news and more like getting a playbook for the next 24 months. If you’re in a role like mine, here’s how I’m translating it into action:

1. Map Your Portfolio Against the “Easy Win” Categories. Look at your SKUs. Where do you have high-volume, simple-logistics items like the report’s rotisserie chicken example? That’s your lowest-friction entry point.
2. Audit Your Supply Chain for “Reuse Readiness.” Do your co-packers have cleaning lines? Is there a wash hub within 200 miles of your key distribution center? If not, start those conversations now. The report says PROs should invest in this infrastructure, but you can’t wait for them to build it.
3. Calculate the Real TCO, Not Just the Unit Cost. Factor in reverse logistics, loss rates (expect 5-15% initially), cleaning, and sorting. Then, model that against the escalating EPR fees in states like California and Maine. The business case will shift from CSR to hard ROI faster than you think.
4. Talk to Your Retail Partners About Portland. The Pact is creating a template there. Get on their webinar (registration link here). Your goal isn’t to launch your own solo hero program. It’s to plug into the system they’re building.

The bottom line? The path forward for reuse in retail is finally getting specific. It’s not about idealism; it’s about rotisserie chicken, reverse logistics math, and leveraging EPR’s stick-and-carrot. The blueprint exists. The timeline is set. The question is no longer “if,” but how quickly we can move from isolated, expensive pilots to the collaborative system the report—and our balance sheets—are demanding.