When thinking of the social aspects of convenience in design, I am immediately reminded of the Dead Kennedy's album "Give me convenience or give me death" (1). I always found this title amusing and true. Our society demands convenience, so much that we don't even realize how convenient the world has become. Many of the luxuries of our day to day lives are a result of convenient packaging design.
Over the last few decades, the world has exploded with new, innovative packaging. Just take a look at The Die Line (2). This site is a blog of endless, beautiful, creative packaging. Many of the items we refer to as "great" not only because they are aesthetically pleasing but because they make our lives just a little easier -- a re-sealable bag, a twist off cap. We have become so used to these new ways of packaging that its hard to even remember what it was like to have to tap the end of a ketchup bottle.
Not all aspects of current packaging techniques are positive. Much of this packaging, while convenient is not always the most environmentally friendly. In Nathan's 3m lecture (3), he spoke of the vicious cycle of packaging. He explained that most of the time the packaging that society likes is the type that hurts us the most. Many times packaging is oversized and un-biodegradable. It's tough to change packaging when the current techniques are often the cheapest options for companies.
Its a tough decision for companies to switch to environmentally friendly packaging. They risk the welfare of their product with every and any change. Companies like Sun Chips have found a good way of making their packaging green, maintaining convenience and also staying true to their brand (4). Society is not going to quit demanding convenience. Designers, manufacturers and companies must place a larger emphasis on inventing new, environmentally friendly ways to meet these demands.
1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Give_Me_Convenience_or_Give_Me_Death
2.http://www.thedieline.com/
3.Nathan from 3m, Sen Seminar Lecture, 3.23.10
3.http://www.sunchips.com/healthier_planet.shtml
I agree that it can be risky for a company to change their product in any way, but risk can bring great reward. The challenge is when a company should make a change. One mistake can be costly.
The dielie is a great site that I visit daily. While shopping with my mother last weekend, I happened upon the dieline's most recent packaging design book, box bottle bag, and admired all of the awesome packaging in both aesthetics and environmental factors. She asked me "so why is this good" and I listed about 25 reasons why it is "good" packaging. For the rest of our day, I felt like I had educated her further in the realm of packaging because she kept pointing out what she thought was good design (most of it was actually nicely designed) and now she constantly looks for the recycling icon on packaging.
What seems to influence design of packaging is the habits of people. Convenience food is marketed to make life easier, to give more time for what is important. You know, brushing your teeth and driving while talking on your cell phone.
Instead of sitting down to an even semi-cooked meal, people can eat a meal where every item comes individually wrapped, and you can throw it all away when you are done. In addition to being wasteful, this food is usually highly processed, and low in nutritional value, and eating too much of it makes you feel like the Michelin Man.
Do we really want to eat how the Jetsons do? Without taking time to enjoy new things, savor favorite things, or have satisfaction in creating (even growing) something you can eat? I agree that convenience is important, but I also believe that 'convenience' is morphing into a way of life and that taking time and energy to eat good food, package free, is some sort of outdated nomad thing. Peeling carrots is not hunting and gathering. You don't even have to peel them if you don't want to.
I can't get it out of my head that the 'convenience' culture will have to change the values of its people to believe that there is value in caring about what you eat, where it comes from and where it (and the packaging) will go after you consume it. I'm glad Sunchips has done something, but I don't know whether it is a bandwagon maneuver, and if that even matters, since somebody is doing something.
Moral of the story: I agree.
*jumps off soapbox*
I think its interesting that the speakers form both 3M, and General MIlls spoke on the issues of convenient packaging and what consumers will purchase. And while Grace, like you said, the world is becoming filled with innovative packaging, people are still incredibly resistant to chance, even if it does provide incredible convenience.
The speaker from General Mills told the story about how everyone continually gave the feedback that they wanted a resealable bag to keep cheerios fresh. Well General Mills created the bag, sold it on the shelves side by side with the regular bag, for the same price, same amount of Cheerios, and no one bought it because they were afraid they were being gypped on Cheerios.
What Sunchips is doing is a great idea, and their commercials do a great job of conveying their message. One thing we might want to consider is: at what cost are the new bags being made? I am guessing that the benefit of having completely compostable bags completely outweighs the benefit... but it is also convenient for Sunchips to only tell us that one benefit. Are there other benefits or costs? Are the materials for the new bags local, or do they take a bigger footprint to ship the materials? In the future, when we are in places where these decisions are being made, how will we make them, and will we be honest about their convenience?
Leave a comment