‘Tree-free’ alternatives to wood fibers: 4 common misconceptions

“Tree-free” alternatives to wood fibers — sugarcane, hemp and wheat straw — have gained traction as eco-friendly choices. You can find them in everything from takeout boxes to lip balm. But despite their popularity, these tree-free materials are not a silver bullet. 

Naturally companies aiming to avoid deforestation are looking to drop wood fiber (fiber made from trees) from their packaging. Non-wood fibers can offer benefits; they can be purpose-grown plants like bamboo, or even the byproducts of crops, such as wheat straw. 

But companies looking to go tree-free face some common misconceptions around the benefits and trade-offs of alternative fibers. Below we review four common misconceptions and offer three ways alternative fibers can make a difference.

1. Alternative fibers save trees

Perhaps the most common assumption is that, by changing fiber sources, companies will reduce harvesting pressure and protect forests. There are contexts where this is possible, such as sourcing from high-risk ecosystems. But it disregards the positive impacts markets can have on investing in forests, maintaining forests and even improving them through stewardship. 

In fact, Two Sides North America and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) point to activities such as urban development and conversion to agricultural lands as the main drivers of deforestation.

Bottom line: A significant shift toward non-wood fibers may unintentionally divert resources from forest conservation and stewardship efforts.

2. They would otherwise go to waste

Alternative fibers such as bagasse and wheat straw are often assumed to be agricultural byproducts that would go to waste if not used for paper and packaging pulp. By using this “waste” product, companies assume they’re turning them into a valuable product. 

In some instances, this is valid. In regions with diminished or minimal forest resources (parts of China, India and Africa, and the United States’ Midwest), alternative fibers can create new revenue for rural communities and disincentivize crop burning.

Broadly speaking, though, when a stable market for a byproduct develops, in some ways it no longer fits the definition of waste (a material that is eliminated or discarded as no longer useful or required). Alternative fiber sources are also increasingly useful as feedstocks for products other than paper and packaging, such as biochar and insulation. 

Bottom line: Companies shouldn’t overemphasize the “utilized waste story” in their marketing, since it may be only partially true. 

3. They are always better for the environment

The first two misconceptions exist under the umbrella of a more overarching belief: that using alternative fibers lowers the environmental footprint of the packaging compared to using wood fiber. 

What does “life cycle assessment” data say? A recent study found that replacing virgin and recycled wood pulp with alternative fibers may result in unfavorable carbon footprint impacts, driven by the alternative fiber’s need for fertilizer during growth and different manufacturing processes.

Yet even this finding may not be conclusive: As with all such models, there are many considerations for designing material comparisons. Frustratingly, the answer is: “It depends.” 

Bottom line: The assumption that alternative fibers are always environmentally better is hard to prove. Companies shouldn’t broadcast claims that alternative fiber sources are better unless they have sound data from suppliers to support them.

4. They are cheaper

Finally, there’s the cost. Many brands look to alternative fibers to reduce packaging cost. Increased demand for fiber-based products, a limited or costly wood supply and a surplus of affordable non-wood fiber feedstocks all make alternative fibers appealing — but increased demand could also increase their price and erase the cost benefit.

Bottom line: Non-wood fibers may not be cheaper than wood fibers because of supply chain factors, market volatility and product quality implications. The good news? Using both non-wood and tree-wood as feedstocks could improve supply chain flexibility and protection from market dynamics.

Beyond tree-free

Alternative fiber sources certainly have a place in sustainable sourcing. Instead of sourcing to become tree-free, companies can use alternative fibers to meet a range of concrete sustainability and performance targets. Here are three reasons to include non-wood fibers in your portfolio:  

• Lower the product or package’s life cycle environmental footprint 

• Supplement volatile or limited wood fiber sources

• Maintain recyclability and/or compostability of the package 

Companies should be clear about their objectives and not oversell the environmental benefits.