Skip to content

Ethical brand ratings and accreditation since 2001

Back to table

Macfarlane Packaging

How ethical is Macfarlane Packaging?

Macfarlane Packaging is a packaging company which has fallen below The GOOD Shopping Guide’s ethical benchmark on our Ethical Packaging Ratings Table. Unlike many brands in this sector whose below-benchmark performance reflects gaps in environmental transparency, Macfarlane Packaging’s failure to meet the standard is driven primarily by a fundamental ethical concern relating to its parent company’s involvement in the armaments industry.

What does Macfarlane Packaging do?

Macfarlane Packaging is the trading brand of Macfarlane Group PLC, established in 1949 and listed on the London Stock Exchange since 1973. Headquartered in Glasgow, the group supplies protective packaging to customers across retail, e-commerce, food, logistics, electronics, medical, automotive, defence, and aerospace sectors.

Why does Macfarlane Packaging fall below The GOOD Shopping Guide’s benchmark?

Macfarlane Packaging’s below-benchmark performance is notable because the company performs well across most environmental criteria. The brand achieves good ratings for its environmental report, pollution prevention, and eco certifications, demonstrating a commitment to environmental transparency that compares favourably with many of its competitors. These are strengths that should be acknowledged.

However, Macfarlane Packaging receives a poor rating for armaments involvement. Through its parent company Macfarlane Group PLC, the brand actively supplies customers in the defence and aerospace sectors, including operations connected to armaments manufacturing. For consumers seeking to avoid any connection to the weapons industry through their purchasing decisions, this represents a significant and non-negotiable ethical concern. Unlike gaps in environmental reporting or product range, armaments involvement cannot be addressed through incremental policy improvements – it requires a fundamental reassessment of which customer sectors Macfarlane Group chooses to serve.

Macfarlane Packaging also receives a poor rating for vegan options, indicating limited focus on plant-based or vegan-certified packaging solutions. The packaging sector has seen considerable growth in sustainable and plant-based alternatives to conventional packaging materials, and expanding into this area would help address this gap.

Beyond these poor ratings, Macfarlane Packaging’s toxic chemicals policy and fossil fuels ratings are both acceptable rather than good, indicating further room for improvement in chemical management and energy transition commitments.

It is worth noting that Macfarlane Packaging has no documented public record criticisms as a standalone brand, and its environmental performance across reporting, pollution, and eco certifications is strong. However, the armaments involvement through its parent company is a serious ethical concern that The GOOD Shopping Guide cannot overlook, and which brings the brand below the benchmark regardless of its environmental credentials.

Consumers seeking packaging solutions that meet The GOOD Shopping Guide’s ethical benchmark are encouraged to consult our Ethical Packaging Ratings Table and our guide to ethical packaging, and prioritise brands that hold Ethical Accreditation. Several higher-ranking alternatives in this sector have achieved independent ethical verification and represent stronger choices for consumers who wish to avoid any connection to the defence and armaments industry. Our how we rate page explains the criteria used to assess all brands in this sector.

Ethical performance in category

0

GSG score

69
73

GSG category benchmark

100

Ethical Rating

Environment

  • Environmental Report

    Good

  • Pollution

    Good

  • Toxic Chemicals Policy

    Acceptable

  • Fossil Fuels

    Acceptable

  • Eco Certifications

    Good

Animal

  • Animal Welfare

    Good

  • Vegan Options

    Poor

People

  • Armaments

    Poor

  • Irresponsible Marketing

    Good

  • Political Donations

    Good

Other

  • Ethical Accreditation

    Poor

  • Public Record Criticisms

    Good

= GSG Top Rating = GSG Middle Rating = GSG Bottom Rating