Growing demand for functional nutrition is reshaping supplement packaging as brands seek to balance convenience, portion control, product protection and lower material use.

According to Innova Market Insights’ Category Survey 2026, 38% of consumers have increased their consumption of sports and functional nutrition, supporting demand for packaging designed around daily routines, travel and on-the-go consumption.

Industry executives from Great Earth and ACG Group point to two developments occurring in parallel: growth in single-serve stick packs and pouches, and greater interest in refill systems using durable containers with lightweight refill packaging.

The approaches address different consumer needs, but they also expose a central challenge for the sector: greater convenience can sometimes mean more packaging per serving.

Stick Packs and Pouches Gain Ground

Bottles remain the most widely used packaging format for nutrition products, but flexible formats are gaining momentum.

Aaron Quinn, head of business for Europe at Vantage Nutrition, ACG’s nutraceutical development and manufacturing business, identifies stick packs and single-serve flat pouches as among the fastest-growing formats globally.

They are particularly suited to hydration products, electrolytes, collagen and other functional powders where accurate dosing and portability are important.

The trend reflects a wider movement from large bulk packages toward formats designed around individual consumption occasions.

Jochen Scheil, VP of global sales and business development at ACG Packaging Materials, said brands are increasingly developing packaging around travel, gym use, daily routines, trials, subscriptions and personalized nutrition.

This is supporting demand for pre-measured sachets, stick packs, unit-dose blisters and daily-dose systems.

However, packaging preferences remain strongly dependent on the product and market.

Capsules and tablets continue to commonly use bottles, while blister packs can provide product protection, hygiene, tamper evidence and portability.

Larger sports nutrition products frequently remain in tubs, although resealable pouches are becoming another option.

Refill Systems Target Material Reduction

Great Earth is taking a different approach to reducing packaging material for products consumed repeatedly.

The company combines a durable recycled PET (rPET) jar with lightweight refill pouches, allowing consumers to retain the primary container instead of purchasing another jar with every refill.

Great Earth CEO Patrik Falk said its refill pouch uses 95% less plastic than a new jar, while the rPET container has been tested for a service life of at least eight years.

The company estimates that refill systems can achieve an 80–90% reduction in packaging material when lightweight pouches are paired with durable rPET containers.

This approach attempts to preserve the familiar functionality of a rigid package while reducing the amount of material associated with repeated purchases.

Falk argues that refill packaging is moving beyond a niche format as more nutrition brands introduce similar systems.

Convenience Creates a Packaging Trade-Off

The growth of single-dose packaging creates a more complicated sustainability calculation.

Pre-measured packs can improve dosing accuracy, hygiene and portability, but dividing a product into individual servings can increase the amount of packaging used per dose.

Great Earth argues that single-dose formats are most appropriate where hygiene or dosing precision provides a clear benefit.

For everyday supplements, the company favors durable containers, refill systems and right-sized packaging.

The comparison demonstrates why packaging reduction cannot always be assessed simply by looking at the weight of an individual package.

A single flexible sachet uses little material, but dozens of individually packed servings can create a different material footprint from one larger package containing the same quantity of product.

Plastics Still Account for 83% of Nutrition Packaging Launches

Despite growing interest in alternative materials, plastic remains dominant.

Innova Market Insights data covering global nutrition product launches between July 2025 and June 2026 found that 83% used plastic packaging.

Fiber was the second-most-common material, while aluminum packaging launches were increasing.

Great Earth has been introducing fiber into parts of its packaging system.

In 2025, the company began transitioning its portfolio to paper-based closures developed with Blue Ocean Closures.

Falk said the change reduces plastic use per closure by 95% and is expected to eliminate approximately 2.6 metric tons of plastic annually once fully implemented across production batches.

The company is also exploring alternatives to its current rPET jars, although Falk emphasized that this development remains at an early stage.

Barrier Performance Limits Material Substitution

Replacing conventional plastics is particularly difficult in supplement packaging because the package must protect sensitive active ingredients throughout the product’s shelf life.

Moisture, oxygen and light can affect some formulations, making barrier performance a critical packaging requirement.

ACG Packaging Materials supplies flexible barrier structures for unit-dose supplements and powder formulations, including its Unidose films.

The company has also introduced SuperPod, a cold-form blister packaging system designed to reduce material use by enabling smaller blister cavities while retaining barrier performance and machine runnability.

Scheil cautioned that reducing packaging material at the expense of product stability can create another environmental problem through increased product waste.

This means lightweighting and material substitution have to be evaluated alongside the shelf-life requirements of the formulation.

Accessibility Becomes Part of Packaging Design

Convenience is also extending beyond portability.

Great Earth identifies accessibility as an important consideration because many supplements are opened and closed every day.

According to Falk, the company’s fiber-based closures have greater natural surface friction than conventional plastic closures, reducing the gripping force required to open the jar.

This can be particularly relevant for consumers with reduced hand strength or dexterity.

The example illustrates how packaging development can combine environmental objectives with improvements to everyday usability rather than treating the two issues separately.

PPWR and EPR Add Pressure to Packaging Decisions

Regulation is adding another layer to supplement packaging development.

The EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) and extended producer responsibility systems in multiple markets are increasing attention on recyclability, material efficiency and packaging design.

Innova data show that recyclability claims among supplement and sports nutrition launches increased 9% between July 2021 and June 2026.

However, companies still face practical limitations.

Alternative materials can cost more than virgin plastics, while recycling infrastructure and accepted material streams differ substantially between countries.

Barrier requirements can also prevent immediate replacement of plastics in certain nutrition applications.

These factors make a single packaging solution unlikely to dominate the supplement category.

Instead, packaging is becoming more application-specific: single-dose formats where precision and portability matter, refill systems for repeated purchases, and high-barrier structures where product stability is the overriding requirement.

The next stage of supplement packaging development will therefore depend less on replacing one material with another and more on finding the appropriate balance between convenience, material consumption, recyclability, accessibility and product protection for each application.

Source: Packaging Insights, Innova Market Insights, Great Earth and ACG Group.

Last Updated on 31/08/2026 by Jota Machinery