The implementation of measures such as plain packaging, which eliminates logos and distinctive colors of brands, has generated an intense debate in various sectors. This policy could have profound economic and social consequences. Brands are much more than just logos or attractive packaging; They represent the very essence of competition in a market economy. They function as symbols of identity, quality, trust and emotional connection with the consumer.
By removing these distinctive elements, basic principles are violated such as free competition, differentiation and the inherent value of brands. A brand’s ability to stand out and be recognized is not only crucial for its survival, but also for driving innovation and progress in a competitive environment. This differentiation encourages creativitypromoting a wide variety of options for consumers and contributing to economic dynamism.
For consumers, brands are an essential guide in the decision-making process. In a saturated market, where the offer seems infinite, brands provide an anchor of trust, representing the quality expected in each purchase. By eliminating this ability to differentiate, not only manufacturers are harmed, but also the buyer, who loses a clear and reliable reference.. In highly regulated markets, such as consumer products, the priority should be promoting transparency and clear information, rather than imposing a uniform aesthetic that eliminates the foundations of fair competition.
Plain packaging has a considerable negative impact on the economy. The measure reduces the competence to a price war, relegating key factors such as quality, design and innovation to the background. By eliminating the possibility of visual differentiation, the potential for companies to stand out is blocked, equally affecting large corporations and small and medium-sized businesses that depend on a strong brand to position themselves in saturated markets. This homogenization not only affects consumers, but also slows business growth.
Besides, This standardization directly impacts key sectors such as marketing, graphic design, packaging production and graphic arts. The damage is not only limited to the producing companies, but extends its effect to an entire value chain that supports thousands of jobs and contributes significantly to economic activity. This interdependent network is vital for the Spanish economy, so any measure that weakens its functioning has harmful side effects.
An additional problem with plain packaging is that it facilitates the fake. By removing distinctive visual elements, plain packaging opens the door to the creation of counterfeit products, fueling the black market and illicit trade. Counterfeiting affects both legitimate producers and consumers, who can be deceived by substandard products. This phenomenon undermines the formal economy and deprives the tax system of crucial revenue.
The sector of tobacco in Spain is a clear example of the repercussions of plain packaging. This sector generates more than 3.7 billion euros in gross added value and employs more than 57,400 people, both directly and indirectly. Besides, annually contributes 9.5 billion euros to public coffers. The introduction of plain packaging could lead to an estimated loss of between 260 and 460 million euros in gross value added, in addition to the disappearance of up to 5,600 direct and indirect jobs. The policies implemented so far have already proven to be effective, with a very significant drop in consumption, registering the lowest historical figure, according to the latest EDADES survey of 2024.
This example highlights how plain packaging is not only unnecessary, but counterproductive. By focusing exclusively on aesthetic uniformitya balanced and reasonable approach for all actors involved in a value chain is left aside. Therefore, policies must be based on solid and real data, to ensure that measures are effective without putting vital economic sectors at risk.
In short, brands play a fundamental role in the economy and competitiveness of companies. Regulation must foster a fair and competitive environment, ensuring differentiation and protecting the interests of both consumers and manufacturers. Public policies must be balanced, based on clear evidence and aimed at maximizing economic well-being, without slowing down innovation or limiting the ability of companies to compete fairly.
#true #cost #energy #packaging #brand #identity #jobs #stake
