South Africa marked Arbour Week from 1 to 7 September, and it is timely to reflect on how the forestry sector – and the paper and wood it provides – are perceived. This annual programme focuses on the significance of tree planting and greening initiatives to improve communities and highlight the importance of trees for the environment and cultural heritage.
Tying with this significant initiative, asked to rate the environmental friendliness of eight materials, only 24% of consumers see paper as the most environmentally friendly, whereas 56% consider wood to be among the most sustainable materials. Cue a raised eyebrow: Paper is made from wood. Conducted across key regions by Two Sides and Toluna, the global 2025 Trend Tracker survey examined the opinions of 12 400 consumers.
Although the South African-focused research was a small percentage of this, it still provided revealing insights into what consumers believe about printing and paper products.
While environmental awareness continues to shape consumer behaviour, surveys by the paper industry show a persistent paradox of consumer perceptions when it comes to print, paper, paper-based packaging, forestry and wood.
The contradictions are stark: half of respondents believe that paper and paper packaging are major contributors to global greenhouse gas emissions, and 45% consider the products harmful to the environment. Some 76%, believe that electronic communication is more environmentally friendly; an assumption that conveniently ignores the carbon footprint of digital infrastructure.
Adding to the paradox, 77% of respondents acknowledge that planted forests are not bad for the environment. At the same time, 69% recognised the importance of using paper sourced from sustainably managed forests, demonstrating a growing awareness of sustainable sourcing, and yet still failing to connect these dots in the paper lifecycle.
This is not the first time we have encountered these contradictory statistics. A survey conducted by the Paper Manufacturers Association of South Africa (Pamsa) indicated something similar. The 2024 indication was that 61% believed electronic communication is greener compared to using print and paper. But 83% agreed that paper is a renewable resource.
These myths persist because of outdated beliefs, incomplete information, and misleading “go paperless” messaging (greenwashing). We are blind to the hidden environmental costs of countless terabytes of cloud storage, electricity-hungry applications, messages and emails. Since they feel intangible, one may assume that they have little to no environmental footprint.
Any industry or product should be evaluated within the full life-cycle context − including energy sources, recycling practices and responsible manufacturing. When it comes to computers and devices, the embodied carbon − emissions from materials extraction and manufacturing − is often far greater than the emissions from actual device use.
According to the UN’s fourth Global E-waste Monitor (GEM) Report, the 460 Terawatt hours consumed by data centres in 2022 represented two percent of all global electricity usage. The GEM report states that e-waste is on track to rise to 82 megatonne (Mt) in 2030, and of the record 62 Mt produced in 2022, less than a quarter of this is likely to have been properly collected and recycled.
Let us be clear: Of course we cannot avoid using digital devices and applications; they are fundamental to everyday life, the economy and society, offering us unparalleled accessibility to information, convenience, efficiency and so much more. However, we must stop pretending that the environmental impact of the online world is not negligible, and reject the greenwashing that positions digital as automatically “better for the planet”.
■ Samantha Choles is a communications manager.
