Author: admin

The trend for Advent calendars aimed at adults is “superfluous consumerism” that adds to excessive and wasteful consumption, according to environmental groups.

While once children excitedly opened a door each day to see what festive picture lay behind it, adults can now count down the days to Christmas with calendars containing everything from luxury beauty products to instant mashed potato.

This year’s adult versions include beauty calendars such as the Nivea Women’s one at about £30 and one from Liberty priced at £275.

But some have raised concerns over the packaging involved in providing 24 products to either be unwrapped or revealed each day, and the potential for unwanted items.

Anna Diski, a plastics campaigner at Greenpeace UK, said: “Advent calendars like these probably contain two or three items you actually want, and 20 or so more you could do without. You don’t want that single-use plastic lingering in your bathroom cabinet, let alone in the natural environment.”

Daniel Webb, the founder and director of the charity Everyday Plastic, said: “These luxury Advent calendars are a microcosm of a bigger problem, a system that keeps producing more and more stuff we don’t need and probably can’t afford.”

The research firm Ipsos found seven in 10 Britons have a some point purchase an Advent calendar. While most bought chocolate ones (84%), beauty calendars are increasingly popular (15%), along with toy calendars (14%) and non-chocolate food versions (10%).

The firm’s consumer intelligence platform, Ipsos Synthesio, has found online discussions around Advent calendars begin as early as September, driven by promotions by retailers and influencer-led unboxing videos.

Webb said that encouraging people to shop for Christmas in the autumn was a decision “made by marketing departments, purely designed to drive overconsumption, not celebration”.

He added: “I’m sure people find it fun and this isn’t about blaming anyone for wanting to celebrate – it’s about questioning why brands are choosing to fuel the waste crisis in this way. Real change means cutting plastic production and phasing out this kind of superfluous consumerism.”

The beauty expert, journalist and author Sali Hughes said it was important to focus on asking “whether you would want at least five of the advent items if sold at full price”.

She added: “If the answer is yes, then the whole calendar is probably worth the spend. If it’s no, then it’s a lot of money for the sake of novelty.

“I also think it’s worthwhile imagining all the products in a pile, without the seductive packaging. If it consequently loses its allure, then you’re paying all that money for something pretty ephemeral that will, if its even been designed responsibly in the first place, just go into recycling after Christmas.”

Samantha Dover, the insights director of beauty at the market analyst Mintel, said: “The adult Advent calendar trend isn’t going anywhere anytime soon, but the landscape in which these calendars sit is changing. In beauty, the high cost of many Advent calendars, even if they promise significant savings compared to buying individual products, means they are out of reach for many consumers.”

Dover said the perceived savings mean they were still viewed as “good value for money”, adding: “It is likely that many consumers self-gift themselves calendars, and even split the cost with others and share products, as a result.” She said this could help reduce “waste often generated by Advent calendars”.

Dr Christopher Carrick, the founder of bio-plastics manufacturer Lingin Industries, said government legislation was likely to have an impact on the calendars, which he described as “more packaging intensive, compared to the amount of actual product, than almost any other aspect of Christmas”.

He said: “The extended producer responsibility which charges companies based on the amount of unsustainable packaging they put into the world is putting pressure on companies producing Advent calendars to reduce the amount of packaging.

“This year, brands will have more responsibility over the costs associated with the waste generated by packaging, meaning designs and materials will need to be amended.”