In spite of clear evidence that packaging continues to be an attractive means of securing products and protecting brands, there remains a stubborn group of holdouts who see security packaging as more of an expense than an investment.

In a recent security survey by the Pharmaceutical & Medical Packaging News (PMPN) that asked the question, “Is your company using or considering using packaging technologies to enhance security,” 61 percent answered YES while 39 percent said NO. Among the verbatim responses:

“We haven’t run into any security issues – the current system works.”

“It’s not a common practice for medical devices.”

“Our products are not in a high-profile area of the market.”

“Our customers do not require it.

“Our product is a low- to no-risk device.”

In a recent PMPN article on the subject by Daphne Allen, she quoted Jack Anderson, pharmaceutical sales director of security tech firm SIPCA, as saying: “Brand owners are reluctant to add proven technology, seeing security as an expense, rather than a long-term investment… The issue of standards and RFID as a security tool are still questions that linger. Companies are afraid to jump without knowing what possible standards may be implemented by FDA, etc.”

It’s in the mindset. It seems companies are integrating security technology into existing packaging only as a response to a problem – rather than as a means to prevent it. Many claimed they have not found a technology that’s easy to incorporate into their processes, is functional, and that doesn’t add cost. Others responded that since their products have never been counterfeited, diverted or tampered with, they’re loathe to add an “unnecessary” expense to their manufacturing budget. The only factor that could motivate these companies – a mandate by state or federal legislation. Manufacturers are bound to feel the pressure as California’s e-pedigree legislation looms, the FDA starts developing counterfeit-related standards and laws on applying security technologies are passed.

Still, the growth in all types of consumer goods counterfeiting is creating lots of opportunities for security packaging technologies. The fact is, for most consumer products, from clothing to cosmetics to DVDs to cigarettes and pharmaceuticals, the best defense against counterfeiting is still packaging, i.e., hard-to-copy labels, impossible-to-duplicate package markings, and counterfeit-resistant packaging materials.

While authentication options abound – from holography, serialization, color shift and tamper evidence - the latest trend seems to be a “layered” defense. A combination of serialization, overt and covert markings and forensic techniques to authenticate genuine products is seen as providing all supply chain participants with the tools they can use to do their part in authentication. As author Allen illustrated in her article, consumers can use overt features, retailers semi-covert security, inspectors covert technology. Forensic security for legal procedures and track-and-trace solutions for production and distribution control round up the layered protection advantages.

As counterfeiters become part of a global economy – and products become even more difficult to trace – it becomes even more critical for brand owners to take packaging security more seriously and consider it an investment with bottom-line consequences.