The market failures related with the sachet economy in the Philippines, exacerbated byorganizations like Procter & Gamble (P&G), have significant ramifications for both theclimate and society. These disappointments come from the shortfall of instruments toincorporate the negative externalities of plastic contamination and the absence of motivatorsfor reasonable practices inside the ongoing business sector structure.The sachet economy, first and foremost, sustains critical negative externalities, essentially asplastic contamination. Sachet packaging, predominant in the Philippines, adds to theamassing of plastic waste in landfills, rivers, and oceans. Regardless of the natural expensesrelated with plastic garbage removal, these expenses are not considered into the estimating ofsachet items (Eisman et al. 2021). Accordingly, makers and shoppers don't bear the genuineexpense of their utilization choices, prompting overconsumption and wasteful assetdistribution. Besides, the current market structure neglects to give sufficient motivators tomakers and buyers to take on maintainable practices. Sachet bundling is leaned toward for itsreasonableness and accommodation, driving its boundless use in the Philippines. This modelfocuses on transient comfort over long-term supportability. Without impetuses to decreaseplastic use or put resources into appropriate garbage removal framework, the sachet economypropagates ecological corruption and fuels squander the board difficulties