What is the role of the packaging industry economically and within the green transition?
Packaging is a fundamental enabler of the economy, supporting the functioning of virtually every economic sector. It is not limited to what we see on supermarket shelves but is essential in transportation, the pharmaceutical industry, hospitals, and logistics. Packaging allows goods to move around the world, particularly across Europe, and protects those goods. While often associated with waste, packaging actually prevents a significant amount of waste, especially in food and medicine. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, certain types of packaging were crucial for storing and transporting vaccines at specific temperatures. Thus, packaging plays a dual role in the economy and environment, ensuring product protection and reducing waste.
Understanding the full spectrum of packaging's contributions is crucial. It not only enables the movement and protection of goods but also contributes to reducing food spoilage and waste. This is vital for both the economy and environmental sustainability. Effective packaging solutions are essential for maintaining the quality and safety of products, which is why it is important to highlight the multifaceted role packaging plays in our daily lives and the broader economic system.
The PPWR has been a topic of discussion lately. What are its main propositions, and how will it impact the industry and European climate neutrality goals?
It's important to note that Europe has had packaging and sustainability legislation since 1994 with the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive. This directive was initially requested by the industry to address the environmental implications of packaging and to harmonize rules across the European Union, preventing unilateral national actions that could disrupt the single market. However, the new Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) aims to significantly advance packaging sustainability by setting ambitious goals.
One of the key goals of the PPWR is to ensure all packaging on the market is fully recyclable. Currently, not all packaging meets this standard, but the regulation aims to change that by enshrining recyclability in law. This sends a strong investment signal to the industry, which is already moving in this direction due to increased consumer awareness and demand for sustainable packaging. The regulation also introduces targets for recycled content, particularly in plastics, and reuse targets for certain packaging formats. These measures aim to reduce packaging waste and ensure that packaging is used efficiently and sustainably.
How do you ensure that regulatory measures do not hinder the efficiency of essential packaging, especially in the food industry?
This concern emerged strongly during discussions and negotiations on the regulation. At the national level, some countries have taken steps to eliminate certain types of packaging or mandate material substitutions without sufficient scientific backing. This can lead to unintended consequences, such as shorter shelf life resulting in increased food spoilage and product waste.
Ensuring that regulatory decisions are based on robust data and scientific evidence is essential to avoid counterproductive outcomes. Sometimes, regulations are proposed and implemented without fully understanding their impact on product safety and environmental sustainability. It's crucial to balance the need for sustainable packaging with the practical requirements of preserving food quality and safety. This may require adjustments to regulations as more data becomes available to ensure they deliver the intended environmental benefits without compromising product integrity.
How has waste management in Europe changed over the past 30 years, and is the pace of change sufficient for current sustainability goals?
There has been significant transformation in the manufacturing of packaging across the value chain, involving raw material manufacturers, packaging producers, and packers and fillers. However, waste management infrastructure has not kept pace with these changes. While Europe is doing reasonably well in recycling, it is not excelling. Many member states are at risk of not meeting the 2025 recycling targets, highlighting the need for improved waste collection and recycling systems.
Effective waste management requires comprehensive collection systems to ensure packaging waste is collected, sorted, and recycled efficiently. In many member states, certain packaging formats are still not collected, preventing them from entering the recycling stream. This presents a significant challenge for meeting recycling targets and ensuring that all packaging is recyclable in practice and at scale. The current lack of obligations on governments to improve waste management infrastructure is a major concern, as it hinders the progress needed to achieve a circular economy for packaging.
What is the estimated cost of transitioning to a sustainable waste management infrastructure for packaging in Europe?
Estimating the cost is challenging due to the varying infrastructure needs across different countries. Developing new waste management systems involves significant investment, and the industry is already investing in projects to improve waste sorting and recycling. For example, digital tools are being developed to enhance the sorting process, which will significantly increase the amount of packaging that can be recycled.
However, there is still a misconception that waste management is a national issue, limiting the potential for regional collaboration and infrastructure development. Allowing waste to move more freely across borders within the EU could optimize the use of existing infrastructure and create regional recycling clusters. This approach would be more sustainable than expecting every country to develop comprehensive recycling systems for all types of materials independently. Greater coordination and support from governments are needed to realize this potential and drive the necessary changes in waste management practices.
Why is it so important to keep pollution, especially plastic, out of the environment?
The issue of pollution goes beyond aesthetics. Demonizing a single material, like plastic, without understanding the broader implications can be counterproductive. Plastic, like other packaging materials, has a vital role in protecting products and preventing waste. However, low recycling rates for plastic, compared to materials like metal or glass, highlight systemic issues in waste management rather than the material itself.
Effective regulation should be based on scientific evidence and data, not popular sentiment. While emotions can drive public concern, policymakers need to evaluate the impacts and consequences of their decisions. Addressing environmental pollution and climate change requires a comprehensive approach that considers the lifecycle impacts of materials and the practical aspects of waste management. This balanced perspective is essential to develop effective solutions that achieve sustainability goals without causing unintended harm.
Why do you believe that current regulatory approaches can be ideological and counterproductive?
An ideological approach to regulation often ignores scientific data and facts, focusing instead on popular demands. This can lead to misguided decisions, such as substituting one material for another without a thorough lifecycle assessment. For example, the rapid adoption of the Single Use Plastics Directive in just eight months highlights a rush to legislate without comprehensive assessment. Such hasty decisions can have significant implications for industries, products, and environmental outcomes.
Effective regulation requires a balance between addressing public concerns and ensuring that policies are based on robust scientific evidence. Policymakers need to avoid being swayed by popular sentiment and instead focus on developing well-informed solutions that address the root causes of environmental issues. This approach is crucial for achieving sustainable and practical outcomes.
Do you think regulators are currently influenced by popular sentiment, and how does this affect legislation?
Unfortunately, yes. In recent years, there has been a tendency for regulators to respond to popular demands without fully considering the scientific evidence. The Green Deal is an important recognition of the need for collective action on environmental and climate issues. However, the rapid deployment of legislation without addressing fundamental issues, such as waste management, undermines its effectiveness. Without improving waste collection and recycling infrastructure, simply making packaging recyclable will not solve the problem.
A more thoughtful approach is needed to ensure that legislation is implementable and addresses the structural issues that hinder progress. Demonizing specific materials or industries without understanding their broader impacts can be counterproductive. Competitiveness and sustainability can go hand in hand, but achieving this requires a different approach that tackles the underlying causes of environmental problems while supporting industrial competitiveness.
Do you believe that the current approach to regulation is hindering the competitiveness of European industries?
Yes, the loss of competitiveness in European industrial sectors is concerning. Many companies are hesitant to invest in Europe due to high energy costs and regulatory burdens. Charts show a decline in the production of basic materials in Europe year on year. Addressing these structural issues is crucial to maintain the competitiveness of European industries.
Competitiveness and sustainability are not mutually exclusive. A balanced approach that addresses energy costs, access to raw materials, and other structural challenges is essential. Effective regulation should support industrial growth while promoting sustainable practices. This approach will ensure that Europe remains a viable place for industrial investment and production, supporting both economic and environmental goals.
