The EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) is set to reshape packaging requirements, demanding minimization of packaging, reuse, and recycling at scale. To date, many brands have focused their PPWR compliance efforts on meeting the basic requirements for the August 2026 deadline: minimizing packaging, reducing hazardous substances, adding traceable batch or serial numbers, and creating declarations of conformity for each packaging type.
Looking to 2030, requirements extend further, with the focus shifting to packaging materials, removing components that could disrupt recycling streams to maximize packaging recyclability. However, many aspects of the PPWR remain undefined, and the required recycling infrastructure is yet to be put in place. Despite calls for a delay to the deadline and demands for secondary legislation highlighting industry concerns, brands need to start making plans now.
Natasha Jeremic, head of Piezo Inks, Domino Printing Sciences, examines the commercial reality for packaging suppliers and the critical role converters play in enabling sustainability-focused collaboration.
Regulation versus readiness
Despite waning consumer interest in the environmental impact of packaging, regulatory demands are compelling brands to move away from traditional approaches to packaging and label development and production. Long-standing priorities of order volumes, print quality, and cost must now be balanced with PPWR requirements for both packaging recyclability and minimum recycled content.
However, while incremental PPWR targets have been set for 2030 and beyond, the industry has concerns about the lack of a supporting framework. Key definitions of recyclability, recycled material grades, and related testing methodologies, remain unclear or incomplete. Clarity is also lacking about how compliance will be assessed in the long term.
The result is not only a fragmented perception of packaging sustainability but also a siloed approach to sustainable product development. Ink, adhesive, and material suppliers are assessing their own product portfolios in isolation, without consideration for the impact on the overall packaging unit. As a result, while individual components may be deemed PPWR-compliant and technically recyclable, the combined packaging may still fail recyclability assessments if not recyclable at scale.
Environmental friendliness versus full lifecycle impact
Brands have, of course, already made significant shifts in packaging strategy to meet the August 2026 PPWR deadline. Packaging has been minimized, hazardous substances removed, and traceability added. However, the 2030 PPWR requirements’ strong emphasis on packaging recyclability raises questions regarding perceptions of environmental friendliness offered by current recycling capabilities, rather than understanding the full lifecycle environmental impact.
The ambiguity is prompting brands to take different approaches to packaging design and material choices. Babybel, for example, has switched to paper-based packaging where possible – an easy win in terms of recyclability. It is considered a more sustainable choice by consumers and avoids the more complex and evolving rules imposed on plastic packaging. In contrast, Canadian biscuit manufacturer Leclerc switched from cardboard to lightweight plastic film, based on lifecycle analysis showing reductions in transport emissions and overall material use.
Brands must also consider national variations in Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) fees when making packaging decisions. A recent UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) survey highlights major differences between suppliers: only 10% of UK packaging producers have fully transitioned to widely recyclable packaging, while 14% still exclusively supply packaging that poses strong recycling challenges.
The commercial reality for packaging suppliers
There is a pressing need for collaboration throughout the supply chain to address this status quo and provide brands with trusted information about packaging products. Shared testing and validation will be the foundation of packaging design strategies that reflect not only regulatory requirements, but also the capabilities of current recycling systems.
Converters have a clear role in enabling collaboration between suppliers and supporting brands to navigate this period of uncertainty and change. They can clarify the pros and cons of evolving recycled material – for example, high-quality recycled packaging materials are often more expensive and can hold printing challenges in terms of ink adhesion and printing speed – potentially increasing waste, lowering efficiency, and productivity.
Collaboration with press, ink, and material suppliers, sharing testing, and exchanging data, will be vital to building confidence. This insight will enable packaging suppliers to identify and validate sustainable materials that will deliver good production performance and visual impact for their brand customers. Collaboration will also support the move from generic ‘eco-friendly’ or ‘recyclable’ claims in favour of measurable, verifiable ones.
The benefits of digital printing to support the transition
This shared, trusted data will be essential to supporting compliance reporting within an increasingly regulated environment. Converters are central to consolidating data from across the value chain, providing brands with information about materials, recycled content, substances of concern, and recyclability performance to support their declarations of conformity and EPR reporting.
Digital inkjet printing technology can be an important asset during this evolution, enabling the use of variable 2D codes powered by GS1. In addition to supporting traceability, real-time lifecycle monitoring, and compliance reporting, 2D codes and connected data platforms can evolve with product and packaging information requirements as PPWR roll-out, Sunrise 2027, and digital product passport initiatives progress over the coming years.
In addition, digital printing technology underpins the operational agility required by brands managing diverse packaging demands. It allows the efficient production of lower volumes of changing packaging designs to keep pace with evolving requirements for on-pack information, such as batch or unit-based serialisation. Inkjet technology also provides enhanced control over ink application, reducing ink use, and can reduce the impact of print on packaging recyclability. Overall, a digital approach provides converters with a more flexible commercial offering.
Conclusion
Evolving sustainability regulation is adding significant complexity to packaging design and materials. The industry needs to move quickly from a siloed approach to one based on continuous, close collaboration between printing equipment and material suppliers, converters, and brands. Stakeholders across the value chain need to work together to adapt, test, and evolve to meet not only the regulatory requirements but the reality of the current recycling infrastructure.
This provides a compelling opportunity for converters to deepen their understanding of material combinations and recyclability, gather compliance data, and invest in flexibility through digital technologies. Companies that take the lead in sustainability will be well-positioned to stay competitive by supporting their brand customers’ compliance journey.
