Packaging needs to be more sustainable. Everyone agrees on that. But how? Companies must align their processes and products with evolving regulations, including the new Packaging & Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR). In practice, this is proving to be quite a challenge.
On January 22, the PPWR was officially published. As of 12 August 2026, the PPWR will be applicable across all EU Member States. The PPWR introduces measures that impact the entire packaging chain. Stricter rules will be imposed on the recyclability and reusability of packaging, and producers must design their packaging to minimize weight while maintaining functionality. According to Michel Brander, co-owner of Vervo, this presents a major challenge. “Sustainable packaging is a necessity, but let’s not forget why packaging was created in the first place. It is integrated into our daily lives to protect food, ensure safe transportation, and extend shelf life. No one goes to the butcher three times a week anymore to buy fresh meat. And let’s not forget that the Netherlands is one of the largest exporters of cheese and meat in Europe. The impact will be enormous if we compromise on packaging quality.”
According to Diana Schiffer, Packaging Regulatory Advisor at The LCA Centre, it is unfair that packaging is portrayed as the bad guy. Michel recognizes this sentiment: “People criticize plastic wrapping on cucumbers but forget that this thin layer of plastic significantly extends the cucumber’s shelf life.” Leo van der Meer, a film expert at Paardekooper, adds: “It is important to remember that the primary function of packaging is to reduce food waste, with food waste generally having a greater environmental impact than the packaging itself.”
Diana points out that the proportion of the ecological footprint of packaging varies by product and application. For example, what applies to a cucumber does not necessarily apply to a piece of meat. That also explains why red bell peppers are usually not wrapped in plastic while green ones often are, red peppers sell much faster, which makes the risk of spoilage significantly lower than with the green ones. Leo notes that plastic films are sometimes necessary due to mandatory labeling requirements. “This applies, for instance, to organic products. One law mandates packaging, while another law aims to eliminate it.”
Everyone agrees: there is insufficient awareness and knowledge about packaging, and much uncertainty regarding legislation. This may currently be the biggest challenge—and frustration—for the sector. As an example, Diana cites the search for alternative, natural materials leading up to the SUP legislation in 2021. “Composting plastics can work in theory, but it does not always work in practice. Beyond this, composting of plastics leads to loss of the material which is actually what we should try to avoid; not only because the regulatory framework is built to retain material (through recycling) and function (through reuse) as much as possible. And what about the so-called ‘paperisation’? In the eyes of consumers, cardboard and paper are ‘better’ for the environment than plastic. We see all kinds of paper-based alternatives, yet many have a plastic layer because the packaging would otherwise fail to serve its purpose. It’s contradictory.”
That is why the sector is now primarily focusing on recyclable packaging and ways to make packaging lighter and more compact. This is also mandated by the PPWR: Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. While the new law still has many loose ends, Diana believes this is generally the right direction. However, she personally believes reduce and reuse are more effective than recycling, as the latter is very difficult to organize properly at a European level.
“Developments mainly focus on thickness reduction and mono-materials,” Michel explains. “In the field of plastic films, we have already achieved significant material reductions. Thanks to new technologies, films are becoming more advanced, allowing for a reduction in packaging materials. We are also increasingly using mono-materials, which promotes proper recycling.” Marc Vroon and Sanne van Leeuwen, both working at Paardekooper and responsible for industrial bakery packaging, are familiar with this development. The range of available options is growing, but co-extruded header bags made of PE and PP are still selling well. Sanne explains: “Supermarkets are eager to comply with upcoming legislation and are even ahead of the curve, but not everyone is on board yet. This makes sense, as we are still pioneering. Sustainable packaging cannot be implemented overnight. Along the way, we face many challenges. Issues related to functionality, processing, but also consumer perception.”
“And the price,” Marc adds. Everyone nods in agreement. “Due to lower production volumes, the prices of sustainable packaging are often higher in some cases. Or the customer has to adjust the packaging lines. Something as minor as switching from a plastic closure clip to a cardboard one requires modifications to the machinery, with all the associated costs.”
Leo: “Packaging is designed for a reason, if the amount of packaging is reduced, this can affect quality. Reducing thickness is possible, but there are limits. The thinner the packaging, the higher the risk of leaks, which can cause the gas mixture inside to escape. But we have also found that thickness reduction and mono-materials can influence processability. For example, production speed may decrease because the new packaging does not fit well within existing systems.” Michel gives an example of a catering butcher that uses traditional plastic films on one packaging line for both steaks and spare ribs. With a mono-material film, this was not possible. Two packaging lines would have been required, representing a significant investment. Marc is familiar with a similar situation involving thinner bread bags that tore during processing. Everyone faces the same challenges, but that is part of pioneering. Michel compares it to the transition to electric vehicles. “It is the future, it just needs time. Technological developments are constantly advancing.”
Diana: “I mentioned earlier the example of paperisation, the glorification of cardboard over plastic, while cardboard is not necessarily more sustainable. Too often, consumer perception dictates the choices, even though this perception does not always lead to the most sustainable solutions.” Sanne: “The conical cookie tray made of cardboard still outperforms the rPET tray, simply because cardboard has a more artisanal appearance. This fits the image of a traditional bakery, which is what consumers like to see.” Michel shares a similar experience. “We tested a vacuum bag made of mono-material for packaging cheese. The customer objected to the product presentation. In this case, the mono-material was PE with a barrier layer. PE has a naturally milky color and a matte finish. However, the ideal product presentation requires exactly the opposite: a clear and glossy film. In such moments, you are back to square one.”
Leo: “I find it unfortunate to see how often things go wrong in practice, and certainly not always unconsciously. Michel already mentioned the cucumber example. I recently heard about a company that stopped using plastic film for cucumbers and switched to crate bags instead. Consumers were happy because they no longer see plastic film, yet plastic was still being used. This is simply shifting the problem, especially when considering that the crate bags were being promoted as reusable, even though food packaging cannot simply be reused without being 100% clean first, which is nearly impossible with crate bags.”
In addition to this, Diana cites the findings of a study conducted by RIVM (2022)(1) on alternative food contact materials (FCM) following the implementation of the SUP directive. For example, 887 chemicals were detected in paper and cardboard FCM(2). The list is too long to reproduce here, but when it comes to sustainable packaging, one might wonder whether the cure is, in some cases, worse than the disease. Lack of knowledge also plays a role in proper waste separation. Diana explains, “Consumers often don’t see the difference between conventional plastic and biodegradable plastic. This so-called compostable plastic belongs in residual waste, not in organic waste or PMD. Incorrect separation increases the risk of contamination, which can negatively affect the quality of the resulting compost or recyclate.”
“The industry has a key responsibility in this regard,” Marc believes. “We need to encourage consumers to separate waste correctly. On cardboard pastry boxes with a plastic window, for example, it is indicated that the window should be removed and disposed of separately from the cardboard in the PMD bin. And in case you’re wondering why we don’t use mono-material here, it’s because consumers like to see the product inside.”
Diana adds that she does not expect consumers to have in-depth knowledge of materials. “Lack of knowledge is often the result of a lack of clarity,” she states. “The system must be simplified to make recycling easier. This first and foremost requires a unified policy.”
“Not only in the Netherlands, but throughout Europe,” Michel adds. “The PPWR is a major stumbling block. It is a European law, but each country has its own interpretation of what is recyclable, and the infrastructure differs. If even we struggle to understand it, imagine how difficult it is for consumers.” Leo: “I don’t think it’s always clear to those drafting the legislation either. The PPWR states that plastic packaging must contain a certain percentage of recycled material, but in most cases, this doesn’t work for food packaging. From a food safety perspective, food packaging must not be made from recycled content, at least given the recycling technologies currently available on a large scale. The exception is certain approved rPET packaging. Laws contradict one another. While the new regulations are not yet 100% finalized, you can see how difficult it is for businesses to prepare for the new legislation.”
Diana explains that this refers to simplifying the recycling infrastructure. “We need clear material streams. This requires fewer different types of materials, but it also means there is less room for new material types.” According to her, this is why many alternative materials do not work. Our end-of-life systems are not designed for them.
Diana responds, “Good question. If we look at cardboard as an alternative to plastic, we must conclude that cardboard cannot be used for various applications without plastic. Innovation and creativity in packaging are dictated by legal frameworks. That is why we focus on the three R’s. We look at weight reduction and mono-materials, but also at shape, ensuring that packaging can be recognized by sorting machines.”
Leo adds, “Plastic packaging itself is not the problem; waste is the problem. At least, waste that is not properly collected. That’s why it’s so extremely important to organize the system effectively. We can develop the most advanced packaging, but if it cannot be processed within the system, it’s useless.”
Diana agrees. “Although our recycling infrastructure urgently needs improvement, we must tackle the packaging problem at its source: reducing unnecessary packaging and finding reusable alternatives for single-use packaging whenever possible.”
Regarding reuse, Diana says, “There are several successful examples of this. Take the reuse of drums and pallets. These systems have worked for years, but at the level of cups and supermarket packaging, things become much more complex, as control over the packaging significantly decreases in open-loop B2C systems.”
Leo points out that the trend of reusable food packaging is also challenging due to food safety requirements. A great deal of research is being conducted on this, and maintaining control over the system remains crucial. “In an office setting, it’s easy for people to bring their own cup, return it at the end of the day, and have it cleaned for use the next morning. But this is much more difficult for a large to-go retailer. Currently, a pilot project is underway with return points at train stations. You get on at station A and drop off your cup at station B in a type of self-service vending machine. Again, the key is to keep the system as simple and clean as possible so that people can—and want to—use it.”
When it comes to reduction, Diana explains that it is not just about using less material or avoiding packaging altogether. “This must always be considered in relation to the quality of the product. Can we do without packaging or with less packaging without compromising product quality? This largely depends on where the product comes from. Banning packaging doesn’t help anyone—especially not if we want to combat food waste—unless we also rethink the systems in which our products are transported. Think about global supply chains, the demand for products like coffee, chocolate, or exotic fruits, but also all types of fruits and vegetables. The longer the supply chain, the greater the need for packaging and its protective, shelf-life-extending properties. A crucial question we must ask ourselves if we want to approach packaging reduction holistically is: what changes can we make to our supply chains to reduce the need for packaging? Some key questions that arise from this are:
Once again, this underscores the importance of not viewing sustainable packaging solely at the level of packaging itself. Everything is interconnected, and that makes sustainable packaging incredibly complex.”
“Efficiency, which ultimately also contributes to sustainability,” Michel replies with a laugh. “The Netherlands is highly efficient, and packaging plays a role in that as well. In logistics, for instance, the efficiency of incoming materials depends on the shape of the packaging and the number of packaging units per shipment. This can already be considered in the design phase. Another example is minimizing transport distances by carefully selecting the sources of raw materials.” Leo adds: “And improving processing speed. Machines are becoming increasingly advanced.”
Another trend Leo mentions is ‘blank’ packaging, which has largely emerged from the demand for sustainability. “The cleaner the packaging, the higher its value. If no inks are used, the resulting recycled material is of higher quality. Fully printed packaging is now rare—at least in the Netherlands. For those who still need information on the packaging, a label is a good solution. While this adds some weight, it actually benefits recycling. The label and packaging can be separated in the recycling stream because the label has a different density than the plastic film. So you see, nothing in this industry is as simple as it seems.”
For Michel, this is a reason to soon visit a waste processor with the sales team. “So we can see with our own eyes what happens to our plastic packaging. This insight will help us—and our customers—gain more clarity.”
Foodnotes
Zwartsten et al. 2022. Alternative food contact materials on the Dutch market after implementation of the Single Use Plastic Directive and prioritisation of potential migrating chemical substances. RIVM letter report 2022-0102.
2 Geueke et al. 2022. Systematic evidence on migrating and extractable food contact chemicals: most chemicals detected in food contact materials are not listed for use. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition.
Source: Vakblad Voedingsindustrie 2025
Magazine Voedingsindustrie has been made possible in part by:
© COPYRIGHT 2025 VOEDINGSINDUSTRIE | ALLE RECHTEN VOORBEHOUDEN
Powered by Wallbrink Crossmedia © 2025
