The uncomfortable truth that the packaging industry needs to confront is that despite its best efforts, more than half of what ends up on recycling facility residue lines could be technically recyclable material. A study examining mixed municipal solid waste in Sweden found that 53% of plastic packaging ending up in residue streams were materials that should have been recovered within the recycling system.
That figure should be ringing alarm bells for packaging professionals worldwide. While this research was conducted within Sweden's advanced waste infrastructure, the implications extend far beyond Scandinavia. If a system as honed and developed as Sweden's is losing half of its recoverable plastic packaging to incineration, what does that say about the global state of recycling infrastructure?
For packaging converters and brand owners investing heavily in recyclable formats, this gap between technical capability and real-world performance is concerning to say the least. You can engineer the perfect mono-material structure, ensure it meets every design-for-recycling guideline, and still watch it end up in landfill or incineration because the infrastructure to process it simply isn't there - or isn't working as it should.
The design-reality disconnect
The problem starts with a fundamental misalignment. Packaging designers and converters are doing exactly what they should be; optimising for recyclability, creating structures that meet circular economy standards, and pushing the boundaries of sustainable innovation. The issue is that material recovery facilities are still working with what they've got: inconsistent collection systems, variable sorting technologies, and contamination that can render entire batches unprocessable.
PET is a perfect example. Waste intelligence data highlights one example facility recovering 95% of clear PET containers, while capturing just 15% of certain coloured PET variants. Same material, vastly different outcomes. The difference is how easily optical sorters can identify and separate the material in real-world conditions. It's happening at scale, right now, across facilities processing billions of items annually. And this becomes more complex when you move beyond rigid packaging into flexible formats, where even fully recyclable mono-material films can be lost if collection systems aren't designed to handle them.
Where the system breaks down
The 53% problem exists because recyclability depends on a chain of decisions and capabilities, any of which can break the loop.
Firstly, collection systems still vary wildly by geography. What's collected kerbside in one region might require a deposit return scheme elsewhere or might not be collected at all. Even within the UK, the postcode recycling lottery means identical packaging can have completely different end-of-life outcomes depending on where the consumer lives.
Secondly, sorting infrastructure hasn't necessarily kept pace with material innovation. New barrier coatings, adhesive systems, and composite structures might be technically superior, but if MRF operators can't identify or separate them efficiently, they’ll default to rejection. It's a rational economic decision at facility level that undermines circularity at system level.
And finally, market dynamics matter more than we might initially realise. A material could be perfectly sortable, but if there's no buyer for that particular recyclate stream, it's not getting recovered. Recyclers are businesses, and they naturally prioritise materials with stable end markets.
The EPR impact
Extended Producer Responsibility schemes are forcing a much-needed confrontation with these realities, and finally putting pressure on the infrastructure and system investment that's been lacking. When EPR fee modulation is tied to actual real-world recyclability, rather than just design intent, it creates the financial incentives needed to upgrade collection and sorting capabilities.
The upcoming PPWR regulations go further, distinguishing between materials that are recyclable by design and those that are recycled in practice. This distinction is crucial, because it recognises that converters have largely delivered on their side of the bargain, creating genuinely recyclable formats. Now the focus needs to shift to ensuring the systems exist to process them. If packaging can't realistically be recovered in existing systems, it shouldn't carry recyclability claims, regardless of how theoretically circular the structure might be.
For converters, this creates opportunity. The challenge is maintaining credibility while infrastructure catches up, but the opportunity is in being positioned as the solution provider when those systems do improve, and in helping brands navigate the complexity in the meantime.
Bridging the gap
Maintaining momentum while infrastructure catches up requires packaging companies to continue pushing circular design forward while building the case for system investment. That means understanding not just material science, but material recovery economics, and using that knowledge to advocate for the infrastructure improvements the industry needs. It also means testing packaging designs against actual facility capabilities, not just theoretical guidelines. And it means being honest with brand customers about what 'recyclable' really means in different markets, while continuing to champion the innovations that will deliver true circularity once systems catch up.
The data infrastructure now exists to make smarter decisions. Waste intelligence systems are providing real-time visibility into what's actually happening at MRFs, such as which materials are being captured, which are being lost, and why. Forward-thinking converters are using this intelligence to inform design decisions, creating packaging that works with the grain of existing recovery systems rather than against it, while simultaneously demonstrating where infrastructure investment would unlock the most value.
This is where specialist marketing support becomes very valuable. At Think B2B Marketing, we work with packaging companies to help them navigate these complexities and communicate their genuine sustainability credentials without falling into greenwashing territory. At the core, the 53% problem is a credibility challenge. And, in an era of heightened scrutiny around environmental claims, that credibility is worth protecting.
The packaging industry has made remarkable progress on recyclability by design, often outpacing the infrastructure needed to process those innovations. Now it needs to maintain that leadership while advocating for the system investment that will allow circular design to deliver on its full potential. The 53% problem won't fix itself, but the tools and knowledge to address it are finally available, and the industry is perfectly positioned to lead the charge.
To find out more please visit: www.thinkb2bmarketing.com