Flexible Packaging Europe

March 2023 Flexible Packaging Europe (FPE) is the industry association representing the interests of more than 85 small, medium-sized companies, and multinational manufacturers of flexible packaging. Those operate with a workforce of 57,000+ people at more than 350 sites all over Europe. The member companies account for almost 90% of European sales of flexible packaging made of different materials, mainly plastics, aluminium, and paper. Flexible packaging is intrinsically linked to household staples and there is a good reason for this: it provides appropriate protection against contamination and product spoilage, and keeps the food nutritious, fresh, and savoury during the necessary shelf life. Products can be delivered to consumers safely and properly, without losing their properties, bringing benefits of affordability and accessibility, while reducing risks of food waste.

…losing their properties, bringing benefits of affordability and accessibility, while reducing risks of food waste. We manufacture packaging for an extremely wide variety of products, all of them with specific needs. Baby food, for example, needs special protection to keep the product nutritious and safe for children to eat. Coffee, whether in beans, ground or instant, can easily loose taste and flavour if not packaged properly and flexible packaging does provide the right protection in addition to the appropriate format. Same goes for perishable food such as fresh cheese or meat or salads/veggies/fruits. 50% of all food products sold in the European retail market are using flexible packaging, while such flexible packaging contributes only to 17% of food packaging waste generated by weight – this is resource efficiency1 and waste prevention in action!

…only to 17% of food packaging waste generated by weight – this is resource efficiency1 and waste prevention in action! 1 The positive impact of flexible packaging solutions on packaging waste mitigation and overall environmental footprint at EU scale has been demonstrated in the Prevention LCA Study accessible at https://www.flexpack-europe.org/resource- efficiency-prevention. COMMENTS ON PACKAGING AND PACKAGING WASTE REGULATION PROPOSAL Ref. Ares(2023)2802244 - 20/04/2023 2 General remarks Flexible Packaging Europe (FPE) fully supports the objectives of the proposal for a regulation on Packaging and Packaging Waste (PPWR) which is aligned with our vision2 for packing products more sustainably. We embrace the objective to lower the total environmental impacts of production and consumption of packaging and packaged goods, in the line with the EU Green Deal goals.

…impacts of production and consumption of packaging and packaged goods, in the line with the EU Green Deal goals. We welcome the retention of the internal market legal basis (Article 114 TFEU) and the choice of a Regulation as the legal instrument. The PPWR is an opportunity to halt many diverging national initiatives, such as arbitrary bans, design requirements and labelling. Even though the proposal makes great advanced by harmonizing these key provisions, we regret seeing that Member States still benefit from wide discretion when it comes to develop national measures. We hope that the objectives of harmonization and the free movement of packaging and packaged goods will remain a priority during the co-decision process.

…and the free movement of packaging and packaged goods will remain a priority during the co-decision process. However, it is concerning that the Impact Assessment accompanying the Proposal lacks an in-depth product-by-product analysis on core provisions, such as bans and reuse targets. We highlight that insufficient attention has been given to hygiene, food safety and food waste as well as consumer habits, lifestyles and specific needs. Those deficiencies have also been highlighted by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, stating that “the report still contains significant shortcomings”. 1. Recyclability (Article 6) • We strongly welcome the approach to assess packaging recyclability criteria against category- specific design for recycling (DfR) criteria as of 2030.

…to assess packaging recyclability criteria against category- specific design for recycling (DfR) criteria as of 2030. However, the lack of specific deadlines for the Commission to deliver such DfR criteria (Article 6 Paragraph 4) brings uncertainty at a time when the packaging value chain is investing in product innovation, new equipment, new materials, and recycling technologies. The right period between the publication of DfR criteria and compliance should be at least 4 years. Should the Commission delay the adoption of specific EU design for recycling criteria, the entry into force of DfR requirements should be postponed accordingly to give enough time to the industry to adapt.

…the entry into force of DfR requirements should be postponed accordingly to give enough time to the industry to adapt. Building on recent statements of the Commission that EU standardisation work and existing industry guidelines (such as the CEFLEX “Design for a Circular Economy” guidelines for flexible packaging3 and the work done by the Circular Plastics Alliance4) should be used in the development of such DfR criteria, we would welcome a clearer reference to this in the legislation. • As for the concept of “recyclability at scale” (Article 6 Paragraph 2 point (e)), the legislator should keep in mind that flexible packaging is not widely recycled firstly because it is still not collected everywhere. This is due to slow implementation of the Waste Framework Directive as well as Member States establishing derogations of certain packaging from collection.

…the Waste Framework Directive as well as Member States establishing derogations of certain packaging from collection. Collection is a prerequisite for sorting and recycling, and also for necessary investments in innovation and infrastructures. Despite producers participate in the shared responsibility for waste management through EPR, infrastructures for collection are lacking in many EU countries. Therefore, failure by a Member State to implement infrastructures for collection and sorting of certain packaging formats must not lead to a negative assessment on recyclability of such packaging. To ensure widespread separate collection, it is crucial that the PPWR sets high ambitions and explicit collection obligations at Member State level to scale up recycling and make a truly circular economy a reality.

…collection obligations at Member State level to scale up recycling and make a truly circular economy a reality. We believe that current provisions (including Article 43, Article 44 and Article 46) would not suffice to oblige Member States to take action. 2 https://www.vision.flexpack-europe.org 3 Please find the CEFLEX DfR guidelines at https://guidelines.ceflex.eu 4 Please find more info on the work by the Circular Plastics Alliance at https://single-market- economy.ec.europa.eu/industry/strategy/industrial-alliances/circular-plastics-alliance/commitments-and-deliverables- circular-plastics-alliance_en 3 • We would also like to highlight that Article 6 includes contradicting deadlines, especially in Art 6(1) and Art (6)(2)(a) – (d). As it is currently phrased, the text seems to suggest that certain provisions would apply as of 12 months after the entry into force of the Regulation.

…text seems to suggest that certain provisions would apply as of 12 months after the entry into force of the Regulation. It is clear that 2030 and 2035 are the deadlines chosen respectively to implement Design for Recycling (DfR) and recyclability at scale obligations. We urge legislators to correct this and stick to the proposed deadlines. OUR ASKS 1. Draft DfR guidelines considering existing sectoral voluntary approaches for specific packaging categories, such as CEFLEX “Design for a Circular Economy” guidelines for flexible packaging. 2. Set ambitious and clear obligations for Member States to collect and separate all packaging formats, without room for derogations. Industry can recycle only if all packaging is collected.

…separate all packaging formats, without room for derogations. Industry can recycle only if all packaging is collected. 3. Clarify deadlines for recyclability obligations by specifying what applies as of 2030 and what applies as of 2035. None of those provisions should apply as of 2025. 2. Plastic recycled content targets (Article 7) • Targets alone are not enough to ensure a functioning secondary raw material market. There is the need for some fundamental enabling conditions beyond PPWR, such as clear rules for non-PET plastics in contact with food & drinks5 , time to go through authorisation of food-grade mechanical recycling technologies, scaling up advanced recycling, such as chemical recycling, and widespread deployment of efficient collection of all packaging. Without those, there will be no functioning market for recycled plastics and targets will not solve the problem.

Without those, there will be no functioning market for recycled plastics and targets will not solve the problem. In particular, chemical recycling, complementary to mechanical recycling, is of paramount importance to have plastics recycled content for contact sensitive application. • We are concerned that mandating the inclusion of plastic recycled content for each single packaging unit may lead to a ban on many recyclable contact-sensitive packaging by 2030. There simply may not be enough recyclates secondary raw material of the right quality to fulfil this for all contact- sensitive packaging to ensure compliance with current and future product safety and hygiene requirements and expectations. We propose that the PPWR instead mandate recycled content as an average for each producer across their packaging portfolio.

28 → 12

originalus šaltinis (PDF) ↗

(1) Review of the requirements for packaging and other measures to prevent packaging waste 31 July 2020 Flexible Packaging Europe (FPE) represents the interests of the European producers of flexible packaging, covering all kind of flexible packaging mainly used as primary packaging of Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCGs). FPE comprises more than 80 small and medium sized companies as well as the major European producers of flexible packaging. These companies cover more than 85% of the European flexible packaging turnover. Also, six national flexible packaging associations are members of FPE ensuring consistency between national and European activities.

…flexible packaging associations are members of FPE ensuring consistency between national and European activities. As an evidence of the important role and high resource efficiency of the sector, flexible packaging represents half of food primary packaging placed on the EU market (in product units) while accounting for only one sixth of packaging material used (in weight). We welcome the opportunity to share our views on the inception impact assessment regarding the review of packaging and packaging waste rules. As the circular economy becomes a cornerstone of the EU’s industrial base, we appreciate the relevance of updated packaging rules. This initiative is of importance for FPE as it impacts how our products (flexible packaging) are designed, managed at end-of-life, and perceived.

…for FPE as it impacts how our products (flexible packaging) are designed, managed at end-of-life, and perceived. Most importantly, it contributes to our broader vision for a sustainable flexible packaging market where waste is minimized and resources are recovered and recycled, without pollution into the natural environment. Last but not least, this initiative is integral to our efforts to contribute to the EU’s objective to become carbon neutral by 2050. Having in mind the significance of this initiative, it is of utmost importance to define the problem and identify the causes in a way which will yield the correct policy options. Clear definitions will also make the economic, environmental, and social impact assessment more calibrated and effective.

…definitions will also make the economic, environmental, and social impact assessment more calibrated and effective. We are therefore contributing to the Commission’s better understanding of the problem, main drivers and possible solutions from a flexible packaging perspective, in line with the Better Regulation principles. Context and problems As a resource efficient and innovative sector, FPE endorses the high-level objectives of the legislation referred to in the context section. We fully support the objectives of the Packaging & Packaging Waste Directive (PPWD) to prevent the negative impact of packaging on the environment and ensure the functioning of the internal market. We also welcome the commitment of the Circular Economy Action Plan to achieve a climate neutral, resource efficient and more competitive economy.

…of the Circular Economy Action Plan to achieve a climate neutral, resource efficient and more competitive economy. Feedback of Flexible Packaging Europe on the European Commission’s Inception Impact Assessment (1) Ref. Ares(2020)4055696 - 31/07/2020 2 We strongly recommend that these top-line goals are coupled with a rigorous assessment of the problems the initiative aims to tackle in terms of potential, risks, and impact. We offer therefore, several precisions: • Understanding more deeply which packaging trends have contributed to overall increase of packaging waste. In this context lightweight packaging must be clearly treated as part of the solution.

…of packaging waste. In this context lightweight packaging must be clearly treated as part of the solution. To illustrate this point, flexible packaging represents only 5% by weight of all packaging put on the market; its very light weight (with a packaging-to-product ratio up to 5 times lower than alternative solutions) has helped slow the growth of packaging volume by weight. The fact that the overall weight of packaging waste is increasing indicates that more fundamental social changes are underway – a clear understanding of these trends is needed to pinpoint legislative measures that would help to stabilize or reduce growth in tonnage. • Considering greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions throughout the lifecycle We believe the EU’s Green Deal objective of reaching climate neutrality by 2050 must be the starting point of all packaging discussions.

Green Deal objective of reaching climate neutrality by 2050 must be the starting point of all packaging discussions. The inception impact assessment barely scratches the surface, by mentioning in passing the GHG emissions from incineration and the carbon impact of virgin plastic. For this exercise to contribute to the Green Deal the carbon impact of packaging must be addressed throughout the entirety of its lifecycle including material use, transport, disposal, and savings from prevented product spoilage. • Packaging design The inception impact assessment addresses design improvements only through the lens of recyclability. We believe the correct way to address packaging design (for reduced environmental impact) is by relying on the waste hierarchy which places prevention on the top.

…design (for reduced environmental impact) is by relying on the waste hierarchy which places prevention on the top. This means preventing GHG emissions by first reducing the amount and weight of packaging material used and then recycling it, while continuing to ensure that packaging is fit for purpose. An FPE-commissioned study helps to demonstrate the superior impact of prevention regarding Global Warming Potential in the packaging context. In an hypothetical scenario where at EU level all FMCGs excluding beverages are packed in lightweight flexible packaging with a 0% recycling rate (for the exercise), the study finds that the overall Global Warming Potential would be significantly lower compared to the opposite scenario with alternative rigid packaging solutions which are 100% recycled. This is not to say that recycling is a low priority.

…rigid packaging solutions which are 100% recycled. This is not to say that recycling is a low priority. To reduce its footprint even further, FPE is committed to increasing the recyclability and recycling rate of flexible packaging. A European consortium of companies and associations representing the entire value chain1 is already exploring and implementing options to enhance the performances of flexible packaging in a circular economy, i.e. improve recyclability while maintaining light-weighting and minimizing resource use. We therefore ask the Commission to link the workstreams of waste prevention and the essential requirements to ensure a coherent and balanced outcome from a climate perspective.

…waste prevention and the essential requirements to ensure a coherent and balanced outcome from a climate perspective. 1 For further details see www.ceflex.eu 3 We also call for performance-based, rather than prescriptive, essential requirements to ensure that legislation encourages continuous improvement in packaging design, collection, sorting and recycling technologies and infrastructure. • Packaging functionality and product safety at the core The environmental impact of packaging cannot be considered in isolation from the packaged product. The design and timing of measures must not lead to increased product damage or food waste and not hinder innovation in packaging and product features.

…must not lead to increased product damage or food waste and not hinder innovation in packaging and product features. • Correct baseline scenario for packaging recyclability and prevention measures The packaging supply chain is already working to implement legal requirements introduced in the revision of the Packaging & Packaging Waste Directive (PPWD), Waste Framework Directive (WFD) and the Single-Use Plastics (SUP) Directive alongside ambitious voluntary corporate commitments. The impact assessment should quantify mandatory prevention and recyclability improvements already taking place before opting for further prescriptive measures. This is in line with the European Commission’s working principles which aim to avoid unnecessary regulatory burden in favour of evidence-based and targeted regulation.

…which aim to avoid unnecessary regulatory burden in favour of evidence-based and targeted regulation. FPE’s position on suggested policy options identified in the inception impact assessment • We want to avoid a situation where a narrow focus on end of life might undermine the overall environmental performance or the functionality of packaging. For example, changing the packaging solution to make it easier to recycle can often lead to an increase in material use and a higher carbon footprint. In maintaining the waste hierarchy and placing prevention above recycling, the EU can create an enabling policy framework where packaging fulfils its protective function, use of resources is minimized and packaging waste is collected, sorted and recycled. For this, timescale and policy support for industry-led initiatives are critical.

17 → 12

originalus šaltinis (PDF) ↗

(1) Review of the requirements for packaging and other measures to prevent packaging waste 22 December 2020 About flexible packaging and Flexible Packaging Europe Flexible Packaging Europe (FPE) represents the interests of the European producers of flexible packaging, covering all kind of flexible packaging mainly used as primary packaging of Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCGs). FPE comprises more than 80 small and medium sized companies as well as the major European producers of flexible packaging. These companies cover more than 85% of the European flexible packaging turnover. Also, six national flexible packaging associations are members of FPE ensuring consistency between national and European activities. Flexible packaging represents half of food primary packaging placed on the EU market (in product units) while accounting for only one sixth of packaging material used (in weight).

…placed on the EU market (in product units) while accounting for only one sixth of packaging material used (in weight). This fact demonstrates the key function of flexible packaging, which is to use a very small amount of material to protect products. The requisite protection is achieved by selecting appropriate materials, sometimes in combination, to benefit from the cumulated materials’ properties. The result is that flexible packaging solutions are generally 4 to 5 times lighter and have a much lower global warming potential1 than alternative solutions. The consequence of such an efficient use of materials is that flexible packaging is generally more challenging to recycle. Since energy recovery has been considered to be a valid and legal end-of-life option, infrastructures to collect, sort and recycle flexible packaging are not yet widely in place.

…end-of-life option, infrastructures to collect, sort and recycle flexible packaging are not yet widely in place. FPE recognises the need to rapidly transition to a circular economy and is taking steps in this direction. FPE welcomes the opportunity to respond to the European Commission’s public consultation on the review of the requirements for packaging and other measures to prevent packaging waste. As the circular economy becomes a cornerstone of the EU’s industrial base, we appreciate the importance and the relevance of updated packaging rules. This legislative development is of importance for FPE as it impacts how our products (flexible packaging) are designed, managed at end-of-life, and perceived by customers and consumers.

…how our products (flexible packaging) are designed, managed at end-of-life, and perceived by customers and consumers. Most importantly, it contributes to our broader vision for a sustainable flexible packaging market where waste is minimized and resources are recovered and recycled, without pollution into the natural environment – a sustainability vision for flexible packaging recently agreed by the entire industry together with its commitments to achieve it . 1 IFEU Study, Potential packaging waste prevention by the usage of flexible packaging and its consequences for the environment. Position paper on the revision of the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive (1) Ref.

…for the environment. Position paper on the revision of the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive (1) Ref. Ares(2020)7906022 - 23/12/2020 2 Our General Statement We fully support the overall objectives of the Packaging & Packaging Waste Directive (PPWD) to prevent the negative impact of packaging on the environment and ensure the functioning of the internal market. We expect the revised Essential Requirements and the other measures to reduce the generation of packaging waste to be designed to fully support these overall objectives.

…other measures to reduce the generation of packaging waste to be designed to fully support these overall objectives. To help packaging contribute to achieving the goal of climate neutrality and prevent an increase in its overall negative environmental impact, the measures laid down in the revision of the PPWD should, in our view, allow resource-efficient packaging to further improve its performance and continue to play, at EU level, a key role to minimise both the generation of packaging waste and the environmental impact of packaging. Although flexible packaging is generally more resource efficient than alternative solutions, it is not yet widely recycled. The industry is committed to making it recyclable and recycled and, by so doing, even more resource efficient.

The industry is committed to making it recyclable and recycled and, by so doing, even more resource efficient. However, sufficient time and flexibility is needed to adapt and encourage relevant innovation and progress to permit such a massive overhaul. A European consortium of companies and associations representing the entire value chain2 is already exploring and implementing options to improve flexible packaging’s recyclability while maintaining light-weighting and minimizing resource use. Changes to the PPWD have the potential to support such industry-led initiatives, if they facilitate progress in packaging design and waste management rather than acting as a brake on innovation by being too prescriptive and restrictive.

…design and waste management rather than acting as a brake on innovation by being too prescriptive and restrictive. Steps in the direction of climate neutrality would be missed if not yet recyclable flexible packaging solutions are substituted by heavier recyclable ones, leading to an increase in material use, a higher carbon footprint and missing the opportunity to benefit from optimum light and recycable solutions. Our position on some of the Commission’s objectives addressed in the consultation and related potential measures targeting packaging Objective 1: To increase level playing field and harmonization of requirements for products placed on the internal market FPE agrees with the Commission’s observation that packaging requirements have an enormous impact on the free flow of goods, and warmly welcomes the conclusion that a harmonised approach on packaging is paramount.

…on the free flow of goods, and warmly welcomes the conclusion that a harmonised approach on packaging is paramount. The power of the internal market will be needed to achieve the environmental objectives set out for this legislative revision. This means, in our view, defining clear outcomes to set all affected parties on the same path, backed up by effective and efficient implementation and enforcement. 2 For further details see www.ceflex.eu 3 Objective 2: To limit and/or reduce the packaging waste generated across the EU FPE agrees with the Commission’s link between greenhouse gas emissions and packaging waste generation. An FPE-commissioned study helps to demonstrate the key role of prevention regarding Global Warming Potential in the packaging context, and its superior impact as compared to recycling3.

…regarding Global Warming Potential in the packaging context, and its superior impact as compared to recycling3. To limit and/or reduce the amount of packaging placed on the market, a waste prevention target should be coupled with a stronger prevention aspect in the revision of the essential requirements to stimulate innovation of the packaging sector by applying resource minimization thinking. At the same time, a strong monitoring mechanism should be put in place to follow waste generation trends as they appear. Objective 3: To promote the use of reusable packaging whenever logistically feasible with a view to reduce packaging waste generation FPE notes the Commission’s statement that reusable packaging can support reductions in packaging waste generation and can lead to decreased greenhouse gas emissions.

…packaging can support reductions in packaging waste generation and can lead to decreased greenhouse gas emissions. We would add that the overall environmental benefits of reusable packaging are strongly influenced by a range of factors, including transport distances and packaging weight. The condition for promoting reusable packaging should, in our view, include overall environmental benefit, in addition to logistical feasibility. Sector-specific targets or quotas may, therefore, be too blunt an instrument to promote reuse because they may drive reuse in cases where it is not environmentally beneficial. Development of guidance through reference to a European Standard could be helpful in this regard.

…beneficial. Development of guidance through reference to a European Standard could be helpful in this regard. Objective 4: To increase the recyclability of packaging While FPE agrees to some extent with the Commission’s view that designing packaging for recyclability is key to increasing packaging recycling rates, we believe that packaging design and the development and scaling up of economically viable sorting and recycling solutions go hand in hand. This is why we are working with a consortium of companies and associations in CEFLEX to explore and implement options to improve flexible packaging’s recyclability while maintaining light-weighting and minimizing resource use. Reducing the complexity of packaging materials can lead to some packaging formats being removed from the market.

22 → 12

originalus šaltinis (PDF) ↗