Brussels – At the 2026 edition of the Packaging Waste & Sustainability Forum in Brussels, the future of packaging emerged less as a breakthrough material and more as a complex system in development. With the EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) – which tightens requirements on recyclability, recycled content and reuse – nearing implementation, the focus has shifted to how these targets will work in practice. A consensus across discussions was that reuse and recycling are no longer alternatives but parallel infrastructures that must be designed together.
And that in this context, Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is evolving from a compliance tool to a lever for improving system performance and advancing the circular transition.
The reuse versus recycling debate
For 33 years, the Packaging Waste & Sustainability Forum has been a meeting ground for Europe’s regulators and the packaging industry to debate key legal and practical changes. This year, from 24 to 26 March, regulators once again sat down with producers; waste operators exchanged ideas with material innovators; and brand owners sought guidance on navigating the PPWR – ahead of the European Commission’s publication of implementation guidelines on 30 March – and on aligning EPR schemes across borders. This convergence was clear in the “Circular Cities and Consumers” track, which connected EU regulation with urban waste systems and evolving retail models, from deposit return schemes (DRS) to AI‑based sorting and reuse logistics. As the EU moves toward 90% collection targets and higher recycled content by 2030, “sustainable packaging” is becoming less of a label and more the outcome of system performance.
That tension is evident in the reuse versus recycling debate. According to Laure Darondeau, Packaging Sustainability Lead at Nestlé Waters & Premium Beverages, life-cycle assessments from the French Agency for Ecological Transition ADEME’s show that returnable glass outperforms single-use glass after just a few cycles – around 4 to 5 reuses, with high return rates – while the comparison with aluminium and PET remains less clear-cut and depends heavily on system efficiency and distances.
These differences reflect distinct industrial logics. One‑way systems rely on highly optimised production lines, while reuse requires separate infrastructures for collection, washing and refilling – often kept in‑house for quality control. As a result, reuse was indicated as strongest in specific contexts such as hospitality or local delivery models.
Deposit return schemes
On the other hand, deposit return schemes are increasingly regarded as the backbone of circularity. As highlighted by Marián Áč, President of the European Deposit Return Systems Association (EDRSA), countries with mature systems, such as Norway, reach return rates above 90%; while newer systems like Slovakia’s are approaching that level quickly. Beyond collection, DRS has also proven effective in reducing litter. Even high‑performing systems, however, leave a residual share of non‑returned containers. The challenge now is integrating reuse into these systems. While existing DRS infrastructure could technically handle refillables, reuse requires shorter, local loops and stricter controls, making integration complex without redesigning roles and cost structures.
AI and evolving consumers expectations
At the same time, artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionising waste management. Platforms like Greyparrot’s Deepnest, according to DeepNest’s Managing Director, Yaseed Chaumoo, use computer vision to track how packaging behaves in real sorting facilities, providing detailed data on materials, formats and even brands. This “waste intelligence” allows producers and regulators to assess real‑world recyclability and link design choices – such as labels, colours or materials – to performance and compliance costs.
Consumer expectations are also evolving. According to Pro Carton’s survey of 5,000 people across Spain, France, Germany, Italy and the UK, cost of living now dominates public concern, but climate and waste remain close behind. Recycling is seen as the most important individual action to mitigate climate impacts, and recyclability has overtaken ease of opening or re‑closability as the leading packaging feature. When given the option, around 89% of respondents prefer fibre‑based packaging over plastic, especially in Italy, Germany and France, yet a comparable share is unwilling to pay a premium for “sustainable” packs, which they now consider a baseline expectation. Four in ten say they have switched products in the past year purely because of dissatisfaction with packaging – often due to poor recyclability or over‑packing – and younger consumers are quick to take their loyalty elsewhere.
Taken together, these trends point to a shift away from material debates and toward system performance. High collection rates, real‑world recyclability and consumer behaviour are becoming the key metrics. Whether Europe’s circular packaging ambitions translate into tangible results will now depend on how effectively policymakers, cities and companies will align regulation, infrastructure and design.
Cover: Envato image