Walking through the halls in Utrecht, it was impossible to move more than a few metres without meeting someone from another project, another country, another part of the value chain. The venue was buzzing, the agenda was packed, and every corridor felt like a mini-reunion.
What really stayed with me was this: packaging has moved from side-topic to centre-stage.
With the new Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation – PPWR (Regulation (EU) 2025/40) now adopted, the rules of the game are changing fast. And across the whole conference – and my three active roles there (“Ask the Europeans”, “Single Market(s) for Recycling” and “Innovations Driving Recycled Content”) – the same themes kept coming back.
Ten themes I took away from Utrecht
1. Packaging is now very close to a market-access issue
PPWR makes packaging requirements much more closely linked to whether products can be placed on the EU market: in many categories, compliance with rules on design, composition, labelling and waste management will strongly influence what can still be sold where.
2. 2026 is “tomorrow” in packaging time
Again and again, we came back to the same point: some obligations land much earlier than many still think. One example is PFAS in food-contact packaging from 12 August 2026 – from that date, packaging above specific PFAS limit values can no longer be placed on the EU market. Portfolios, data and suppliers need to move quickly.
3. Harmonised EPR is becoming the financial backbone of circularity
Serious recycling needs serious, well-designed extended producer responsibility (EPR): producer contributions that cover the necessary system costs and can be modulated to reward better prevention, reuse, recycled content and recyclability, in line with EU waste law and PPWR.
4. A single market for products needs a single market for recycling
If collection, sorting, recycling capacity and enforcement stay fragmented between countries, “circularity” remains patchy. The single market idea only really delivers if the recycling side also works as one system, with fair conditions for secondary raw materials.
5. Design is the first line of compliance
Light-weighting, mono-materials, reuse formats, recyclability and recycled content: design choices now strongly shape whether packaging will comply and stay viable in the medium term. And we cannot forget the user: the overall offering still needs to deliver a great experience (we cannot highlight this enough).
6. Data and documentation are moving to the centre
Statements of compliance, recyclability information, EPR reporting and future digital tools are pushing data and IT from the background into a core enabler role for packaging, regulatory and quality teams. The EU Declaration of Conformity under PPWR is one visible part of this shift (pls keep in mind 12th of August 2026 for this!).
7. The user experience still makes or breaks “sustainable” packs
One thing I tried to repeat: being “right” on paper is not enough. People still need packs that open easily, protect the product, travel well, look good and are simple to sort or dispose of. In the end, “sustainable” packaging that frustrates users will not succeed.
8. Innovation has to be multifaceted
Yes, new technologies in materials, sorting and recycling are critical. But Utrecht reminded us (again) that we also need innovation in design, business models, infrastructure and collaboration – not just new tech.
9. Circularity has to be investable
Recycling plants need predictable input flows, a fair playing field with imports and a stable policy framework. Without that, it is unrealistic to expect high-quality recyclate at scale and at acceptable cost.
10. Packaging is a team sport – and a business Board topic
PPWR touches R&D, marketing, brand, regulatory, legal, quality, procurement, supply chain, sustainability and IT. Given its link to what can be sold where, it logically appears on the board agenda.
And beyond job titles: every person who touches packaging – from marketers, designers and buyers to operators, planners and recyclers – will help decide whether we succeed or fail.
Now sharing from the panels was participating or moderating ….
“Ask the Europeans”
In the “Ask the Europeans” session, my message was clear: PPWR is no longer something to monitor – it is a framework companies must execute on at pace.
The regulation applies from 12 August 2026. From that date, food-contact packaging containing PFAS above specific limit values can no longer be placed on the EU market. That leaves very little time to get portfolios, data, systems and suppliers aligned. PPWR also requires an EU Declaration of Conformity for packaging, so companies will need their documentation and processes in place by then.
At the same time, ticking the compliance box will not be enough: people still expect a great packaging experience – easy to open, protective, convenient to use and simple to dispose of.
That is why I described packaging as a holistic cross-functional exercise: PPWR will touch R&D, marketing, brand, regulatory, legal, quality, procurement, supply chain, sustainability and even IT as digitalization accelerates. The winners, in my view, will be those with a clear vision of what their future portfolio should look like (not only sales packaging, but also grouped and transport packaging), who understand both the regulations and the markets, who move at pace, create value beyond compliance – and who team up across functions and with external partners better than anyone else.
“Single Market(s) for Recycling”
Moderating the “Single Market for Recycling” panel in Utrecht, I left with one simple conclusion: if Europe is serious about circularity, it has to make recycling investable.
For me, that starts with well-designed, harmonised EPR. Under EU waste law and PPWR, producer contributions in EPR schemes are intended to cover the necessary costs of collection, sorting and recycling and can be adjusted according to how packaging is designed for prevention, reuse, recycled content and recyclability. When those rules are applied consistently across Member States, they can help turn demand for recycled material into long-term, bankable offtake instead of short-term, price-only decisions – even when virgin resin looks cheaper.
At the same time, a “single market for recycling” will remain theoretical if:
- collection and sorting stay fragmented,
- recycling plants cannot stay viable when energy prices spike, or
- imported material does not follow broadly equivalent rules within EU and international trade frameworks.
My overall takeaway was that harmonised packaging rules and EPR across the EU are not a technical detail; they are a backbone connecting design, separate collection, high-quality recycling capacity, fair competition and long-term partnerships between brands and recyclers into one functioning circular system.
“Innovations Driving Recycled Content”
On the panel “Innovations Driving Recycled Content”, I put it this way: we can’t choose between big bets and basic homework – we need both.
We discussed impressive new technologies on stage, and I stressed that in parallel we have to fix the basics. In Member States where recycling rates are still behind, those innovations can only reach their full potential if the underlying systems improve.
Innovation, for me, is multifaceted, and I highlighted three additional layers:
- Product design innovation
The packs that will remain on the market are those that are lighter, recyclable and embed recycled content without frustrating people – they still need to open easily, look good on shelf and do their job. The “job to be done” of packaging is a fine art, balancing many requirements at once. - The business case
Recycled content will not scale if it is only seen as an extra cost. It has to be linked to better user experiences, stronger brands and long-term resilience – Creating Value overall, not just additional expense. - Collaboration
No single player can fix collection, sorting and recycling alone. The companies that will come out ahead are the ones treating this as a system change – working differently with suppliers, customers and peers – to deliver packaging that is compliant and circular, and clearly better for people, for the business and for the planet.
One last reflection
Leaving Utrecht, what stayed with me was not just the regulation text – although it matters a lot – but the people and the feel of the summit: legal teams talking to designers, recyclers talking to brand owners, suppliers talking to sustainability leads, and all those “every five metres” corridor conversations.
For me, that’s the clearest sign that packaging now matters more than ever – and that people are making the difference. I have a genuine feeling that things are moving in the right direction, and that every person touching packaging will play a critical role in the years to come.
p.s. These are my personal reflections from the summit and from reading the official legislation (for example Regulation (EU) 2025/40 on packaging and packaging waste on EUR-Lex, and the Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC); they do not constitute legal advice.
By Marius Tent
ViaPackaging UG
