The Green Dot has been around for decades. Is it still fit for purpose in today's world of fast-moving sustainability and mounting climate pressure?
Yes, absolutely. Our work is not yet done. While we have made fantastic progress in recycling paper, cardboard, and glass over the past 30 years, achieving recycling quotas of 80% or more in some countries, plastics remain a challenge. We still incinerate too much plastic in Europe, including in Germany. The main sectors using plastic are packaging, construction, automotive, and electronics, with packaging being by far the largest. The recycling quotas for plastics are affected by local collection systems, sorting, and recycling infrastructure.
Until we achieve an 80% recycling rate for plastics, we must continue to accelerate our efforts, replace fossil materials, and protect Europe’s limited resources. Achieving this ambitious target within the next 5 to 10 years is our challenge.
We often hear that circularity in packaging is within reach—but in practice, most systems fall short. What are the biggest bottlenecks?
Circularity starts with proper packaging design that is ready for recycling. This means using fewer composites and more mono-materials, especially in plastics. Every brand manager needs to consider the end of life of packaging during the design process. Another key step is educating consumers on how to separate waste correctly at home, as this facilitates better sorting downstream. Proper sorting at scale helps generate high-quality resources for recycling.
The next challenge is finding the right outlets for recycled plastic, where both the public sector and big brands can play a role. Public sector procurement can support demand for recycled materials, while big brands need to fulfil the internal targets they set for using recycled plastics. Plastic recycling remains a pain point compared to the more successful recycling of paper and glass.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) was once a breakthrough idea. How do you see the evolving relationship between EPR systems and corporate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals?
I believe the approach is still correct.
Every product should carry its internal and external costs, including at the end of its life. I am driven by two aspects: environmental protection and our social responsibility to future generations.
The first step is to be restrictive in consuming virgin resources, keeping materials in the loop as long as possible, and avoiding linear consumption since resources in Europe are limited. We should focus on reducing and reusing materials where appropriate.
Secondly, keeping materials in a closed recycling loop generates real savings in CO2 emissions. For instance, using recyclates instead of virgin polyolefins can save up to 50% in CO2 emissions. This has a significant value when looking at sustainability goals and taxation discussions. For me, EPR systems and ESG goals work together; they are a perfect combination.
You have cooperation agreements across Europe and the UK. How realistic is a harmonised EU, or even global, approach to waste management?
A global approach might be possible in the future, but different countries and regions have different starting points. We cannot compare emerging markets with saturated markets, as they face different challenges. The foundation of any approach starts with consumer awareness and acceptance, alongside the willingness of politicians to improve local systems. Companies need to follow consumer demands for more circularity in packaging. While we might find different routes to reach the same goal, across developed countries, we can define comparable prerequisites for a common approach.
How do you evaluate current progress towards a pan-European circular economy?
I am optimistic. We work in several working groups and focus on both cooperation and harmonization. Multinational brands, like PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, Nestlé, and Unilever, face different prerequisites across European countries, and they would greatly benefit from harmonization. The new Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) is an excellent example, as the European Parliament and Commission aim to harmonize the system while building on existing national infrastructures. The goal is to achieve the same recycling quotas across Europe, which creates a solid foundation for collaboration.
If you could change one thing tomorrow about how the world currently approaches packaging and circularity, what would it be and why?
If I could change one thing, it would be to connect the consumers’ underlying desire for less packaging waste with the ambition to run an efficient recycling loop without overburdening them. Overburdening can mean complexity and costs, and if systems do not work at reasonable costs, they will fail. It is crucial that everything we do is cost-effective.
I would like to see companies take responsibility for the entire life cycle of their products and packaging, including the external costs. I advocate for private-run, profit-oriented solutions in developed countries with intense competition, as this would help bring down costs. Politicians should focus on setting clear, reliable frameworks and deadlines for what should be achieved, but then step back. A good starting point would be the recycling quotas outlined in the PPWR for specific material streams across Europe, which I believe is achievable.
