Events
EPR
Published on:
Vivian Loftin
Co-Founder & CMO
Key Takeaways
With August 2026 approaching, companies must move past uncertainty regarding secondary legislation and act on current PPWR guidance.
While industry calls for an "EPR one-stop shop," stakeholders must first align on basic definitions and reporting rhythms before true harmonisation can occur.
PROs require granular packaging data to manage waste budgets effectively; digital solutions are now essential to handle this reporting complexity.
Introduction
This year, Recyda was proud to sponsor the Packaging Waste & Sustainability Forum in Brussels as an EPR Knowledge partner. The event brought together key representatives from Producer Responsibility Organisations (PROs), international brands, and the EU Commission. These discussions are critical in shaping the present and future of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) in Europe. We’ve summarised the main developments here to help you benefit from these industry-leading insights.
Uncertainty is Blocking Progress
The EU Commission recently published long-awaited PPWR guidance to support implementation, yet many companies remain hesitant, waiting for the final look of secondary legislation. With August 2026 fast approaching, the time for "wait and see" has passed. One of the primary points of friction is the lack of harmonisation. While there is a significant demand for an "EPR one-stop shop," the current reality requires companies to report individually to each country in increasing detail. Interestingly, "harmonisation" means different things to different stakeholders. Before we can reach a unified system, we must align on definitions, governance, fee structures, and reporting rhythms. In the meantime, companies must manage today’s fragmented reality.
The Quest for ROI on Eco-Modulated Fees
Eco-modulation—adjusting EPR fees based on a package's sustainability—is set to become a standard instrument under PPWR. However, its impact has been mixed. At Recyda, we’ve observed that many companies haven't yet established "designing for EPR" as a core business process. This is often because EPR compliance and R&D teams operate in silos.
Furthermore, the lack of a clear Return on Investment (ROI) often blocks progress; if fee differences are too small, there is little financial incentive to change a design. We are seeing a shift, however. Citeo (France) highlighted how increased penalties on carbon black packaging successfully drove it out of the market, and Conai (Italy) reported higher percentages of recyclable packaging following significant price increases.
Balancing Reporting Complexity: Data is the New Currency
As eco-modulation expands, reporting has become vastly more detailed. While the industry pleads for simplicity, PROs require granular data to make informed decisions regarding waste management costs and budget allocations.
Complexity is no longer a valid excuse in 2026. With the data demands of both EPR and PPWR, the need for structured, detailed data management is permanent. Digital solutions are now a necessity to strip away the complexity of these calculations and ensure compliance across multiple borders.
What Happens Next?
The Forum proved that there are no simple answers to harmonisation or the "perfect" eco-modulation model. However, all stakeholders share a common goal. The next few years under PPWR offer a unique opportunity to achieve that goal through continued dialogue and decisive action.
Join the Conversation
We invite you to dive deeper into these trends. Join our upcoming webinar in collaboration with PRO Europe: "Navigating EPR Trends 2026: Discussing Strategy, Fees, and Impact."