Shunho Creative’s Material Solutions for PPWR

Europe’s packaging rules have entered a new phase. The EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) establishes a single, harmonised framework for packaging requirements across the EU market, encompassing packaging design, labelling, and end-of-life considerations. For packaging owners, converters, and brands, PPWR is not simply a sustainability signal; it is a practical driver of material and design decisions that must stand up to scrutiny internally (compliance, procurement) and externally (customers, regulators).

This article outlines what PPWR is, why it matters now, how timelines affect planning, and how Shunho Creative approaches material innovation using test methods and certification frameworks that support evidence-based claims.

What is PPWR, and why does it matter now?

PPWR is the EU’s packaging regulation intended to reduce packaging waste and strengthen packaging circularity across the single market. The European Commission introduced the proposal titled “Proposal for a Regulation… on packaging and packaging waste,” with the explicit rationale that fragmented national rules create barriers to the internal market and legal uncertainty for businesses.

The policy intent is clear: packaging should be designed to perform better environmentally, at scale, in real systems. The Commission frames packaging as a significant material user and waste contributor, highlighting the need for stricter, more consistent rules and implementation tools.

What makes PPWR different from previous legislation?

A major change is the instrument itself. PPWR is a regulation, meaning it applies across EU member states without requiring national transposition in the same way directives do. The Commission’s proposal explicitly argues that a regulation is needed to reduce diverging national approaches and create a level playing field for market operators.

For businesses, the impact is practical:

• Packaging requirements increasingly need to be demonstrated with documentation, test methods, and recognised standards, rather than relying on market-by-market assumptions.
• Material choice becomes more tightly linked to end-of-life pathways and compliance narratives.
• “Local interpretation” becomes less of a planning strategy.

When will PPWR apply, and how should companies prepare?

From a planning standpoint, dates that matter:

• Feb 2025 — PPWR entered into force
• Aug 2026 — General application date of PPWR provisions
• Jan 2030 — Recyclability must be expressed in performance grades (A, B or C); packaging below grade C is restricted from being placed on the EU market
• Jan 2035 — Recyclability grades move from “design for recycling” to include “recycled-at-scale” criteria
• Jan 2038 — Packaging must be at least grade B to be placed on the EU market

This phased reality is important. It creates a window for redesign, supplier alignment, testing, and documentation. It also means that material decisions made today may need to remain defensible through evolving technical criteria and standards.

A useful way to frame readiness is to separate:

• Immediate actions (portfolio mapping, supplier data capture, evidence review), and
• Medium-term actions (material transitions, redesign cycles aligned to performance criteria, third-party testing/certification where relevant).

What does PPWR require from packaging materials at a decision level?

PPWR is designed to influence packaging across its lifecycle. On the European Commission’s overview page, the stated objectives include making packaging recyclable “in an economically viable way by 2030,” increasing recycled plastics use safely, and decreasing virgin material use.

In the Commission proposal text, the regulation is positioned as setting requirements “over the entire life-cycle of packaging… to allow placing packaging on the market,” alongside obligations related to labelling and packaging waste management.

For packaging decision-makers, this translates into a material question: Can the chosen structure be supported by evidence that it works in the intended end-of-life route? The direction of travel in PPWR is away from vague “eco” framing and toward substantiated performance and documentation.

Why is material complexity becoming a compliance issue?

High-performance packaging often relies on multi-material structures (e.g., paper + coatings, paper + polymer, multilayer films) to deliver barrier, durability, and premium appearance. However, PPWR is designed around outcomes in waste systems. The Commission highlights the internal-market and environmental problems caused by packaging characteristics that inhibit recycling and by “technically recyclable packaging” that is not recycled in practice due to a lack of cost-effective processes or insufficient output quality.

That is why material and structural complexity matter: recyclability is not only a design intent; it is a system interaction. Collection rates, sorting behaviour, and industrial processing realities influence whether a package can credibly align with the direction of PPWR.

How Shunho Creative Approaches PPWR Alignment: Evidence First

Shunho Creative’s approach to PPWR alignment is grounded in verifiable material performance, assessed through recognised testing methodologies and certification frameworks, rather than unsubstantiated sustainability claims.

For fibre-based packaging, recyclability is evaluated using industry-recognised laboratory methods that replicate key stages of the paper recycling process. TransMet®, matilized paperboard innovated by Shunho Creative, has been assessed in accordance with UNI 11743, a paper recyclability test method developed to evaluate behaviour during pulping, screening, and fibre recovery under conditions representative of industrial paper recycling.

This type of assessment reflects real processing environments, rather than theoretical recyclability assumptions. By anchoring recyclability discussions to defined test protocols, packaging teams gain:

• clearer internal decision-making criteria,
• stronger supplier qualification documentation, and
• more consistent technical dialogue with EU stakeholders and downstream partners.

Demonstrating Compostability Credibly: Certification That Withstands Scrutiny

Compostability within the EU regulatory framework is treated as a defined recovery pathway, governed by harmonised standards and third-party certification rather than generic claims.

At the European level, EN 13432 (“Packaging – Requirements for packaging recoverable through composting and biodegradation”) establishes the technical criteria for compostable packaging, covering biodegradation, disintegration, and environmental safety. This standard is explicitly referenced within the certification schemes operated by TÜV AUSTRIA under its OK compost INDUSTRIAL and OK compost HOME programmes.

TransMet® are certified under both OK compost INDUSTRIAL and OK compost HOME, enabling brand owners to rely on independently verified compostability for applications where composting is the appropriate end-of-life route.

By separating recyclability and compostability into distinct, certified pathways, Shunho Creative aligns with PPWR’s core principle: packaging must be designed with a clear, demonstrable, and system-compatible recovery route, supported by recognised standards.

Designing for Europe’s next packaging era

PPWR signals a long-term shift: Europe is moving toward packaging rules that are more consistent across the single market and more closely tied to measurable outcomes. The timeline is already in motion, and standards and further measures will continue to shape how “recyclable” and “compostable” are evaluated in practice.

Shunho Creative’s role is to support packaging owners and brands with material solutions built for evidence: test-informed recyclability pathways in fibre-based systems, and certification-driven compostability narratives where composting is the intended route.