A few years ago, efforts to reduce overall packaging waste - including plastics and other single-use materials - focused primarily on collecting and reporting data such as the tonnage of materials like plastic, paper, or glass placed on the market.
Today, an increasing number of requirements have created a complex web of regulatory and legal challenges. Evolving regulations like Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and country-specific Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes have significantly heightened reporting expectations.
As a result, more detailed data collection and reporting are now mandatory. Companies must provide extensive information, including material breakdowns and specific details about packaging specifications such as the use of barrier materials, adhesives, and inks. Oftentimes, companies do not have these details at hand since they did not need this information from their suppliers in the past.
Further challenges can be attributed to regional differences in reporting requirements, incomplete data, poor data quality, and inefficient internal data collection systems and structures.
In recent years, more companies have recognised that one of the key solutions to these reporting challenges—and a way to maintain compliance—is transitioning their packaging data to a digital environment. Many understand that this digital shift enhances scalability, harmonisation, centralisation, efficiency, and transparency.
However, despite this awareness, many hesitate to adopt digitisation solutions like Recyda’s software due to the misconception that incomplete packaging data makes such tools inaccessible.
This article delves into why comprehensive packaging data is essential, highlights key data gap trends we have encountered, and explains why your incomplete packaging data is the perfect reason to adopt our digital solution for efficient and effective reporting.
The Canada Plastics Pact collaborated with Circular Economy Leadership Canada to release a Discussion Paper prepared by Intafesu Consulting.
It is important to note that although this Discussion Paper focuses on data and reporting efforts related to plastic packaging in the residential (or consumer) sector, its observations and recommendations ‘are relevant to a broader suite of areas, including other types of packaging, as well as other material streams in sectors such as construction and consumer goods.’
Part of the Discussion Paper examines the key plastics data collection and reporting challenges in the Canadian industry. As described in the document, these are:
Brand owners in Europe have experienced the majority of these obstacles as well. For instance, on the topic of data ownership and sensitivity - increasing business barriers, such as legal and contractual arrangements, often hinder data sharing.
For example, as observed in the Discussion Paper, ‘waste haulers will often not share detailed information and data with their customers or the public, given concerns about their competitors gaining insight or advantages when negotiating future contracts.’
This means that due to the proprietary nature of some packaging information and the need for suppliers to remain competitive, data sharing between suppliers and customers is adversely affected. This also hinders the exchange of data beyond direct transactional relationships (e.g., supplier–vendor data exchanges).
Our customers often receive compact data information from their suppliers, typically in PDF format. This data is commonly manually stored in their systems. From our experience, we have identified recurring data gaps during the process of transferring our clients’ data onto our software. These include:
Colour
Common issues with packaging colour data include:
Ambiguous or missing colour specifications create challenges, as many design-for-recycling guidelines and EPR eco-modulation schemes require precise colour details. For example, in Belgium, fee structures differ significantly based on the colour categorisation of PET: ‘PET transparent colourless’, ‘PET transparent blue’, and ‘PET transparent other than colourless and blue’ each fall into distinct categories with varying costs.
Packaging Components
This relates to all parts required to assemble the packaging. Recurring gaps in this area include missing or inaccurately described:
The Discussion Paper highlights that manual data collection and aggregation ‘significantly increases risks related to data accuracy and, ultimately, its value.’ This is a key reason behind data gaps, as information is often incorrectly entered.
From our experience, two recurring challenges prevent companies from digitising their packaging data. Below, we address each challenge and offer solutions.
First Challenge: Uncertainty about how to transfer their data into Recyda’s digital architecture
Solution: There are three ways to input your packaging data into our software:
Based on our experience, all three options work well. For larger packaging portfolios, ‘integration’ is the most favourable option but can also be achieved step by step by starting for example with an Excel import.
Second Challenge: Belief that incomplete packaging data is a hindrance to using our software
Solution: In reality, the truth is quite the opposite. Recyda’s software is specifically designed to work with companies that have incomplete data. We encourage companies to upload whatever data they have, no matter how minimal. Our system can review existing data against country-specific guidelines and identify any gaps. In the meantime, the client receives preliminary results (be it for recyclability or EPR) which already give valuable insights.
Our software has an Analytics Dashboard that can input all the data a company currently has, even if the dataset is incomplete.
One recurring challenge for clients is the difficulty in meeting varying regulatory requirements across target markets, as these pose different obligations. A product compliant in one country may fail to meet requirements in another. Recyda’s software addresses this issue by analysing a company’s data points against the regulations of specific target markets.
Our robust and intuitive software identifies discrepancies between existing data and regulatory requirements. If the data is insufficient, our system generates a list of missing data points.
To keep up the pace with evolving regulations, our software is continuously updated to reflect the latest changes, ensuring the data requirements we provide are always current.
Additionally, our software can correlate data gaps with the sales volumes affected by these gaps. For instance, it can calculate how much material tonnage is impacted by incomplete data. This insight allows companies to prioritise which data gaps to close first, based on their potential impact.
Recyda’s software can also serve as a cost-benefit tool. For example, we provide EPR forecasting to help companies anticipate regulation changes. This empowers businesses to adapt their packaging choices proactively.
Penalties for non-compliance can be costly; for instance, a higher rate for the use of incompatible colours. From our experience in working with our customers, they often pay too much because of missing data which leads to conservative categorisations and consequently, higher fees. With advanced notice from our forecasting tools, companies can make informed decisions to avoid such penalties, such as altering their colour packaging choices.
Packaging compliance can feel overwhelming, especially when faced with incomplete data or complex regulations. However, this shouldn’t hold your business back. As today’s blog highlights, Recyda’s intuitive platform is tailored to bridge your data gaps, streamline compliance, and provide actionable insights to meet evolving regulatory requirements.
Take the first step toward digitising your packaging data today. With Recyda, you don’t need perfect data to start your journey—just the drive to build a more scalable, compliant, and efficient packaging process.
Contact us now to discover how our solution can turn your data challenges into opportunities.