Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The adoption of the PPWR by the Council of the European Union (EU/2025/40) in 2025 intensifies the regulatory pressure on packaging manufacturers and food producers. This necessitates their adaptation of packaging to the new standards and selection of materials by various sustainability criteria and minimum standards. The legal text places particular emphasis on recyclability and the carbon footprint. The dairy industry holds significant economic importance in the DACH region (Germany, Austria, and Switzerland); this study therefore analyzed and compared the recyclability and carbon footprint of selected product categories and diverse packaging options for butter, yogurt, spreads, curd cheese, and cottage cheese. This study found large differences within the product categories, and also between the assessed countries, due to differing waste management systems (collection, sorting, and recycling) and waste streams. A key finding is the substantial discrepancy in glass packaging, which significantly exceeds the emission values of other packaging systems. In terms of recyclability, glass packaging performs well due to the effectiveness of the recycling systems regarding the future effective PPWR. However, significant variations in recyclability were observed between Germany and Austria for tray and cup materials made of PP and PS. Notably, there is a preference for packaging systems without a cardboard sleeve over those with one. This study provides critical insights into the environmental performance of packaging materials in the dairy sector. It highlights the challenges posed by regulatory changes and the urgent need for region-specific strategies. By identifying key areas for improvement in packaging design and waste management, this work lays the foundation for achieving compliance with the PPWR and advancing the transition toward a circular economy in the DACH region.
Klein et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: