SPI Sustainable Packaging Strategy: Material Alternatives, Recyclability and Redesign Roadmaps

The problem: targets, rules and fees now pull on the same pack

Sustainability teams used to choose materials against their own public commitments. In 2026 the same pack has to satisfy three tests at once: the company’s target, the rules in each market, and a fee schedule that charges more for formats that are hard to recycle. The three do not always point the same way.

The 2025 targets came due, and many were missed

Brand owners set a wave of packaging targets for 2025, and their 2025 and fiscal 2026 reports now give the outcome. In the SPI Buyers Database, companies report 19 targets due by 2025 as missed and 16 as met; for 24 more, no outcome has been reported yet. The recycled-content targets show the pattern.

Recyclability targets show a similar gap. Walmart reports 64.3% of global private-brand packaging recyclable, reusable or industrially compostable in fiscal 2026 against a 100% target for 2025; Carrefour reports 67.2% of own-brand packaging reusable, recyclable or compostable in 2025 against 100%; Nestlé reports 89.5% against its earlier 100% target (SPI Buyers Database, company reports). AB InBev reports 89.7% of products in returnable or majority-recycled packaging in 2025 against a 100% goal, and cites limited recycled PET supply (SPI Buyers Database, AB InBev 2025 Annual Report).

The rules set floors that targets cannot go below

The rules in the SPI Regulation Tracker now set minimums in several markets.

Two details change design choices. First, how recycled content is measured is not settled everywhere: the PPWR calculation method depends on a Commission implementing act, and HMRC has announced that from 1 April 2027 pre-consumer plastic will no longer count towards the UK 30% threshold (PR-EU-004, PR-GB-001, SPI rule notes). Second, the PPWR recyclability test grades formats A, B or C, and packaging below grade C is treated as non-recyclable (PR-EU-010, SPI rule note). A format that passes today’s fee test may still need redesign for the 2030 grade.

Fees already price recyclability

EPR fee schedules in the SPI EPR & Plastic Tax Calculator make the cost of a poor format visible.

Who this service is for

• Sustainability teams setting or restating packaging targets that must stand up against regulation and peers.
• Packaging development and technical teams choosing between materials or formats for a specific pack or range.
• Brand and category teams who need to know which redesign to fund first.
• Converters and material suppliers preparing a proposal for a customer whose public target they must help meet.

Scope: what SPI covers

1. Material alternatives for a pack or range, compared on recyclability evidence, regulatory fit, fee effect and indicative cost direction.
2. Desk-based recyclability review against published design-for-recycling guidance and the recyclability rules of your markets.
3. Reuse and refill options, including what the PPWR and national reuse targets require of transport and grouped packaging.
4. Peer benchmarks of public packaging commitments and reported progress, from the SPI Buyers Database and company reports.
5. Redesign opportunities and priorities, ranked on criteria you agree.

Deliverables

Methodology: the SPI 6-step spine, applied to materials

Options are mapped against published recyclability guidelines and the rules in the SPI Regulation Tracker; peer commitments come from the SPI Buyers Database and company reports. Where the evidence on an option is thin, for example a new material without collection at scale in your markets, the matrix says so rather than giving it a score it has not earned. See the SPI Methodology for how SPI keeps facts and judgement apart.

How SPI ranks the options

Each alternative is scored on criteria agreed in the brief, and the weights are written down before scoring starts, so the ranking cannot be tuned after the fact. The usual criteria are:

• Regulatory fit: does the option meet the recyclability, recycled-content, reuse and format rules in every market in scope, and from which date? An option that fails the PPWR test in 2030 scores low even if it is cheaper today.
• Recyclability evidence: is there published design-for-recycling guidance that supports it, and is collection and sorting in place in your markets? Evidence is graded strong, partial or thin, with the source named.
• Fee and tax effect: the change in EPR fees and plastic taxes per market, in each scheme’s own currency, from the published rows in the calculator.
• Cost direction: whether material and conversion cost is likely to rise, fall or stay level, from public and supplied data.
• Performance risk: shelf life, barrier, filling-line and transport constraints you set, and what testing would be needed to confirm them.
• Target contribution: how much the change moves your public targets, measured on the same definition and baseline as the target itself.

Where this service fits

In the SPI path from Discover to Implement, Sustainable Packaging Strategy sits at the Evaluate stage. Readers usually arrive after checking peer targets in the SPI Buyers Database (Discover) and the rules for their markets in the SPI Regulation Tracker (Understand). The roadmap then feeds the Decide and Implement stages: a funding decision on the first redesign wave, followed by a retainer that tracks rule and peer changes against the plan.

Sample deliverable outline (illustration only)

The outline below illustrates the format of an SPI options matrix and roadmap. It is not a past project. It names no company and reports no results; it shows the structure and the kind of evidence each row carries.

Formats, timelines and pricing

Prices are quoted after a scoping call and fixed in a written proposal.

What SPI needs from you

• The packs in scope with their current specifications: materials, layers, components, weights and formats.
• Your public and internal packaging targets, with baselines and deadlines.
• Sales volumes or tonnages by market, so fee and tax effects can be weighted.
• Performance constraints: shelf life, barrier, filling line and transport requirements.
• Any recyclability ratings, test results or supplier declarations you already hold.
• The peers you want to be benchmarked against.

Limitations: what SPI does not do

• A recyclability review is a desk review against published guidance. It is not a laboratory test, a recyclability certification or an audit opinion.
• SPI does not carry out or certify life-cycle assessments. Where you need laboratory testing or a certified LCA, SPI says so and can point you to a qualified provider.
• Cost direction is indicative, from public and supplied data; it is not a supplier quotation.
• Peer data is company-reported. SPI quotes it with its source and does not audit it.
• Regulatory content is decision support, not legal advice.

SPI Trackers this service draws on

• SPI Buyers Database: 179 public packaging targets from 42 brand owners and retailers, each with its source quote and reported progress.
• SPI Regulation Tracker: recycled-content, reuse, design and ban rules, including the PPWR 2030 obligations and their SPI rule notes.
• SPI EPR & Plastic Tax Calculator: published fee lines by material and format, used to price each option’s fee effect per market.

Related reading: the PPWR 2030 format restrictions and plastic packaging taxes in 2026. For the full rule and cost picture across your markets, see SPI Packaging Regulatory Intelligence; for emerging materials not yet at scale, see SPI Packaging Innovation & Technology. Sustainability teams can start from SPI Intelligence for Sustainability teams.

How to enquire

Send the enquiry form or write to sales@strategicpackaginginsights.com with the packs, markets and targets in question and your decision deadline. The SPI team aims to reply within two business days, then holds a scoping call and sends a written proposal with a fixed price.