The lengthy and yet to be conclusive agreement with both the European Council and Parliament on the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) was praised by many as the result of a balanced balance between economic, environmental and social requirements.

But, a quick read of article 22 and the annex devoted to limitations (i.e. prohibitions) suffices to comprehend that if this becomes the final draft the amendment will significantly limit the efficiency and capabilities that the Italian fresh produce industry across Europe increase expenses for catering businesses as well as limit safe and cost-effective accessibility to large-scale food consumption.

Despite the determination by the Italian government, and the many members in Brussels in reversing the sensible plan that was approved by the European Parliament, Article 22 is primarily focused on packaging made of plastic, and has hit low with regard to packaging of vegetables and fruits.

Article 22 imposes a ban on the packing of non-processed fruits and vegetables in quantities less than 1.5 kg. However, it additionally provides the option for states to implement particular exemptions based on the requirements to guard certain types of produce, and the choice for members to continue with further bans, whether they are already incorporated into national law or to allow the European Commission to add new bans at a later date.

Anyone with even a bare grasp of the basic concepts of community trading can determine whether it is sustainable or not, and more importantly, the potential of destroying the basic idea of a single market by making multiple laws across the nation regarding packaging.

This is the result of demise of the fresh food production sector for packaging, which is an Italian quality on a European scale, given that more than 70 percent of all packaging throughout Europe is manufactured by Italian firms.

Italian producer of plastic packaging has always taken a stand for sustainability and have already developed an economy that is circular, based on rising recycling percentages for the product that is sold.

The market is flooded with packaging that is so modern that in a lot of cases the packaging already meets not only with the standards of the 2023/2486 regulation (“Regulation of Taxonomy” which should establish “sustainable” actions and products) However, it also meets those the PPWR establishes as its targets for 2040 (recyclability as a result of the average amount of recycled material equivalent to 70 percent of the weight of the product.)”

Italian exports are also growing because of the availability of sustainable, effective options. They are also what makes well-preserved tomato made by Pachino can be purchased in Berlin for a reasonable price.

There’s no evidence (none! ) or even in the study upon which the PPWR was formulated, that can show how the alternative options put out by the PPWR are environmentally friendly which is less than that associated with plastic containers. Actually, the reverse is true!

The remarkable preservation capacity of plastic containers reduces the degradation and thus the danger of food waste. It is one of the most important aspects of a holistic strategy to sustainable development globally (contained and content) can’t overlook and which legislators did miss.

Sustainability for the environment cannot be distinguished from economic sustainability alternatives to packaging cost more than double, and this additional cost, when paired with the “invisible” costs of food waste since it degrades faster, is a burden on producers and consumers in the final phase which will result in an increase in the price of items, including high-quality ones.

The present availability of inexpensive plastic packaging could be an effective deterrent to the increase in costs of other packaging and distribution. But what is the next step?

It is important to be aware that often it is believed that as the most efficient and viable alternative to plastic i.e. paper isn’t only plastic, but rather the outcome from the combination of plastic and paper!

Recycling of “paper” (+plastic) packaging even more difficult, and can lead to degradation of the recycled materials, which means that they cannot be utilized for food preparation, but could be possible using recycled plastic.

A replacement for plastic using bioplastic is not an achievable solution. Our companies have made bioplastic containers for many years, however the fact is that the cost, availability and limitations on functionality makes this a viable option only for a small portion of the need.

Also, it should be noted that major retail chains have made an assortment of items that will be offered for sale in loose form (around 50 percent of all) as well as introduced alternatives to plastic when is.

The PPWR also bans the usage of plastic containers within the H&R industry, beginning with plastic cups, is a major reversal of the most recent and insufficiently implemented Directive on Single-Use Plastic (SUP).

In a similar vein, plastic cups constitute an additional product type in which Italian firms hold the leading place in the European market. They were banned under the directive right after manufacturing firms invested a staggering amount of euros in bringing their manufacturing systems in line with the complex requirements of the Directive regarding the obligatory labeling (i.e. the well-known turtle symbol)

This is all against what green advantages?

It was proven that the environmental benefits the PPWR could provide (overall!) was not calculated correctly and only partially as regards CO _2. emissions, it is less than 1% of the CO2 emissions generated annually is produced by the European Community.

The PPWR is not fruitful and is instead the (poisoned) product of an antiplastic notion.

The PPWR will cancel all investment into sustainability that are made by companies.

The PPWR has canceled more than 2,000 jobs in Italy and only considers direct workers.

The PPWR lowers the international competition of the Italian agricultural system.

The PPWR hinders the further growth of the Italian recycling industry: when managed well, plastic is a good opportunity and not a threat, and this production-distribution model should be taken as an example, not condemned.