A new peer-reviewed study suggests that Europe’s approach to plastic recycling may be fundamentally flawed, as recycling quality has a far greater impact on climate performance than recycling volume.
The research, conducted by IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, TERRA and Swedish Plastic Recycling, and published in The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, compares the climate impact of three plastic packaging waste treatment methods used in Europe.
The researchers analysed a Swedish case study covering:
- direct incineration with energy recovery,
- so-called downcycling, where mixed plastics are recycled with little or no sorting, and
- high-quality mechanical recycling enabled by advanced sorting.
The results show that high-quality recycling reduces climate impact by 27% compared with incineration, while downcycling delivers only a 4% reduction.
“From a climate perspective, downcycling plastic packaging is almost as damaging as burning it,” said Linnea Granström, Climate and Environmental Strategist at Swedish Plastic Recycling and co-author of the study.
Infrastructure gap limits climate benefits
According to the study, the key factor determining climate benefits is whether recycled plastic can replace virgin, fossil-based plastic. High-quality recycling enables this substitution, while downcycling often replaces materials such as wood instead, leaving demand for new plastic largely unchanged.
However, many European countries lack the advanced sorting infrastructure required to achieve high-quality recycling at scale.
“The climate benefit depends on what the recycled material actually replaces,” said Tomas Ekvall, researcher at TERRA and lead author of the study. “When recycled plastic can substitute virgin plastic, emissions from new plastic production can be avoided.”
The findings come as the EU finalises new rules under the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR). The researchers argue that current policy frameworks still prioritise recycling rates over recycling quality, potentially locking in low-impact solutions.
Implications for EU circular economy policy
The study provides scientific support for expanding EU circular economy legislation to include requirements for recycling infrastructure, sorting performance and material quality — not only collection targets and packaging design.
“Downcycling is often the cheapest option after incineration, which is why quantity is currently favoured over quality,” said Rickard Jansson, Development Engineer at Swedish Plastic Recycling and co-author of the study. “If Europe wants real circularity and climate benefits, policy must reward quality.”
The authors also link recycling quality to Europe’s strategic autonomy. Incineration and downcycling reduce access to recycled raw materials, increasing dependence on imported virgin plastics.
“High-quality recycling is not just a climate issue — it is an investment in Europe’s resilience and resource security,” Jansson said.
Additional information about the study
Title: The basket-of-functions approach applied to compare the climate aspects of high-quality mechanical recycling and downcycling of plastics
Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
Authors: Tomas Ekvall (TERRA), Linnea Granström and Rickard Jansson (Swedish Plastic Recycling), Emma Moberg and Tomas Rydberg (IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute)
Funding: The Foundation for Water and Air Protection Research (SIVL) and Swedish Plastic Recycling
The study is openly available at:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11367-025-02543-7
For more information please contact:
Linnea Granström
Environmental Strategist, Swedish Plastic Recycling
Phone: +46 73 704 85 22
Email: linnea.granstrom@svenskplastatervinning.se
Rickard Jansson
Development Engineer, Swedish Plastic Recycling
Phone: +46 76 799 90 18
Email: rickard.jansson@svenskplastatervinning.se
Tomas Ekvall
Researcher, TERRA
Email: tomas.ekvall@terra.se
