Paper and cardboard packaging consistently achieve the highest recycling rates among all packaging materials in Europe.
According to aggregated EU and industry data (including Eurostat and CEPI), more than 80% of paper-based packaging placed on the European market is recycled, while plastic packaging recycling rates remain below 45%, and composite materials significantly lower.

This strong performance is often cited as evidence that paper and cardboard are inherently sustainable packaging choices. While this is partially true, recycling rates alone do not tell the full environmental story.

Recycling is efficient — but not impact-free

Recycling paper and cardboard requires fewer resources than producing virgin fibers, but it still involves measurable environmental costs.

Producing recycled cardboard typically requires:

• energy for collection, sorting, transport and reprocessing
• water and process chemicals for pulping and fiber cleaning
• additional raw fiber input to compensate for quality loss

Scientific studies show that paper fibers can be recycled only a limited number of times — typically 4 to 7 cycles — before they become too short to provide sufficient mechanical strength. As a result, recycled cardboard products still rely on a continuous inflow of virgin fibers, usually sourced from managed forests.

From a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) perspective, this means that even highly recyclable materials continue to generate:

• greenhouse gas emissions
• water consumption
• energy demand

when treated strictly as single-use packaging.

What LCA studies increasingly show

Over the past decade, LCA research has shifted from comparing materials in isolation to analysing entire packaging systems. One recurring conclusion is clear:

Extending the use phase of packaging can reduce total environmental impact more effectively than recycling alone.

Multiple peer-reviewed LCA studies indicate that:

• reusable packaging systems outperform single-use systems after a defined number of reuse cycles
• environmental break-even points are often reached after 2–5 reuse rotations, depending on logistics efficiency
• reuse reduces demand for virgin material production, which remains the dominant environmental hotspot

For fiber-based packaging, extending use even modestly can:

• reduce total fiber demand
• lower cumulative energy and water consumption
• decrease overall CO₂ emissions per delivered product

Importantly, these benefits are achieved without introducing new materials — but by improving how existing ones are used.

Recycling vs. reuse is not a competition

It is important to emphasise that reuse does not replace recycling — it complements it.

In well-designed circular systems:

1. Packaging is designed for durability and multiple use cycles
2. Packaging is reused as long as it remains functional
3. Only at end-of-life is the material recycled into new products

This hierarchy aligns with the EU waste framework, which prioritises:

1. prevention
2. reuse
3. recycling

Yet, most cardboard packaging today skips directly to step three.

Why system design matters more than material choice

E-commerce and modern logistics have amplified inefficiencies in packaging systems:

• oversized boxes
• excessive void fill
• packaging optimised for one transport only

Even recyclable packaging can become environmentally inefficient when system design is poor. Research in logistics engineering shows that small improvements in packaging utilisation and lifespan can scale into significant system-level impact reductions when applied across high-volume supply chains.

That is why current research increasingly focuses not only on what materials we use, but how long and how often we use them, and under what logistical conditions.

Looking forward

Paper and cardboard already perform well compared to alternative materials. The next sustainability gains will not come primarily from marginal material improvements, but from rethinking packaging as part of a circular logistics system rather than a disposable product.

This system-level perspective is increasingly shared across academic research, policy discussions and industry innovation — and it is essential when discussing the future role of cardboard packaging in a low-carbon economy.