A world without plastics is inconceivable. From medical equipment to clothing to food packaging or car interiors, plastics are woven into every aspect of our lives. But their production, use, and disposal remain one of the great environmental and economic challenges of our time.
The centrality of plastics means that the debate is not about whether the material should exist. Instead, it is focused on how to make their life cycle sustainable. For that to happen, industry investment and innovation must be unlocked. Some industry insiders believe that the regulatory framework for plastics recycling may inadvertently undermine Europe’s wider ambitions for a circular economy.
As President for Chemical Intermediates and Fibers at Eastman, Erwin Dijkman is well-placed to understand the challenges that major businesses face in creating the capacity that Europe needs to become a global leader in the circular economy. He told The Parliament that in an increasingly unstable world, European competitiveness rests on its ability to be more self-reliant when it comes to raw materials.
“Competitiveness is a buzzword, but it is a buzzword for a reason,” Dijkman tells us. “We’re waking up to a hard reality where the world around us is changing. We are a continent that’s dependent on raw materials for the chemical industry coming mostly from elsewhere. And that situation hasn’t improved. It has actually deteriorated.”
Dijkman is particularly concerned that there is the potential risk of regulation misaligning with Europe’s broader ambitions, leading to the EU undermining its own ability to develop a robust recycling sector. He told The Parliament that by allowing low-cost recycled plastic imports to count towards meeting recycled content targets, the EU has created a system that disincentivises investment in solutions that are focused on dealing with Europe’s own plastic waste in Europe.
We’re waking up to a hard reality where the world around us is changing. We’re a continent that’s dependent on raw materials coming mostly from elsewhere. And that situation hasn’t improved - it has actually deteriorated
Without intervention, Dijkman fears that Europe risks becoming the waste processing hub for plastic arriving from all over the world rather than a leader in new materials and recycling innovation. That could have profound long-term consequences, reducing the drive for innovations that can deliver a true circular economy.
“By importing recycled content from other regions, the only thing that we are doing is helping other regions get rid of their waste,” Dijkman points out. “By not creating the right regulatory framework that allows a level playing field with imports, you effectively kill the whole idea of circularity in Europe.”
Dijkman is acutely aware that Europe’s plastics industry faces a dual challenge. On one hand, policymakers are pushing for greater recycling and circularity. On the other, regulatory uncertainty and competition from low-cost imported plastics threaten investment in the very technologies that could enable this transformation.
“We think that there is a need for a framework where circularity has credibility,” he explains. “If you can make that economy work you create an opportunity for Europe to be a global leader. But the regulatory framework needs to enable that.”
Dijkman describes a real-world example of how this is slowing progress with chemical recycling, - a process that can break down hard-to-recycle plastics into high-quality raw materials for reuse. Despite the potential of the technology to transform difficult-to-recycle plastics into high-quality materials an infinite number of times, it is still not fully enabled in the EU.
Eastman has pioneered the approach in the US, but plans for a major facility in France are now on hold due to regulatory uncertainty around whether the EU will prioritize recycling its own plastic waste. Eastman emphasizes the importance of treating plastic waste as close to the source as possible not to lose valuable materials that can be included back in the economy. This would support EU’s circular economy goals and the intentions to promote sustainability and reduce global dependencies on raw materials.
“It has a direct consequence. Lack of clarity in Europe has literally caused us to focus on our second commercial-scale recycling facility in the US,” Dijkman tells us. “In Europe, we are looking at what regulators are going to do to determine whether the business case here stacks up.”
Without that investment in innovation, Dijkman fears that Europe will fall behind as a leader in recycling. His analysis is supported by research. A study last year by systems change specialists Systemiq calculated that allowing imports of waste could result in the recycling rate for some plastics falling to between 32% and 38% by 2040. That contrasts with an estimated 67% in a projected circular scenario.
Dijkman is clear that it would spell disaster for Europe and end any claims to be a global leader in the sustainable production and use of plastics. He explains that unless there is clarity from regulators, companies like his own will hesitate to commit the resources needed to deliver the scale of change that Europe aspires to. This will result in stalled projects, lost innovation, and a widening gap between ambition and reality. “We need more innovation, more innovative ways to use the raw materials from waste and to be the leader in that global economy,” he says. “I think is a huge opportunity, but it feels like we’re letting it slip through our fingers.”
For Dijkman, the goal must be “true circularity” that sees manufacture, use, and reuse all supported by a wider European ecosystem.
“If we want to get to a circular economy, the regulatory framework should be built around driving that progression. Circularity only works if you make it regional, understanding regional as European in this context. The single market provides a great opportunity to create that environment.”
Dijkman believes that Europe has an opportunity to lead the world on this agenda but cautions that leadership requires action. If we delay, Europe won’t just fall behind – it will become dependent on others in a world of increasing instability. This isn’t just about the environment. It’s about jobs, innovation, and economic competitiveness.
The stakes are high. A circular economy for plastics would mean fewer emissions, less landfill waste, and greater self-sufficiency. It would also position Europe as a global leader in sustainable materials, setting the standard rather than simply managing the world’s waste. But hesitation comes at a cost. If policy uncertainty continues, investment will go elsewhere. The choice for European regulators is clear. Shape the future of plastics, or risk being left behind.
Sign up to The Parliament's weekly newsletter
Every Friday our editorial team goes behind the headlines to offer insight and analysis on the key stories driving the EU agenda. Subscribe for free here.