Although we have heard about the circular economy, today, the data indicate that really circular practices – such as prevention, reuse and repair – go back. Meanwhile, public policies and environmental campaigns continue to focus on recycling.
For decades, the industry has encouraged the containers of using and throwing, mainly plastic, as a symbol of modern comfort. They have sold us the idea that we can continue to consume in an excessive way whenever we throw the container in the correct container.
In addition, in the case of products that are not disposable, but very demanding critical minerals, such as electrical and electronic devices, their production has shot, and thus these minerals have become waste because of the short life of these technologies.
This narrative that adds a single more recycling is not accidental: it is a strategy designed to perpetuate an unsustainable productive model. Today we know that circularity has retreated 2.2% the last ten years and only 6.9% of the materials used come from recycled sources. In addition, selective collection rates have touched roof. The majority of waste accumulate in landfills, are incinerated or dispersed to the environment.
And what is recycled, a large part loses quality in the process: the recycled material does not have the same properties as the Virgin and end up being used in less value applications. It is what is known as DowncyCling. This devaluation spiral is incompatible with efficient management of resources and a real circular economy.
Meanwhile, the industry continues to produce non -reusable containers and that are increasingly difficult to recycle: composite materials, incompatible mixtures, non -standard formats. A paradigmatic case are cardboard vessels with plastic laminate, impossible to recycle. The circular economy cannot exist if we start from containers designed to be waste.
And who pays all this? Citizenship and public administrations. The industry is shielded in recycling to continue generating waste, without assuming the real cost. The expanded responsibility of the producer (rap), which forces the companies to be paid for the management of the waste they generate, is systematically breached.
In addition, despite being in force for decades, the rap system has failed to reverse the growing trend of waste generation. Recycling continues to be the focus, while prevention, reuse or repair go back. In an increasingly fragile context – with unstable supply chains, energy crisis and scarcity of raw materials – Europe cannot continue to waste resources. RAP has to stop being a mechanism to co -finance waste management to become the heading lever.
Therefore, more and more voices claim to reformulate rap with a vision based on two pillars. One, optimize the system: establish common criteria, guarantee more control, avoid fraud and facilitate compliance by producers. Two, activate circularity: invest in prevention, reuse and repair. Finance washing infrastructure, reuse systems and repair funds.
Unfortunately, today only the first pillar is working. The second, which could really transform the system, remains absent from political priorities.
This limited strategy brakes the transition to a zero residue production and consumption model and keeps alive the illusion that recycles solves everything. But recycling is not the solution: it is the alibi to continue producing without limits.
We demand brave measures, starting by prioritizing reuse ahead of recycling. We must enforce the regulations, allocate public resources to the effective promotion of reuse and not yield to the pressures of the disposable industry in the cut of objectives or in their fake News campaigns against reuse.
It is also necessary to activate proposals aimed at lengthening the life of products, increasing their durability and making strategic use of waste. That is, to consume raw materials within the planetary limits, ensuring the health and well -being of people and communities.
At the same time, we must prohibit superfluous containers and non -recyclable containers, as well as restrict entry into the disposable products market that appear as more sustainable (such as bioplastic) when they really are false solutions.
It is also necessary to apply fiscal measures that record the production, distribution and consumption of disposable products above their reusable alternatives. Another key measure is the reconfiguration and strict application of the expanded responsibility, without neglecting the commitment to a new governance of the waste model.
In summary, it is urgent to assume the failure of recycling and demand a change of model.
Rosa García, General Director of Rezero