Mario Draghi's report on European competitiveness published in September 2024, and more specifically its "Part B," was not intended to be a sectoral manifesto, let alone a militant document. And yet, it is becoming the intellectual basis for many decisions taken or in preparation in Brussels, particularly on the circularity of plastics.
That is why I described this report as the European Commission's "compass of compasses" during a conference in Brussels where I was invited to speak (video below).
Not because it dictates every measure, but because it sets a new course: that of realistic circularity, which can be industrialized and is compatible with a Europe that does not give up on manufacturing.
A clear distinction in terms of GHG emissions
The Draghi report deserves credit for setting the record straight regarding the direct carbon impact of our production. It explicitly distinguishes the "Rubber and Plastics" sector from the four most energy-intensive industries (chemicals, base metals, non-metallic minerals such as glass or cement, paper and wood).
The plastics industry therefore emits less greenhouse gases (GHG) than all of these industries, both in absolute terms and in relation to the sector's added value. This is not a personal opinion of Mario Draghi or the plastics industry. It is a documented and accepted fact.
This factual reminder is essential. It directly contradicts the widespread narrative that the plastics industry is, by nature, one of the biggest contributors to climate change in European industry. Reducing GHG emissions will not be achieved by reducing European plastics manufacturing. For an industry where some spend their time justifying themselves, this point is a game changer.
Overcoming the misconception of "decarbonization"
The Draghi report provides a major conceptual clarification that many have pretended to ignore until now: plastic is a carbon-based material. By design. By definition. By chemistry.
Therefore, talking about "decarbonizing" plastic is nonsense. And Mario Draghi says it explicitly: the challenge is not to eliminate carbon, but to reduce dependence on fossil fuels as a raw material.
Even today, a large proportion of the plastics produced in Europe are based on fossil resources. The report does not deny this fact. It draws a strategic conclusion: the future of the sector lies in defossilization, where possible. To achieve this, recycling and the emergence of a truly unified market for secondary raw materials, along with the use of bio-based solutions that are relevant for certain applications, will undoubtedly enable us to succeed.
This semantic shift is far from insignificant. It confirms, in black and white, what Plastalliance has been saying for years: the problem is not plastic itself, but the supply model.
A realistic assessment of the recycling economy
Mario Draghi openly admits that plastic recycling does not currently have a strong business case.
The report clearly identifies these obstacles:
– Virgin material remains cheaper, even when the price of carbon is included.
– Landfill and incineration costs are still too low in Europe.
– It is difficult to obtain a "green premium" for recycled plastics due to the variable quality of secondary materials.
This diagnosis is valuable because it breaks with a dangerous fiction: that of imposing objectives without creating the economic conditions necessary to achieve them.
The report thus paves the way for a new European framework, the Circular Economy Act, which aims to structure a single market for waste and make recycling competitive with incineration and landfilling. This is also where the future of the industry will be decided.
Ending excessive national regulation: a matter of industrial survival
Finally, the Draghi report tackles a subject that manufacturers know all too well: national over-transposition and gold-plating. According to the European Commission, gold-plating is defined as "an excess of standards, guidelines, and procedures accumulated at the national, regional, and local levels, which interfere with the expected policy objectives of the regulation."
These additional regulatory layers, added by certain Member States (such as France) beyond the European texts, create unnecessary complexity, fragment the market, and penalize companies operating in multiple territories.
The recommendation to strengthen the role of the Single Market Enforcement Taskforce (SMET) is not technical. It is political. It means that Europe cannot claim to defend its industrial competitiveness while tolerating internal distortions that weaken its own champions. All too often, Europe is accused of what Member States themselves add. Circularity will not survive 27 divergent interpretations or applications of the same text.
For the European plastics industry, this is a clear signal: harmonization is not an option, it is a condition for survival.
A roadmap to support, not caricature
The Draghi report does not advocate the elimination of plastic, including single-use plastic. It recognizes that the sector accounts for around 5% of European manufacturing and is strategic for the continent's industrial autonomy.
He proposes a demanding but realistic path: one of circularity compatible with competitiveness, based on functional markets, clear rules, accessible energy, and a Europe that stops shooting itself in the foot.
Plastalliance will be there to seize this opportunity, not to endure the transition, but to steer it forward alongside those who share these values.
