EMF Eyes Paper Flexibles as Option for Tackling Sachet Pollution

Paper enters the discussion as a material that, under certain conditions, may behave differently at end of life, particularly in environments where plastic leakage is high and persistent.

But the report is explicit about the limits of substitution. Paper-based flexibles must meet multiple requirements simultaneously: product protection, consumer usability, affordability, and compatibility with local waste systems.

David Allen, vice president of sustainable packaging at PepsiCo, points to that balance from a brand perspective: “We see potential in paper-based flexibles, but scaling them will require advances in material performance, cost competitiveness, and infrastructure alignment.”

Those constraints shape where paper can realistically be deployed.

Materials, machines, and supply chains

For packaging engineers who work for brands and their converter suppliers, the report highlights a set of practical trade-offs tied to moving from plastic films to paper-based structures.

Flexible plastic packaging relies on multilayer films and coatings to deliver barrier performance, protecting against moisture, oxygen, grease, and light. Replicating those properties in paper typically requires coatings, laminations, or hybrid structures, which can complicate recyclability or biodegradability.An EMF technology roadmap outlines current limitations and timelines for paper-based flexibles, including barrier coatings, sealing performance, and the need for equipment retrofits.Ellen MacArthur Foundation

On the production side, paper behaves differently than plastic film in forming and sealing operations. Paper webs can be less forgiving in high-speed horizontal and vertical form/fill/seal systems, with narrower process windows for sealing and greater sensitivity to moisture and tension. Barrier coatings can introduce variability in seal strength and dwell time, requiring adjustments to temperature, pressure, and line speed.

Converters and material suppliers face their own constraints. Developing paper-based flexibles often involves balancing fiber content with functional coatings, while maintaining machinability and cost targets. That can mean new coating technologies, additional converting steps, or hybrid material structures that sit between traditional paper and plastic formats.

These trade-offs help explain why paper-based flexibles have not yet scaled broadly across applications.

The six design criteria

To address those challenges, EMF defines six criteria for what it calls “responsibly designed” paper-based flexible packaging:

• Sourced from responsibly managed renewable inputs
• Produced with minimized environmental impacts
• Capable of meeting product performance and consumer expectations
• Compatible with existing collection and recycling systems
• Free from hazardous or problematic substances
• Aligned with broader circular economy goals

The report emphasizes that failing to meet any one of these criteria can undermine environmental outcomes, reinforcing the need for a systems approach rather than a material swap.

Brand perspectives: alignment required

Brand participants in the report consistently point to coordination across the value chain as a prerequisite for progress.

“Progress will depend on collaboration across the value chain, from material innovation to collection systems and policy frameworks,” says a representative from a global consumer packaged goods company involved in the initiative.

That reflects a broader theme across EMF’s recent work: packaging solutions are constrained not only by materials, but by infrastructure, economics, and policy.

Where paper fits in the broader plastics agenda

The paper flexibles report aligns closely with EMF’s 2030 Plastics Agenda, which emphasizes collaboration, policy, and system-level change over isolated material decisions.

In that context, paper is positioned as one pathway among several, alongside reuse models, packaging reduction, and improvements to collection and recycling systems.

The report does not argue that paper will replace plastic across flexible formats. Instead, it identifies specific conditions under which paper-based solutions may contribute to reducing leakage from hard-to-recover packaging.

That narrower framing reflects a more pragmatic approach to material innovation, one that acknowledges both the potential and the limits of substitution.

What's next?

The report stops short of prescribing a single direction, instead outlining a set of conditions that would need to be met for paper flexibles to scale responsibly.

For brands, converters, and equipment suppliers, that likely means continued experimentation with materials and formats, alongside participation in collaborative pilots and policy discussions.

As with EMF’s broader plastics work, the emphasis is less on identifying a single solution and more on aligning multiple levers—materials, infrastructure, and policy—around a defined problem.

The challenge, as the report frames it, is not simply finding alternatives to plastic, but ensuring those alternatives function within the systems that will ultimately determine their impact.