Harmonising EPR the right way: start with the data
The EU’s new rules on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) are a big step forward, that is not in question, and here at WEFT we support efforts to harmonise EPR across the EU but that support comes with caveats – we’ll come to those in a moment.
What's the deal?
Member states will need to fund collection, sorting, and recycling through producer responsibility schemes, all set up within 30 months of the directive entering into force. That’s good news for tackling waste problems but less good news for anyone trying to comply in more than one country.
For brands and retailers, in addition to the extra cost of EPR, the reality is a potential patchwork: different scopes, formats, timelines, eco-modulation levers, compliance reporting portals, the lot. It’s easy to see already how this becomes an administrative slog that slows progress and inflates cost.
Let countries innovate. Standardise the data.
If a member state wants to drive reuse or push recycling infrastructure, then fine. If another leans into a specific eco-modulation priority, also fine – lets go. Local context matters: material flows, collection systems, consumer behaviour, market maturity.
What must be consistent is the data structure
A shared, set of rules (or for techies - machine-readable schema) for EPR reporting - across materials, formats, and product hierarchies - lets brands prepare once and comply everywhere. It also makes life easier for regulators, auditors, and recyclers. Clean inputs, comparable outputs.
Think: common identifiers, material taxonomy, units, pack-level attribution, claim provenance, and a minimal set of mandatory fields, with room for country-specific extensions. That’s how we get both comparability and flexibility.
The dream for any brand facing a multitude of compliance reports would be to press one button that reports all the necessary data to all those compliance reporting systems at once.
Why this matters now
-
Speed to compliance: One data model reduces duplicate effort across markets.
-
Better eco-modulation: Comparable data enables smarter fee signals and clearer design-for-recycling guidance. It also helps nations with common objectives to align on signals and requirements.
-
Lower total cost: Less bespoke formatting, fewer one-off spreadsheets, less manual work and more automation.
Higher trust: Consistent, auditable submissions improve data quality for everyone in the system.
How WEFT can help
-
Eco-modulation impact modelling
We simulate how different fee criteria affect your portfolio: by market, material, format, and design choice, so you can prioritise the highest-leverage changes. -
Data readiness assessments
We map your current product data against a proposed cross-EU EPR schema, identify gaps, and design the pipelines to close them. Outcome: data that’s analysis-ready, not just report-ready. -
Policy scenario analysis for governments
We help government decision makers test eco-modulation levers and infrastructure assumptions using real-world brand data structures, so policy design aligns with how data actually flows.
We’ve been working with EPR systems and textiles data for years - and we understand the need for each brand to develop systems that can implement simply.
A practical path forward
-
Define the core structure. Agree the minimal shared fields and taxonomies; allow extensions for national specifics.
-
Adopt “prepare once, file many” pipelines. Transform from the core schema into each member state’s format.
-
Close the loop. Use fee and performance feedback to update design rules and data capture at source.
EPR will work best when markets can tailor solutions, and we can compare results. The fastest way there is not one universal fee table: it’s one dependable data backbone.
If you’re wrestling with multi-market EPR, or designing the rules that others will live by, let’s talk. We’ll help you get the data right - so the rest falls into place.