University of Manchester study warns recycling terminology may mislead consumers

UK – Researchers at the University of Manchester have raised concerns that commonly used recycling terminology on plastic packaging could distort consumer perceptions and inadvertently slow progress toward a circular economy.

In a study published in Cambridge Prisms: Plastics, the team argues that directional labels such as “upcycled,” “downcycled,” and “recycled” have proliferated in marketing and on-pack communication, often without sufficient clarity about their real environmental impact.

According to the researchers, the term “downcycling” tends to imply that a material is converted into a lower-value or inferior product, while “upcycling” carries more positive connotations of added value and environmental benefit.

However, they caution that these perceptions do not always reflect reality. In practice, a so-called “downcycled” stream may generate a high-value or long-lasting product, while an “upcycled” pathway could result in greater environmental burdens than alternative recycling routes.

Michael Shaver, professor of polymer science at the university, said the language used around plastic waste management often overlooks broader considerations of value and unintended consequences.

“The confused terminology surrounding the fate of plastic waste often lacks a consideration of value and unintended consequences,” Shaver noted.

“As these terms are now used to promote technologies outside of a sustainable system, we felt it important to argue for clarity and caution when presuming quality from this directional terminology.”

The study comes at a time when brand owners and packaging producers are under mounting regulatory and consumer pressure to demonstrate circularity credentials.

Claims related to recyclability and recycled content are increasingly scrutinized, particularly in Europe, where policymakers are tightening rules around green claims and packaging waste.

Beyond terminology, the researchers advocate for a more systemic approach to plastics management.

They highlight that end-of-life packaging materials can be repurposed into other sectors, including automotive, textiles, building, and construction, provided the recycled polymers are adapted to meet required quality standards.

The team proposes a “spiral system” of reuse, in which plastics are treated as complex material streams that can be chemically deconstructed and reprocessed into new, longer-life applications rather than simply cycled within single-use packaging loops.

Co-author Claire Seitzinger emphasized the need for cross-sector collaboration, particularly as recycled polypropylene (PP) from packaging already finds applications in multiple industries.

“Building a circular plastics economy means looking at the whole system, not isolated solutions pitched against each other,” she said.

“Policy, industry, innovation, and collaboration across sectors are essential for a sustainable future.”

The findings add to a growing body of research urging greater transparency and standardization in environmental labelling to ensure that sustainability claims drive genuine impact rather than confusion.

Subscribe to our email newsletters that provide busy executives like you with the latest news insights and trends from Africa and the World. SUBSCRIBE HERE