TESTING | BIODEGRADABILITY
Right: Compostable by Design Guidelines provide a framework for designing, testing and introducing compostable packaging
postable by Design Guidelines, which provide “a science-based framework for designing, testing and introducing compostable packaging and products that support bio-waste recycling,” the group reported. “With Europe’s Waste Framework Directive now requiring separate bio-waste collection in all Member States, and the new Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation establishing industrial composting standards for specific packaging types, the guidelines arrive at a pivotal moment for the packaging industry.” Afsaneh Nabifar, Chair of CbDP and Head of
Global Advocacy and Sustainability for Biopoly- mers at BASF, said: “Compostable packaging and products can play an important role in advancing Europe’s circular economy goals, but meaningful progress depends on collective action. Our guidelines, born from unprecedented cross-value- chain collaboration, give businesses, policymakers and innovators the clarity and confidence to design compostable solutions that genuinely support a circular future for Europe.”
Below: Laboratory for testing biodegradability at Normec OWS
Designing compostability The group has developed a best practice guide for field testing compostable packaging and products intended for industrial composting operations in Europe. The guide builds on protocols used in North America (eg from CMA, ASTM, and the Compostable Field Testing Platform) and protocols from the Italian Biogas and Composting Associa- tion (CIC) and Cré, the Composting and Anaerobic Digestion Association of Ireland. The best practice guide can provide a framework for harmonizing field-testing methods in Europe, said CbDP. “Compostability testing ensures that materials accepted at [compost manufacturing] facilities are safe and compatible with their operations,” said Janet Thoman, Managing Director and General
Counsel at CMA in the US. “Without it, manufactur- ers cannot determine whether materials will contaminate their product – visibly or invisibly. Robust testing is essential to building trust in the materials composters are asked to accept.” Lab testing is a first step, to be followed by field testing to confirm effective disintegration. “The ASTM D6400 or D6868 compostability testing requirements are vital to confirm that a product is biodegradable and that it will not leave toxins in the compost or negatively affect plants. As a threshold, all materials labelled ‘compostable’ should meet the ASTM criteria before ever consid- ering a product for acceptance in a commercial composting facility,” said Thoman.
Field testing CMA has refined its field-testing method over more than 15 years of field disintegration testing. “Composting has evolved alongside changes in technology, markets, and regulation,” explained Thoman. “Facilities now use a range of processing methods, each with distinct time and temperature profiles that influence material performance. CMA has found that these variations directly affect disintegration. Bio-based polymers tend to perform best in high-temperature systems, such as covered in-vessel technologies, and are less dependent on agitation. In contrast, fibre-based materials rely more heavily on moisture, residence time, and agitation to fully disintegrate.” CMA’s field testing covers three industrial composting technologies: covered in-vessel, windrow, and aerated static pile systems, which cover most of the composting volume across North America, Thoman said. CMA offers third-party certification that requires lab testing as well as field testing. The group certifies products related to items used to collect yard waste and food scraps only. Test methods and standards are often revised to reflect new science and technology or new market
20 COMPOUNDING WORLD | May 2026
www.compoundingworld.com
IMAGE: NORMEC OWS
IMAGE: CBDP
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48
