The bioplastics gap: Europe races to catch up with Asia
Bioplastics sector is expanding rapidly, but Europe still lags far behind Asia. The bottleneck is not innovation, but industrial scale-up and competitiveness. This is why an EU-funded project aims to create the conditions for market uptake
Bioplastics account for just 0.5% of the nearly 414 million tonnes of plastic produced annually, but the sector is expanding rapidly, driven by rising demand and advancing technologies. Global bioplastics production capacity is expected to double, from around 2.47 million tonnes in 2024 to approximately 5.73 million tonnes in 2029. Some regions have already taken the lead: in 2025 Asia continued to dominate global bioplastics production capacities, holding about 55 %. Europe, however, is set to increase its share from 14 % to 17.2% by 2030. If the reasons behind Europe's lag are relatively clear, the path to catching up remains far more uncertain.
Bioplastics production: the reasons behind Asia's advantage
China is at the forefront of Asia's bioplastics industry together with India, Japan, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia. The reasons are structural, according to Michael Carus, one of the leading experts on the global bioplastics market, the founder and former CEO at nova Institute (Germany). China's ability to anticipate future markets, combined with strong state support for strategic sectors, has enabled it to invest early in export-oriented industries linked to the green transition, from batteries to solar panels and biotechnology. From a technical standpoint, scaling up renewable plastics production requires "relying on three pillars: bio-based production, CCU (Carbon Capture and Utilisation, a process that captures CO2 emissions and converts them into valuable products), and recycling. And China is strong in all three", Carus says.
Europe, by contrast, faces a different reality. "In Europe there is not a lot of support. We have support in research and development, but we have almost no support in market introduction. So that means we have so far no quotas or similar incentives for those products, in contrast to other regions of the world such as India", Carus underlines.
Beyond industrial policy and cost competitiveness, is the availability of raw materials a factor contributing to Asia's advantage? "Of course, in Asia they have good biomass availability. That's true. For example Cassava, a starch crop, sugar cane, castor oil
… but, on the other hand, Europe is not so short on biomass. For example—Carus explains –, starch is a very important raw material for plastic and we have plenty of wheat and corn production here in Europe. What's needed is a change of mindset: cultivation for industries must not be taboo anymore. Most experts think it's a good idea to use 5–10% of food crops for industrial applications to have such emergency reserves in the back (...) Agriculture has always supplied both industry and food; this has been the case for thousands of years".
This remains a contested view among bioeconomy experts, reflecting broader tensions between food security and the industrial use of biomass.
The European system: rethinking the value chain
So, could a strategy blending recycling, CO2 utilisation and biomass production work as effectively as in Asia to boost the European bioplastics sector? For Carmen Fernández Ayuso of CETEC, the challenge goes beyond materials alone. In her view, Europe still needs stronger coordination across the bioplastics value chain if it wants to improve competitiveness. Key issues include industrial scale, speed of deployment and manufacturing. "To close the gap, Europe needs not only more material production, but also stronger alignment between polymer producers, converters, brand owners, regulators and end-of-life systems. If those parts do not evolve together, market adoption remains slow. So, overall, I would say that the main difference between Asia and Europe is the one of the industrial scale-up. Europe knows how to innovate; the real challenge is scaling that innovation into competitive production and market uptake", Fernández Ayuso says.
ViSS project: creating the conditions for realistic market uptake
From Murcia, Spain, Carmen Fernández Ayuso coordinates the European ViSS project, which is developing biobased and biodegradable PHBV plastic from poultry and sugar-industry residues through a non-sterile fermentation process.
The project aims to demonstrate the feasibility of this value chain for food-packaging applications. A PHBV poly (3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3-hydroxyvalerate) pellet has already been developed in Spain with 10–15% and 20–30% 3HV (3 Hydroxyvalerate) content, which is relevant because it allows material properties to be adjusted to different packaging requirements. The project has progressed beyond early laboratory work, with feedstocks validated, pilot-scale production achieved and the demo plant under development. The next stages include scale-up, packaging demonstrators and industrial validation.
If timelines are held, pilot demonstrators could launch by June 2026 through industrial partnerships. Then an Italian firm will produce trays and films, while Alicante's tech centre pioneers mesh bags.
Fossil-based polymers still retain a major advantage in production scale, installed capacity and cost competitiveness. "I wouldn't say the market entry challenge is solved yet, but ViSS is building the right conditions for realistic market uptake: pilot-scale production has been demonstrated, formulation work is producing promising results, and industrial packaging validation is built into the later work packages", Fernández Ayuso says.
"Safe and sustainable by design": debunking the illusion of cheap fossil-based plastics
Cost remains the central obstacle. PHAs-based bioplastics, such as those developed within ViSS, can cost between two and four times more than conventional plastics or even more.
For José Benedicto, Senior R&D Consultant and Sustainable Development Researcher at Kveloce, a ViSS partner, this price gap is misleading. "Conventional plastics remain artificially cheap, as their environmental externalities are not priced", a distortion that, he argues, can only be addressed through a systemic shift towards a Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) approach. This approach embeds four dimensions from the earliest stages of material design to the end of life: "safety, environmental sustainability, social sustainability and economic sustainability (...) The externalities of conventional non-biodegradable plastic are very high, but no consumer is directly paying for them", Benedicto says.
In other words, plastic bags may be cheap for consumers, but they are costly for society, public finances and the environment.
To move now and concretely towards sustainable production, Benedicto points to two urgent priorities. First, regulation: "Legislation should ensure that it is possible to upcycle agro-industrial waste to avoid extracting more materials from nature". Second, scale: "economic support for large-scale production is needed to support the initial phase, when production volumes are low".
Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation: a real push for bioplastics?
Amid fierce competition in the bioplastics market, the EU's Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation 2025/40 (PPWR) will become mandatory across all member states from August 12, 2026. Under the regulation, by 2030 all packaging placed on the EU market must meet a minimum recyclability threshold of around 70%, or it will no longer be allowed. This requirement will tighten over time. The PPWR also introduces mandatory recycled content targets for plastic packaging (10–35% by 2030), binding waste reduction targets starting at 5% by 2030, and effectively PFAS-free food-contact packaging, with only trace-level thresholds permitted.
But will this translate into a real boost for bioplastics?
"My view is that PPWR is necessary, but it is not sufficient on its own—Fernández Ayuso says—Wider adoption will also depend on whether these materials can meet the performance standards expected by industry while delivering clear environmental value". "This legislation is generally for plastics. It's an opportunity for bioplastic solutions, but also plastic that is not bioplastic is recyclable…", Benedicto adds. The PPWR greenlights biodegradable and compostable materials only for high-impact niches, like fruit and vegetables labels, tea and coffee filters, delivering instant wins. Yet it offers no broad push for bioplastics, while a lot of experts demand game-changing quotas to supercharge them—for them to win the materials race and to fill the gap with Asian bioplastic production.
Contact us at:
info@viss-project.eu
Provided by iCube Programme
