The Australian Landscape of Certified Compostable Packaging and Tapes: Market Dynamics, Regulatory Compliance (AS 4736/5810), and End-of-Life Systemic Barriers

Audio Overview of the Compostable Packaging and Tapes

I. Strategic Market Overview and Policy Context: Driving the Shift to Biodegradable Alternatives

The rapid adoption of biodegradable and certified compostable packaging in Australia is not merely a reflection of consumer preference but a compulsory strategic response to national legislative mandates and existential failures within the conventional recycling infrastructure. Corporate decisions regarding packaging selection are increasingly defined by the need to comply with ambitious federal goals intended to usher in a comprehensive circular economy.

A. The Mandate for Sustainable Packaging: Growth Drivers and Future Projections

The Australian Sustainable Packaging Market is poised for dramatic expansion, reflecting an irreversible commitment across the supply chain to reduce environmental impact. Projections estimate the market will grow from USD 145 billion in 2025 to USD 268 billion by 2031, underpinned by a robust Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 10.4%.¹ This accelerated momentum is propelled by several synergistic factors: heightened public awareness regarding environmental damage, proactive government legislation mandating bans on problematic single-use plastics, and sustained, massive demand from high-volume sectors. These sectors include Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG), food and beverage distribution, and, critically, the exponentially expanding e-commerce sector.¹ The e-commerce boom specifically necessitates lightweight, protective packaging formats, including advanced tapes, that can demonstrably comply with emerging eco-friendly standards.² The analysis indicates that the future trajectory of the Australian packaging market will be intrinsically linked to regulatory enforcement, the maturation of circular economy processes, and continuous material innovation.¹

B. Australia’s Circular Economy Framework and the National Packaging Targets (NPTs)

Australia’s strategic direction is cemented by the National Packaging Targets (NPTs), which were endorsed by the Federal Government and all State and Territory Governments, and formalized within the National Waste Policy Action Plan.³ These targets establish four key goals intended to transform packaging practices by 2025:

1. Achieving 100% of packaging being reusable, recyclable, or compostable.³
2. Ensuring 70% of plastic packaging is either recycled or composted.³
3. Incorporating an average of 50% recycled content across all packaging materials (revised upward from 30% in 2020).³
4. Completing the phase-out of problematic and unnecessary single-use plastics.³

Complementing the NPTs is the ANZPAC Plastics Pact, a regional initiative that refines these goals specifically for plastic packaging, setting parallel objectives for elimination, 100% compliance, and an average of 25% recycled content in plastic packaging across the region.⁵

C. Current Performance Against NPTs: The Critical Gap

While the industry has made commendable strides in packaging design, demonstrating 86% compliance with the material compatibility target (Target 1) and making substantial progress toward the recycled content goal (44% progress on Target 3) ³, the operational recovery rate represents a systemic failure point.

The most severe challenge is the target requiring 70% of plastic packaging to be recycled or composted. Current data shows this target is dramatically off-track, with plastic packaging recovery rates standing at only 19% as of 2022-23.³ Other assessments have placed the rate as low as 16-18% in recent years, indicating stagnation or even decline.⁸ The Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation (APCO) acknowledges that achieving the 70% plastic target presents the “biggest challenge,” citing critical deficiencies in the collection of flexible plastics and insufficient market demand for resulting recycled content.⁸

This pervasive failure to meet the 70% plastic recovery benchmark fundamentally alters the strategic calculus for packaging procurement. Given the NPT Target 1 mandates that 100% of packaging must be reusable, recyclable, or compostable ³, and given that the traditional recycling pathway is clearly insufficient, certified compostability becomes the only remaining viable compliance route for high-volume, disposable packaging, such as logistics tapes. This dynamic transforms compostability from an environmental preference into a crucial strategic necessity for major businesses seeking to meet their legal and covenant obligations, even if that path is currently hampered by operational infrastructure deficiencies.

A deeper look at the recovery data reveals structural limitations. The plastic recycling rate for Commercial and Industrial (C&I) waste streams (45.4%) is significantly higher than that for municipal/consumer kerbside waste (21.9%).¹⁰ This discrepancy implies that environmental claims related to packaging disposal are more credible and easier to manage within closed B2B or commercial distribution loops than in the highly fragmented consumer environment. Consequently, e-commerce operations seeking to guarantee the recovery of their packaging must prioritize systems that direct certified compostable tapes and packaging toward a managed commercial endpoint, rather than relying on unreliable consumer kerbside disposal, thereby mitigating accusations of environmental misrepresentation.

The following table summarizes the status of the NPTs:

Table 1: Progress Against Australia’s 2025 National Packaging Targets (NPTs)

II. Definitional Clarity, Standards, and Regulatory Risk: Navigating the Compliance Minefield

For corporate entities, strategic investment in sustainable packaging is only justifiable if claims of environmental benefit can be substantiated against rigorous Australian standards. Failure to draw a clear distinction between vague marketing terms and certified compostability exposes organizations to significant legal and reputational risks under Australian Consumer Law (ACL).

A. Deconstructing Sustainability Claims: Biodegradable vs. Compostable

The term “biodegradable” is a critical point of regulatory vulnerability in the Australian market. Generalized “biodegradable” labels, often applied to conventional plastics with chemical additives (frequently referred to as oxo-degradables), are highly misleading.¹² These products are fundamentally derived from fossil resources and, rather than undergoing full biological assimilation, merely fragment into smaller plastic pieces, potentially generating microplastics that persist indefinitely in the environment.¹²

In contrast, compostable packaging describes materials that biologically decompose and disintegrate entirely within a managed composting environment—either commercial or home—within a defined timeframe. The defining feature is that the final compost must meet strict criteria for quality and ecotoxicity.¹⁴ Compostable materials are typically bioplastics, such as Polylactic Acid (PLA), or cellulose derived from renewable plant resources like corn starch or sugarcane.¹⁵

B. The Cornerstones of Australian Certification: AS 4736 and AS 5810

Compliance in Australia necessitates verification against two mandatory standards governed by the Australasian Bioplastics Association (ABA), providing objective metrics for performance:

1. AS 4736–2006 (Commercial Composting)

This standard applies to products intended for industrial composting facilities, which operate at high, consistent temperatures. To achieve compliance, plastic materials must demonstrate a minimum of 90% biodegradation within 180 days and a minimum of 90% physical disintegration into fragments smaller than 2mm within 12 weeks.¹⁶ A crucial differentiator of the Australian standard compared to international equivalents (such as EN 13432 or ASTM D6400) is the mandate for rigorous testing to confirm the resulting compost has absolutely no toxic effect on plants or earthworms.¹⁶ This focus on ecotoxicity reinforces Australia’s emphasis on ensuring compost output is safe for agricultural land application.

2. AS 5810–2010 (Home Composting)

This standard addresses suitability for the less controlled environment of household compost heaps. While maintaining the minimum 90% biodegradation requirement, the timeline is extended to 12 months, reflecting the lower, more inconsistent heat typical of home composting.¹⁶ Disintegration must be achieved within 26 weeks. An important physical constraint for materials aiming for AS 5810 certification is product thickness; some suppliers note that while their products may meet AS 4736 up to 192 microns, compliance for AS 5810 is currently restricted to thinner materials, such as those below 60 microns.¹⁶

The table below highlights the comparative stringency of Australian standards:

Table 2: Australian Compostability Standards: AS 4736 (Commercial) vs. AS 5810 (Home) Requirements

C. Certification Logos: Verification and Supply Chain Trust

Formal certification is communicated through official logos, which provide crucial supply chain and consumer trust. The Seedling Logo verifies compliance with AS 4736, confirming that the product has passed stringent tests by independent, accredited laboratories.¹⁸ Similarly, the Home Compostable Verification Logo signifies compliance with AS 5810.¹⁶ These logos are essential tools that enable consumers, customers, and municipal authorities to confidently recognize and correctly dispose of compostable packaging.¹⁸

D. ACCC Enforcement and Greenwashing Mitigation: Compliance under ACL

Australian Consumer Law (ACL) mandates that businesses do not make false or misleading claims, including those relating to environmental sustainability.²⁰ The ACCC actively regulates this area, labeling the use of unsubstantiated claims, or the omission of key information that makes a product appear less harmful than it is, as “greenwashing”.²⁰

The legal risk for companies employing sustainable packaging extends beyond the simple technical truth of the material. The Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation (APCO) explicitly cautions that claims of “biodegradable” or “compostable” are high risk—and potentially non-compliant with ACL—if there is no established system to collect and process the packaging, meaning it will inevitably end up in landfill.²¹ Therefore, a procurement strategy that relies solely on technical certification (e.g., AS 4736 compliance) without verifying regional end-of-life recovery options for the end-user is highly vulnerable to ACCC scrutiny.

The ACCC has demonstrated its commitment to enforcement, notably imposing an $8.25 million penalty against Clorox Australia for misleading claims about “ocean plastic” content.²² Furthermore, businesses must avoid the use of customized or unofficial symbols, as this visual imagery can mislead consumers into believing the product has been verified or certified by an independent third party, a clear contravention of consumer protection laws if the certification does not exist.²³ The concept of “Landfill Biodegradable” materials, while offered by some suppliers ²⁴, exists in this regulatory shadow. Landfills are fundamentally anaerobic environments, which actively inhibit the microbial conditions required for true biodegradation.²⁵ Relying on claims that materials degrade in a landfill runs counter to the national waste strategy to halve organic waste to landfill ⁴ and heightens exposure to ACCC investigation for misrepresenting the product’s actual environmental fate.

III. Analysis of Advanced Biodegradable Packaging Materials and Economics

The successful adoption of certified compostable packaging in Australia hinges on the technical viability of biopolymers and the resolution of persistent economic barriers, primarily high material costs.

A. Primary Bio-based Polymers in Australian Packaging

The bioplastics market encompasses materials that are either derived from renewable resources (bio-based), biodegradable, or possess both characteristics.²⁶

Polylactic Acid (PLA): PLA represents the dominant bioplastic feedstock currently used in Australian packaging.²⁷ It is sourced from annually renewable resources, such as corn starch, sugarcane, or starches, and is used extensively for rigid containers, cup linings, and film carriers, including those used in packaging tapes.¹⁵ PLA is prized for its low carbon dioxide emissions during production compared to conventional plastics like Polyethylene (PE) or Polyethylene terephthalate (PET).²⁸

Other Key Materials: Other vital materials in the sustainable packaging spectrum include Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), which are fully bio-based and biodegradable polymers that show significant promise as next-generation alternatives.²⁶ Cellulose Film, derived from natural plant materials, serves as an eco-friendly carrier for certain packaging tapes, offering straightforward natural decomposition.²⁹ Beyond bioplastics, fibre-based materials, such as paper and board made from wood pulp or agricultural residues like bagasse (sugar cane pulp), remain essential sustainable substitutes.¹⁵

B. Performance Attributes and Environmental Advantages

The transition to bioplastics is motivated by demonstrable environmental benefits across the product lifecycle. Comparative life cycle analysis demonstrates that bioplastics offer a lower carbon footprint and require reduced energy consumption during the manufacturing phase compared to traditional fossil-based polymers.³⁰ The production of PLA, for example, results in lower greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional plastic production.¹⁵

While biopolymers like PLA and Polybutylene adipate terephthalate (PBAT) are foundational, ongoing research is targeting advanced material innovation to close the performance gap with conventional plastics.³¹ Efforts focus on incorporating materials like Polyvinyl Alcohol (PVA), chitosan, or Carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) into films to enhance critical functional properties, such as moisture, heat, and oxygen barriers, thereby ensuring optimal food preservation.³¹

C. Economic Realities: The Cost Premium Barrier

Despite their technical and environmental advantages, the widespread adoption of bioplastics is constrained by prohibitive economic factors. The cost of producing bioplastics remains significantly higher than that of conventional fossil-based plastics, acting as a major structural barrier.³³

This high cost is attributed primarily to the expensive nature of the renewable raw materials (corn sugar, starches) used as feedstock, which are inherently more costly to produce and process than fossil fuels.³³ Furthermore, the Australian bioplastics industry currently operates at a smaller scale, which prevents the realization of economies of scale necessary to minimize production costs.³³ Australia is highly dependent on international supply chains, with the majority of bioplastics being imported, often from countries like Thailand and Brazil.²⁷ This reliance on imported materials introduces logistical complexity and price volatility.

The high cost premium creates a critical, cyclical challenge: businesses require bioplastics for NPT compliance, yet the high expense inhibits mass adoption, which in turn prevents the domestic industry from achieving the necessary economies of scale to lower prices. This reliance on expensive imported feedstock necessitates a strategic commitment, both from industry and government, to invest heavily in establishing domestic processing and manufacturing infrastructure to stabilize supply and achieve cost parity with fossil-based polymers. Until this cost barrier is overcome through scaling production, conventional materials like PET, which benefit from massive production scale, will continue to dominate the market.³⁴ This analysis indicates that current corporate investment in certified compostables is largely undertaken for design compliance (Target 1) and brand value, rather than immediate and cost-effective recovery compliance (Target 2).

IV. Deep Dive: Certified Compostable Packaging Tapes in Australia

Packaging tapes are a crucial yet often overlooked component in achieving full packaging sustainability. Even if a cardboard box is 100% recyclable, contamination by a non-compostable adhesive tape renders the entire package system non-compliant. The Australian market offers specialized solutions to address this specific failure point.

A. Market Overview of Key Australian Suppliers

Australia hosts dedicated suppliers committed to sustainable packaging formats. BioPak is recognized for its award-winning, plant-based compostable packaging, designed specifically for the circular economy, focusing heavily on foodservice and catering.³⁵ Biogone supplies both landfill biodegradable and home compostable everyday plastic products.²⁴

Key suppliers focusing on certified tapes include:

• Omni Group: An Australian manufacturer that offers Biodegradable Packaging Tape™, characterized by a 55-micron biodegradable film and an organic adhesive liner. This product is promoted as a non-toxic, eco-friendly alternative to traditional plastic tape, suitable for hand and machine rolls.³⁶
• Biogone: Distributes Cellulose Packing Tape, a versatile solution made with a natural cellulose film and a natural plant-based adhesive. This composition is designed to decompose naturally in both landfill (though this pathway is strategically discouraged) and compost bins.²⁹
• Gateway Packaging: Supplies certified films, including Compostable Monta Tape, which is available in clear or natural rubber formulations, alongside numerous options for Kraft Paper Packaging Tape.³⁷
• Signet: Also offers Kraft Packaging Tape as a biodegradable and eco-friendly solution specifically tailored for e-commerce shipping needs.³⁸

B. Technical Composition of Tapes: Film Carriers and Adhesive Systems

Achieving full compostability requires that both the carrier material (film or paper) and the adhesive system break down completely without leaving toxic residue.

Film Carriers:

For film-based tapes, Polylactic Acid (PLA), often sold under brand names such as Monta biopack®, provides a robust film carrier derived from corn starch.39 This BOPLA (Bi-axially Oriented PLA) technology provides functional strength comparable to conventional BOPP (Polypropylene) tapes.28 Alternatively, natural cellulose films provide a fully plant-based carrier.29

Adhesive Systems—The Critical Component:

The adhesive historically represents the primary point of contamination. Certified compostable packaging tapes overcome this by utilizing specially formulated adhesives:

• Natural Rubber: High-performance natural rubber adhesives are commonly used, with some versions containing approximately 90% bio-based content, ensuring the entire product system can degrade.³⁹
• Organic Adhesives: Products like the Omni tape specify the use of an organic adhesive liner.³⁶
• Eco-Friendly Hot Melt Adhesives: For paper tape applications, specialized hot melt adhesives have been developed to be fully biodegradable, ensuring that they degrade within 180 days in industrial composting and eliminating the common issue where “paper is compostable but the adhesive is not”.⁴⁰

The successful procurement of compostable tape requires absolute assurance of integrated certification, confirming that every constituent part of the product—the film, the carrier, and the adhesive—meets the necessary AS 4736/5810 criteria. If the adhesive, the smallest component, is not certified, the entire packaging is disqualified from the composting stream, jeopardizing the environmental claim of the entire shipment.

C. Compliance Verification and Strategic Application

Certified products, such as the Monta biopack® tape, are verified to meet Australian Standard AS 4736 (2006) and relevant international standards.³⁹

For immediate and reliable compliance in the Australian market, Kraft Paper Packaging Tape combined with a certified compostable adhesive offers a significant strategic advantage over PLA film tapes. While PLA film is technically compostable, it often faces rejection by FOGO facilities due to visual similarity to conventional plastics, increasing the risk of contamination.⁴¹ Kraft paper tape, however, is visibly fibre-based. When paired with a compostable hot melt adhesive, the product can typically be recycled alongside the cardboard box, utilizing the established, less restrictive paper/cardboard recycling infrastructure.⁴² This option provides a lower-risk profile for achieving Target 1 compliance by relying on proven, existing recovery pathways.

Table 3 summarizes the technical specifics of key Australian compostable tape solutions:

Table 3: Technical Analysis of Key Australian Compostable Packaging Tapes

V. End-of-Life Infrastructure and Systemic Barriers to Adoption

The fundamental challenge to the widespread success of certified compostable packaging in Australia is the operational dissonance between material design standards and the country’s fragmented end-of-life recovery systems, particularly municipal Food Organics and Garden Organics (FOGO) programs.

A. State of Australian Composting Infrastructure: Facilities and Capacity

Australia operates approximately 150 commercial composting and organics recycling facilities.⁴³ These industrial facilities are essential for handling AS 4736 certified bioplastics, as they maintain the high heat (minimum 55°C) and consistent aeration required for materials like PLA to fully break down within the stipulated 180-day timeframe.¹⁷ Industry groups, such as BioPak through its Compost Connect platform, have invested resources in linking foodservice businesses with existing commercial composting services and advocating for systemic policy change.⁴⁴

However, the alternative route, home composting, presents significant difficulties even for AS 5810 certified products. Home compost heaps typically do not achieve the consistent high temperatures required to fully break down complex biopolymers, often resulting in disposal failure and persistence of materials, which ultimately necessitates landfill disposal.²⁵

B. FOGO Acceptance: Policy Inconsistencies Across Australian Jurisdictions

Despite the National Waste Policy Action Plan targeting the halving of organic waste sent to landfill by 2030 ⁴, the acceptance of certified compostable packaging into municipal FOGO streams is severely restricted and inconsistent across jurisdictions.

The New South Wales (NSW) Compost Order 2016 illustrates this regulatory conflict perfectly. In NSW, facilities are generally prohibited from accepting certified compostable plastics or fibre-based packaging.⁴¹ This restriction forces items like certified compostable tapes and containers into the general waste bin, resulting in landfill disposal.²⁵

The Caddy Liner Paradox: The single major exception to the NSW ban is the use of certified compostable kitchen caddy liners (AS 4736). These are permitted, but only because they aid in the cleaner collection and diversion of food waste from landfill, despite offering negligible nutrient value to the final compost product.⁴¹ This exception creates immense consumer confusion. The visual presence of some certified plastic in the organics bin causes consumers to mis-sort other certified packaging, guaranteeing contamination. This contamination risk provides composting facilities with ongoing justification to maintain the ban on all other packaging.³³ This policy failure is the single greatest structural impediment to achieving scalability in the certified compostable packaging market.

Systemic challenges reported by composting facilities include short processing durations, which are insufficient to allow full biodegradation of certain bioplastics, and low consumer awareness regarding verification and proper sorting, which drives up contamination rates.³³

C. The Impact of State Single-Use Plastic Bans on Certified Alternatives

Further complicating the sustainable packaging landscape are state-level bans on Single-Use Plastic (SUP) items across Australia (e.g., NSW, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia).⁴⁶ The critical policy decision in these bans is that they apply even if the SUP items are manufactured from certified biodegradable, compostable, or bio-plastics.⁴¹ For instance, NSW banned single-use plastic cutlery and plates starting November 2022, explicitly including AS 4736 certified compostable versions in the prohibition.⁴¹

This regulatory stance sends an unambiguous signal to the market: policy preference is shifting definitively toward reusable alternatives and away from all single-use disposable formats, regardless of their material composition or end-of-life claims. Companies relying on compostable packaging for single-use food service applications must recognize this systemic shift as a signal to prioritize reuse models.

Table 4 summarizes the contradictory nature of FOGO acceptance:

Table 4: The FOGO Acceptance Paradox: Policy Barriers to Certified Compostable Packaging

D. Addressing the Post-2025 Challenge: Collection, Sorting, and Processing Gaps

The failure to meet the 70% plastic recovery target by 2025 suggests systemic intervention is required beyond material substitution. Even if planned national recycling infrastructure upgrades are fully realized, forecasts indicate Australia will only achieve 36% plastic recycling capacity, remaining far short of the target.⁸

A primary focus for closing this recovery deficit is flexible plastics, which represent a significant fraction of packaging with the largest recycling gap.⁹ Industry consensus supports the establishment of a voluntary Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme to generate the necessary funding and coordination to support enhanced collection, dedicated processing, and end-market demand for recovered materials.⁹ Without such systemic intervention, investment in compostable materials—which are expensive and face processing hurdles—is a systemic risk, yielding high costs for the business while often producing the same environmental outcome (landfill) as cheaper, conventional materials.

VI. Strategic Recommendations and Future Outlook

The Australian packaging market is navigating a complex regulatory and infrastructure environment. Corporate strategies must be anchored in material integrity (certification) and grounded in the operational reality of end-of-life recovery systems.

A. Recommendations for Procurement: Prioritizing Certification and Transparency

1. Mandatory Certification Enforcement: Businesses must mandate that all purportedly biodegradable or compostable packaging and tapes adhere strictly to Australian Standards AS 4736 or AS 5810. Ambiguous, unverifiable “biodegradable” or “degradable” products should be eliminated from the supply chain to mitigate legal exposure.¹²
2. Vetting Adhesive Systems: Procurement due diligence must include detailed technical documentation proving that all components of packaging tape—film carrier, paper backing, and adhesive—are certified compostable. Preference should be given to organic hot melt or natural rubber adhesive systems known for complete biodegradability.³⁹
3. Risk Mitigation through Material Selection: For B2C e-commerce and mass distribution, strategic sourcing should prioritize Kraft Paper Tape with certified compostable adhesives over film-based PLA tapes. This choice leverages the visibility of fibre-based materials and their inherently superior compatibility with existing paper/cardboard recycling infrastructure, offering a lower operational risk of consumer mis-sorting and municipal rejection.⁴²

B. Recommendations for Risk Mitigation: Navigating ACCC Scrutiny

1. Recovery Pathway Guarantee: Corporations must not make compostability claims unless they can demonstrably guarantee an accessible disposal pathway for the majority of end-users (e.g., through documented commercial composting partnerships or verified municipal acceptance). Claiming compostability where the system only permits landfill disposal places the company in violation of ACL by misleading consumers.²¹
2. Unambiguous Labeling: All packaging claims must exclusively utilize the official, verified Seedling or Home Compostable logos. The use of custom symbols, ambiguous visual imagery, or confusing qualifying text should be prohibited, as these practices are directly targeted by the ACCC as potential greenwashing tactics.²⁰
3. Continuous Regulatory Monitoring: Businesses should implement a real-time regulatory tracking system to monitor rolling state-level single-use plastic bans. These bans frequently apply to certified compostable alternatives, meaning packaging specifications must be dynamically adjusted to avoid compliance violations in specific jurisdictions.⁴⁶

C. Outlook on Bioplastics Technology and Investment Needs

1. Targeted Investment Strategy: To mitigate the high cost premium and supply chain risk associated with imported materials ²⁷, strategic long-term investment must focus on establishing domestic manufacturing capacity for core biopolymers (PLA, PHA). This is the only path to achieving the economies of scale necessary to make certified packaging financially competitive and resilient.
2. Material Innovation: Ongoing monitoring of advanced biopolymer research, such as the development of PHA and improved cellulosic derivatives, is critical. These next-generation materials offer the potential for superior barrier properties and broader environmental degradation profiles necessary to close the performance gap with conventional plastics and function successfully in diverse (and inconsistent) composting environments.³¹
3. Policy Advocacy and Harmonization: Industry engagement with bodies like APCO and the ABA must continue to prioritize advocacy for national regulatory harmonization of FOGO systems. Resolving the “Caddy Liner Paradox” and standardizing the acceptance of certified AS 4736 packaging is essential to unlock the full potential of market investment and make the composting pathway a reliable means of NPT compliance.²¹ Without a functional, nationwide collection infrastructure, the strategic pivot toward certified compostable packaging remains environmentally aspirational but operationally obstructed.

Works cited

1. Australia Sustainable Packaging Market Size and Forecasts 2031 – Mobility Foresights, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://mobilityforesights.com/product/australia-sustainable-packaging-market
2. Australia Plastic Packaging Market – Companies, Size & Trends – Mordor Intelligence, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/australia-plastic-packaging-market
3. Australia’s National Packaging Targets – APCO, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://apco.org.au/national-packaging-targets
4. National Waste Policy Action Plan – DCCEEW, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/protection/waste/publications/national-waste-policy-action-plan
5. Australia’s 2025 National Packaging Targets – Australian Marine Conservation Society, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.marineconservation.org.au/anzpac/
6. 2025 Packaging Targets, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://prpackaging.com/2025-packaging-targets/
7. APCO LAUNCHES ROADMAP TO ACHIEVE ANZPAC 2025 TARGETS, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://apco.org.au/news/20Y9e00000001ADEAY
8. Australia failing to meet plastic reduction targets, new report shows, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.marineconservation.org.au/australia-failing-to-meet-plastic-reduction-targets-new-report-shows/
9. Submission by APCO – ACCC, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/public-registers/documents/Submission%20by%20APCO%20-%2009.05.25%20-%20PR%20-%20AA1000695%20Soft%20Plastics.pdf
10. Analysis of Australia’s municipal recycling infrastructure capacity, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.agriculture.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/waste-stocktake-report.pdf
11. Single-use plastic product bans in Australia – Parliament of NSW, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/Documents/Single-use-plastic-product-bans-in-Australia-2023.pdf
12. Biodegradable Plastic Problems | BioPak Australia, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.biopak.com/au/resources/biodegradable-plastic-problems
13. Compostable vs Biodegradable | Oceanwatch Australia, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.oceanwatch.org.au/uncategorized/compostable-vs-biodegradable/
14. Composting – ABA Australasian Bioplastics Association, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://bioplastics.org.au/composting/
15. Articles Bio Packaging – A Worthy Alternative – WF Plastic, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://wholesale.wfplastic.com.au/article/articles/bio-packaging-a-worthy-alternative/
16. Everything You Need To Know About AS4736 & AS5810 | Australian Compostable Standards – Adventpac, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.adventpac.com/resources/australian-compostability-standards
17. What happens to compostable packaging? | City of Hobart, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.hobartcity.com.au/files/content/public/v/43/residents/waste-and-recycling/waste-reduction-resources/what-happens-to-compostable-packaging.pdf
18. Commercial Compostable Verification Programme – ABA Australasian Bioplastics Association, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://bioplastics.org.au/certification/the-seedling-logo/
19. Certification – ABA Australasian Bioplastics Association, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://bioplastics.org.au/certification/
20. Environmental and sustainability claims – ACCC, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.accc.gov.au/business/advertising-and-promotions/environmental-and-sustainability-claims
21. NATIONAL COMPOSTABLE PACKAGING STRATEGY, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://documents.packagingcovenant.org.au/public-documents/National%20Compostable%20Packaging%20Strategy
22. Clorox ordered to pay $8.25m in penalties for misleading ‘ocean plastic’ claims about certain GLAD products | ACCC, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/clorox-ordered-to-pay-825m-in-penalties-for-misleading-ocean-plastic-claims-about-certain-glad-products
23. Making environmental claims – A guide for business – ACCC, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/greenwashing-guidelines.pdf
24. Biogone | Biodegradable & Compostable Plastics Supplier Australia, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.biogone.com.au/
25. Australasian Bioplastics – Parliament of Australia, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=14b1ee1e-976a-494d-a9e2-3c704bebe5e3&subId=744421
26. Environmental and economic implications of biobased packaging – Victoria University, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://content.vu.edu.au/sites/default/files/environmental-and-economic-implications-of-biobased-packaging.pdf
27. CSIRO report reveals the state of bioplastics in Australia, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.csiro.au/en/news/all/news/2024/december/csiro-report-reveals-the-state-of-bioplastics-in-australia
28. Petroleum-based or Bio-based?the future of packing tape – TuòZ, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.tuozllc.com/the-future-of-packing-tape/
29. Cellulose Packing Tape – Printed, Naturally Biodegradable – Biogone, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.biogone.com.au/product/cellulose-packing-tape-printed-naturally-biodegradable/
30. A Critical Review of Consumer Perception and Environmental Impacts of Bioplastics in Sustainable Food Packaging – MDPI, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/4/1358
31. Current trends in biopolymers for food packaging: a review – Frontiers, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sustainable-food-systems/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1225371/full
32. An Overview of Bio-Based Polymers with Potential for Food Packaging Applications – MDPI, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/17/17/2335
33. State of bioplastics in Australia – CSIRO Research, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://research.csiro.au/ending-plastic-waste/wp-content/uploads/sites/408/2024/12/24-00426_ENV_REPORT_EPWStateOfBioplastics_WEB_241204.pdf
34. The PLA and PET: plastic world two focal points of comparison, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.hydepackage.com/info-detail/the-pla-and-pet-plastic-world-two-focal-points-of-comparison
35. Market Leaders in Eco-Friendly Food Packaging | BioPak Australia, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.biopak.com/
36. Biodegradable Packaging Tape Omni 48mm x 75m Clear, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://omnigroup.com.au/biodegradable-packaging-tape-omni-48mm-x-75m-clear-73.320
37. Kraft & Compostable Tapes | Eco Solutions – Gateway Packaging, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.gatewaypackaging.com.au/packaging/eco-products/paper-packaging-tapes/
38. Eco-Friendly Packaging Tape – Signet, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.signet.net.au/packaging/e-commerce-packaging/sustainable-ecommerce-packaging/kraft-packaging-tape.html
39. Eco-Friendly Adhesive Tape With Marketing Benefit, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.naylornetwork.com/ppi-otw/articles/index-v2.asp?aid=726280&issueID=86286
40. 85% Bio-based – Biodegradable Hot Melt Adhesive for Paper Packaging – 熱熔膠, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.hot-melt-glue.com/en/news.php?act=view&id=126
41. FOGO information for households | EPA – NSW Environment Protection Authority, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/Your-environment/Recycling-and-reuse/household-recycling-overview/FOGO-information-for-households
42. Made With Eco-Friendly Hot Melt Adhesive – Paper Tape for Green Packaging – 熱熔膠, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.hot-melt-glue.com/en/news.php?act=view&id=132
43. Commercial Composting – ABA Australasian Bioplastics Association, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://bioplastics.org.au/composting/commercial-composting/
44. End-of-Life | BioPak Australia, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.biopak.com/au/sustainability-report-jan-dec-24/end-of-life
45. A-Z FOGO list | City of Parramatta, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/residents/bins-waste-and-recycling/fogo/a-z-fogo-list
46. Which Australian states are banning single-use plastics?, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www.marineconservation.org.au/which-australian-states-are-banning-single-use-plastics/
47. Single-Use Plastics Ban: Policy | VIC.GOV.AU – Department of Education, Victoria, accessed on October 23, 2025, https://www2.education.vic.gov.au/pal/single-use-plastics-ban/policy