Australians are overwhelmingly supportive of packaging reform, mandatory recycled content requirements and a nationally consistent approach to plastics recycling, according to Cleanaway's newly released 2026 Recycling Behaviours Report.
The findings come as the Federal Government progresses its Packaging Reform agenda and as Cleanaway and Viva Energy advance plans for Cycleback Plastics, a proposed large-scale soft plastics recycling facility that would convert post-consumer soft plastics into food-grade recycled polypropylene.
Based on a survey of 1000 Australians, the report suggests public opinion has moved beyond broad support for recycling towards backing specific policy measures increasingly being considered by governments and industry.
Among the headline findings, 94 per cent of respondents support a single national plan with consistent plastics recycling rules across all states, while 92 per cent support national rules requiring recycled content in plastic packaging. A further 91 per cent want recycled content to be mandatory across all packaging.
The research also found 89 per cent believe stronger rules should apply to manufacturers and brands to help reduce waste, while 83 per cent support companies contributing to the cost of recycling the packaging they place on the market.
Public support aligns with reform agenda
For the packaging sector, the findings arrive at a pivotal moment.
Federal packaging reforms currently under development include proposals for mandatory packaging design standards, extended producer responsibility (EPR) arrangements and recycled content requirements intended to strengthen circularity and drive investment in domestic recycling infrastructure.
Cleanaway head of innovation Jeroen Wassenaar said the findings demonstrate that Australians increasingly understand both the scale of the packaging waste challenge and the need for coordinated action across the value chain.
“What's encouraging about that 92 per cent figure is that it shows Australians are not unknown to the volume of waste packaging produced year on year and are wanting collective action to help them further contribute to making a sustainable future possible,” Wassenaar said.
He argues that mandatory recycled content requirements are critical to creating the market certainty needed to underpin major recycling investments.
“Building large-scale processing infrastructure here in Australia takes significant investment, and that investment becomes possible when there's clear, sustained demand for the recycled material at the other end. Mandates create exactly that kind of demand and do it with certainty.”
According to Cleanaway, those policy settings will also directly influence the next stage of investment in Cycleback Plastics, which is currently progressing through its engineering phase.
Developed as a joint venture with Viva Energy, the proposed facility would establish large-scale advanced recycling capability for soft plastics in Australia. Cleanaway says future investment decisions remain closely linked to federal regulations on product stewardship and mandated recycled content, which are currently being developed by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW).
“We value the partnership approach the Federal Government has taken on this, and we're pleased to be part of that conversation,” Wassenaar told PKN.
“With those policy settings in place, the chain we've been talking about for years – domestic recycling, Australian jobs, plastic back into plastic on Australian shelves – moves from possibility into delivery.”
Soft plastics remain a key challenge
The report identifies soft plastics as the area where community expectations and existing infrastructure remain furthest apart.
Australia generates approximately 521,000 tonnes of soft plastic waste annually, yet recovery rates remain well below national targets. Cleanaway notes that while Australia's 2025 packaging targets sought 70 per cent recovery of plastic packaging, soft plastics recovery reached only around 9 per cent.
Consumer frustration reflects that gap.
Nearly two-thirds of Australians (64 per cent) say they have felt misled by soft plastics packaging that appears recyclable but is not accepted through existing kerbside systems. Almost half (49 per cent) admit to placing soft plastics in kerbside recycling bins in the hope they would be recycled.
At the same time, support for a new solution is overwhelming. Ninety-four per cent say they would use a new soft plastics recycling scheme if one became available, while 93 per cent support a national kerbside collection system for soft plastics.
The findings suggest consumers remain willing participants in a circular solution, provided collection systems are accessible and clearly understood.
National consistency emerges as a priority
The strongest message to emerge from the report may be the public demand for consistency.
While the Federal Government remains the most frequently nominated leader of the circular economy transition, responsibility is increasingly seen as being shared across governments, brands, manufacturers and consumers.
Wassenaar said Australians are expressing frustration with a system that often changes depending on geography.
“What's particularly heartening about the 94 per cent figure is that Australians are telling us something they've experienced firsthand, that recycling rules vary depending on where you live, and that variation makes it harder to do the right thing.”
For businesses operating nationally, he says the impact extends well beyond household confusion.
“When rules and standards shift location to location, it adds friction for everyone in the chain – from households trying to do the right thing to brand owners designing packaging for a national market, and for those building the infrastructure trying to accommodate technology that will work across multiple jurisdictions.”
A nationally consistent framework, he argues, would simplify participation for consumers while providing clearer design and investment signals across the packaging value chain.
“It would reduce recycling confusion, giving households a single, clear set of rules to follow, give brand owners a single design standard to meet, and give industry the confidence to invest in the kind of national-scale processing infrastructure Australia needs.”
FOGO offers a lesson
Beyond packaging, the report highlights Food Organics and Garden Organics (FOGO) as evidence that participation follows access.
Among households with access to a FOGO bin, 74 per cent actively use the service. Among households without access, 57 per cent identify the absence of kerbside collection as the primary barrier.
The findings reinforce a broader theme running throughout the report: Australians appear willing to participate in circular economy initiatives when the necessary infrastructure is available and the rules are clear.
Ed's comment
The significance of this report lies less in the headline percentages than in what they reveal about the maturity of the packaging reform debate.
For years, discussion around mandatory recycled content, EPR schemes and harmonised recycling systems has centred on whether consumers were ready to support stronger intervention. The Cleanaway findings suggest that question may now be largely settled.
What remains unresolved is whether policy can move quickly enough to unlock the investment needed to build Australia's next generation of recycling infrastructure.
The report points to a growing alignment between consumer expectations and industry priorities. Consumers are calling for recycled content, national consistency and accountability. Recyclers and infrastructure investors are seeking the same policy settings to justify long-term capital investment.
The challenge now is converting that alignment into practical outcomes. As projects such as Cycleback Plastics demonstrate, the next phase of Australia's circular economy will depend not on public support, but on the speed with which regulatory certainty can be translated into infrastructure on the ground.
