Analysis of the separate collection of packaging waste from households in Slovakia in the context of Circular Economy Package
Abstract
The part of the EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy adopted by The European Commission is a result of revision of the waste legislative framework (so called Waste Package or Circular Economy Package). It includes measures to increase waste prevention, changes in product design, increase preparation for reuse and recycling, etc. The Waste Package, which contains revision of four directives, entered into force in July 2018 and the Member States have to transpose it by 2020. The revisions have introduced ambitious targets for municipal waste, packaging waste and a reduction in the amount of landfilled waste and they have established minimum requirements for extended producer responsibility (EPR). The main goal of this paper is to evaluate the separate collection of packaging waste from household in Slovakia in the context of Circular Economy Package.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The packaging waste recycling rate of some materials such as PET beverage packaging in Slovakia was much lower than the recycling target rate set by the EU, and recycling rates varied across two different cities.
“Trošanová et al. (2019) evaluated the collection system of household packaging waste in Slovakia.The packaging waste recycling rate of some materials such as PET beverage packaging was much lower than the recycling target rate set by the EU.The recycling rates were also found to vary across two different cities.”
From Packaging design for the circular economy: A systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as Trošanová et al. (2019)
In Slovakia, the PET packaging recycling rate is lower than the EU standard whereas the recycling rate for PP is higher than the EU standard partially due to recycling infrastructure.
“An example is that, in Slovakia, the PET packaging recycling rate is lower than the EU standard whereas the recycling rate for PP is higher than the EU standard partially due to recycling infrastructure (Trošanová et al., 2019).”
From Packaging design for the circular economy: A systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as Trošanová et al., 2019
Polypropylene (PP) is a better option from the circular economy perspective in Slovakia.
“This suggests that PP is a better option from the CE perspective in Slovakia.”
From Packaging design for the circular economy: A systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as Trošanová et al., 2019
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Packaging design for the circular economy: A systematic review
Zhu, Z., Liu, W., Ye, S., & Batista, L. (2022) · Sustainable Production and Consumption · doi:10.1016/j.spc.2022.06.005 · Cited by 204 · see citing works
“Tro š anová et al. (2019) evaluated the collection system of household packagingwaste inSlovakia.”
Background
- Authors
- Trosanova, M., Mihalikova, R., & Skultetyova, I.
- Venue
- 2019 International Council on Technologies of Environmental Protection (ICTEP)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2019-10
- Pages
- 262-268
- OpenAlex
- W3003451664
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 0.81
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Council on Technologies of Environmental Protection (ICTEP) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Municipal Solid Waste Management
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Waste Management and Recycling
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
- Keywords
- source separation, packaging waste, household waste, extended producer responsibility, waste prevention, recycling, reuse, landfill reduction, Slovakia
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
