Recycled Content Mass Balance Certification FAQ

Data: ISO's standards catalogue covers the chain-of-custody and recycled content standards that mass balance and segregated certification schemes draw on, providing the accounting basis for verified claims.

Judgment: Require the named certification scheme and allocation model behind any recycled content claim, because a percentage without a scheme cannot be audited or defended.

Source: ISO - ISO Standards Catalogue (2024)

Data: The European Commission's packaging policy framework promotes recycled content targets in packaging and references the verification approaches that make such claims credible on the EU market.

Judgment: Treat recycled content targets as a reason to demand verified chain-of-custody documentation, not as permission to claim content on the basis of supplier statements alone.

Source: European Commission - Packaging and Plastics Policy (2024)

Data: The Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) runs a North American certification program for compostable products, illustrating how third-party verification turns a material claim into a checkable credential.

Judgment: Extend the same third-party verification logic to recycled content — an unverified percentage is a marketing statement, while a certified one is a specification item.

Source: Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) - Compostability Certification (2024)

What is mass balance certification for recycled content?

Mass balance is an accounting method that tracks recycled material as it is mixed with virgin material during production, then allocates a share of the recycled input to specific outputs. It lets a supplier claim a recycled content percentage on a product even though recycled and virgin material are physically blended, provided the claim is verified by a recognised certification scheme. Ask whether the certificate uses mass balance or a segregated model, because the two allow different claims.

How do you verify a recycled content claim?

Ask for the certification scheme, the certificate number, and the allocation method the claim relies on, then confirm the certificate covers the material and plant that actually supply you. A stated percentage without a scheme and a certificate is an assertion, not a verified claim. Match the certificate to the specific SKU, because a valid certificate for one grade does not transfer to another.

What is the difference between mass balance and segregated models?

A segregated model keeps recycled material separate from virgin material end to end, so it supports a claim about the physical unit. Mass balance mixes the recycled input and allocates a share to outputs, so it supports a claim about the system. The same "30% recycled" number means different things under each model, so match the claim wording to the model and do not present a system-level number as a unit-level fact.

Why do mass balance claims need careful wording?

Because a mass balance allocation can be claimed on an output that contains little or no physically recycled material in that specific unit, even though the overall system contains the credited recycled input. The claim is legitimate at the system level but can mislead if it implies each unit is made of recycled material. State the allocation method and the scheme next to the claim so the buyer sees how the number was produced.

What should you ask the supplier before buying?

Ask which scheme issued the certificate, the certificate number, which allocation model applies, which plant and grade are covered, and whether the chain-of-custody audit is current. A supplier who can answer all five has a real certification program; one who answers "we're certified" without details is offering an assertion. Hold the certificate with the specification and re-check it on every order.

What are the most common certification mistakes?

Using unit-level wording on a mass balance allocation, citing an expired certificate, citing the wrong grade, omitting the scheme name, and implying a segregated claim while actually using mass balance. Each is a gap between what the claim says and what the certificate proves. Close the gap by naming the scheme, naming the model, and keeping the certificate with the specification.