Beijing's Guidelines for the Use of Green Packaging by Food Delivery Merchants (DB11/T 2510-2026) took effect on 1 September 2026. By 9 September, the city was in its second week of implementation. The municipal market regulator describes it as China's first local standard specifically addressing green packaging use by food delivery merchants. One day later, on 2 September, the mandatory food-contact coatings standard GB 4806.10-2025 also took effect. The Beijing guide helps merchants choose packaging, while the national standard addresses coating safety. The guide does not impose a blanket ban on a named material: it sets out packaging options according to the food and delivery conditions.
This matters to material producers and packaging converters because food delivery is a major, high-frequency use of disposable paper containers, cups and bowls. Merchants' selection criteria influence upstream demand. This article explains the guide, why it does not favour biodegradable materials in every case, and where PP, paper, aluminium foil and biodegradable materials fit. It also considers practical actions across the value chain.
01 Choosing packaging under China's first merchant-focused local guide
DB11/T 2510-2026 was issued by the Beijing Administration for Market Regulation on 27 May 2026 and took effect on 1 September. The 'T' denotes a recommended local standard. It provides technical guidance rather than establishing a new penalty regime, while applicable food-safety and other legal duties still apply. Its recommended status does not make it commercially insignificant: the way it was developed and is promoted helps explain its potential influence.
The Beijing Municipal Commission of Development and Reform proposed the standard and oversees its technical coordination. The source article describes coordination by its resources and environment division alongside DB11/T 2246-2024, the local standard on evaluating green packaging in food delivery. The China National Export Commodities Packaging Research Institute, part of China Logistics Group, led drafting, with deputy chief engineer Feng Qingzheng as the first drafter. Participants included the China Packaging Federation, the National Center for Quality Inspection and Testing of Packaging Products (Jinan), the Beijing Energy Conservation and Environmental Protection Center, and Meituan through Beijing Sankuai Online Technology Co., Ltd. This combination brought packaging expertise, testing and merchant experience into the work. The standard was also presented at the launch of Beijing's 2026 National Energy Conservation Publicity Week activities on 15 June.
The source article reports plans for the city's development and reform commission and market regulator to cultivate demonstration merchants, starting with restaurant chains and leading businesses in commercial districts. Proposed actions include packaging procurement and recycling records, together with attention to merchants' cost concerns. The municipal authorities see the guide as a possible reference for other cities. It translates the broader plastic-pollution agenda into practical advice for food delivery; the source also cites a citywide green initiative launched in Shenzhen in April 2026. The significance lies in connecting technical guidance with implementation by identifiable organisations.
Platform participation could amplify that influence. The guide itself does not create penalties, but requirements incorporated into merchant rules or green procurement catalogues could become commercial qualification criteria for suppliers. This remains a potential route for implementation, rather than proof that every platform has already adopted the standard as a binding rule.
Green packaging is understood in terms of its life cycle: it fulfils the packaging function while limiting harm to human health and the environment and reducing resource and energy use. The source article cites an estimated 630 million food delivery users in China by December 2025. It also cites platform disclosures that, by the end of July 2026, 590 million users had selected 'no cutlery', covering more than 13 billion orders and an estimated carbon reduction of over 500,000 tonnes, with container-recycling programmes in more than 20 provinces. These are attributed market and platform figures; the imported article does not provide the underlying reports for independent verification. The scale nevertheless explains the industry's interest in merchant-level packaging choices.
The guide's organising question is which packaging suits which food. A shift towards selection by use case could alter demand across competing materials, although the size and pace of that change will depend on adoption.
02 Start with simple or sealed packaging, then assess liquid content and temperature
The guide has four principles: safety, material reduction, ease of recycling or degradability, and reuse. Packaging must meet applicable national food-safety standards; tamper-evident seals or outer packaging that cannot be restored after opening are recommended. Sizes should fit the meal closely, with limited empty space and simple printing; non-woven bags should be avoided where insulation is unnecessary. Single-material or readily separable structures are preferred to support end-of-life handling. Consumers can also be encouraged to reuse containers for non-food-contact purposes, such as household storage.
Within those principles, the guide distinguishes simple packaging from sealed packaging, using liquid content, leakage risk and temperature to organise advice for common dishes. This makes it directly relevant to daily restaurant operations.
Simple packaging suits foods with little or no liquid that can be wrapped or contained as a whole. Bags can be used for steamed buns and flatbreads. Burgers, sandwiches and hot dogs should have fewer packaging layers. Paper boxes are recommended for pizzas and cakes that need protection against deformation or sticking. Stir-fries and rice dishes with little sauce can use lidded containers without a sealing design. Barbecue foods can be wrapped in aluminium foil and placed in a bag that closes securely. Biodegradable packaging is recommended for hot, oily fried snacks with no broth, such as fried rice cakes. Divided compartments can be used for dumplings and sushi.
Sealed packaging suits foods with more liquid that need protection against leakage. For room-temperature foods with little oil and substantial liquid, such as chilled jelly desserts, fruit desserts and cold skewers, the options include PP containers, paper bowls and biodegradable containers. Room-temperature dishes with more oil and sauce, such as rice sheets and spicy mixed dishes, can use paper cups, paper bowls or biodegradable containers. Hot, relatively low-oil foods with broth, including noodle soup, wontons and congee, can use PP containers, paper bowls or biodegradable containers. Hot, oily, liquid-rich dishes such as maoxuewang, Sichuan-style fish in chilli oil, malatang and maocai can use PP containers with sealing wrap, biodegradable containers or aluminium-foil containers. Frozen desserts such as slushes can use PP or PET containers or paper bowls. Tea, coffee and juice can use paper, PP or PET cups with recycled-material cup carriers. Every option must be suitable for the actual food and temperature; listing PET here is not a recommendation to use every PET grade for hot filling.
The guide also seeks to reduce plastic stretch wrap: avoid unnecessary wrapping for ambient, chilled and frozen foods, and use only small amounts of narrow edge-sealing wrap where hot dishes require it. Beverage seals should be selected for temperature suitability and ease of physical separation; straw use should be reduced, and disposable cutlery should not be supplied automatically. The source article cites a Beijing hotpot restaurant where a better-sealing container eliminated repeated wrapping, prevented leaks and reduced preparation time. This example suggests that less packaging can also save labour. Across the selection table, liquid content, temperature and leakage risk drive the choice. Paper cups, bowls and boxes appear in simple-packaging, sealed-packaging and beverage applications, giving paper a broad range of potential uses.
03 Recycling and degradability are alternative pathways, not a universal material ranking
Two common misreadings should be avoided.
The first is that the guide requires complete replacement of conventional plastics. It does not. PP and PET remain options for appropriate sealed-packaging uses. For demanding hot, oily dishes with substantial broth, the listed options include PP containers with sealing wrap. Their position in a list does not establish a performance ranking. The guide uses language such as 'may' and 'should' to distinguish options and recommendations; it is not a blanket phase-out order for an entire material category.
The second is that biodegradable materials are guaranteed to win. Again, they are not. The guide presents ease of recycling or degradability as alternatives. Packaging function, food safety, cost and available collection and treatment systems must be considered together. Biodegradable materials are recommended for fried snacks, but many liquid-rich dishes have parallel options including paper bowls, PP containers and biodegradable containers. Merchants still need to choose by application.
Three practical checks follow. First, assess food-contact safety under the standards applicable to the finished construction, including GB 4806.10-2025 where a coating falls within its scope. Second, favour simpler or readily separable structures and a credible recycling or degradation route. Third, check cost and user experience. These are procurement considerations, not a substitute for formal testing or certification.
Real-world constraints matter. Oily food residues and limited cleaning or separation can impede container recycling. Biodegradable products may carry a cost premium, while appearance after contact with oily food can affect customer acceptance. The source article cites Wu Xiaomeng, an associate professor at China Agricultural University's College of Food Science and Nutritional Engineering, on the guide's integration of material selection, design, use and recovery with dish-specific advice. Implementation will still be gradual and depend on local infrastructure. Suppliers need products that withstand the intended food conditions and have a demonstrable end-of-life route. Fluorine-related claims, repulpability and compostability should be assessed where relevant; they are not universal properties or identical requirements for every material.
04 Four material groups, with barrier performance central to paper's wider use
Each material group has a distinct role.
PP and PET remain established options for appropriate sealed-packaging applications. Their temperature capabilities differ, so material and grade must be matched to use. Opportunities include easier separation, reduced wrapping and recycled-material cup carriers where specified. The guide does not itself establish that plastic demand will grow or shrink.
Aluminium foil serves specialised applications. It offers useful temperature performance for barbecue foods, grilled fish and hot, oily dishes. Heating is only appropriate where the finished product and appliance instructions allow it. Cost and container design constrain its use, making it an application-specific option rather than a universal solution.
Biodegradable materials benefit from the guide's recognition of degradability. They are recommended for fried snacks and listed alongside other options for foods with broth. Heat resistance, cost and suitable treatment infrastructure must still be checked for each product. Biodegradability does not automatically establish compostability under every set of conditions.
Paper-based products, including cups, bowls, boxes and moulded-fibre containers, appear across a broad range of applications. Paper boxes are recommended for pizza and cake, paper bowls are among the options for selected cold dishes, noodle soup and congee, and paper cups are among the beverage options. This is broad coverage, not a blanket preference over all other materials. On the supply side, the source article attributes to Guanyan Tianxia estimates that China's moulded-pulp capacity exceeded 2.5 million tonnes during the first three quarters of 2025, representing about 56.8% of global capacity, while output reached 1.82 million tonnes, up 25% year on year. It compares this with a cited 3.38% growth figure for paper-product manufacturing, although the statistical bases should be checked before direct comparison. Grand View Research estimates the global moulded-pulp packaging market at about USD 6.21 billion in 2025, rising to USD 10.18 billion by 2033. These are third-party estimates with different scopes, not interchangeable measures of demand or capacity.
Paper's wider use depends heavily on the barrier layer or internal sizing that protects fibres from water and grease. PE extrusion coating remains an established, economical option, but fibre recovery depends on the construction and recycling process; fluorinated grease treatments face tighter substance restrictions and procurement policies. The source article cites McDonald's commitments on no intentionally added fluorinated compounds in primary guest packaging, certified fibre and bio-based materials; Starbucks' 2030 reusable, recyclable or compostable customer-packaging ambition; KFC China's reported substitution of certain plastic bags and cutlery and some PS lids with PP alternatives; and Luckin Coffee's August 2026 cup initiative focused on material reduction and recycling. These company-specific statements should be checked against the underlying disclosures and their geographic and product scope. They illustrate growing attention to material choice and recovery, rather than one universal specification. Coated paper may require compliance with both GB 4806.8-2022 and GB 4806.10-2025; adhesives must be assessed under their own applicable provisions and are not automatically classified as coatings. Water-based acrylic or PHA barriers can be designed for water and grease resistance, release performance and sealing, but being water-based does not itself prove absence of PFAS, repulpability, recyclability or compostability. Finished-product evidence is essential. BIOTEN Packaging positions its Pro PHA waterborne barrier emulsion for paper and moulded fibre. According to the company disclosures cited in the source article, it provides water resistance, grease resistance and heat sealing, is made without intentionally added PFAS, and is repulpable; the company reports passing tests under GB 4806.10-2025 in January 2026 and certifications from ABA, BPI and DIN CERTCO. Buyers should check the test reports, certificate scope and intended-use conditions for the product supplied.
Chinese dishes with different characteristics are packed in paper, plastic or aluminium-foil containers according to their needs.
05 Practical actions across the value chain and signals to watch
Four groups can take practical steps now.
Container manufacturers and paper converters: Organise the product range by simple or sealed packaging, then by liquid content and temperature. State suitable dishes, material composition, ease of separation and any verified repulpability or compostability. Arrange the relevant substrate and coating tests, including GB 4806.8 and GB 4806.10 where applicable, so the evidence is available before customers ask.
Material and coating suppliers: Support claims about resistance to oily liquids and heat, fluorinated substances, repulpability and compostability with relevant data. This can include migration results, grease-resistance testing, fibre-recovery results and appropriate certificates. Offer an application-tested system rather than raw material alone.
Restaurant chains and merchants: Ask whether the construction is single-material or readily separable, whether relevant food-contact test reports are available, and whether the proposed recycling or degradation route suits the target market. The guide does not require every product to be both recyclable and biodegradable. Incorporate no-cutlery requests, correctly sized packaging and reduced wrapping into operating procedures.
Platforms: Procurement criteria, visibility incentives and subsidies could transmit the guide's principles quickly. The source article cites platform programmes covering 16 food categories, container recycling in 29 cities across 22 provinces with more than 46,000 tonnes collected, and a beverage-cup programme reporting over 100 million cups recycled in one year with 64 brands and nearly 100,000 stores. These figures remain attributed disclosures requiring the original reports to verify scope and timing. Suppliers should watch whether and when the Beijing guide enters merchant rules or group-purchasing qualification criteria.
Four early signals merit attention: adoption of similar guidance by other cities and adaptation to local food and supply chains; the strength of platform procurement and visibility incentives; changes in the cost gap between biodegradable, paper-based and conventional plastic containers; and whether design for recovery connects with real collection and treatment capacity, including expansion of existing container-recycling programmes.
Beijing's guide could become a reference for other cities. Orders will ultimately depend on how a product performs in uses such as a bowl of malatang or a cup of coffee: food-contact safety, resistance to the intended contents and a credible route after use. For the paper packaging value chain, validated barrier performance could turn broader application coverage into business opportunities.
This article was compiled by BIOTEN Packaging from public materials, government and standards information, including DB11/T 2510-2026, publications from Beijing's market regulator and development and reform commission, media reports including CCTV News and Qianlong, disclosures attributed to Meituan, McDonald's, Starbucks, Yum China and Luckin Coffee, and third-party market research. Information cutoff: 9 September 2026. Market and capacity figures are third-party estimates with differing scopes; some underlying reports and company claims cited in the source article have not been independently verified here. This article is for industry research and learning and does not constitute a procurement or performance guarantee. For corrections, clarification or removal requests, contact this WeChat official account; we will review requests within 24 hours of receipt.
Original source unavailable
