The PEF method explores a new way of communicating the environmental impacts
of products through the application of the PEF formula(s), as part of the efforts
towards a Circular Economy. This new way expresses no longer the actual potential
environmental impact, but includes also the potential benefits of the recycling/
recoverability process, as well as the energy recovery potential of the materials.
While understandable for professionals in the field, this new approach poses multiple questions in determining how this complex message gets across to consumers
and how it will contribute to fulfilling the original goal of streamlining the communication of environmental information. The wide participation in the PEF/OEF
pilot of actors across most industries and beyond European borders showed that the
relevance of LCA methods in taking decisions and communicating on environmental related aspects is more actual than ever, as well as the interest in the unifying
approach which the PEF/OEF method is bringing.
VITO stated that the identification of information flows between PEF and ISO
14001 determines how an organisation can integrate both the PEF and ISO 14001 in
a coherent and efficient manner.
3 Conclusions
The discussion during this special session highlighted the great amount of work
done by the European Commission and all stakeholders in the context of the
Environmental Footprint pilot phase. It is widely acknowledged that major
improvements from the methodological point of view have been achieved, leading
to a new generation of LCA/PEF studies that should deliver results that are more
reliable, more reproducible and more verifiable. The pilot phase highlighted issues
to be solved in the area of characterisation factors in existing impact assessment
methods, the need to develop more and better defined impact categories (e.g. in the
area of biotic and abiotic resources). There are important quality issues found in all
commercial databases that would require paying more attention and, in particular, to
the review process of these databases. There is work to be done to better identify the
benchmarks, and to develop classes of performance. There is an important “educational” work to be done within practitioners, policy makers, and NGOs when it
comes to the development and use of weighting factors. However, notwithstanding
all these possible improvements, the LCA community is aware that their credibility
depends highly on the success of PEF. There are market needs to be addressed,
there are policies that could highly benefit from a consistent use of LCA principle.
There are problems related to misleading green claims and the way we implement
green public procurement that could be addressed and maybe solved by embedding
PEF into a number of existing or new policies. After the pilot phase the European
Commission will engage with all interested stakeholders in an open conversation
about the future role of PEF/OEF and LCA into European policies.
Special Session on Product Environmental Footprint
519
of products through the application of the PEF formula(s), as part of the efforts
towards a Circular Economy. This new way expresses no longer the actual potential
environmental impact, but includes also the potential benefits of the recycling/
recoverability process, as well as the energy recovery potential of the materials.
While understandable for professionals in the field, this new approach poses multiple questions in determining how this complex message gets across to consumers
and how it will contribute to fulfilling the original goal of streamlining the communication of environmental information. The wide participation in the PEF/OEF
pilot of actors across most industries and beyond European borders showed that the
relevance of LCA methods in taking decisions and communicating on environmental related aspects is more actual than ever, as well as the interest in the unifying
approach which the PEF/OEF method is bringing.
VITO stated that the identification of information flows between PEF and ISO
14001 determines how an organisation can integrate both the PEF and ISO 14001 in
a coherent and efficient manner.
3 Conclusions
The discussion during this special session highlighted the great amount of work
done by the European Commission and all stakeholders in the context of the
Environmental Footprint pilot phase. It is widely acknowledged that major
improvements from the methodological point of view have been achieved, leading
to a new generation of LCA/PEF studies that should deliver results that are more
reliable, more reproducible and more verifiable. The pilot phase highlighted issues
to be solved in the area of characterisation factors in existing impact assessment
methods, the need to develop more and better defined impact categories (e.g. in the
area of biotic and abiotic resources). There are important quality issues found in all
commercial databases that would require paying more attention and, in particular, to
the review process of these databases. There is work to be done to better identify the
benchmarks, and to develop classes of performance. There is an important “educational” work to be done within practitioners, policy makers, and NGOs when it
comes to the development and use of weighting factors. However, notwithstanding
all these possible improvements, the LCA community is aware that their credibility
depends highly on the success of PEF. There are market needs to be addressed,
there are policies that could highly benefit from a consistent use of LCA principle.
There are problems related to misleading green claims and the way we implement
green public procurement that could be addressed and maybe solved by embedding
PEF into a number of existing or new policies. After the pilot phase the European
Commission will engage with all interested stakeholders in an open conversation
about the future role of PEF/OEF and LCA into European policies.
Special Session on Product Environmental Footprint
519