Product environmental footprint in policy and market decisions: Applicability and impact assessment
- 1 April 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
- Vol. 11 (3) , 417-424
Abstract
In April 2013, the European Commission published the Product and Organisation Environmental Footprint (PEF/OEF) methodology—a life cycle-based multicriteria measure of the environmental performance of products, services, and organizations. With its approach of “comparability over flexibility,” the PEF/OEF methodology aims at harmonizing existing methods, while decreasing the flexibility provided by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standards regarding methodological choices. Currently, a 3-y pilot phase is running, aiming at testing the methodology and developing product category and organization sector rules (PEFCR/OEFSR). Although a harmonized method is in theory a good idea, the PEF/OEF methodology presents challenges, including a risk of confusion and limitations in applicability to practice. The paper discusses the main differences between the PEF and ISO methodologies and highlights challenges regarding PEF applicability, with a focus on impact assessment. Some methodological aspects of the PEF and PEFCR Guides are found to contradict the ISO 14044 (2006) and ISO 14025 (2006). Others, such as prohibition of inventory cutoffs, are impractical. The evaluation of the impact assessment methods proposed in the PEF/OEF Guide showed that the predefined methods for water consumption, land use, and abiotic resources are not adequate because of modeling artefacts, missing inventory data, or incomplete characterization factors. However, the methods for global warming and ozone depletion perform very well. The results of this study are relevant for the PEF (and OEF) pilot phase, which aims at testing the PEF (OEF) methodology (and potentially adapting it) as well as addressing challenges and coping with them. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2015;11:417–424. © 2015 SETACKeywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Water Footprint of European Cars: Potential Impacts of Water Consumption along Automobile Life CyclesEnvironmental Science & Technology, 2012
- USEtox human exposure and toxicity factors for comparative assessment of toxic emissions in life cycle analysis: sensitivity to key chemical propertiesThe International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2011
- Soil organic carbon changes in the cultivation of energy crops: Implications for GHG balances and soil quality for use in LCABiomass and Bioenergy, 2011
- A comparison of cut roses from Ecuador and the NetherlandsThe International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2011
- USEtox—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessmentThe International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2008
- The role of atmospheric dispersion models and ecosystem sensitivity in the determination of characterisation factors for acidifying and eutrophying emissions in LCIAThe International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2008
- Bias in normalization: Causes, consequences, detection and remediesThe International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2006
- Key Elements in a Framework for Land Use Impact Assessment Within LCA (11 pp)The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2006
- Country-dependent Characterisation Factors for Acidification and Terrestrial Eutrophication Based on Accumulated Exceedance as an Impact Category Indicator (14 pp)The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2005
- Human health damages due to ionising radiation in life cycle impact assessmentEnvironmental Impact Assessment Review, 2000