RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/CTE/M/49/Add.1 
28 May 2010 
 
 (10-2963) 
Committee on Trade and Environment  
  
 
SUMMARY REPORT OF THE INFORMATION SESSION ON 
PRODUCT CARBON FOOTPRINT AND LABELLING SCHEMES 
17 FEBRUARY 2010 
  
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
Addendum  
  
1. The Information Session on Product Carbon Footpr int (PCF) and Labelling Schemes was held 
on 17 February 2010 in response to the requests by  a number of developing country Members for 
information on the various initiatives being developed at the national and intern ational levels in the 
area of product carbon footprint standards and labelling schemes.
2   
2. This Report provides a detailed summary of th e key points of the presentations and of the 
issues that arose from the discussions during the in formation session.  The full presentations made by 
the speakers are available on the WTO trade and environment website.3  
 
_______________ 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
  
I.
 OVERVIEW: RECENT STUDIES IN THE OECD .............................................................2  
II. NATIONAL EXPERIENCE SHARING: PUBLICLY AVAILABLE 
SPECIFICATION (PAS 2050) – LESSONS LEARNED ......................................................3  
III. HARMONIZATION OF CARBON FOOT PRINT RELATED STANDARDS .................4  
A. WRI/WBCSD  PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE ACCOUNTING AND REPORTING STANDARD .................4  
B. ISO  14067  CARBON FOOTPRINT OF PRODUCTS - PART 1: QUANTIFICATION AND 
PART 2: C OMMUNICATION .......................................................................................................6  
 
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members and to their rights and obligations under the WTO. 
2 See meeting of November 2009 of the Committ ee on Trade and Environm ent (CTE), WT/CTE/M/48. 
3 http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/events_feb10_e/event_17feb10_e.htm  WT/CTE/M/49/Add.1 
Page 2  
 
  I. OVERVIEW: RECENT STUDIES IN THE OECD 
3. By way of introduction, Mr Dale Andrew
, OECD Trade and Agriculture Directorate, recalled 
the typical features  of PCF labels.  They:  displayed the total amount of greenhouse gas (GHG) 
emissions that were emitted during the entire life cycle of a product or a service;  they were expressed in grams of CO
2 equivalent per unit of the product; and were displayed not only directly on 
packaging, but also on websites or on the store shelf.     
4. PCF labels could have different objectives .  For producers, the key objectives were to help 
companies prioritize GHG reduction efforts along the supply chain and to demonstrate their 
commitment to climate change mitigation (as part of their corporate social responsibility efforts).  
PCF labels were a tool to compare the carbon footpr int of similar products from different origins or 
with different packaging characteristics (e.g. a fruit juice bottled in a can, a glass bottle, or a plastic 
bottle).  Knowing the carbon footprint of a product coul d also help offset emissions that could not be 
reduced, e.g. as suggested by th e "Stop Climate Change" scheme in Germany, and help consumers 
reduce their "personal" carbon footprint.   
5. The OECD recently conducted a survey  on the extent to which PCF labels influenced 
consumer, buyer and investor behaviour.  The survey showed that, in purchasing decisions, 
environmental concerns ranked afte r quality and price.  He explai ned that although PCF schemes had 
first appeared in 2007, their number had quickly grow n since then.  Such schemes had started out with 
limited coverage, mostly food and drink, but had then been extende d to a wide range of products.  
Moreover, many schemes that started as privat e and voluntary had now seen the involvement of 
governments and international organizations.  As at  the end of 2009, the OECD had identified PCF 
schemes in the following ten countries:  Canada , France, Germany, Japan, Republic of Korea, 
Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, the United Kingdom and the United States.   
6. Some examples of PCF schemes included:  (i ) Japan's voluntary carbon footprint labelling 
scheme for products launched in 200 9 on a trial basis;  (ii) two French PCF schemes, initiated by 
supermarket chains, for application either on produc ts themselves or on the receipt as the sum of all 
purchases;  and (iii) a private PCF label for biof uels, developed by a Swedish association and the 
Brazilian ethanol industry, wh ich covered both environmenta l and labour conditions.   
7. The following comments could be made on the schemes surveyed by the OECD:  only about 
half of the schemes had published methodologies;  the quality of the documentation varied greatly;  
most schemes reflected a full life cycle analysis, but with different starting or ending points;  most did not appear to create market access barriers for produ cers in developing country or distant countries, 
mainly due to the use of a life cycle analysis;  so me ignored short distance transport flows, such as 
internal domestic transport;  the calculation of sh ipping emissions relied on various factors;  there 
were uncertainties on how to treat the loss of soil carbon in agricultural practices;  the schemes used 
different communication strategies, e.g. displaying the actual value of the CO
2 emissions equivalent 
per unit or showing carbon-free claims (i.e. for companies offsetting their GHG emissions);  and it 
was very difficult and costly to determine the exact carbon footprint of a product, particularly due to 
the lack of relevant data.   
8. In Mr Andrew's view, conformity assessment  was a major weakness of the current schemes.  
He reported that only four schemes relied on thir d party verification of the PCF and that the 
conformity assessment procedures generally lacked  clarity and transparen cy.  In response to a 
question about conformity assessment, Mr Andrew  drew a parallel between carbon footprint and 
certification of organic products, where an entirel y new industry had emerged in order to certify 
organic products.  He acknowledged that certificatio n was expensive, especially when producers had 
to seek certification for different schemes at the same time.    WT/CTE/M/49/Add.1 
 Page 3 
 
 
  9.  Finally, in terms of the effects of these schemes on small and medium-sized enterprises  
(SMEs), Mr Andrew explained that some supermar ket chains had worked very closely with all 
suppliers upstream, including farmers,  importers and retailers.  He noted that one problem of some of 
the earlier schemes was that they relied heavily on so-called sec ondary data, or default values, 
particularly in developing countries, in calculati ng the carbon footprint without actually measuring the 
emissions in the respective countries.  He noted that at present no empirical work existed on the 
effects of PCF labels on SMEs, but previous work  done in the OECD on private labelling schemes 
could provide valuable insights.    
II. NATIONAL EXPERIENCE SHARING: PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SPECIFICATION 
(PAS 2050) – LESSONS LEARNED 
10. Ms Maureen Nowak  of the United Kingdom's Department for Environment, Food and Rural 
Affairs (DEFRA) presented the United Kingdom's expe rience in developing a standard to measure 
embodied GHG emissions across the life cycle of goods  and services, the so-called Publicly Available 
Specification (PAS) 2050, published in October 2008.     
11. The development  of PAS 2050 started in 2007 in response to a demand from the business 
community to better understand the GHG emissions of  their supply chains, identify hotspots where 
GHG emissions could be reduced most effectively a nd share information abou t its work internally, 
with their supply chains, and with customers.  The objective was to develop a tool for measuring 
GHG emissions that could be applied across a wide range of products, services and supply chains, and 
would allow a consistent and comparable appro ach to supply chain measurement of GHGs across 
different markets.  The project was overseen and ma naged by the British Standards Institute (BSI) and 
co-sponsored by DEFRA and the Carbon Trust.  The development process of PAS 2050 involved 
consultations with over 1,000 stak eholders, both national and intern ational.  Over 3,000 comments 
were received and PAS 2050 had been tested as part of pilot projects across a wide range of products, 
services, sectors and companies, including manufacturers, retailers and traders.   
12. PAS 2050 had the following key characteristics :  it was built on internationally recognised 
life cycle assessment methods, specifically the IS O 14044;  covered all GHGs specified by the 
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) ;  included the whole lifecycle of a product;  
could be applied to any product or service, by any company and in any geographic location;  allowed 
a full internal assessment of GHG emissions and thus the identification of emissions hotspots;  facilitated evaluation of options, e.g. for purchasi ng and sourcing decisions;  supported corporate 
reporting and communications with consumers;  a nd it enabled comparability within an organisation 
since PAS 2050 was suitable for comparing the impact of changing materials, processes, distribution, 
use profiles, end of life opportunities, changes ove r time and the different formulations of similar 
products.  However, Ms Nowak pointed out that  PAS 2050 did not provide the level of detail 
necessary for product comparison. 
13. PAS 2050 was already being used by many companies, including several leading retailers, 
across long and complex international supply chains .  For example, the Carbon Trust had completed 
many projects worldwide, including in Europe an d in South America as well as in Canada, China, 
South Africa and the United States.  It had certified footprints of over 5,500 individual product lines, 
with a total carbon footprint of eight million tonnes of CO
2 equivalent.      
14. Ms Nowak then shared some lessons learned from a User Trials Project :  the step-by-step 
approach in PAS 2050 provided a good structure for undertaking product or service carbon 
footprinting;  the accompanying Guide to PAS 2050  was found to be clear and user-friendly and to 
provide a good overview;  the primary data require ments of the PAS 2050 could be time consuming, 
but allowed important insights into the supply chai n;  difficulties were encountered in collecting 
secondary data.  Recommendations from the user tr ial projects included the need for a recognized WT/CTE/M/49/Add.1 
Page 4  
 
  source of full life cycle emission factors for common flows, such as energy, transportation and waste 
management;  and wider publicly available databases needed to be more accessible.  
15. A review  of PAS 2050 will be conduc ted and take into account the related international 
initiatives, specifically the developing ISO 14067 standard and the WRI-W BCSD GHG Protocol 
Product Standard, as well as the European Commission' s work on PCF.  Ms Nowak explained that the 
review process of the PAS 2050 would also include wi de consultations with st akeholders, a high level 
of technical expert input and extensive evidence ga thering to support any proposed changes.  It was 
expected that the overall process would take about  nine months, for completion by late 2010.   
16. To conclude , Ms Nowak noted that PCF had a key role to play in motivating businesses to 
reduce their carbon emissions and hence move towa rds a low carbon economy.  The effectiveness of 
PAS 2050 needed to be assessed and if necessary impr oved in order to increase uptake by businesses.  
For instance, some practical aspects in PAS 20 50 needed to be addressed, most notably the 
availability and accessibility of reliable and releva nt data.  Moreover, some products, such as  
agriculture and chemical products, were inherently more difficult to assess than others, as they had for 
instance complex and variable supply chains and multiple ingredients.  She acknowledged that PAS 
2050 did not work as a 'one size fits all' and that for practical purposes it needed to be supported by 
specific rules or guidance for each sector.   
III. HARMONIZATION OF CARBON FOOTPRINT RELATED STANDARDS 
A. WRI/WBCSD
 PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE ACCOUNTING AND REPORTING STANDARD  
17. Ms Andrea Brown-Smatlan , representing the World Resource Institute (WRI) and the World 
Business Council for Sustainable Development (W BCSD), presented the GHG Protocol Initiative.4  
The GHG Protocol Initiative started in 1998 as a response to an increasing demand for harmonization 
coming from various stakeholders.  This was a mu lti-stakeholder initiative, which included business, 
NGOs, governments, academics and others, in tended to develop in ternationally accepted 
GHG accounting and reporting standards and promote their use worldwide.  
18. Under the GHG Protocol Initiative, WRI/WBCS D had published a Corporate Accounting and 
Reporting Standard for GHG emissions in 2001 (revised  in 2004).  This so-called GHG Corporate 
Protocol had since become the most widely used international accounting standard for corporate GHG accounting.  It provided the accounting framework for almost every GHG standard and was used by 
various programs across the world, such as ISO 14064 (Part I), the Climate Registry, the Carbon 
Disclosure Project, the Californian Climate Action Registry, Dow Jones Sustainability Index, the 
European Union Emissions Trading Scheme, World W ildlife Fund Climate Savers, etc.  The initiative 
also led to a number of other protocols and sector-specific programs, such as the GHG Protocol for 
Project Accounting, which was a methodology to  account for emission reduction activities, and a 
reporting program for the cement sector.   
19. Ms Brown-Smatlan reported that a survey c onducted by WRI/WBCSD in 2008 had indicated 
a strong need for additional information on supply chain and product GHG emissions.  The increase in 
the number of GHG accounting initiatives and regulations  at the company level, at the sector level, 
within organisations and national governments demonstrated the need for an internationally accepted, 
standardized and credible approach to measu re GHG emissions.  Therefore, in 2008, the 
WRI/WBCSD Secretariat initiated the development of two new standards .  First, the Scope 3 
Accounting and Reporting Standard quantify, mana ge and report GHG emissions in the corporate 
value chain.  This standard was built on the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard.  And second, the 
                                                     
 
4 For copies of the draft Scope 3 and Product Standards, see:  
http://www.ghgprotocol.org/standards/product-and-supply-chain-standard   WT/CTE/M/49/Add.1 
 Page 5 
 
 
  Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard  to quantify, manage and report the life cycle 
GHG emissions of individual products.  It was bu ilt upon the existing life cycle assessment standards, 
PAS 2050 and ISO 14011. The initial drafts of both standards had been released in November 2009, 
the second draft would be available for public co mment by mid-2010 and the final standards were 
expected to be published by year end. 
20. For WRI/WBCSD, the primary objective  of a product standard was the public disclosure of 
GHG emissions of goods and services.  Implementi ng the standard might also support additional 
business goals, namely the identification of the GHG reduction opportunities within a product supply 
chain, the engagement of the supply chain in  order to obtain better quality data, and product 
differentiation.  The standard was sufficiently  flexible to accommodate GHG quantification and 
reporting for many types of goods or services.  Howe ver, the standard did not fully support product 
comparison, as that level of comparison would require a greater degree of prescriptiveness.  WRI/WBCSD intended to include guidance on how pr ograms, product category rule developers and 
other organizations or governments could specify additional prescriptiveness in order to make a valid 
product comparison possible.  In response to a qu estion, Ms Brown-Smatla n added that WRI/WBCSD 
was also considering developing an SME-targeted guidance document to help them better understand 
the requirements to measure the PCF. 
21. As for the structure of the process , Ms Brown-Smatlan explained that the WRI/WBCSD 
Secretariat convened and facilitated the process.  A Steering Committee of 25 members included government representatives, academia, major businesses and international organi sations.  The process 
structure included several technical working groups, with about 170 experts, for the development of 
both standards, and a stakeholder advisory group , with about 1,200 members, who were kept 
informed about the standard development and w ho were able to provide comments throughout the 
process.  Five stakeholder workshops were he ld (in Berlin, London, Guangzhou, Beijing and 
Washington D.C.), inviting the stakeholder advisory group to provide comments.   
22. In response to a question, Ms Brown-Smatlan noted that WRI/WBCSD attached great 
importance to an open and inclusive process, with a representation of over 40 countries, in developing 
the new standards. A majority of representatives originated from Europe and North America, but 
WRI/WBCSD specifically sought out participation fro m developing countries, such as Brazil, China 
and India.  WRI/WBCSD also organized a public  comment period and thus received over 2,000 
individual comments from around 65 different compan ies and organisations.  Ms Brown-Smatlan 
explained that a road testing  phase was underway (from January to June 2010) with the participation 
of 70 companies from a wide range of sizes, sectors, geographical locations and experiences in GHG 
accounting.  Companies from Brazil, China, India a nd South Africa were involved in this testing of 
the standards.  The results of the road testing woul d be used to revise the two standards before final 
publication.  
23. Finally, Ms Brown-Smatlan noted that harmonization  of standards could accomplish several 
important goals, such as:  the reduction in complia nce costs for business;  an increased confidence in 
the marketplace;  the facilitation of a valid compar ison and thus more informed choices by consumers;  
and an improvement in the availability of quality data.  She noted that the current versions of all three 
PCF standards that existed or were being developed, namely PA S 2050, ISO 14067, and GHG 
Product Life Cycle Standard, were generally aligned and that all three institutions would continue to 
work together towards further harmonization over th e coming year.  She was of the view that there 
was room in the marketplace for more than one  standard with an aligned methodology.    WT/CTE/M/49/Add.1 
Page 6  
 
  B. ISO
 14067  CARBON FOOTPRINT OF PRODUCTS - PART 1: QUANTIFICATION AND 
PART 2: C OMMUNICATION  
24. Mr Rob Steele , Secretary-General of the Internationa l Organization for Standardization (ISO), 
and Mr Klaus Radunsky , ISO Working Group Convener for ISO 14067, gave a joint presentation on 
the work of ISO to develop an international standard on carbon footprint of products, namely 
ISO 14067.  Mr Steele  provided an introductory overview of the ISO system.  He emphasized that 
ISO aimed to ensure the effective participation by developing countries in the standard setting 
process.  He clarified that ISO encouraged the proper implementation of standards, but was not 
involved in certification. 
25. Mr Steele introduced an ISO study,  published in February 2010,  on "International standards 
and private standards".5  He noted that a distinction should be  made between international standards, 
which used principles for international standard s set out in the context of WTO Agreement on 
Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) as well as disciplines established through acceptance of the TBT Code of Good Practice, and other standards that  may be described as consortia standards.  He 
voiced the opinion that there should be a move over time towards international standards in order to 
avoid the creation of non-tariff barriers to trade.  He stressed the need for formal international 
standardisation with wide participation across countries and between industries, consumers and 
governments.   
26. Finally, Mr Steele outlined ISO's current work  relating to climate change, such as GHG 
emissions quantification and reporting as well as carbon footprint of products.  Furthermore, ISO was 
working on energy efficiency and performance with the aim to assist industry to improve their energy 
management; on renewable energy sources, such as so lar and wind energy;  on the measurement of 
the impacts of climate change, on transpor tation and on sustainability perspectives. 
27. In the second part of the presentation, Mr Radunsky
 updated the CTE on the recent work in 
the Working Group 2 of TC 207, Sub Committee 7, which was developing the ISO standard 14067.  The development of this standard started in April 2008 and its publication was expected by the end of 
2011, or at latest by the beginning of 2012.  He poi nted out that due to growing interest, an increasing 
number of experts were participating in the m eetings.  At every stage, the Working Group had 
received about 1,000 comments which substantially  helped further improve the standard.  He 
highlighted the fact that several of these techni cal committee meetings took place in developing 
countries in order to ensure their active participati on.  In this context, he mentioned that Sweden 
(SIS/Sida Project) provided a capacity building program for countries in the Middle East and North 
Africa region in order to facilitate their effectiv e participation in the standard setting process.  
Mr Radunsky also explained that about 100 experts from 30 countries, including developing countries, such as Argentina, Brazil, China, Indonesi a, Malaysia and Mexico participated regularly in 
the meetings of Working Group 2. 
28. Mr Radunsky also provided a short overview  of the standard.  The objective of this standard 
was to provide clarity and consis tency for quantifying, monitoring, reporting and verifying the PCF to 
the benefit of organizations, governments, project  proponents and stakeholders.  In response to a 
question on definitions, he clarified that although the standard was called carbon footprint of products 
(and not GHG footprint of products), it addressed a ll relevant GHGs.  In f act, Annex A, which was 
mandatory to the standard, referred to all GHGs identified by the IPCC and its Fourth Assessment 
Report.  The name PCF was chosen because it w as already a common name in the marketplace.    
29. Part 1 of the standard laid down the principl es and requirements to quantify PCF based on the 
method of life cycle assessment.  At the heart of  the new standard would be the methodological 
                                                     
 
5 Study available at http://www.iso.org/iso/private_standards.pdf   WT/CTE/M/49/Add.1 
 Page 7 
 
 
  framework with an inventory analysis of PCF.  It would also address the question of allocation, which 
arose when processes yielded more than one product.  Mr Radunsky highlighted that the standard set 
some detailed product category rules in order to a llow consumers to compare carbon footprints across 
products.  Part 2 aimed to specify requirements for th e development of information to communicate 
the PCF and give guidelines on how to use such information on PCF.  The requirements and 
procedures for communication would be different between business-to-business communication and 
business-to-consumer communication.  On verification,  he clarified that ISO was taking a flexible 
approach, allowing verification according to various ISO standards.   
30. Mr Radunsky also emphasized that harmonization  was a common goal for PAS 2050, 
WRI/WBCSD and ISO.  In his view, it was of par ticular importance to have  similar requirements, 
principles, terms and definitions, and a similar level of  verification in all three standards.  In order to 
ensure harmonization, he explained that representa tives of the three initiatives participated actively in 
each others' meetings.  He echoed the previous speak er by stating that there was an added value of 
having more than one approach:  PAS 2050 was ma inly driven by the needs of investors, 
WRI/WBCSD mainly by the needs of the owners of the supply chain, whereas ISO was broader, 
including the interests of consumers and governments. 
31.  As for the role of PCF , it was not meant to be a barrier to trade, but rather a tool to facilitate 
the participation in supply chains, which were  required to provide information about the carbon 
footprint.  PCF standards helped ascertain and manage the GHG emissions along the supply chain and 
respond to new regulatory, shareholders and cons umers pressures.  PCF standards also helped 
improve the understanding of risks and opportunities of the supply chain and eventually achieve a 
higher productivity of the supply chain.  Key ch allenges in the development of PCF standards 
included the need to achieve the right bala nce between practicality and environmental 
integrity/credibility, the definition of product categor y rules and the question of timing.  In his view, 
measuring and reporting the PCF of  all goods and services could contribute to the transition to a zero 
or low carbon society.  He believed that the economic crisis offered a unique opportunity to 
restructure the supply chains of products and to ma ke them more efficient in terms of GHG emissions.  
32. As a follow-up to the reference to the Swed ish capacity building program, the representative 
of Sweden  mentioned a conference held in Stockholm in November 2009, where several developing 
countries gave insightful presentations.6  A representative of the Swedish Standards Institute (SIS) 
also informed that pre-seminars were conducted for the Middle-East and North African region in 
order to prepare eleven countries to participate mo re actively in the development of the ISO carbon 
footprint standard.  He mentioned that one of the issues brought up during the pre-seminars was the 
importance to have, especially for SMEs, a cost-ben efit approach of various methodologies in order to 
facilitate compliance with PCF standards.       
__________  
 
                                                      
6 See http://www.sis.se/