ANNEX I

Product Environmental Footprint Method

Abbreviations 10

Definitions 12

Relationship to other methods and standards 22

1. Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCRs) 23

1.1. Approach and examples for potential applications 23

2. General considerations for Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) studies 24

2.1. How to use this method 24

2.2. Principles for Product Environmental Footprint studies 24

2.3. Phases of a Product Environmental Footprint study 25

3. Defining the goal(s) and scope of the Product Environmental Footprint study 26

3.1. Goal definition 26

3.2. Scope Definition 27

3.2.1 Functional unit and reference flow 27

3.2.2. System boundary 28

3.2.3. Environmental Footprint impact categories 28

3.2.4. Additional information to be included in the PEF 30

3.2.5. Assumptions/ limitations 32

4. Life Cycle Inventory 32

4.1. Screening step 33

4.2. Life cycle stages 33

4.2.1. Raw material acquisition and pre-processing 33

4.2.2. Manufacturing 34

4.2.3. Distribution stage 34

4.2.4. Use stage 34

4.2.5. End of life (including product recovery and recycling) 35

4.3. Nomenclature for the life cycle inventory 36

4.4. Modelling requirements 36

4.4.1 Agricultural production 36

4.4.2. Electricity use 40

4.4.3. Transport and logistics 44

4.4.4. Capital goods – infrastructure and equipment 48

4.4.5. Storage at distribution centre or retail 48

4.4.6. Sampling procedure 49

4.4.7. Modelling requirements for the use stage 52

4.4.8. Recycled content and end of life modelling 54

4.4.9. Extended product lifetime 63

4.4.10 Greenhouse gases emissions and removals 66

4.4.11 Offsets 69

4.5 Handling multi-functional processes 69

4.5.1 Allocation in animal husbandry 70

4.6 Data collection requirements and quality requirements 78

4.6.1 Company-specific data 78

4.6.2 Secondary data 79

4.6.3 Datasets to be used 79

4.6.4 Cut-off 79

4.6.5 Data quality requirements 80

5. Environmental Footprint impact assessment 87

5.1. Classification and characterisation 87

5.1.1 Classification 87

5.1.2 Characterisation 87

5.2. Normalisation and weighting 88

5.2.1 Normalisation of Environmental Footprint impact assessment results 88

5.2.2 Weighting of Environmental Footprint impact assessment results 88

6. Interpretation of Product Environmental Footprint results 88

6.1. Introduction 88

6.2. Assessment of the robustness of the Product Environmental Footprint model 88

6.3. Identification of hotspots: most relevant impact categories, life cycle stages, processes and elementary flows 89

6.3.1 Procedure to identify the most relevant impact categories 89

6.3.2 Procedure to identify the most relevant life cycle stages 89

6.3.3 Procedure to identify the most relevant processes 90

6.3.4 Procedure to identify the most relevant elementary flows 90

6.3.5 Dealing with negative numbers 91

6.3.6 Summary of requirements 91

6.3.7 Example 91

6.4. Conclusions and recommendations 94

7. Product Environmental Footprint reports 94

7.1. Introduction 94

7.1.1. Summary 94

7.1.2. Aggregated EF compliant dataset 94

7.1.3. Main report 94

7.1.4. Validation statement 95

7.1.5. Annexes 95

7.1.6. Confidential report 95

8. Verification and validation of PEF studies, reports, and communication vehicles 95

8.1. Defining the scope of the verification 95

8.2. Verification procedure 96

8.3. Verifier(s) 96

8.3.1. Minimum requirements for verifier(s) 97

8.3.2. Role of the lead verifier in the verification team 98

8.4. Verification and validation requirements 98

8.4.1 Minimum requirements for the verification and validation of the PEF study 99

8.4.2 Verification and validation techniques 100

8.4.3 Data confidentiality 100

8.5 Outputs of the verification/ validation process 101

8.5.1 Content of the verification and validation report 101

8.5.2 Content of the validation statement 101

8.5.3 Validity of the verification and validation report and the validation statement 102

References 103

List of figures 108

List of tables 109

Abbreviations

ADEME Agence de l'Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l'Energie AF allocation factor AR allocation ratio B2B business to business B2C business to consumer BoC bill of components BoM bill of materials BP best practice BSI British Standards Institution CF characterization factor CFCs chlorofluorocarbons CFF Circular Footprint Formula CPA Classification of Products by Activity DC distribution centre DMI dry matter intake DNM Data Needs Matrix DQR Data Quality Rating EC European Commission EF environmental footprint EI environmental impact EMAS Eco-Management and Audit Scheme EMS Environmental Management Systems EoL end of life EPD Environmental Product Declaration FU functional unit GE gross energy intake GHG greenhouse gas GR geographical representativeness GRI Global Reporting Initiative GWP global warming potential ILCD International Reference Life Cycle Data System ILCD-EL International Reference Life Cycle Data System – Entry Level IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ISIC international standard industrial classification ISO International Organisation for Standardisation IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources JRC Joint Research Centre LCA life cycle assessment LCDN Life Cycle Data Network LCI life cycle inventory LCIA life cycle impact assessment LCT life cycle thinking LT lifetime NACE Nomenclature Générale des Activités Economiques dans les Communautés Européennes NDA non-disclosure agreement NGO non-governmental organisation NMVOC non-methane volatile compounds OEFSR organization environmental footprint sectorial rules P precision PAS publicly available specification PCR product category rules PEF product environmental footprint PEFCR product environmental footprint category rules PEF-RP PEF study of the representative product RF reference flow RP representative product SB system boundary SMRS sustainability measurement & reporting system SS supporting study TeR technological representativeness TiR time representativeness TS Technical Secretariat UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UUID Universally Unique Identifier WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development WRI World Resources Institute

Terminology: shall, should, may

This Annex I uses precise terminology to indicate the requirements, the recommendations and options that companies may choose.

The term “shall” indicates what is required for a PEF study to be compliant with this method.

The term “should” indicates a recommendation rather than a requirement. Any deviation from a “should” recommendation must be justified by the party conducting the study and made transparent.

The term “may” indicates an option that is permissible

Definitions

Activity data - information which is associated with processes while modelling Life Cycle Inventories (LCI). The aggregated LCI results of the process chains, which represent the activities of a process, are each multiplied by the corresponding activity data (1) and then combined to derive the environmental footprint associated with that process.

Examples of activity data include quantity of kilowatt-hours of electricity used, quantity of fuel used, output of a process (e.g. waste), number of hours equipment is operated, distance travelled, floor area of a building, etc.

Synonym of ‘non-elementary flow’.

Acidification – EF impact category that addresses impacts due to acidifying substances in the environment. Emissions of NOx, NH3 and SOx lead to releases of hydrogen ions (H+) when the gases are mineralised. The protons contribute to the acidification of soils and water when they are released in areas where the buffering capacity is low, resulting in forest decline and lake acidification.

Additional environmental information – environmental information outside the EF impact categories that is calculated and communicated alongside PEF results.

Additional technical information – non-environmental information that is calculated and communicated alongside PEF results.

Aggregated dataset - complete or partial life cycle of a product system that – next to the elementary flows (and possibly not relevant amounts of waste flows and radioactive wastes) – itemises only the product(s) of the process as reference flow(s) in the input/output list, but no other goods or services.

Aggregated datasets are also called ‘LCI results’ datasets. The aggregated dataset may have been aggregated horizontally and/or vertically.

Allocation – an approach to solving multi-functionality problems. It refers to ‘partitioning the input or output flows of a process or a product system between the product system under study and one or more other product systems‘.

Application specific – generic aspect of the specific application in which a material is used. For example, the average recycling rate of PET in bottles.

Attributional – process-based modelling intended to provide a static representation of average conditions, excluding market-mediated effects.

Average Data – production-weighted average of specific data.

Background processes – refers to those processes in the product life cycle for which no direct access to information is possible. For example, most of the upstream life-cycle processes and generally all processes further downstream will be considered part of the background processes.

Benchmark – a standard or point of reference against which any comparison may be made. In the context of PEF, the term ‘benchmark’ refers to the average environmental performance of the representative product sold in the EU market.

Bill of materials – a bill of materials or product structure (sometimes bill of material, BOM or associated list) is a list of the raw materials, sub-assemblies, intermediate assemblies, sub-components, parts and the quantities of each needed to manufacture the product in scope of the PEF study. In some sectors it is equivalent to the bill of components.

Business to business (B2B) – describes transactions between businesses, such as between a manufacturer and a wholesaler, or between a wholesaler and a retailer.

Business to consumers (B2C) – describes transactions between business and consumers, such as between retailers and consumers.

Characterisation – calculation of the magnitude of the contribution of each classified input/output to their respective EF impact categories, and aggregation of contributions within each category.

This requires a linear multiplication of the inventory data with characterisation factors for each substance and EF impact category of concern. For example, with respect to the EF impact category ‘climate change‘, the reference substance is CO2 and the reference unit is kg CO2-equivalents.

Characterisation factor – factor derived from a characterisation model which is applied to convert an assigned life cycle inventory result to the common unit of the EF impact category indicator.

Classification – assigning the material/energy inputs and outputs tabulated in the life cycle inventory to EF impact categories, according to each substance’s potential to contribute to each of the EF impact categories considered.

Climate change – EF impact category considering all inputs and outputs that result in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The consequences include increased average global temperatures and sudden regional climatic changes.

Co-function - any of two or more functions resulting from the same unit process or product system.

Commissioner of the EF study - organisation (or group of organisations), such as a commercial company or non-profit organisation, that finances the EF study in accordance with the PEF method and the relevant PEFCR, if available.

Company-specific data – refers to directly measured or collected data from one or more facilities (site-specific data) that are representative for the activities of the company (company is used as synonym of organisation). It is synonymous to ‘primary data‘. To determine the level of representativeness a sampling procedure may be applied.

Company-specific dataset – refers to a dataset (disaggregated or aggregated) compiled with company-specific data. In most cases the activity data is company-specific while the underlying sub-processes are datasets derived from background databases.

Comparative assertion – an environmental claim regarding the superiority or equivalence of one product versus a competing product that performs the same function (including the benchmark of the product category).

Comparison – a comparison, not including a comparative assertion, (graphic or otherwise) of two or more products based on the results of a PEF study and supporting PEFCRs.

Consumer – an individual member of the general public purchasing or using goods, property or services for private purposes.

Co-product – any of two or more products resulting from the same unit process or product system.

Cradle to gate – a partial product supply chain, from the extraction of raw materials (cradle) up to the manufacturer’s ‘gate‘. The distribution, storage, use stage and end of life stages of the supply chain are omitted.

Cradle to grave – a product’s life cycle that includes raw material extraction, processing, distribution, storage, use, and disposal or recycling stages. All relevant inputs and outputs are considered for all of the stages of the life cycle.

Critical review – process intended to ensure consistency between a PEFCR and the principles and requirements of the PEF method.

Data quality – characteristics of data that relate to their ability to satisfy stated requirements. Data quality covers various aspects, such as technological, geographical and time-related representativeness, as well as completeness and precision of the inventory data.

Data quality rating (DQR) - semi-quantitative assessment of the quality criteria of a dataset, based on technological representativeness, geographical representativeness, time-related representativeness, and precision. The data quality shall be considered as the quality of the dataset as documented.

Delayed emissions – emissions that are released over time, e.g. through long use or final disposal stages, versus a single emission at time t.

Direct elementary flows (also named elementary flows) – all output emissions and input resource uses that arise directly in the context of a process. Examples are emissions from a chemical process, or fugitive emissions from a boiler directly onsite.

Direct land use change (dLUC) – the transformation from one land use type into another, which takes place in a unique land area and does not lead to a change in another system.

Directly attributable – refers to a process, activity or impact occurring within the defined system boundary.

Disaggregation – the process that breaks down an aggregated dataset into smaller unit process datasets (horizontal or vertical). The disaggregation may help make data more specific. The process of disaggregation should never compromise or threaten to compromise the quality and consistency of the original aggregated dataset.

Downstream – occurring along a product supply chain after the point of referral.

Ecotoxicity, freshwater – EF impact category that addresses the toxic impacts on an ecosystem, which damage individual species and change the structure and function of the ecosystem. Ecotoxicity is a result of a variety of different toxicological mechanisms caused by the release of substances with a direct effect on the health of the ecosystem.

EF communication vehicles – all the possible ways that may be used to communicate the results of the EF study to the stakeholders (e.g. labels, environmental product declarations, green claims, websites, infographics, etc.).

EF-compliant dataset – dataset developed in compliance with the EF requirements, regularly updated by DG JRC (2).

Electricity tracking (3) – the process of assigning electricity generation attributes to electricity consumption.

Elementary flows – in the life cycle inventory, elementary flows include ‘material or energy entering the system being studied that has been drawn from the environment without previous human transformation, or material or energy leaving the system being studied that is released into the environment without subsequent human transformation‘.

Elementary flows include, for example, resources taken from nature or emissions into air, water, soil that are directly linked to the characterisation factors of the EF impact categories.

Environmental aspect – element of an organisation’s activities or products or services that interacts or can interact with the environment.

Environmental footprint (EF) impact assessment – phase of the PEF analysis aimed at understanding and evaluating the magnitude and significance of the potential environmental impacts for a product system throughout the life cycle of the product. The impact assessment methods provide impact characterisation factors for elementary flows, to aggregate the impact so as to obtain a limited number of midpoint indicators.

Environmental footprint (EF) impact assessment method – protocol for converting life cycle inventory data into quantitative contributions to an environmental impact of concern.

Environmental footprint (EF) impact category – class of resource use or environmental impact to which the life cycle inventory data are related.

Environmental footprint (EF) impact category indicator – quantifiable representation of an EF impact category.

Environmental impact – any change to the environment, whether adverse or beneficial, that wholly or partially results from an organisation’s activities, products or services.

Environmental mechanism – system of physical, chemical and biological processes for a given EF impact category linking the life cycle inventory results to EF category indicators.

Eutrophication – EF impact category related to nutrients (mainly nitrogen and phosphorus) from sewage outfalls and fertilised farmland that accelerate the growth of algae and other vegetation in water.

The degradation of organic material consumes oxygen, resulting in oxygen deficiency and, in some cases, fish death. Eutrophication translates the quantity of substances emitted into a common measure, expressed as the oxygen required for the degradation of dead biomass.

To assess the impacts due to eutrophication, three EF impact categories are used: eutrophication, terrestrial; eutrophication, freshwater; eutrophication, marine.

External communication – communication to any interested party other than the commissioner or the practitioner of the study.

Extrapolated data – data from a given process that is used to represent a similar process for which data is not available, on the assumption that it is reasonably representative.

Flow diagram – schematic representation of the flows occurring during one or more process stages within the life cycle of the product being assessed.

Foreground elementary flows - direct elementary flows (emissions and resources) for which access to primary data (or company-specific information) is available.

Foreground processes – those processes in the product life cycle for which direct access to information is available. For example, the producer’s site and other processes operated by the producer or its contractors (e.g. goods transport, head-office services, etc.).

Functional unit – defines the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the function(s) and/or service(s) provided by the product being evaluated. The functional unit definition answers the questions ‘what?’, ‘how much?’, ‘how well?’, and ‘for how long?’.

Gate to gate – a partial product supply chain that includes only the processes carried out on a product within a specific organisation or site.

Gate to grave – a partial product supply chain that includes only the distribution, storage, use, and disposal or recycling stages.

Global warming potential (GWP) – An index measuring the radiative forcing of a unit mass of a given substance accumulated over a chosen time horizon. It is expressed in terms of a reference substance (for example, CO2-equivalent units) and specified time horizon (e.g. GWP 20, GWP 100, GWP 500 – for 20, 100 and 500 years respectively).

By combining information on both radiative forcing (the energy flux caused by emission of the substance) and on the time it remains in the atmosphere, GWP gives a measure of a substance’s capacity to influence the global average surface-air temperature and therefore subsequently influence various climate parameters and their effects, such as storm frequency and intensity, rainfall intensity and frequency of flooding, etc.

Horizontal averaging – the action of aggregating multiple unit process datasets or aggregated process datasets in which each provides the same reference flow, to create a new process dataset.

Human toxicity – cancer – EF impact category that accounts for adverse health effects on human beings caused by the intake of toxic substances through inhalation of air, food/water ingestion, penetration through the skin – insofar as they are related to cancer.

Human toxicity - non cancer – EF impact category that accounts for the adverse health effects on human beings caused by the intake of toxic substances through inhalation of air, food/water ingestion, penetration through the skin – insofar as they are related to non-cancer effects that are not caused by particulate matter/respiratory inorganics or ionising radiation.

Independent external expert – competent person, not employed in a full-time or part-time role by the commissioner of the EF study or the user of the EF method, and not involved in defining the scope or conducting the EF study.

Indirect land use change (iLUC) – this occurs when a demand for a certain land use leads to changes, outside the system boundary, i.e. in other land use types. These indirect effects may be mainly assessed by means of economic modelling of the demand for land or by modelling the relocation of activities on a global scale.

Input flows – product, material or energy flow that enters a unit process. Products and materials include raw materials, intermediate products and co-products.

Intermediate product – output form of a unit process that in turn is input to other unit processes which require further transformation within the system. An intermediate product is a product that requires further processing before it is saleable to the final consumer.

Ionising radiation, human health – EF impact category that accounts for the adverse health effects on human health caused by radioactive releases.

Land use – EF impact category related to use (occupation) and conversion (transformation) of land area by activities such as agriculture, forestry, roads, housing, mining, etc.

Land occupation considers the effects of the land use, the amount of area involved and the duration of its occupation (changes in soil quality multiplied by area and duration). Land transformation considers the extent of changes in land properties and the area affected (changes in soil quality multiplied by the area).

Lead verifier – person taking part in a verification team with additional responsibilities, compared to the other verifiers in the team.

Life cycle – consecutive and interlinked stages of a product system, from raw material acquisition or generation from natural resources to final disposal.

Life cycle approach – takes into consideration the spectrum of resource flows and environmental interventions associated with a product from a supply-chain perspective, including all stages from raw material acquisition through processing, distribution, use, and end of life processes, and all relevant related environmental impacts (instead of focusing on a single issue).

Life cycle assessment (LCA) – compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle.

Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) – phase of life cycle assessment that aims to understand and evaluate the magnitude and significance of the potential environmental impacts for a system throughout the life cycle.

The LCIA methods used provide impact characterisation factors for elementary flows to aggregate the impact, to obtain a limited number of midpoint and/or damage indicators.

Life cycle inventory (LCI) - the combined set of exchanges of elementary, waste and product flows in a LCI dataset.

Life cycle inventory (LCI) dataset - a document or file with life cycle information of a specified product or other reference (e.g., site, process), covering descriptive metadata and quantitative life cycle inventory. A LCI dataset could be a unit process dataset, partially aggregated, or an aggregated dataset.

Loading rate – ratio of actual load to the full load or capacity (e.g. mass or volume) that a vehicle carries per trip.

Material-specific – a generic aspect of a material. For example, the recycling rate of polyethylene terephthalate (PET).

Multi-functionality – if a process or facility provides more than one function, i.e. it delivers several goods and/or services (‘co-products’), then it is ‘multifunctional‘. In these situations, all inputs and emissions linked to the process will be partitioned between the product of interest and the other co-products, according to clearly stated procedures.

Non-elementary (or complex) flows – in the life cycle inventory, non-elementary flows include all the inputs (e.g. electricity, materials, transport processes) and outputs (e.g. waste, by-products) in a system that need further modelling efforts to be transformed into elementary flows.

Synonym of 'activity data'.

Normalisation – after the characterisation step, normalisation is the step in which the life cycle impact assessment results are divided by normalisation factors that represent the overall inventory of a reference unit (e.g. a whole country or an average citizen).

Normalised life cycle impact assessment results express the relative shares of the impacts of the analysed system, in terms of the total contributions to each impact category per reference unit.

Displaying the normalised life cycle impact assessment results for the different impact topics next to each other shows which impact categories are affected most and least by the analysed system.

Normalised life cycle impact assessment results reflect only the contribution of the analysed system to the total impact potential, not the severity/relevance of the respective total impact. Normalised results are dimensionless, but not additive.

Organisation Environmental Footprint Sectorial Rules (OEFSRs) - sector specific, life-cycle based rules that complement general methodological guidance for OEF studies by providing further specification at the level of a specific sector.

OEFSRs help to shift the focus of the OEF study towards those aspects and parameters that matter the most, and hence contribute to increased relevance, reproducibility and consistency of the results by reducing costs versus a study based on the comprehensive requirements of the OEF method. Only the OEFSRs developed by or in cooperation with the European Commission, or adopted by the European Commission or as EU acts are recognised as in line with this method.

Output flows – product, material or energy flow that leaves a unit process. Products and materials include raw materials, intermediate products, co-products and releases. Output flows are also considered to cover elementary flows.

Ozone depletion – EF impact category that accounts for the degradation of stratospheric ozone due to emissions of ozone-depleting substances, for example long-lived chlorine and bromine containing gases (e.g. chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), halons).

Partially disaggregated dataset - a dataset with an LCI that contains elementary flows and activity data, and that yields a complete aggregated LCI data set when combined with its complementing underlying datasets.

Partially disaggregated dataset at level-1 - a partially disaggregated dataset at level-1 contains elementary flows and activity data for one level down in the supply chain, while all complementing underlying datasets are in their aggregated form.

Figure 1

Example of dataset partially disaggregated at Level-1

L1442022EN110120211215EN0001.00012176Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/2279of 15 December 2021on the use of the Environmental Footprint methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisationsTHE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 191 and 292 thereof,Whereas:(1)Reliable and correct measurement and information on the environmental performance of products and organisations is an essential element in the environmental decision-making of a wide range of actors.(2)The Product Environmental Footprint and Organisation Environmental Footprint methods (hereafter Environmental Footprint methods) enable companies to measure and communicate their environmental performance and thereby compete on the market based on reliable environmental information. They contain detailed instructions on how to model and calculate the environmental impacts of products and organisations. The Environmental Footprint methods build on existing, internationally accepted practices, indicators and rules.(3)In 2013, the Commission adopted Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EUCommission Recommendation 2013/179/EU of 9 April 2013 on the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations (OJ L 124, 4.5.2013, p. 1). to promote the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations. It recommends their use to Member States, companies, private organisations and the financial community, and contains two annexes establishing the proposed methods.(4)The Commission established a framework for developing further the Environmental Footprint methods with the participation of a wide range of stakeholders, including industry, and particularly SMEs, through a pilot phase.(5)In the pilot phase running from 2013 to 2018, the development of product-specific rules (Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules, PEFCRs) and sector-specific rules (Organisation Environmental Footprint Sector Rules, OEFSRs) was tested with the active participation of stakeholders, resulting in the finalisation of 19 PEFCRs and 2 OEFSRs.(6)The Environmental Footprint methods were also updated on several technical aspects, such as: (1) application of the materiality principle (act where it matters); (2) the definition of a benchmark corresponding to the Environmental Footprint profile of the average production the market, also called representative product / organisation; (3) agreements on the modelling of key aspects concerning climate change, electricity, transport, infrastructure & equipment, packaging, end-of-life and agriculture; (4) inclusion of normalisation and weighting; (5) guidelines on how to include biodiversity as additional environmental information; (6) improvement of some impact assessment methods, with particular attention to the toxicity-related methods (human toxicity – cancer effects; human toxicity – non-cancer effects; eco-toxicity freshwater, water use, land use, resources and particulate matter); (7) defining characterisation factors based on REACH data; (8) and a guide on Environmental Footprint compliant datasets.(7)The results of the pilot phase were presented in the 2019 Commission Staff Working Document on Sustainable Products in a Circular Economy – Towards an EU Product Policy Framework contribution to the Circular EconomySWD(2019) 91final.. The same staff working document also indicated possible uses of the Environmental Footprint methods in policy development at EU level. Since 2019, and following a call of interest addressed to industry, the Commission continued the development of new Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules.(8)The Council Conclusions of October 2019https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/40928/st12791-en19.pdf welcomed the piloting of the EU Environmental Footprint methodology and all initiatives to support the communication of environmental impacts based on the Environmental Footprint pilot.(9)The European Green DealCOM(2019) 640 final. aims to mobilise industries for a clean and circular economy and underlines that to enable buyers to make more sustainable decisions and reduce the risk of green washing, reliable, comparable and verifiable information is needed.(10)In its Communication A new Circular Economy Action Plan – For a cleaner and more competitive EuropeCOM(2020) 98 final., the Commission highlighted that companies should substantiate their environmental claims using Product and Organisation Environmental Footprint methods and committed to test the integration of these methods in the EU Ecolabel.(11)The Communication on a New Consumer Agenda – Strengthening consumer resilience for sustainable recoveryCOM(2020) 696 final. indicates that to stimulate more voluntary corporate action, the Commission plans to work with economic operators to encourage their voluntary pledges to disclose to consumers the company’s environmental footprint, improve their sustainability and reduce the impact on the environment.(12)The Council Conclusions of December 2020 noted that the Product Environmental Footprint method has the potential of being one underlying methodology for various product policy tools in the EU and the framework for sustainable products, taking also other suitable methodologies into account.(13)The use of the Environmental Footprint methods is already foreseen in the context of EU policies and legislation such as the Taxonomy RegulationRegulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 (OJ L 198, 22.6.2020, p. 13)., the Sustainable Batteries InitiativeCOM(2020) 798 final. and the Green Consumption Pledgehttps://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/working_document_for_the_green_consumption_pledges_0.pdf.(14)In the light of these developments, Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU should be updated to integrate the technical developments of the pilot phase, in particular the development of category and sector rules, and therefore provide a sound basis for further policy development and implementation. It should facilitate companies to calculate their environmental performance based on reliable, verifiable and comparable information, and for other actors (public administrations, NGOs, business partners, for example) to have access to such information. It should also enhance the development of an EU Environmental Footprint database.(15)SMEs might lack the expertise and resources to address the requests for life cycle environmental performance information. Therefore, support to SMEs should be provided not only by the Commission, but also by Member States and industrial associations.(16)As new, internationally agreed approaches emerge, the Environmental Footprint methods are expected to be updated to integrate new indicators or modelling rules. These aspects are discussed in the Commission expert group on the Environmental Footprint Technical Advisory Board. Impacts related to biodiversity are for instance currently being considered.(17)As announced in the new Circular Economy Action Plan, the Commission will explore the development of a regulatory framework for certification of carbon removals based on robust and transparent carbon accounting to monitor and verify the authenticity of carbon removals. This framework will be developed in mutual synergy and consistency with the environmental footprint method and when necessary be reflected in future updates of this Recommendation.(18)While this recommendation focuses on environmental impacts, in the global context concerns related to economic and social impacts, including of labour practices, play an increasingly important role. The Commission will continue to closely follow these developments as well as methods of analysing environmental, social and economic supply chain impacts of products consumed in the EU that have effects along the supply chain in third countries.(19)This Recommendation should replace the Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU,HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:1.PURPOSE AND SCOPE1.1.This Recommendation promotes the use of the Environmental Footprint methods in relevant policies and schemes related to the measurement and/or communication of the life cycle environmental performance of all kinds of products, including both goods and services, and of organisations.1.2.This Recommendation is addressed to Member States and to private and public organisations that measure or intend to measure the life cycle environmental performance of their product or of their organisation, and/or communicate or intend to communicate life cycle environmental performance information to any private, public and civil society stakeholder in the EU.1.3.This Recommendation does not apply to the implementation of EU mandatory legislation that foresees a specific methodology for the calculation of the life cycle environmental performance of products or organisations. This Recommendation may however be referred to by EU legislation or policy as a method for the calculation of the life cycle environmental performance of products or organisations.2.DEFINITIONSFor the purposes of this Recommendation, the following definitions apply:(a)Product Environmental Footprint (hereinafter PEF) method: general method to measure and communicate the potential life cycle environmental impact of a product as laid down in Annex I.(b)Organisation Environmental Footprint (hereinafter OEF) method: general method to measure and communicate the potential life cycle environmental impact of an organisation as laid down in Annex III.(c)Product Environmental Footprint: result of a Product Environmental Footprint study based on the Product Environmental Footprint method.(d)Organisation Environmental Footprint: result of an Organisation Environmental Footprint study based on the Organisation Environmental Footprint method.(e)Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (hereinafter PEFCRs): Product category specific, life cycle based rules that complement general methodological guidance for PEF studies by providing further specification at the level of a specific product category. If a PEFCR exists, this should be used for calculating the environmental footprint of a product belonging to that product category.(f)Organisation Environmental Footprint Sector Rules (hereinafter OEFSRs): Sector-specific, life-cycle-based rules that complement general methodological guidance for OEF studies by providing further specification at the level of a specific sector. If an OEFSR exists, this should be used for calculating the environmental footprint of an organisation belonging to the sector.(g)Life cycle environmental performance: quantified measurement of the potential environmental impacts taking all relevant life cycle stages of a product or organisation into account, from a supply chain perspective.(h)Communication of life cycle environmental performance: any disclosure of life cycle environmental performance information, including to business partners, investors, public bodies or consumers.(i)Organisation: a company, corporation, firm, enterprise, authority or institution, or part or combination thereof, whether incorporated or not, public or private, that has its own functions and administrations.(j)Scheme: for-profit or not-for-profit initiative taken by private companies or an association thereof, by a public-private partnership, by governmental or by non-governmental organisations that requires the measurement or communication of life cycle environmental performance.(k)Industrial association: organisation representing private companies that are members of the organisation or private companies belonging to a sector at local, regional national or international level.(l)Financial community: all actors providing financial services (including financial advice), including banks, investors and insurance companies.3.USE OF THE PEF AND OEF METHODS IN MEMBER STATES’ POLICIESMember States should:3.1.Use the PEF method or the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs in voluntary policies involving the measurement or communication of the life cycle environmental performance of products or organisations, as appropriate while ensuring that such policies do not create obstacles to the free movement of goods in the EU.3.2.Consider life cycle environmental performance information or claims based on the use of the PEF method or the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs as valid in relevant national schemes involving the measurement or communication of the life cycle environmental performance of products or organisations.3.3.Make efforts to increase the availability of high quality life cycle data by setting up actions to develop, review and make available national databases and contributing to populating existing public databases, based on requirements for Environmental Footprint compliant datasets. Coherence between the different databases should be ensured between themselves..3.4.Contribute to Commission efforts in the area of availability of high quality of EF compliant datasets.3.5.Provide assistance and tools for SMEs to help them measure, improve and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of their products or organisation based on the PEF or the OEF method, on PEFCRs and OEFSRs. In doing so, authorities should avoid to duplicate existing tools, where these are fit for purpose.3.6.Encourage the use of the OEF method and related OEFSRs, where applicable, for measuring or communicating the life cycle environmental performance of public organisations.3.7.Promote and support the use of PEF and OEF methods at international level, including in multilateral forums or in relation to schemes on the measurement or communication of life cycle environmental performance. In doing so, authorities should consider providing assistance and tools to SMEs in EU partner countries for the measurement and improvement of the life-cycle environmental performance of any intermediate goods or semi-finished products they produce.4.USE OF THE PEF AND OEF METHODS BY COMPANIES AND OTHER PRIVATE ORGANISATIONSCompanies and other private organisations deciding to measure or communicate the life cycle environmental performance of their products or organisation should:4.1.Use the PEF method and the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs for the measurement or communication of the life cycle environmental performance of their products or organisation.4.2.Contribute to the review of public databases and populate these with high quality life cycle data in line with requirements on Environmental Footprint compliant datasets. Contribute to Commission efforts in the area of availability of high quality of EF compliant datasets.4.3.Consider providing support to companies in their supply chains, especially SME, to provide information based on PEF and OEF or PEFCRs and OEFSRs and to improve their organisations’ and their products’ life cycle environmental performance.Industrial associations should:4.4.Promote the use of the PEF method and the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs among their membership.4.5.Contribute to the review of public databases and populate these with high quality life cycle data in line with the requirements on Environmental Footprint compliant datasets. Contribute to Commission efforts in the area of availability of high quality of EF compliant datasets.4.6.Provide simplified calculation tools and expertise to help SME members calculate the life cycle environmental performance of their products or organisation based on the PEF method or the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs.4.7.Promote and support the use of PEF and OEF methods at international level, including in multilateral forums or in relation to schemes on the measurement or communication of life cycle environmental performance.5.USE OF THE PEF AND OEF METHODS AND RELATED PEFCRS AND OEFSRS IN SCHEMES RELATED TO THE MEASUREMENT OR COMMUNICATION OF LIFE CYCLE ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE5.1Schemes related to the measurement or communication of life cycle environmental performance should use the PEF method and the OEF method and related PEFCRs/OEFSRs as a reference method for the measurement or communication of the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations.6.USE OF THE PEF AND OEF METHODS AND RELATED PEFCRS/OEFSRS BY THE FINANCIAL COMMUNITYMembers of the financial community should, if appropriate:6.1.Promote the use of life cycle environmental performance information calculated on the basis of the PEF method or the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs in the assessment of financial risk related to life cycle environmental performance.6.2.Promote the use of information based on OEF studies in their assessment of performance levels for the environmental component of sustainability indices.6.3.Promote and support the use of PEF and OEF methods at international level, including in multilateral forums or in relation to schemes on the measurement or communication of life cycle environmental performance.7.VERIFICATION7.1.If PEF and OEF studies are disclosed to third parties, the studies should be verified according to the requirements of the PEF and OEF methods and any specific indications in PEFCRs and OEFSRs.8.REPORTING ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECOMMENDATION8.1.Member States are invited to inform the Commission of actions taken in light of this Recommendation on a yearly basis. The first provision of information should be transmitted one year after the adoption of this Recommendation. Information transmitted should include:(a)how the PEF method and the OEF method and related PEFCRs/OEFSRs are used in policy initiative(s);(b)number of products and organisations covered by the initiative;(c)incentives related to life cycle environmental performance;(d)initiatives related to the development of high quality life cycle data;(e)assistance provided to SMEs in the provision of life cycle environmental information and in improving their life cycle environmental performance;(f)eventual problems or bottlenecks identified with the use of the methods.9.REPEALING OF PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONCommission Recommendation 2013/179/EU is hereby repealed. References to the repealed Recommendation shall be construed as references to the present Recommendation.Done at Brussels, 15 December 2021.For the CommissionVirginijus SinkevičiusMember of the Commission

Particulate matter – EF impact category that accounts for the adverse effects on human health caused by emissions of particulate matter (PM) and its precursors (NOx, SOx, NH3).

PEFCR supporting study – PEF study based on a draft PEFCR. It is used to confirm the decisions taken in the draft PEFCR before the final PEFCR is released.

PEF profile – The quantified results of a PEF study. It includes the quantification of the impacts for the various impact categories and the additional environmental information considered necessary to report.

PEF report – Document that summarises the results of the PEF study.

PEF study of the representative product (PEF-RP) – PEF study carried out on the representative product(s) and intended to identify the most relevant life cycle stages, processes, elementary flows, impact categories and any other major requirements needed for to define the benchmark for the product category/ sub-categories in scope of the PEFCR.

PEF study – term used to identify all the actions needed to calculate the PEF results. It includes the modelling, data collection and analysis of the results. PEF study results are the basis for drafting PEF reports.

Photochemical ozone formation – EF impact category that accounts for the formation of ozone at the ground level of the troposphere caused by photochemical oxidation of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and carbon monoxide (CO) in the presence of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sunlight.

High concentrations of ground-level tropospheric ozone damage vegetation, human respiratory tracts and manmade materials, by reacting with organic materials.

Population - any finite or infinite aggregation of individuals, not necessarily animate, subject to a statistical study.

Primary data – data from specific processes within the supply chain of the user of the PEF method or user of the PEFCR.

Such data may take the form of activity data, or foreground elementary flows (life cycle inventory). Primary data are site-specific, company-specific (if multiple sites for the same product) or supply chain specific.

Primary data may be obtained through meter readings, purchase records, utility bills, engineering models, direct monitoring, material/product balances, stoichiometry, or other methods for obtaining data from specific processes in the value chain of the user of the PEF method or user of the PEFCR.

In this method, primary data is a synonym of ‘company-specific data’ or ‘supply chain specific data’.

Product – any good or service.

Product category – group of products (or services) that can fulfil equivalent functions.

Product category rules (PCRs) – set of specific rules, requirements and guidelines for developing Type III environmental declarations for one or more product categories.

Product environmental footprint category rules (PEFCRs) – product category-specific, life cycle-based rules that complement general methodological guidance for PEF studies by providing further specification for a specific product category.

PEFCRs help to shift the focus of the PEF study towards those aspects and parameters that matter most, and hence increase the relevance, reproducibility and consistency of the results by reducing costs, compared to a study based on the comprehensive requirements of the PEF method.

Only PEFCRs developed by or in cooperation with the European Commission, or adopted by the Commission or as EU acts, are recognised as being in line with this method.

Product flow – products entering from or leaving to another product system.

Product system – collection of unit processes with elementary and product flows, performing one or more defined functions, which model the life cycle of a product.

Raw material – primary or secondary material used to produce a product.

Reference flow – measure of the outputs from processes in a given product system required to fulfil the function expressed by the functional unit.

Refurbishment – the process of restoring components to a functional and/or satisfactory state compared to the original speciﬁcation (providing the same function), using methods such as resurfacing, repainting, etc. Refurbished products may have been tested and verified to function properly.

Releases – emissions to air and discharges to water and soil.

Representative product (model) – this may be a real or virtual (non-existing) product. The virtual product should be calculated based on average European market sales-weighted characteristics for all existing technologies/materials covered by the product category or sub-category.

Other weighting sets may be used, if justified – for example weighted average based on mass (ton of material) or weighted average based on product units (pieces).

Representative sample – a representative sample with respect to one or more variables is a sample in which the distribution of these variables is exactly the same (or similar) as in the population of which the sample is a subset.

Resource use, fossil – EF impact category that addresses the use of non-renewable fossil natural resources (e.g. natural gas, coal, oil).

Resource use, minerals and metals – EF impact category that addresses the use of non-renewable abiotic natural resources (minerals and metals).

Review – procedure intended to ensure that the process of developing or revising a PEFCR has been carried out in accordance with the requirements provided in the PEF method and part A of Annex II.

Review report - a documentation of the review process that includes the review statement, all relevant information about the review process, the detailed comments from the reviewer(s) and the corresponding responses, and the outcome. The document shall carry the electronic or handwritten signature of the reviewer (or the lead reviewer, if a reviewer panel is involved)

Review panel – team of experts (reviewers) who will review the PEFCR

Reviewer – independent external expert conducting the review of the PEFCR and possibly taking part in a reviewer panel.

Sample – a subset containing the characteristics of a larger population. Samples are used in statistical testing when population sizes are too large for the test to include all possible members or observations. A sample should represent the whole population and not reflect bias toward a specific attribute.

Secondary data – data that is not from a specific process within the supply-chain of the company performing a PEF study.

This refers to data that is not directly collected, measured or estimated by the company, but rather sourced from a third party LCI database or other sources.

Secondary data includes industry average data (e.g., from published production data, government statistics and industry associations), literature studies, engineering studies and patents) and may also be based on financial data, and contain proxy and other generic data.

Primary data that go through a horizontal aggregation step are considered to be secondary data.

Sensitivity analysis – systematic procedures for estimating the effects of the choices made regarding methods and data on the results of a PEF study.

Site-specific data – directly measured or collected data from one facility (production site).

A synonym of ‘primary data’.

Single overall score – sum of the weighted EF results of all environmental impact categories.

Specific data – directly measured or collected data representative of activities at a specific facility or set of facilities.

A synonym of ‘primary data’.

Subdivision – subdividing involves disaggregating multifunctional processes or facilities to isolate the input flows directly associated with each process or facility output. The process is investigated to see whether it may be subdivided. Where subdivision is possible, inventory data should be collected only for those unit processes directly attributable to the products/services of concern.

Sub-population – any finite or infinite aggregation of individuals, not necessarily animate, subject to a statistical study that constitutes a homogenous sub-set of the whole population.

A synonym of ‘stratum’.

Sub-processes – processes used to represent the activities of the level 1 processes (=building blocks). Sub-processes may be presented in their (partially) aggregated form (see Figure 1).

Sub-sample - a sample of a sub-population.

Supply chain – all of the upstream and downstream activities associated with the operations of the user of the PEF method, including the use of sold products by consumers and the end-of-life treatment of sold products after consumer use.

Supply chain-specific – refers to a specific aspect of a company’s specific supply chain. For example, the recycled content of aluminium produced by a specific company.

System boundary – definition of aspects included or excluded from the study. For example, for a ‘cradle-to-grave‘ EF analysis, the system boundary includes all activities ranging from the extraction of raw materials, through processing, distribution, storage and use, to the disposal or recycling stages.

System boundary diagram – graphic representation of the system boundary defined for the PEF study.

Temporary carbon storage – this happens when a product reduces the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere or creates negative emissions, by removing and storing carbon for a limited amount of time.

Type III environmental declaration – an environmental declaration providing quantified environmental data using predetermined parameters and, where relevant, additional environmental information.

Uncertainty analysis – procedure for assessing uncertainty in the results of a PEF study due to data variability and choice-related uncertainty.

Unit process – smallest element considered in the LCI for which input and output data are quantified.

Unit process, black box – process chain or plant-level unit process. This covers horizontally averaged unit processes across different sites. Also covers multi-functional unit processes where the different co-products undergo different processing steps within the black box, hence causing allocation problems for this dataset (4).

Unit process, single operation - unit operation type unit process that cannot be further subdivided. Covers multi-functional processes of the unit operation type (5).

Upstream – occurring along the supply chain of purchased goods/ services prior to entering the system boundary.

User of the PEFCR – stakeholder producing a PEF study based on a PEFCR.

User of the PEF method – stakeholder producing a PEF study based on the PEF method.

User of the PEF results – stakeholder using the PEF results for any internal or external purpose.

Validation – confirmation – by the environmental footprint verifier – that the information and data in the PEF study, PEF report and communication vehicles are reliable, credible and correct.

Validation statement – conclusive document aggregating the conclusions from the verifiers or the verification team regarding the EF study. This document is mandatory and shall carry the electronic or handwritten signature of the verifier or (where a verification panel is involved) the lead verifier.

Verification – conformity assessment process carried out by an environmental footprint verifier to demonstrate whether the PEF study has been carried out in compliance with Annex I

Verification report – documentation of the verification process and findings, including detailed comments from the verifier(s), as well as the corresponding responses. This document is mandatory, but it may be confidential. The document shall carry the electronic or handwritten signature of the verifier or (where a verification panel is involved) the lead verifier.

Verification team – team of verifiers who will verify the EF study, EF report and EF communication vehicles.

Verifier – independent external expert performing a verification of the EF study and possibly taking part in a verification team.

Vertical aggregation – technical or engineering-based aggregation refers to vertical aggregation of unit processes that are directly linked within a single facility or process train. Vertical aggregation involves combining unit process datasets (or aggregated process datasets) together, linked by a flow.

Waste – substances or objects which the holder intends (or is required) to dispose of.

Water use – EF impact category that represents the relative available water remaining per area in a watershed, after demand from humans and aquatic ecosystems has been met. It assesses the potential for water deprivation, to either humans or ecosystems, based on the assumption that the less water remaining available per area, the more likely it is that another user will be deprived.

Weighting – a step that supports the interpretation and communication of the analysis results. PEF results are multiplied by a set of weighting factors (in %), which reflect the perceived relative importance of the impact categories considered. Weighted EF results may be directly compared across impact categories, and also summed across impact categories to obtain a single overall score.

Relationship to other methods and standards

Each requirement specified in the PEF method was developed taking into consideration the recommendations of similar, widely recognised product environmental accounting methods and guidance documents.

Specifically, the methodological guides considered were:

ISO standards, in particular:

(a) EN ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Principles and framework;

(b) EN ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Requirements and guidelines;

(c) EN ISO 14067:2018 Greenhouse gases — Carbon footprint of products — Requirements and guidelines for quantification;

(d) ISO 14046:2014 Environmental management — Water footprint — Principles, requirements and guidelines;

(e) EN ISO 14020:2001 Environmental labels and declarations — General principles;

(f) EN ISO 14021:2016 Environmental labels and declarations — Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling)

(g) EN ISO 14025:2010 Environmental labels and declarations – Type III environmental declarations – Principles and procedures;

(h) ISO 14050:2020 Environmental management — vocabulary

(i) CEN ISO/TS 14071:2016Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Critical review processes and reviewer competencies: Additional requirements and guidelines to EN ISO 14044:2006

(j) ISO 17024:2012 Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodies operating certification of persons.

(k) PEF Guide, Annex to Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU on the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations (April 2013);

(l) ILCD (International Reference Life Cycle Data System) Handbook (6) developed by EC Joint Research Centre;

(m) Ecological Footprint Standards (7);

(n) Greenhouse Gas Protocol - Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard (8) (World Resources Institute - WRI/ World Business Council for Sustainable Development - WBCSD);

(o) BP X30-323-0:2015 General principles for an environmental communication on mass market products (Agence de la transition écologique, ADEME) (9);

(p) PAS 2050:2011 Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services (British Standards Institution - BSI);

(q) ENVIFOOD Protocol (10).

(r) FAO:2016. Environmental performance of animal feeds supply chains: Guidelines for assessment. LEAP Partnership.

A detailed description of most of the analysed methods and the outcome of the analysis is available in ‘Analysis of Existing Environmental Footprint methodologies for Products and Organisations: Recommendations, Rationale, and Alignment‘ (11).

1. Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCRs)

The primary objective of a PEFCR is to fix a consistent and specific set of rules for calculating the relevant environmental information of products belonging to the product category in scope. An important objective is to focus on what matters most for a specific product category, to make PEF studies easier, faster and less costly.

An equally important objective is to enable comparisons and comparative assertions in all cases where this is feasible, relevant and appropriate. Comparisons and comparative assertions are allowed only if PEF studies are conducted in compliance with a PEFCR. All PEF studies shall be conducted in compliance with a PEFCR, if a PEFCR is available for the product in scope.

Requirements for developing PEFCRs are specified in part A of Annex II. A PEFCR may further specify requirements made in the PEF method and add new requirements, if the PEF method leaves more than one choice. The objective is to ensure that PEFCRs are developed according to the PEF method and that they provide the specifications needed to achieve the comparability, increased reproducibility, consistency, relevance, focus and efficiency of PEF studies.

PEFCRs should, as far as possible, and recognising the different application contexts, be compliant with existing relevant international product category rules (PCR). If other PCRs are available from other schemes, these are to be listed and evaluated. They may be used as a basis for developing a PEFCR, in line with the requirements provided in Annex II.

1.1. Approach and examples for potential applications

The rules provided in the PEF method enable practitioners to conduct PEF studies that are more reproducible, consistent, robust, verifiable and comparable. The results of PEF studies are the basis for the provision of EF information and they may be used in a diverse number of potential fields of application.

Applications of PEF studies without an existing PEFCR for the product(s) in scope will include:

1) In-house applications a) optimising processes along the life cycle of a product, b) supporting environmental management, c) identifying environmental hotspots, d) supporting product design that minimises environmental impacts along the life cycle, e) environmental performance improvement and tracking,

2) External applications: (e.g. business to business (B2B), business to consumer (B2C)): a) applying or complying with policies referring to the PEF, b) responding to customers and consumers demands, c) marketing, d) co-operation along supply chains to optimise the product along the life cycle, e) participating in 3rd party schemes related to environmental claims or giving visibility to products that calculate and communicate their life cycle environmental performance. Applications of PEF studies performed in compliance with an existing PEFCR for the product in scope, in addition to those listed above, will include: — Comparisons and comparative assertions (i.e. claims of overall superiority or equivalence for the environmental performance of one product compared to another (based on EN ISO 14040:2006)) based on PEF studies, — Comparison and comparative assertions against the benchmark of the product category, followed by a grading of other products according to their performance versus the benchmark, — Identifying significant environmental impacts common to a product group, — Reputational schemes giving visibility to products that calculate their life cycle environmental performance, — Green procurement (public and corporate).

2. General considerations for Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) studies

2.1. How to use this method

This method provides the rules necessary to conduct a PEF study and is presented in a sequential manner, in the order of the methodological steps that shall be completed when calculating a PEF.

Where appropriate, sections begin with a general description of the methodological step, along with an overview of necessary considerations and supporting examples.

When additional requirements for creating PEFCRs are specified, these are available in Annex II.

2.2. Principles for Product Environmental Footprint studies

To perform a PEF study the following two requirements shall be met:

i) The bill of material (BoM) shall be specific of the product in scope,

ii) The modelling of the manufacturing processes shall be based on company-specific data (e.g. energy needed to assemble the materials/components of the product in scope).

Note: For companies producing more than one product, the activity data used (including the BoM) shall be specific to the product in scope of the study.

To produce reliable, reproducible, and verifiable PEF studies, a core suite of analytical principles shall be adhered to. These principles provide overarching guidance on how to apply the PEF method. They shall be considered with respect to each phase of PEF studies, from defining the goal and the scope, through data collection, impact assessment, reporting and verification of study outcomes.

Users of this method shall observe the following principles in conducting a PEF study:

(1) Relevance

All methods used and data collected for the purpose of quantifying the PEF shall be as relevant to the study as possible.

(2) Completeness

Quantification of the PEF shall include all environmentally relevant material/energy flows and other environmental interventions as required for adherence to the defined system boundary, the data requirements, and the impact assessment methods employed.

(3) Consistency

Strict conformity to this method shall be observed in all steps of the PEF study, to ensure internal consistency and comparability.

(4) Accuracy

All reasonable effort shall be taken to reduce uncertainties in product system modelling and the reporting of results.

(5) Transparency

PEF information shall be disclosed in such a way as to provide intended users with the necessary basis for decision-making, and for stakeholders to assess its robustness and reliability.

2.3. Phases of a Product Environmental Footprint study

A number of phases shall be completed in carrying out a PEF study in line with this method - i.e. goal definition, scope definition, life cycle inventory (LCI), life cycle impact assessment (LCIA), interpretation of PEF results and PEF reporting – see Figure 2.

Figure 2

Phases of a Product Environmental Footprint study

L1442022EN110120211215EN0001.00012176Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/2279of 15 December 2021on the use of the Environmental Footprint methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisationsTHE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 191 and 292 thereof,Whereas:(1)Reliable and correct measurement and information on the environmental performance of products and organisations is an essential element in the environmental decision-making of a wide range of actors.(2)The Product Environmental Footprint and Organisation Environmental Footprint methods (hereafter Environmental Footprint methods) enable companies to measure and communicate their environmental performance and thereby compete on the market based on reliable environmental information. They contain detailed instructions on how to model and calculate the environmental impacts of products and organisations. The Environmental Footprint methods build on existing, internationally accepted practices, indicators and rules.(3)In 2013, the Commission adopted Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EUCommission Recommendation 2013/179/EU of 9 April 2013 on the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations (OJ L 124, 4.5.2013, p. 1). to promote the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations. It recommends their use to Member States, companies, private organisations and the financial community, and contains two annexes establishing the proposed methods.(4)The Commission established a framework for developing further the Environmental Footprint methods with the participation of a wide range of stakeholders, including industry, and particularly SMEs, through a pilot phase.(5)In the pilot phase running from 2013 to 2018, the development of product-specific rules (Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules, PEFCRs) and sector-specific rules (Organisation Environmental Footprint Sector Rules, OEFSRs) was tested with the active participation of stakeholders, resulting in the finalisation of 19 PEFCRs and 2 OEFSRs.(6)The Environmental Footprint methods were also updated on several technical aspects, such as: (1) application of the materiality principle (act where it matters); (2) the definition of a benchmark corresponding to the Environmental Footprint profile of the average production the market, also called representative product / organisation; (3) agreements on the modelling of key aspects concerning climate change, electricity, transport, infrastructure & equipment, packaging, end-of-life and agriculture; (4) inclusion of normalisation and weighting; (5) guidelines on how to include biodiversity as additional environmental information; (6) improvement of some impact assessment methods, with particular attention to the toxicity-related methods (human toxicity – cancer effects; human toxicity – non-cancer effects; eco-toxicity freshwater, water use, land use, resources and particulate matter); (7) defining characterisation factors based on REACH data; (8) and a guide on Environmental Footprint compliant datasets.(7)The results of the pilot phase were presented in the 2019 Commission Staff Working Document on Sustainable Products in a Circular Economy – Towards an EU Product Policy Framework contribution to the Circular EconomySWD(2019) 91final.. The same staff working document also indicated possible uses of the Environmental Footprint methods in policy development at EU level. Since 2019, and following a call of interest addressed to industry, the Commission continued the development of new Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules.(8)The Council Conclusions of October 2019https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/40928/st12791-en19.pdf welcomed the piloting of the EU Environmental Footprint methodology and all initiatives to support the communication of environmental impacts based on the Environmental Footprint pilot.(9)The European Green DealCOM(2019) 640 final. aims to mobilise industries for a clean and circular economy and underlines that to enable buyers to make more sustainable decisions and reduce the risk of green washing, reliable, comparable and verifiable information is needed.(10)In its Communication A new Circular Economy Action Plan – For a cleaner and more competitive EuropeCOM(2020) 98 final., the Commission highlighted that companies should substantiate their environmental claims using Product and Organisation Environmental Footprint methods and committed to test the integration of these methods in the EU Ecolabel.(11)The Communication on a New Consumer Agenda – Strengthening consumer resilience for sustainable recoveryCOM(2020) 696 final. indicates that to stimulate more voluntary corporate action, the Commission plans to work with economic operators to encourage their voluntary pledges to disclose to consumers the company’s environmental footprint, improve their sustainability and reduce the impact on the environment.(12)The Council Conclusions of December 2020 noted that the Product Environmental Footprint method has the potential of being one underlying methodology for various product policy tools in the EU and the framework for sustainable products, taking also other suitable methodologies into account.(13)The use of the Environmental Footprint methods is already foreseen in the context of EU policies and legislation such as the Taxonomy RegulationRegulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 (OJ L 198, 22.6.2020, p. 13)., the Sustainable Batteries InitiativeCOM(2020) 798 final. and the Green Consumption Pledgehttps://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/working_document_for_the_green_consumption_pledges_0.pdf.(14)In the light of these developments, Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU should be updated to integrate the technical developments of the pilot phase, in particular the development of category and sector rules, and therefore provide a sound basis for further policy development and implementation. It should facilitate companies to calculate their environmental performance based on reliable, verifiable and comparable information, and for other actors (public administrations, NGOs, business partners, for example) to have access to such information. It should also enhance the development of an EU Environmental Footprint database.(15)SMEs might lack the expertise and resources to address the requests for life cycle environmental performance information. Therefore, support to SMEs should be provided not only by the Commission, but also by Member States and industrial associations.(16)As new, internationally agreed approaches emerge, the Environmental Footprint methods are expected to be updated to integrate new indicators or modelling rules. These aspects are discussed in the Commission expert group on the Environmental Footprint Technical Advisory Board. Impacts related to biodiversity are for instance currently being considered.(17)As announced in the new Circular Economy Action Plan, the Commission will explore the development of a regulatory framework for certification of carbon removals based on robust and transparent carbon accounting to monitor and verify the authenticity of carbon removals. This framework will be developed in mutual synergy and consistency with the environmental footprint method and when necessary be reflected in future updates of this Recommendation.(18)While this recommendation focuses on environmental impacts, in the global context concerns related to economic and social impacts, including of labour practices, play an increasingly important role. The Commission will continue to closely follow these developments as well as methods of analysing environmental, social and economic supply chain impacts of products consumed in the EU that have effects along the supply chain in third countries.(19)This Recommendation should replace the Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU,HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:1.PURPOSE AND SCOPE1.1.This Recommendation promotes the use of the Environmental Footprint methods in relevant policies and schemes related to the measurement and/or communication of the life cycle environmental performance of all kinds of products, including both goods and services, and of organisations.1.2.This Recommendation is addressed to Member States and to private and public organisations that measure or intend to measure the life cycle environmental performance of their product or of their organisation, and/or communicate or intend to communicate life cycle environmental performance information to any private, public and civil society stakeholder in the EU.1.3.This Recommendation does not apply to the implementation of EU mandatory legislation that foresees a specific methodology for the calculation of the life cycle environmental performance of products or organisations. This Recommendation may however be referred to by EU legislation or policy as a method for the calculation of the life cycle environmental performance of products or organisations.2.DEFINITIONSFor the purposes of this Recommendation, the following definitions apply:(a)Product Environmental Footprint (hereinafter PEF) method: general method to measure and communicate the potential life cycle environmental impact of a product as laid down in Annex I.(b)Organisation Environmental Footprint (hereinafter OEF) method: general method to measure and communicate the potential life cycle environmental impact of an organisation as laid down in Annex III.(c)Product Environmental Footprint: result of a Product Environmental Footprint study based on the Product Environmental Footprint method.(d)Organisation Environmental Footprint: result of an Organisation Environmental Footprint study based on the Organisation Environmental Footprint method.(e)Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (hereinafter PEFCRs): Product category specific, life cycle based rules that complement general methodological guidance for PEF studies by providing further specification at the level of a specific product category. If a PEFCR exists, this should be used for calculating the environmental footprint of a product belonging to that product category.(f)Organisation Environmental Footprint Sector Rules (hereinafter OEFSRs): Sector-specific, life-cycle-based rules that complement general methodological guidance for OEF studies by providing further specification at the level of a specific sector. If an OEFSR exists, this should be used for calculating the environmental footprint of an organisation belonging to the sector.(g)Life cycle environmental performance: quantified measurement of the potential environmental impacts taking all relevant life cycle stages of a product or organisation into account, from a supply chain perspective.(h)Communication of life cycle environmental performance: any disclosure of life cycle environmental performance information, including to business partners, investors, public bodies or consumers.(i)Organisation: a company, corporation, firm, enterprise, authority or institution, or part or combination thereof, whether incorporated or not, public or private, that has its own functions and administrations.(j)Scheme: for-profit or not-for-profit initiative taken by private companies or an association thereof, by a public-private partnership, by governmental or by non-governmental organisations that requires the measurement or communication of life cycle environmental performance.(k)Industrial association: organisation representing private companies that are members of the organisation or private companies belonging to a sector at local, regional national or international level.(l)Financial community: all actors providing financial services (including financial advice), including banks, investors and insurance companies.3.USE OF THE PEF AND OEF METHODS IN MEMBER STATES’ POLICIESMember States should:3.1.Use the PEF method or the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs in voluntary policies involving the measurement or communication of the life cycle environmental performance of products or organisations, as appropriate while ensuring that such policies do not create obstacles to the free movement of goods in the EU.3.2.Consider life cycle environmental performance information or claims based on the use of the PEF method or the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs as valid in relevant national schemes involving the measurement or communication of the life cycle environmental performance of products or organisations.3.3.Make efforts to increase the availability of high quality life cycle data by setting up actions to develop, review and make available national databases and contributing to populating existing public databases, based on requirements for Environmental Footprint compliant datasets. Coherence between the different databases should be ensured between themselves..3.4.Contribute to Commission efforts in the area of availability of high quality of EF compliant datasets.3.5.Provide assistance and tools for SMEs to help them measure, improve and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of their products or organisation based on the PEF or the OEF method, on PEFCRs and OEFSRs. In doing so, authorities should avoid to duplicate existing tools, where these are fit for purpose.3.6.Encourage the use of the OEF method and related OEFSRs, where applicable, for measuring or communicating the life cycle environmental performance of public organisations.3.7.Promote and support the use of PEF and OEF methods at international level, including in multilateral forums or in relation to schemes on the measurement or communication of life cycle environmental performance. In doing so, authorities should consider providing assistance and tools to SMEs in EU partner countries for the measurement and improvement of the life-cycle environmental performance of any intermediate goods or semi-finished products they produce.4.USE OF THE PEF AND OEF METHODS BY COMPANIES AND OTHER PRIVATE ORGANISATIONSCompanies and other private organisations deciding to measure or communicate the life cycle environmental performance of their products or organisation should:4.1.Use the PEF method and the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs for the measurement or communication of the life cycle environmental performance of their products or organisation.4.2.Contribute to the review of public databases and populate these with high quality life cycle data in line with requirements on Environmental Footprint compliant datasets. Contribute to Commission efforts in the area of availability of high quality of EF compliant datasets.4.3.Consider providing support to companies in their supply chains, especially SME, to provide information based on PEF and OEF or PEFCRs and OEFSRs and to improve their organisations’ and their products’ life cycle environmental performance.Industrial associations should:4.4.Promote the use of the PEF method and the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs among their membership.4.5.Contribute to the review of public databases and populate these with high quality life cycle data in line with the requirements on Environmental Footprint compliant datasets. Contribute to Commission efforts in the area of availability of high quality of EF compliant datasets.4.6.Provide simplified calculation tools and expertise to help SME members calculate the life cycle environmental performance of their products or organisation based on the PEF method or the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs.4.7.Promote and support the use of PEF and OEF methods at international level, including in multilateral forums or in relation to schemes on the measurement or communication of life cycle environmental performance.5.USE OF THE PEF AND OEF METHODS AND RELATED PEFCRS AND OEFSRS IN SCHEMES RELATED TO THE MEASUREMENT OR COMMUNICATION OF LIFE CYCLE ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE5.1Schemes related to the measurement or communication of life cycle environmental performance should use the PEF method and the OEF method and related PEFCRs/OEFSRs as a reference method for the measurement or communication of the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations.6.USE OF THE PEF AND OEF METHODS AND RELATED PEFCRS/OEFSRS BY THE FINANCIAL COMMUNITYMembers of the financial community should, if appropriate:6.1.Promote the use of life cycle environmental performance information calculated on the basis of the PEF method or the OEF method and related PEFCRs and OEFSRs in the assessment of financial risk related to life cycle environmental performance.6.2.Promote the use of information based on OEF studies in their assessment of performance levels for the environmental component of sustainability indices.6.3.Promote and support the use of PEF and OEF methods at international level, including in multilateral forums or in relation to schemes on the measurement or communication of life cycle environmental performance.7.VERIFICATION7.1.If PEF and OEF studies are disclosed to third parties, the studies should be verified according to the requirements of the PEF and OEF methods and any specific indications in PEFCRs and OEFSRs.8.REPORTING ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECOMMENDATION8.1.Member States are invited to inform the Commission of actions taken in light of this Recommendation on a yearly basis. The first provision of information should be transmitted one year after the adoption of this Recommendation. Information transmitted should include:(a)how the PEF method and the OEF method and related PEFCRs/OEFSRs are used in policy initiative(s);(b)number of products and organisations covered by the initiative;(c)incentives related to life cycle environmental performance;(d)initiatives related to the development of high quality life cycle data;(e)assistance provided to SMEs in the provision of life cycle environmental information and in improving their life cycle environmental performance;(f)eventual problems or bottlenecks identified with the use of the methods.9.REPEALING OF PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONCommission Recommendation 2013/179/EU is hereby repealed. References to the repealed Recommendation shall be construed as references to the present Recommendation.Done at Brussels, 15 December 2021.For the CommissionVirginijus SinkevičiusMember of the Commission

In the goal definition phase, the aims of the study are defined, namely the intended application, the reasons for carrying out the study and the intended audience. In the scope definition phase, the main methodological choices are made, for example the exact definition of the functional unit, identifying the system boundary, selecting additional environmental and technical information, and the main assumptions and limitations.

The LCI phase involves the data collection procedure and the calculation procedure for quantifying of inputs and outputs of the studied system. Inputs and outputs concern energy, raw material and other physical inputs, products and co-products and waste, and emissions to air/water/soil. Data collected concern foreground processes and background processes. Data are put in relationship to the process units and functional unit. The LCI is an iterative process. In fact, as data are collected and more is learned about the system, new data requirements or limitations may be identified that require a change in the data collection procedures so the goals of the study will still be met.

In the impact assessment phase, LCI results are associated with environmental impact categories and indicators. This is done through LCIA methods, which first classify emissions into impact categories and then characterise them as common units (e.g. CO2 and CH4 emissions are both expressed in CO2 equivalent emissions by using their global warming potential). Examples of impact categories are climate change, acidification or resource use.

In the interpretation phase, results from LCI and LCIA are interpreted in accordance with the stated goal and scope. In this phase, most relevant impact categories, life cycle stages, processes and elementary flows are identified. Conclusions and recommendations can be drawn, based on the analytical results. It also includes the reporting step designed to summarise the results of the PEF study in the PEF report.

Finally, during the verification phase a conformity assessment process is carried out, to check whether the PEF study has been carried out in compliance with the present PEF method. The verification is mandatory whenever the PEF study, or part of the information in it, is used for any type of external communication.

3. Defining the goal(s) and scope of the Product Environmental Footprint study

3.1. Goal definition

Goal definition is the first step of a PEF study, and sets the overall context for the study. The purpose of clearly defining goals is to ensure that the aims, methods, results and intended applications are aligned, and that a shared vision is in place to guide participants in the study.

The decision to use the PEF method implies that some aspects of the goal definition will be decided a priori, due to the specific requirements provided by the PEF method.

In defining goals, it is important to identify the intended applications and the degree of analytical depth and rigour of the study. This shall be reflected in the defined study limitations (scope definition phase).

The goal definition for a PEF study shall include:

1. Intended application(s);

2. Reasons for carrying out the study and decision context;

3. Target audience;

4. Commissioner of the study;

5. Identity of the verifier.

Table 1

Example of goal definition - Product Environmental Footprint of a T-shirt

Aspects Detail Intended application(s): Provide product information to customer Reasons for carrying out the study and decision context: Respond to a request from a customer Target audience: External technical audience, business-to-business. Verifier: Independent external verifier, Mr Y Commissioner of the study: G company limited

3.2. Scope definition

The scope of the PEF study describes in detail the system to be evaluated and the technical specifications.

The scope definition shall be in line with the defined goals of the study and shall include (see subsequent sections for a more detailed description):

1. Functional unit and reference flow;

2. System boundary;

3. EF impact categories (12);

4. Additional information to be included;

5. Assumptions/limitations.

3.2.1 Functional unit and reference flow

The functional unit (FU) is the quantified performance of a product system, to be used as a reference unit. The functional unit qualitatively and quantitatively describes the function(s) and duration of the product in scope.

The reference flow is the amount of products needed to provide the defined function. All other input and output flows in the analysis quantitatively relate to it. The number of products needed to fulfil the lifetime of the product should always be rounded up, unless there is a valid reason for not doing this. The reference flow may be expressed in direct relation to the FU or in a more product-oriented way.

Users of the PEF method shall define the FU and the reference flow for the PEF study. They shall also describe which aspects of the product are not covered by the FU and justify why (e.g., because they are not quantifiable or intrinsically subjective).

The FU for a PEF study shall be defined according to the following aspects:

i) The function(s)/service(s) provided: ‘what’;

ii) The extent of the function or service: ‘how much’;

iii) The expected level of quality: ‘how well’;

iv) The duration/life time of the product: ‘how long’;

If shelf-life (indicated for example as ‘best before date’ or ‘use by date’) is provided on the packaging (e.g. number of months) of food products, then food losses at storage, retail, and consumer stages shall be quantified. If the type of packaging affects the shelf-life, it shall be taken into account. This is relevant for the ‘how long’ aspect of the FU.

If applicable standards exist, they shall be used and cited in the PEF study when defining the FU. The International System of Units (SI), commonly known as the metric system, shall always be used.

Example 1

Define the FU of decorative paint: the functional unit is to protect and decorate 1 m2 of substrate for 50 years at a specified quality level (minimum 98% opacity).

What: Provide decoration and protection of a substrate,

How much: coverage of 1 m2 of substrate,

How well: with a minimum 98% opacity

How long: for 50 years (life time of the building)

Reference flow: amount of product needed to fulfil the defined function, to be measured in kg of paint.

Example 2

Define the FU and reference flow for the PEF of pet food.

What: To serve the recommended daily intake in kilocalories of metabolisable energy (kcal ME) (‘daily ration‘) of prepared pet food to a cat or dog

How much: Daily ration

How well: To meet the daily caloric and nutritional requirements of an average cat or dog (where average refers to the pet’s weight: 4 kg for a cat and 15 kg for a dog)

How long: 1 day of serving prepared pet food to a cat or dog.

Reference flow: amount of product needed to fulfil the defined function, to be measured in grams (g) per day.

For intermediate products, the FU is more difficult to define as it may often fulfil multiple functions and the whole life cycle of the product is not known. Therefore, a declared unit should be applied, for example, mass (kilograms) or volume (cubic meters). In this case, the reference flow may correspond to the FU.

3.2.2. System boundary

The system boundary defines which parts of the product life cycle and which associated life cycle stages and processes belong to the analysed system (i.e. are required for carrying out its function as defined by the FU), except for those processes excluded based on the cut-off rule (see section 4.6.4). The reason for and potential significance of any exclusion shall be justified and documented.

The system boundary shall be defined following a general supply-chain logic, including all stages from raw material acquisition and pre-processing, production of the main product, product distribution and storage, use stage and end of life treatment of the product (if appropriate, see section 4.2). The co-products, by-products and waste streams of at least the foreground system shall be clearly identified.

System boundary diagram

A system boundary diagram (or flow diagram) is a schematic representation of the analysed system. It shall clearly indicate the activities or processes that are included and those that are excluded from the analysis. The user of the PEF method shall highlight where company-specific data were used.

The activity and/or process names in the system diagram and in the PEF report shall be aligned. The system diagram shall be included in the scope definition and included in the PEF report.

3.2.3. Environmental Footprint impact categories

The purpose of LCIA is to group and aggregate the collected LCI data according to the respective contributions to each EF impact category. The selection of EF impact categories covers a broad range of relevant environmental issues related to the product supply chain of interest, following the general completeness requirements for PEF studies.

EF impact categories (13) refer to specific categories of impacts considered in a PEF study and they constitute the EF impact assessment method. Characterisation models are used to quantify the environmental mechanism between the LCI (i.e. inputs (e.g. resources) and emissions associated with the product life cycle) and the category indicator of each EF impact category.

Table 2 provides a default list of EF impact categories and related assessment methods. For a PEF study, all EF impact categories shall be applied, without exclusion. The full list of CFs that shall be used is provided within the EF reference package (14)

Table 2

EF impact categories with respective impact category indicators and characterisation models.

EF impact category Impact category indicator Unit Characterisation model Robust-ness Climate change, total (15) Global warming potential (GWP100) kg CO2 eq Bern model - Global warming potentials (GWP) over a 100-year time horizon (based on IPCC 2013) I Ozone depletion Ozone depletion potential (ODP) kg CFC-11 eq EDIP model based on the ODPs of the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) over an infinite time horizon (WMO 2014 + integrations) I Human toxicity, cancer Comparative toxic unit for humans (CTUh) CTUh based on USEtox2.1 model (Fantke et al. 2017), adapted as in Saouter et al., 2018 III Human toxicity, non-cancer Comparative toxic unit for humans (CTUh) CTUh based on USEtox2.1 model (Fantke et al. 2017), adapted as in Saouter et al., 2018 III Particulate matter Impact on human health Disease incidence PM model (Fantke et al., 2016 in UNEP 2016) I Ionising radiation, human health Human exposure efficiency relative to U235 kBq U235 eq Human health effect model as developed by Dreicer et al. 1995 (Frischknecht et al, 2000) II Photochemical ozone formation, human health Tropospheric ozone concentration increase kg NMVOC eq LOTOS-EUROS model (Van Zelm et al, 2008) as applied in ReCiPe 2008 II Acidification Accumulated exceedance (AE) mol H+ eq Accumulated exceedance (Seppälä et al. 2006, Posch et al, 2008) II Eutrophication, terrestrial Accumulated exceedance (AE) mol N eq Accumulated exceedance (Seppälä et al. 2006, Posch et al, 2008) II Eutrophication, freshwater Fraction of nutrients reaching freshwater end compartment (P) kg P eq EUTREND model (Struijs et al, 2009) as applied in ReCiPe II Eutrophication, marine Fraction of nutrients reaching marine end compartment (N) kg N eq EUTREND model (Struijs et al, 2009) as applied in ReCiPe II Ecotoxicity, freshwater Comparative toxic unit for ecosystems (CTUe) CTUe based on USEtox2.1 model (Fantke et al. 2017), adapted as in Saouter et al., 2018 III Land use (16) Soil quality index (17) Dimensionless (pt) Soil quality index based on LANCA model (De Laurentiis et al. 2019) and on the LANCA CF version 2.5 (Horn and Maier, 2018) III Water use User deprivation potential (deprivation-weighted wat