Communication of Life Cycle Information in the Building and Energy Sectors Communication of Life Cycle Information in the Building and Energy Sectors 3

For more information, contact: UNEP DTIE www.unep.org Sustainable Consumption and United Nations Environment Programme P.O.Box 30552 Nairobi, Kenya Production Branch Tel.: ++254-(0)20-62 1234 15 rue de Milan Fax: ++254-(0)20-62 3927 75441 Paris CEDEX 09 E-mail: [email protected] France E-mail: [email protected] www.unep.fr

Environmental Management Research Group Escola Superior de Comerç Internacional (ESCI) Co m m u n i c a t i o n Universitat Pompeu Fabra o f i f e y cl e Passeig Pujades, 1 L C 08003 Barcelona In f o r m a t i o n Spain www.giga.cat in t h e Bu i l d i n g a n d En e r g y Se c t o r s

This booklet is based on the outcomes of the International Ex- pert Workshop “Sector-Specific Approaches for Communica- tion of Life Cycle Information to different Stakeholders”, which was held at the Escola Superior de Comerç Internacional, Bar- celona, in September 2005, as well as those from the follow-up October 2008 workshop “Sustainability Communication in the Building Sector in different World Regions – Connecting Life Cycle Information with Market Impacts”, which was held in Stuttgart in Decem- ber 2006. Both meetings were organized by the Task Force on Communication of Life Cycle Information of the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. r o g r a m m e r o g r a m m e

The text provides a comprehensive overview of the state of the P P art in Environmental Product Information Systems (EPIS) in the construction and energy sectors. In particular, it contains valuable information on type III Eco-labelling, including an updated discussion of the main existing programmes in this field world- n v i r o n m e n t n v i r o n m e n t E E wide, including European, Asian and South American ones. All of the original presentations delivered at the 2005 workshop Generalitat de Catalunya a t i o n s a t i o n s Government of Catalonia are also included in the booklet as an appendix. N N Department of the Environment and Housing n i t e d n i t e d U U

DTI/1090/PA About the UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics

The UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (DTIE) helps governments, local authorities and decision-makers in business and industry to develop and implement policies and practices focusing on sustainable development. The Division works to promote: > sustainable consumption and production, > the efficient use of renewable energy, > adequate management of chemicals, > the integration of environmental costs in development policies.

The Office of the Director, located in Paris, coordinates activities through: > The International Environmental Technology Centre - IETC (Osaka, Shiga), which implements integrated waste, water and disaster management programmes, focusing in particular on Asia. > Sustainable Consumption and Production (Paris), which promotes sustainable consumption and production patterns as a contribution to human development through global markets. > Chemicals (Geneva), which catalyzes global actions to bring about the sound management of chemicals and the improvement of chemical safety worldwide. Copyright © United Nations Environment Programme, 2007 > Energy (Paris), which fosters energy and transport policies for sustainable development and encourages investment in renewable energy and energy efficiency. This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educa- tional or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, > OzonAction (Paris), which supports the phase-out of ozone depleting substances provided acknowledgement of the source is made. UNEP would appreciate re- in developing countries and countries with economies in transition to ensure ceiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use implementation of the Montreal Protocol. of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment > Economics and Trade (Geneva), which helps countries to integrate environmental Programme. considerations into economic and trade policies, and works with the finance sector

Disclaimer to incorporate sustainable development policies. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Na- UNEP DTIE activities focus on raising awareness, tions Environment Programme concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or bounda- improving the transfer of knowledge and information, ries. Moreover, the views expressed do not necessarily represent the decision or the fostering technological cooperation and partnerships, and stated policy of the United Nations Environment Programme, nor does citing of tra- implementing international conventions and agreements. de names or commercial processes constitute endorsement. Information contained herein does not necessarily reflect the policy or views of the Society of Environmen- tal Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC). Mention of commercial or non-commercial products and services does not imply endorsement or affiliation by SETAC.

Legal deposit: B-0000-08 For more information, ISBN: 978-92-807-2965-8 see www.unep.fr

Printed on Taller Gràfic Gilaver, sl - Vilanova del Camí / Designed by esdedia, estudi de disseny anoia Co m m u n i c a t i o n o f Li f e Cy cl e In f o r m a t i o n in t h e Bu i l d i n g a n d En e r g y Se c t o r s

October 2008 2 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 3

Report on the International Expert Workshop “Sector-Specific Approaches for Communication of Life Cycle Information to different Stakeholders” held in Escola Superior de Comerç Internacional, Barcelona, 8th September 2005, organized by the Task Force on Communication of Life Cycle Information of the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative The edition of this report has been funded by the Ministry of Environment of the Government of Catalonia

Title Communication of Life Cycle Information in the Building and Energy Sectors

Authors Pere Fullana Escola Superior de Comerç Internacional, Barcelona, Spain Paolo Frankl Ecobilancio Italia/Ambiente Italia, Rome, Italy1 Johannes Kreissig PE International, Stuttgart, Germany

Contributions Steve Baer Armstrong World Industries, USA Acknowledgments Birgit Bodlund Vattenfall, Sweden Udo Jeske Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Germany The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support of Vattenfall AB Generation and Escola Superior de Mark Johnson British Energy, United Kingdom Comerç Internacional for the workshop organisation and of the Ministry of Environment and Housing of the Catalan Denis Le Boulch Electricité de France, France Government for the edition of this report. Fritz Moedinger Gasser, Italy Timothy Smith University of Minnesota, USA We also want to thank all the experts who participated in the discussion during the workshop in Barcelona for their kind contributions, especially those who prepared a presentation. Cristina Gazulla Escola Superior de Comerç Internacional, Barcelona, Spain Emanuela Menichetti Ecobilancio Italia, Rome, Italy, and University of St. Gallen, Switzerland2 We thank all the experts who sent written contributions for their very valuable review and input. Moreover, we Marco Raugei Escola Superior de Comerç Internacional, Barcelona, Spain thank the group of reviewers who contributed to the final review process set up by the Secretariat of the Life Cycle Frieder Rubik Institut für ökologische Wirtschaftsforschung (IÖW), Heidelberg, Germany Initiative at the Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) Branch of UNEP:

Gianluca Donato ABB Group Service Center, Italy Sonia Valdivia UNEP DTIE Deborah Dunning International Design Center for the Environment, USA Eva Schmincke FiveWinds International, Germany Annik Magerholm Fet Norwegian University of Sci. and Technology, Norway Jeppe Frydendal LCA Center Denmark, Denmark Rolf Wuestenhagen University of St. Gallen, Switzerland Sébastien Humbert University of California Berkeley, USA Paolo Masoni ENEA, Italy Shpresa Kotaji Huntsman, Belgium Chie Nakaniwa JEMAI, Japan Ning Yu Environment and Development Foundation, Taiwan (PROC) Kristian Steel BRE, United Kingdom Joyce Cooper University of Washington, USA Chris van Rossem Lund University Finally, we would like to thank the local organizing committee of the 2nd expert workshop on “Sustainability Supervision, technical editing and support Communication in the Building Sector in different World Regions – Connecting Life Cycle Information with Market Marco Raugei Escola Superior de Comerç Internacional, Barcelona, Spain Impacts”, which was held at the University of Stuttgart, Germany, on 6th December, 2006: Sonia Valdivia UNEP DTIE Guido Sonnemann UNEP DTIE Anna Braune Bas de Leeuw UNEP DTIE Cecilia Makishi

Michael Held

1 currently at the International Energy Agency, Paris, France 2 currently at the Observatoire Méditerranéen de l’Energie (OME), Paris All from the University of Stuttgart, Lehrstuhl fuer Bauphysik, Abteilung Ganzheitliche Bilanzierung. 4 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 5

Table of contents

Preface 7 3 The International Expert UNEP/SETAC Workshop in Barcelona 40

3.1 Objectives 40

1 Introduction 8 3.2 Summary of presentations 41

1.1 Objective and structure of the Report 8 3.2.1 LCA information in marketing communications: addressing communication effectiveness in the building materials industries (Timothy Smith) 41 1.2 Integrated Product Policy and Communication of Life Cycle Information 9 3.2.2 ISO-type III standardization activities in the building sector (Johannes Kreissig) 42 1.3 The UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative 10 3.2.3 The experience in the US building sector (Steve Baer) 44 1.4 Environmental Product Information Schemes 11 3.2.4 EPD as a credible communication tool for sustainable clay brick products (Fritz Moedinger) 45 1.4.1 Definitions, existing standards and references 11 3.2.5 The user needs – The German experience (Udo Jeske) 46 1.4.2 Existing “classical” programmes worldwide (ISO type I labels) 12 3.2.6 The experience at Vattenfall (Birgit Bodlund) 48 1.4.3 A more recent communication tool: Environmental Product Declarations (ISO type III) 13 3.2.7 The experience at British Energy (Mark Johnson) 49

3.2.8 The experience at Electricité de France (Denis Le Boulch) 50 2 Environmental product information schemes in the building and energy sectors 15 3.3 Discussion 52 2.1 Introductory remarks 15 3.3.1 Effectiveness for change? 52 2.2 Sector-specific approaches 16 3.3.2 Credibility 52 2.3 The Building and Construction Sector 17 3.3.3 Role and limits of EPD 53 2.3.1 ISO-type I ecolabels 17 3.3.4 User needs and life cycle information for change 56 2.3.2 ISO-type II environmental claims 19 3.3.5 Next steps 56 2.3.3 ISO-type III Environmental Product Declarations 20 3.4 Conclusions and Future Research Areas 57 2.3.4 Other quantitative declarations 28 3.4.1 Main Conclusions 57 2.3.5 Environmental Assessment of Buildings 29 3.4.2 Needs for future research 62 2.4 The Energy Sector 35 3.4.3 Preliminary results from the 2nd Expert Workshop 2.4.1 ISO-type I ecolabels 35 “Sustainability Communication in the Building Sector in different World Regions – 2.4.2 ISO-type II environmental claims (green electricity marketing) 36 Connecting Life Cycle Information with Market Impacts” 64

2.4.3 ISO-type I-like guarantee labels (green electricity marketing) 37

2.4.4 ISO-type III environmental declarations 38 4 Recommendations 65

5 References 68

Annex 1 - List of workshop participants 71

Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations 73 7

Preface

In developed societies like our own, there still linger up of an environmental product declaration programme some individual and collective habits stemming from an (type III eco-labelling according to ISO nomenclature) erroneous environmental conception of progress and for the building sector, which will complement the ac- well-being. tivities in terms of type I eco-labelling that are already This conception translates into accelerated con- being carried out in Catalonia since the 1990’s through sumption of raw materials and non-renewable and the “Distintiu de Garantia de Qualitat Ambiental” (the scarce resources, like fossil energy resources and wa- Catalan Environmental Quality Label) and the EU-flower. ter; generation of large amounts of wastes which are The programme follows the ISO and CEN guidelines to harder and harder to manage; and mobility habits that be compatible with other similar ones from around the impair air quality and, year by year, increase the green- world, and is born with the aim of sparking the develop- house effect which is responsible for climate change. ment of type III eco-labelling all over Spain. It also re- In this century, an extraordinarily complex transfor- ceives support from both the industrial sector and pro- mation is bound to occur, which will bring about grad- fessional organizations, and thus we are sure that it will ual but inexorable change in the development model be a useful tool for the building sector (a cornerstone of that we have been following till now. We will move from our country’s economy and environment) to be able to growth based on production and consumption patterns place itself within the framework of sustainability. characterized by little to no respect for the environment, Last but not least, I would like to acknowledge the to a new growth model that will harmonize quality of life effort and commitment of all those who made this pub- with economic activity, and preserve future generations’ lication possible. In particular, I am grateful for having rights on natural patrimony. had the opportunity to take part in the UNEP-SETAC Experts from all over the world agree that only this Life Cycle Initiative, within the Life Cycle Management new growth model, known as sustainable development, Programme, which aims at fostering the application of will be able to ensure the long term well-being of the life cycle approaches and life cycle thinking in business world’s citizens and nations. practices and political decision making. This initiative by For that reason, the governments of the most de- UNEP and SETAC responds to the exhortation made veloped countries have taken this change of model as by various countries in the Malmö Declaration (2000) to a challenge, and consider promoting public consent in create a life cycle economy. Let us hope that this book order to implement sustainability strategies in this first and those activities which, in this sense, we are devel- third of our century to be an unavoidable goal. The oping in our country make a substantial contribution to European Union has recently expressed this will most the practical application of such a wise concept. clearly in the Communication “on the Sustainable Con- sumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy Action Plan (2008)”. The widespread availability of high quality information is crucial to the accomplishment of this goal. Work- shops like the one organized in Barcelona in September 2005 are to be considered a fundamental tool in this sense. In this book, comprehensive information on the results of that workshop can be found, as well as additional complementary data. Many initiatives have been developed in the Depart- ment of Environment and Housing of Catalonia since Francesc Baltasar i Albesa 2005, but one in particular may be singled out as espe- Minister of the Environment and Housing cially relevant to the objectives of this book: the setting Government of Catalonia 8 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 9

1 Introduction 1.2 Integrated Product Policy and Communication of Life Cycle Information

In the last 15 years, a topic appeared on the envi- with the proper information to develop better products. ronmental policy and research agenda – non-sustain- Furthermore, the process of searching for life cycle 1.1 Objective and structure of the Report able production and consumption patterns in modern information builds new relations among the actors of societies. Political authorities, researchers, and busi- the supply chain, who can work together much more ness and civil society stakeholders became aware of efficiently (sharing responsibility and networking). The The objective of this report is manifold. Initially it in the building and energy sectors worldwide. More a long-time underestimated environmental challenge – combination of these aspects has the potential to pro- started as proceedings of the International Expert Work- specific effort has been given to finding information on the challenge to cope systematically with environmental duce and diffuse less environmentally harmful products shop “Sector-Specific Approaches for Communication the less studied type III ecolabelling, i.e. environmen- problems caused by products and services. Of course, on the market. of Life Cycle Information to different Stakeholders” held tal product declarations (EPD). This review reports the challenging the ‘consumption society’ in industrialized in Escola Superior de Comerç Internacional, Barcelo- main existing experiences, which are mostly found in worlds had been a key issue among more radical envi- Consumer information tools and life cycle analysis na, September 8th 2005, and organized by the Task developed economies, especially in Europe and in Ja- ronmentalists during the 1970s. Currently, it seems that are also mentioned in the plan of implementation of the Force on Communication of Life Cycle Information of pan, South-Korea and Taiwan. However, it also looks production and consumption issues enter polity, politics Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Develop- the UNEP/SETAC3 Life Cycle Initiative. To fulfil this goal, at emerging economies, i.e. focusing particularly on the and policy of societies. Sustainable consumption and ment from 2002. They are also relevant elements of the summaries of all presentations have been written and significant experience accumulated in China. production patterns (SCP) have become an issue since 2003 issued Communication of the European Commis- are presented in Chapter 3. Moreover, sections on the the Johannesburg summit of 2002. The so-called Mar- sion on Integrated Product Policy (CEC COM 2003) that discussion generated after the presentations and on the Chapter 3 summarizes the presentations given in rakech process tries to look for answers with regard to was reflected at the International UN DESA/UNEP Ex- reached conclusions and recommendations for future Barcelona and draws the main conclusions, based both this huge challenge. pert Meeting on a 10-Year Framework of Programmes work are also included in this chapter. Full presentations on the review of EPIS and the discussion at the expert for Sustainable Consumption and Production, convened can be found in Annex 2. workshop. The report finishes with a set of recommen- One aspect of SCP refers to products. As a new from 16–19 June 2003, in Marrakech, Morocco. dations to different stakeholders on how to improve the paradigm of which the elaboration started during the The Barcelona workshop was intended to collect use of life cycle information in those industrial sectors. 1990s, the concept of Integrated Product Policy (IPP) The present report reviews the availability and use experiences and generate discussion from experts from has been introduced (see for instance Oosterhuis et of life cycle communication tools in different countries all over the world and to focus on two industrial sec- However, the work is not finished here. Several dis- al. 1996; and Ernst & Young/SPRU 1998). With the worldwide, with a specific focus on the sectors of build- tors: construction and energy. The results were found cussion points were left open, especially in relation to focus on improving the environmental performance of ing & construction and energy. It discusses their main geographically representative and of very good quality. market aspects. Some of these pending issues were products and services along the whole life-cycle, IPP characteristics (e.g. in terms of format, criteria, etc.) and Therefore, it was thought to expand the document. the focus of discussion of the follow up workshop held combines integration, communication and co-operation their appropriateness and effectiveness in reaching the in Stuttgart in December 2006, with the title: “Sustain- as leading principles. IPP can be seen as a long-term target audiences. The main providers of Life Cycle infor- The report now provides a comprehensive overview ability Communication in the Building Sector in different framework strategy implying continuous learning proc- mation and/or Environmental Product Information (EPI) and the state-of-the art of Environmental Product In- World Regions – Connecting Life Cycle Information with esses among policy-makers and civil society actors, are industry and businesses, i.e. the supply side. The formation Systems (EPIS) in the two studied sectors. Market Impacts”. This second expert meeting also had among businesses and consumers and among stake- latter are motivated by a series of driving forces, which Background information about the three ISO types for an increasing focus on emerging economies, in particu- holders and stockholders. On its way to eco-efficient depend on the target audience and which include the EPIS is given in Chapter 1. This is followed by Chapter lar China. Preliminary results of this second workshop products and services, IPP emphasises market-based communication of EPI to (list not exhaustive): 2, a quite comprehensive descriptive inventory of EPIS are included in the present report as well. and multi-stakeholder approaches. The focus on prod- 1. Final private consumers, in order to get com- ucts, their life cycles and the crucial role of communica- petitive advantage in emerging or new green tion is rapidly increasing among policy-makers. Informa- markets. tion exchange and co-operation between stakeholders 2. Business clients, either because requested to are major issues for IPP. (this is especially the case of SMEs in the supply chain), or to compete in the business-to-busi- Voluntary market driven tools like ecolabels and ness market arena. EPDs fit very well in this framework, as ecolabelling cri- 3. Societal stakeholders, to respond to the ex- teria and EPDs product category rules are developed ternal pressure from environmental NGOs and through the involvement of a combination of interested consumer associations. parties. Communication of life cycle information not only helps consumers to know the environmental impacts 4. Financial stakeholders, who are increasingly at- associated to the manufacturing, use and end-of-life of tentive to the sustainable dimensions of organi- 3. UNEP= United Nations Environmental Programme the products they buy, but it also provides designers zations and products. SETAC=Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 10 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 11

5. Public administrations, in order to apply to Green 7. Several stakeholders (e.g. consumers, NGOs, pub- 1.4 Environmental Product Information Schemes Public Procurement (GPP) programmes and/or lic administrations), to convey a more holistic life cy- to obtain tax incentives, whenever applicable. cle picture of products and services, in order to in- 1.4.1 Definitions, existing standards and references 6. Policy makers, providing credible life cycle infor- duce an appropriate use and disposal of products. mation and reference data to support them in better-informed policy decisions and to prevent These target audiences might have different informa- The actual landscape of existing voluntary EPI advertising, publicity, telemarketing, as well as digital a misuse of life cycle approach and simplistic tion needs, which can be satisfied by means of several schemes is wide, ranging from voluntary seal-of-ap- or electronic media, such as the Internet. The relation- green claims, which might be highly misleading. communication tools, described in the next sections. proval programmes, single-attribute programmes, haz- ship with the product life cycle is implicit, and generally ard warning programmes, information disclosure pro- weak. Usually, just one life cycle stage is taken into ac- grammes, environmental self-declaration by individual count. Moreover, often just a single environmental cri- firms or test reporting. They can be classified in First- terion is considered. The positive aspect of ISO-type II party and third party labelling programmes. First-party for industry is quite obviously the high flexibility of the verification is performed by producers on their own be- tool. However, the problem of credibility often remains. 1.3 The UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative half, to promote the positive attributes of their products Many existing labels do not fully satisfy the ISO 14021 on the market. On the contrary, third-party verification requirements and the possibility of misleading claims is carried out by an independent source that awards la- is a matter of fact. Environmental claims are subject to The UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative is a response to velop and disseminate practical tools for evaluating bels to products based on certain environmental criteria national legislation and to EC Directives aimed at the the call from governments for a life cycle economy in the the opportunities, risks, and trade-offs associated with or assessment procedures. protection of consumers. Malmö Declaration (2000). It contributes to the 10-year products and services over their entire life cycle to framework of programmes to promote sustainable con- achieve sustainable development. The International Organisation of Standardisa- As defined in ISO 14025, an ISO Type III declaration sumption and production patterns, as requested at the tion (ISO), through the technical committee (ISO/TC is an “environmental declaration (claim which indicates World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Jo- The programme’s aim is to put life cycle thinking 207), has done much to structure environmental la- the environmental aspects of a product or service) pro- hannesburg (2002)4. The Initiative was officially launched into practice and improve the supporting tools through belling schemes. Three types of voluntary labels are viding quantified environmental data using predeter- by UNEP’s Executive Director Klaus Toepfer at the start of better data and indicators, by hosting and facilitating distinguished: mined parameters and, where relevant, additional envi- UNEP’s 7th International High-Level Seminar on Cleaner expert groups, and disseminating their work through ronmental information”. The predetermined parameters Production (CP-7), the biennial global forum that looks at web-based information systems. ISO Type I label schemes are “Voluntary, multiple are based on the ISO 14040 series of standards and progress made in promoting sustainable production and criteria-based third party programmes that awards the additional environmental information may be quan- consumption, held in Prague in April 2002. In the Phase 1 of the Initiative (2002-2007), the over- a licence authorising the use of environmental labels titative or qualitative. They are covered by the standard all set of activities was split in three main programmes, on products. These indicate the overall environmental ISO 14025, which was published in July, 2006, after a The Life Cycle Initiative is a joint collaboration be- i.e. on i) Life Cycle Inventories (LCI), ii) Life cycle Impact preferability of a product within a particular product long standardization process. ISO-type III declarations tween UNEP and SETAC, aiming at helping govern- Assessment (LCIA) and iii) Life Cycle Management. The category based on life cycle considerations. These la- are described in more detail in paragraph 1.4.3. ments, businesses and consumers to adopt more present report constitutes a main deliverable of the Task bels provide qualitative environmental information“ (ISO environment friendly policies, practices and life-styles. Force 3 of the LCM programme, focusing on Communi- 14024: 1). They are covered by ISO 14024 published in Other relevant EPI schemes are not covered by More specifically, the mission of the Initiative is to de- cation of Life Cycle Information5. April 1999. Life cycle thinking (but not necessarily LCA) the ISO standards. They include product certifications, is explicitly used to set the criteria, which involve multi- like the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), the Marine ple environmental indicators. Involvement of interested Stewardship Council (MSC), the Oeko-tex Standard parties is required and detailed in the standard. Verifica- 100, etc. They usually refer to one product group only. tion is guaranteed by an independent third-party body. Because they are based on some major elements of the The positive feature of Type I environmental labels is that ISO type I standard (i.e. third-party verification, multi-cri- they provide consumers with concise information, which teria based, and partly open stakeholder participation), enables them to make quick purchasing decisions. some authors classify them as “ISO-type I like” labels in literature, as opposed to “classical” ISO-type I labels ISO Type II claims are “self-declared environmental like the EU-Flower, the Blue Angel in Germany and the claims made by manufacturers, importers, distribu- White Swan in the Nordic countries (DEEP 2003). tors, retailers, or anyone else likely to benefit from such a claim without independent third-party certifica- Finally, social labels are relevant to promote sus- tion“ (ISO 14021: 3). They are covered by ISO 14021 tainable production and consumption patterns. They published in 1999. The claims may take the form of include for instance the Social Accountability 8000 In- 4. The WSSD plan of implementation states : "We must develop production statements, symbols or graphics on products or pack- ternational Standard (SA 8000), the TransFair and the and consumption policies to improve the products and services provided, while reducing environmental and health impacts, using, where appropriate, 5. The Task Force on Communication of Life Cycle Information (2002-07) was age labels, or in product literature, technical bulletins, Fair Trade labels. science-based approaches, such as life cycle analysis". chaired by Dr. Paolo Frankl and co-chaired by Dr. Pere Fullana. 12 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 13

1.4.2 Existing “classical” programmes worldwide (ISO type I labels) is basically a scheme of labelling the eco-friendly prod- Decree 316/1994. Initially it was used to guarantee the ucts. An earthen pot has been chosen as the logo for environmental quality of products but, in 1998, it was the Ecomark scheme and is awarded to consumer extended to include services. As environmental matters The German “Blue Angel” was the first official na- founding member of GEN (Global Eco-labelling Network) goods, which meet the specified environmental criteria are part of the exclusive regional jurisdiction in Spain and tional eco-labelling scheme worldwide, launched in and it is worth mentioning that the general affairs office and the quality requirements of Indian Standards. Six- as national ecolabelling schemes were being promoted 1978, followed a decade later (1989) by the “Swan” of the latter is settled precisely in Japan, at the Japan teen categories of products such as soaps and deter- in Spain and neighbouring countries, the Catalonian in the Nordic Countries and the “Eco-Mark” in Japan. Environmental Association (JEA), a non-governmental gents, paper, food items etc. have been covered under Government felt that having its own scheme guided by The majority of national third-party labelling schemes organisation under the guidance and advice of the Envi- the scheme so far (Sharma & Kurani 2003). its own environmental policy would be more adequate emerged during the late eighties and nineties. At ronment Agency. The latter has the responsibility for the for Catalan consumers and producers. Although it has a supra-national level, the EU-Flower was introduced Administration of the Eco-Mark programme. Concerning In Catalonia, the Ministry of Environment created the life cycle perspective, criteria usually focus on reducing in 1992 and had a major regulation revision in 2000. the programme methodology, the latter was profoundly “Distintiu de Garantia de Qualitat Ambiental” through the resource consumption and minimizing waste. At regional level some schemes have also been intro- revised in March 1996 to conform to the draft (at that duced, like the Catalan “Distintiu”, officially created by time) ISO 14024 standards. More specifically, two very the Catalan Government in 1994. important changes were introduced, i.e. a life cycle approach to develop label criteria and consultation with As of 2003, slightly more than the half of the Euro- stakeholders and related parties (EPA 1998). 1.4.3 A more recent communication tool: Environmental Product Declarations pean Union (EU-25) had developed their own national (ISO type III) ISO-type I labelling system. This reflects a quite rel- The Green Seal is the only US-wide eco-labelling pro- evant focus of environmental product policy in EU- gramme fulfilling the ISO-type I standard. It is awarded by member countries. the Green Seal Inc. Currently, requirements for more than An ISO-type III environmental declaration is based of the EU-LIFE Project INTEND, whose main objective 30 product groups have been formed and accepted by on a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) study carried out in is to develop an EPD scheme at international level (IN- Several other ISO-type I schemes have been devel- a Stakeholder Committee representing manufacturers, accordance with the ISO 14040 series. To be compared TEND 2003). Table 2 gives an overview of existing na- oped in other countries at worldwide level (Table 1). trade associations, governmental agencies, product us- with each other, the results of LCA studies must have tional over-sector EPD programmes and sector-specific ers, environmental and public interest groups. the same scope, system boundaries, and calculation initiatives, as of 2006. Japan is historically one of the main leading coun- rules and must be presented in the same format. In an tries worldwide in eco-labelling, together with Germany, In India, the Ministry of Environment (MoEF), Gov- EPD, not just LCA information is presented; other rele- the US, Nordic Countries and Canada. Japan is also a ernment of India (GoI) initiated a scheme in 1991, which vant information is also given as agreed in the PCR. This is ensured in an Environmental Declaration Programme, which provides both general and product category- specific prescriptions for data collection, handling and calculation rules. The latter are contained in the product EU Member States with EU Member States without Other states with national category rules (PCR) i.e., a set of specific rules, require- national ISO type I national ISO type I ISO type I ments, and guidelines for developing Type III environmental declarations for one or more product categories. • Austria • Belgium • Australia PCR are approved in a multi-stakeholder open consul- • Catalonia (Spain) • Cyprus • Brazil tation process. Information contained in the declaration • Czech Republic • Estonia • Canada gives no criteria for assessment, preference or mini- • France • Greece • China mum levels to be met, but the customer can compare products by comparing the quantified results presented • Germany • Ireland • Croatia in the corresponding type III declarations. • Hungary • Italy • Hong Kong

• Lithuania • Latria • India In 2002, the results of a study commissioned by the • Nordic countries • Luxembourg • Israel EC/DG Environment and carried out by ERM reviewing (Denmark, Finland, Norway, • Malta • Japan existing EPD schemes were published (ERM 2002). The Sweden) • Portugal • Korea study reviewed over-sector initiatives in ten countries, • Poland • Slovenia • New Zealand three collaboration initiatives (GEDNet, NIMBUS and Asia), and sector-specific initiatives in the areas of au- • Slovak Republic • United Kingdom • Taiwan tomotive, chemicals, construction, energy & transport, • Spain • Thailand electrical and electronic equipment, food, packaging, • The Netherlands • United States of America pulp & paper, textiles and tourism. In 2003, the study Table 1 - National ISO-type I labelling systems in EU-25 and selected extra-European countries Source: Rubik & Frankl (2005) was further updated and expanded within the Task 1 14 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 1515

2 Environmental product information schemes in the NATIONAL SCHEME SECTORAL SCHEME building and energy sectors COUNTRIES (Scheme Owner) (Sector) Europe Catalonia (Spain) — Operated by the technical architects association of Barcelona (CAATB), promoted by the Catalan Government and developed by ESCi (construction) 2.1 Introductory remarks Denmark Pilot Project EPD BY og BYG (construction) (DEPA – Danish Environmental Protection Which tools are used by industry to communicate life As for business-to-business communication, the Agency) cycle information to consumers and other stakeholders use of ISO-type III environmental declarations has been France Experimental standard on type III environmental FDES (construction) in practice? How effective is this information in fostering significantly increasing, especially in Sweden and Ja- declarations the production and consumption of more environmen- pan. Moreover, a number of initiatives have been taken (AFNOR - Association Francaise de Normalisation) tally sound products and services? Is the use of specific in several industry sectors (e.g. in the electronics and Finland — RTS (construction), Paper profile communication tools just dependent on target-group or construction sectors) at international level to standard- Germany — AUB (construction) also on product groups? This section tries to give a first ise the format of life cycle information data gathered Italy Pilot EPD Programme (ANPA 2000-2001) Consortium lead by Comune di Terlitzi answer to these questions. from suppliers. EU-LIFE INTEND Project – Pilot international (flower cultivation, scheme under EPD system (2003-05) development) ISO-type I labels are still the EPI tools most widely Other initiatives aimed at standardising the format Netherlands — MRPI (construction) used by industry and business for their communication to of EPI to other stakeholders in the supply chain, i.e. consumers in several countries. As far as these specific retailers, distributors and recyclers, are also being de- Norway NHO Type III Project communication tools are concerned, an indirect measure veloped. (NHO - Confederation of Norwegian Business of their effectiveness can be provided, in terms of: and Industry) 1. The number of product groups for which award Product life cycle information is also increasingly be- Sweden EPD programme Volvo Cars EPDs (automotive) criteria have been developed. ing included in environmental and sustainability reports. SEMC (Swedish Environmental Manage- Volvo Trucks EPDs (automotive) The latter are meant as important communication tools ment Council, a company jointly owned by IT Eco Declaration (Information technol- 2. The number of awarded products and firms par- for a variety of both private (e.g. financial) and public the Swedish state, industry and communities) ogy and telecom) ticipating in the scheme, reflecting the adoption by stakeholders. and SWEDAC (the body giving accreditation Byggvarudeklaration (Construction) industry and the behaviour (change) of producers. to certifiers) Teko Environmental Declarations (Textile) 3. The market shares of eco-labelled goods and Finally, it is worth highlighting that industry and Switzerland — SIA (construction) services, which are meant to reflect the actual business have been increasingly using a combina- United Kingdom — BRE Environmental Profiles (construction) change in behaviour of consumers. tion of tools for communication with stakeholders. Extra-Europe For instance, in Japan, some companies carry out However, ISO-type I labels have a set of important Canada EPDS – Environmental Profile Data Sheet (FPAC — ISO-type III declarations on their products but at the limitations. Therefore industry has also been developing – Forest Product Association of Canada, in co- same time use simplified communication to consum- and using other tools to increase the awareness of life operation with Terrachoice) ers. Moreover, a set of different tools is used for com- cycle environmental impacts of products among con- munication to public administrations for green public Japan ECO-LEAF — sumers and to encourage the latter to be more closely procurement (GPP). (JEMAI - Japan Environmental Management involved in reducing impact via better use of the product. Association for Industry) Communication materials include information on pack- South Korea EDP program — aging, in product catalogues and/or advertising cam- (MoE – Ministry for the Environment) paigns via internet, media and information brochures. USA CEP – Certified Eco-Profile Programme — (SCS – Scientific Certification Systems) Another trend to be observed (e.g. in Japan) is the No State Based simplification of complex life cycle information into ISO- type II claims, through which the consumers can more — IVN “better-best” (textile) easily understand how products are improved in a life — AISE Code of Conduct (household laun- cycle perspective. This kind of information is spread out dry detergents) via the web, product catalogues and environmental and Table 2 - Overview of existing national over-sectoral EPD programmes and selected sector-specific initiatives Source: Adapted and sustainability reports. updated from INTEND (2005), ERM (2002). 16 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 17

2.2 Sector-specific approaches 2.3 The Building and Construction Sector

2.3.1 ISO-type I ecolabels Which Environmental Product Information Schemes Overall it can be said that different communication (EPIS) and other tools are currently mostly used for com- tools are used in function of the target stakeholders, i.e. munication with consumers and other stakeholders? final consumers, business clients, financial stakehold- Table 3 summarises the indicators: number of prod- ed by China Environmental United Certification Center What is the format and channel of information used for ers, public administrations, policy makers, NGO’s and uct groups, participating firms and awarded products Co., Ltd (CEC). The second country in terms of eco- different stakeholders? How effective is this information others. Moreover, the review reveals that industry and for the main existing ISO-type I labelling schemes in dif- labelled products (the first in terms of awarded firms) in fostering the production and consumption of more businesses have been increasingly using a combina- ferent countries. is Japan, with more than 5,000 products. It is followed environmentally sound products and services? These tion of tools for communication with stakeholders. For by South Korea, Taiwan and Germany, which record and other questions are addressed by the work of the instance, some companies carry out ISO-type III dec- As shown in Table 3, the ecolabel scheme with the quite high figures of eco-labelled products under their Task Force on Communication of Life Cycle Information larations on their products but at the same time use largest number of awarded products (21,000) is by far schemes. As far as the EU-Flower is concerned, ab- within the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative. A recent re- simplified communication to consumers and/or public the China Environmental Labelling programme, operat- solute figures of awards are much lower, but rapidly view carried out by the Task Force shows that industry administrators. and businesses are developing their own toolboxes to Product Year of Products provide environmental information on products to their There is evidence that the specific EPIS and/or Product groups Country establish- Firms Products Firms Building & stakeholders. A variety of communication tools are used communication tools used do not just depend on the groups Building & ment Constr. in everyday business practice. They include ISO-type I target-group receiving the information but also on the Constr. ecolabels, ISO-type II self-declared environmental claims, industry sector and product group. This is quite logical, China (2006) 1994 56 1,100 21,000 12 n.a. n.a. ISO-type III environmental declarations, but also other because each sector and product group has its own Japan (October 2006) 1989 47 2,107 5,152 3 n.a. n.a. communication tools, such as advertising and product specific requirements in terms of environmental issues South Korea 1992 7 (groups) 103 1,001 4,100 11 252 860 catalogues, information campaigns, environmental and and communication needs. (June 2006) (categories) sustainability reports and information brochures. Taking this into account, the Task Force on Commu- Taiwan 1992 13 (groups) 882 3,893 1 (group) 46 231 This is for example the case of Sweden's Byggvar- nication of Life Cycle Information has taken a working (Green Mark, 103 (categories) 9 (catego- udeklarationen, a Building Product Declaration which approach, which aims at: April 2008) ries) doesn't really fall under the ISO Type I, II, or III. There are 1. Focusing on specific sectors and product cat- Germany 1978 89 529 3,650 13 83 1,944 somewhere between 4000-7000 of these declarations egories. (July 2006) on the market, which represents a very high penetra- 2. Involving industry and other stakeholders. Nordic Countries 1989 66 680 > 1,500 11-15 45-51 >60 tion. However, research has shown that although there (2006) 3. Identifying success stories. is a general uptake of this declaration on the supply Catalonia (Spain) 1994 26 171 895 9 12 79 4. Assessing the transferability of results. side, when requested by purchasers it is very uncer- (DGQA) tain how the information is influencing the purchasing The Netherlands 1992 69 257 360 7 22 n.a. decision. There may also be issues with how often this The first step of this work process was the organi- (Milieukeur, October information is updated by companies as well as its ac- zation of an expert workshop in Barcelona in Septem- 2006) curacy or even relevance. Many contractors simply ask ber 2005, which focused on the building/construc- Spain (AENOR) 1994 11 52 275 2 n.a. 7 for declaration of the products that they are purchasing tion and energy sectors, followed by a workshop in and assemble them in a binder that would be given to Stuttgart narrowed to the construction sector. These EU (October 2006) 1992 24 309 n.a. 2 61 n.a. the client when the project is complete. The type of in- are two crucial sectors of our society, because at the Austria 1991 49 n.a. n.a. 12 14 n.a. formation presented in the label does address most life same time they are very relevant in socio-economic France 1992 19 n.a. n.a. 3 cycle stages, but does not present impacts. terms, have significant environmental impacts and Sweden (Falcon) 1992 11 n.a. n.a. 0 0 0 present a large potential for improvement. Moreover, (October 06) One branch of the building sector in Sweden (water, several companies in both sectors are very active in Brazil (ABNT – 1993 10 (under n.a. n.a. 1 n.a. n.a. heating and ventilation) developed two tools (although the development and use of different EPIS for com- Qualidade Ambiental) development) never released to the public) to assist information users munication to stakeholders. India (October 2006) 1991 16 n.a. n.a. 2 n.a. n.a. (consumers). The first is an interpretative tool for users to better understand the information presented in the Table 3 - Main ISO-type I labelling schemes, as of October 2006, unless otherwise indicated. Source: adapted and updated from Rubik & Frankl (2005) declaration and the environmental significance. The second is a decision making tool to assist users when choosing between potential suppliers of components. . 6. This list is not intended to be comprehensive; more ecolabelling programmes have been established since the time of writing. 18 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 19

increasing. The number of companies using the label Distintiu has 9 product categories in the building and In the Taiwanese Green Mark Program, there are 13 time of writing. Nevertheless, it is worth noticing that at was 37 in March 2000 (ERM 2002), 59 in January 2001 construction sector, of which the leading one is by far product groups which contain a total of 105 product least a product category group Building and construc- (Rubik & Scholl 2002), 128 at the end of 2002, 185 as of “Products and systems for water saving”, with 69 la- categories. The “construction materials” group is one tion exists in the two remaining listed non-European June 2004 and 309 by October 2006, corresponding to belled products (on a total of 79 in the sector). of the 13 groups and has 9 product categories. More countries (Brazil and India). an increase by a factor ten in six years. Acceleration is details and updated information can be found at http:// particularly strong in specific countries (e.g. Italy, France Austria presents a quite relevant number of prod- greenliving.epa.gov.tw/greenlife/green-life/english.aspx. More updated information of Type I ecolabelling pro- and Denmark, but also Catalonia). The case of Catalo- uct categories in the Building and construction group. grammes can be found on-line on the Global Ecolabel- nia is of special interest, given the very high number of Unfortunately, no figures are available regarding the Unfortunately, complete information was not avail- ling Network website: http://www.gen.gr.jp. labelled products with the regional scheme DGQA plus number of eco-labelled products. able for other non-European ecolabel schemes at the the strong acceleration in the EU-Flower scheme. This is a remarkable result for a small country. Within the Dutch ecolabel system (Milieukeur), 7 product categories have been established, and 22 com- The schemes in operation are in most cases “de- panies have applied for the eco-label. Unfortunately, no pendent” on only a small number of product catego- information is available on the number of products. 2.3.2 ISO-type II environmental claims ries. Most important product areas are paper products, paints, durable office equipment and some products ad- Finally, the EU-Flower has two product groups es- dressing national/regional characteristics (e.g. products tablished in the Building and construction area: Hard Environmental claims for water-saving, tourism, flower arrangements, bags, or- floor coverings, and paints and varnishes. Totally, 61 ganisers, food, cat litter, and recycled plastic products). firms have applied, corresponding to approximately A relevant example of the use of ISO-type II environ- Very clearly, the diffusion and effectiveness of ISO-type I 20% of total firms participating in the scheme. How- mental claims is provided by BASF. The latter has devel- labels are not only dependent on countries but also on ever, the same lack of data applies with respect to the oped a new label for products that have been evaluated product groups and/or product group “families”. number of awarded products. through an Eco-Efficiency Analysis. The awarding of the label is dependent on specific requirements. For exam- As far as the product category group “Building and Outside the EU, the most successful schemes with ple, a third party evaluation (critical review) of the eco- construction” is specifically addressed, China, Germany respect to the Building and construction category group efficiency analysis is requested. In addition, the results and South Korea take the lead in terms of product cat- are in China, South Korea and Taiwan. of the analysis have to be published on the Internet. The egory groups, participating firms and eco-labelled prod- label is allowed to be used for three years. After that ucts. Germany and South Korea are also the only two In the China Environmental Labelling programme, 12 period, a revision of the analysis is required in order to countries – together with Catalonia – for which a complete product categories within the Building and construction cover market developments and product diversity. statistics of awarded products and participating firms are group have been established7. Due to the high concerns available. In fact, in general publicly available information on in-door air quality, some of them are very popular on More specifically, the procedure for the awarding of is very limited, with particular respect to the number of the market. For example, about 300 firms producing wa- the label is based on the following steps: eco-labelled products for a specific industry sector. ter-based paints are awarded, which is the biggest prod- 1. Accomplished Eco-Efficiency Analysis accord- uct category in this programme. Unfortunately, complete ing to the methodology certified by TÜV Rhein- Going deeper into the analysis of data per single information on the Building and construction sector is not land/ Berlin-Brandenburg, Germany. country, it is possible to see how in Germany the Build- available. Although the information of awarded products 2. Verification of the investigated product to be more ing and construction category group comprises 13 dif- and involved firms is available month-by-month from the eco-efficient for the defined customer benefit than ferent product categories. Among them, varnishes and website, Product-by-product statistics are not easy to other alternatives as result of the analysis. Figure 1 – Example of environmental claim at BASF paints show the highest number of eco-labelled prod- access. More information can be found from 3. Presentation of a third party evaluation (so-called ucts, contributing to 86% of the total. http://www.sepacec.com/cecen/labelling/. 2. Inosoly 400 Fotopur® - Electronic Chemicals - Critical Review according ISO 14040 ff.). Systems® 4. Publication of the results via internet on website As for the Nordic countries, 4 product categories As far as South Korea is concerned, 11 product cat- 3. Acid quench with the ionic liquid BASIL® have been developed within the Building and construc- egories have been established, for a total number of 250 www.oeea.de, which is referred to on the label. 4. Astaxanthin for Salmon Production. tion group. The total number of participating firms is 13. participating firms and 860 awarded products. Looking at 5. Payment of the licence fee for the duration of With respect to the Swedish Falcon (Bra Miljoval), no the total number of eco-labelled products it can be inferred three years. 5. Propylene Carbonate as Solvent in Wire Coat- product category has been established for the Building that the share retained by the building sector is 21%. ings. and construction sector. The following products have been granted the label 6. Ibuprofen Production. so far: 7. Automotive Refinish Primers for Small Surface 7. Water Based Coatings, Asbestos Free Building Materials, Adhesives, Phos- Spain has only two categories, “Photovoltaic panels phorus Gypsum Building Materials, Wood Based Panels and Finishing Prod- 1. Styrodur in Pitched Roof Insulation above Rafter Damage Repair. for buildings” and “Paints and varnishes”, the first one ucts, Plastic Water & sewage Pipe, Energy-saving Doors & Windows, Sanitary Ceramics, Ceramics Tiles, Blocks for Architecture, Wallpapers, Lightweight (Northern Italy). 8. Injection Moulding with Ultradur® High Speed. being a zero-product category. However, the Catalan Wall Boards. 20 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 21

As it is possible to see from the list, one product Advertising and product catalogues EPDs in the Swedish system cover a wide set of prod- and Stepwise EPD and the Swedish program “On the pertains to the Building and construction sector. ucts and services, ranging from consumer products way to EPD” are important for the EPDs in this sector. There are a lot of examples of advertising brochures like washing machines to the electricity produced by a 16 EPDs have been generated in this context. The eco-label system developed by BASF can actu- for housing and construction products. The reported nuclear power plant. ally be considered an “ISO-type II and a half” tool, since information is mostly qualitative and referring to single In the EPD® system there is a general PCR docu- it requires a third party verification according to pre-de- environmental aspects (e.g. energy efficiency). EPD programmes in the construction sector are ment for building products as well as an additional 9 termined standards, and a quite detailed and complete relatively new and fast growing. EPDs have been devel- PCRs for specific product groups available. 5 PCRs declaration. As an example, the one issued for roof in- oped during the last 20 years. The EU projects INTEND were developed during the INTEND project. sulating materials is a document of 30 pages. (source: http://www.sustainability.basf.com). “On the way to Building & Certified EPDs Reported EPDs EPD” and Construction “Stepwise EPD” sector Sweden 26 27 16 10 Italy 30 36 5 Belgium 18 18 2.3.3 ISO-type III Environmental Product Declarations* Japan 18 22 4 Poland 1 1 Korea 1 1 Environmental product declarations are a very re- The certification is organised by the accreditation Portugal 3 1 cent EPI communication tool and quite obviously their bodies SINCERT (Italy) and SWEDAC (Sweden). Ac- Russia 2 diffusion / adoption by companies is fairly limited in ab- credited certification bodies for the EPD® system are solute numbers. BVQI Sverige AB, Certiquality, DNV Certification AB, Czech Republic 2 As mentioned, there are cross-sector EPD pro- ICMQ S.p.A., JIA, Japan Gas Appliances Inspection Lithuania 1 grammes with declarations of building and construction Association, RINA S.p.A., SEMKO-DEKRA Certification Latvia 1 0 products and sector-specific programmes. AB and SP Swedish National Testing and Research In- TOTAL 94 107 23 20 stitute. The certification bodies are accredited for specific product categories. Table 4 - Number of EPDs registered in the Swedish system per company’s country (own elaboration on data from www.environdec.com as retrieved in October 2006) 2.3.3.1 Sweden - The EPD® programme As of October 2006, in total 107 EPDs are re- 2.3.3.2 Japan – EcoLeaf Type III environmental la- It should be prepared concisely and in a highly uniform As mentioned, a first scheme was developed in ported in the official website of the Swedish EPD® belling program and visual way that product purchasers and consumers Sweden. The Swedish government, together with in- system, 94 of which are certified. An additional 23 can easily understand. Below the main text part, other dustry, introduced a national system for a Type III dec- declarations are registered in the programs “On the In Japan, JEMAI launched the “EcoLeaf Type III en- environment-related information may also be presented, larations programme based on certified environmental way to EPD” and “Stepwise EPD” (http://extra.ivf.se/ vironmental labelling program” in the1st half of 2002. As provided that it can be verified. product declarations in 1999. This system is today an StepwiseEPD/default.asp). Not only Swedish compa- of September 2008, the number of EcoLeaf declara- international system open to all countries. nies participate in the system. Italian, Japanese, Ko- tions has grown up to 465, (747 in total number), with “P.E.I.D.S.”: Product Environmental Information The general procedure of the system includes the rean, Belgian, Polish, Czech, Russian, Portuguese, approximately 58 companies involved. Data Sheet following steps: Lithuanian and Latvian EPDs have also been regis- The EcoLeaf label comprises the following three Overall results of the LCA are presented on the 1. Consider available PCRs and prepare PCR doc- tered in the Swedish system, which is developing to parts: PEIDS to clarify the basis of the PEAD and to summa- ument. embrace EPDs from other countries. rize the results of inventory analysis, impact assess- 2. Collecting LCA-data to be included in the EPD ment, and energy consumption. Table 4 shows the number of EPDs registered un- and also other relevant information. der the Swedish system per country of provenance. Product Data Sheet 3. Compiling environmental information into the As shown, a quite significant number of Italian com- The product data sheet records the underlying data EPD reporting format. panies are participating in the system. This is the con- used in the preparation of the PEIDS. The company 4. Verification and registration. sequence of the Italian-Swedish LIFE project INTEND. introducing EcoLeaf label prepares the product data 5. Considering the rules for using the EPD® Some Japanese companies have also issued EPDs “P.E.A.D.” : Product Environmental Aspects Dec- sheet by describing the inputs and outputs of energy, logotype. certified under the Swedish system, further showing laration raw materials, and environmental contaminants per the increasing international dimension of the latter. The PEAD provides representative information on product unit based on actual measurements within its * Only those EPD programme logos for which we received official permission the product, including point of environmental impacts. direct range of influence (e.g., within its factory). of use are reproduced in the book 22 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 23

The auditors must be qualified by JEMAI and regis- Looking at the different industry sectors involved cates” was basically a documentation of the life cycle of tered as qualified auditors by the EcoLeaf environmen- so far in the Japanese system, the prominence of elec- the product and results from measurements addressing tal labelling program. tronic products (e.g. photocopiers, printers, cameras, all environmental relevant aspects of the product. Today notebooks, etc.) is clear. these aspects can be found in EPDs under “additional A key feature of the Japanese ISO-type III declaration information”, next to the typical LC indicators. system is that, unlike other countries’ Type III programmes, However, there is a growing interest in the building several companies have issued declarations within the sector. As shown in Table 5, this sector has produced EPDs in the AUB scheme are developed in a proce- same product category. This allows for a real comparison 10 PCRs (over a total of 49 for the whole EcoLeaf sys- dure with three stages, where different stakeholders are of products of different companies by clients and custom- tem) and 25 declarations so far. involved: In the first step the producers and experts of ers. Though the absolute number of products is still limited, the sector establish a product forum organised by AUB. companies perceive that (ISO-type II) environmental claims Given the strong growing European and Chinese They develop a draft PCR document for the sector fol- without proof are just self-declaration with limited credibil- interest in EPDs for building products, more declara- lowing the AUB guideline for the development of PCR- ity and recognize on the contrary that certified ISO-type III tions are expected to be introduced in the Japanese documents. The draft is reviewed by an independent declarations are a valuable tool to compete on the market market soon. advisory board regarding completeness from an environ- with respect to environmental performance of products. mental point of view and consistency with the AUB program. After that the PCR document is published for pub- Classification for application Existing PCRs (n. of declarations) lic consultation. In the second step the EPD is developed Products delivered to the construction site Structural aggregate (1) by the producer. In the third step the EPD is verified by a Final products delivered to the final construction - Toilet seat with bidet that sprays water from under- verifier authorized by the independent advisory board. neath and dries with air (2) - Lavatory bowl (PCR has been published, 1) Up to now, 14 PCRs for different construction prod- - Water faucet (PCR has been published, 0) ucts have been developed. PCRs are verified by the in- - Interphone (17) dependent advisory board; EPDs are verified by verifiers - Water meter box (5) Figure 2 – Example of an EPD of construction products in the Nor- authorized by the independent advisory board, and a - Water meter unit (accessory parts) (2) wegian EPD certification by an accredited body is not requested. - Tile carpet (6) 2.3.3.5 China Products installed when it is used Desk (0) The AUB program is supported by several governmen- Free access floor (raised access floor) (3) Even though there is no type-III environmental decla- tal organisations, like the Federal Ministry for Transport and Residential bathroom vanity (0) ration programme established in China right now, China Construction (BMVBS), the German EPA (UBA), the Ger- Residential prefabricated bath (0) Environmental United Certification Center (CEC) has joined man Institute for Building Technology (DIBt) and the Fed- GEDnet and has been preparing for such a programme. eral Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM). Table 5 – EcoLeaf PCRs and declarations for construction and building products in Japan (Source: adapted from JEMAI, 2006) China Building Material Test and Certification Centre is also interested in type III declarations of building materials.

2.3.3.3 South-Korea 2.3.3.4 Norway – The NHO program Most recently, funded by the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), a project (2007-2010) The Korean EDP - Environmental Declaration of The Norwegian EPD program (http://www.epd-norge. has started research on type III environmental declara- Products Program (http://www.koeco.or.kr) was estab- no) was founded in 2000 by NHO - Confederation of Norwe- tions of key building materials and chemicals, and cer- lished by the Korea Eco-products Institute (KOECO), gian Enterprise and is supported by Byggforsk, NTNU and tification programmes are expected to be established. the Environmental Management Corporation (EMC) Østfoldforskning. The focus of the program is on furniture, Besides the two above-mentioned certification bodies, and the Korea Environmental Preservation Association building, energy and paper products. 8 PCRs have been Sichuan University, Tsinghua University and China Na- (KEPA). The system is supported b y the Korean Minis- developed, 2 for construction products. 96 EPDs are regis- tional Institute of Standardization are also involved. try of Environment (MOE) tered, most of them for furniture, 28 EPDs are registered for The focus of the system is in EEE (electric and elec- construction products. As part of the system, other groups tronic equipment). Up to now (October 2006) 96 EDPs are also participating: the verification committee, the techni- 2.3.3.6 Germany – AUB Environmental Declarations are registered within 24 product groups, but there are cal committee and the marketing committee. Currently there no PCRs and EDPs for construction products yet. is a new initiative for the development of PCR and EPDs for In Germany the only type III EPD program is for build- building materials and indoor electrical equipment. ing products. It was developed in 2004 by AUB (Associa- tion of Building Product Producers and Distributors). AUB Verification and registration is organised by "Naer- was publishing ISO type II declarations (Environmental Figure 3 – The operating scheme of the German AUB declaration ingslivets Stiftelse for Miljoedeklarasjoner". Certificates) from 1982, the content of these “certifi- system 24 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 25

Generic Environmental Profiles are carried out by For further information on BRE’s Green Guides please considering data collected from a group of manufac- visit http://www.bre.co.uk/greenguide/section.jsp?sid=435 turers involved in producing broadly similar products. A trade association often takes responsibility for gathering Envest is a software package that informs the de- the necessary data from its members. sign process to deliver buildings with low environmental impact and whole life cost. Envest makes explicit the A generic Profile can therefore: environmental and financial trade offs available in the • Give industry confidence in the manufacturing design process, allowing the client to optimise the final process for construction materials. design according to their priorities. • Help benchmark industry standards across Due to its versatility Envest is an essential product for: manufacturers of similar products • Architects • Help individual organisations improve their environmental impact and manufacturing processes. • Designers • Highlight energy use and CO2 emissions • Engineers • Lead to reductions in environmental impacts. • Surveyors • Clients For further information on LCA Environmental Profiles • Specifiers please visit http://www.bre.co.uk/service.jsp?id=53 Envest is web based allowing design teams to store The BRE Green Guides and share information in a controlled and accessible The Green Guides present information on the en- way, enabling benchmarking and design comparison. vironmental impacts of building elements and speci- Figure 4 - Example of an EPD of building products in the German Figure 5 - Example of an EPD of building products in the German AUB declaration system AUB declaration system fications by ranking these on a simple rating scale of For further information on Envest please visit http:// A,B, or C (where A represents the best performance) envestv2.bre.co.uk/ Behind these simple ratings lies full Life Cycle Assess- There are two distinct types of BREEAM environment (LCA) studies using the UK agreed Environmental mental profiles: Profiling Methodology. 2.3.3.8 France – FDES • Specific Product Profiles • Generic Profiles There are currently two Guides – one covering hous- The French programme FDES (Fiches de déclaration ing specifications and one covering commercial building environnementales et sanitaires) is based on the French 2.3.3.7 United Kingdom – BRE Environmental Specific Product Profiles are usually carried out for specifications. standard NF P01-010 “Déclaration environnementale et Profiles individual manufacturers who wish to verify the environ- sanitaire pour les produits de construction” published in mental performance of their particular branded product. The Guides consider 13 different building compo- 2004. A first experimental standard (XP P01-010) was Environmental Profiles is a Life Cycle Assessment Profiles can be carried out to take account of the im- nents. For each of the 13 components, the standard already published in 1999. The motivation to write a na- approach for presenting information about the envi- pacts at different stages of the product’s life namely; construction specifications have been examined and tional standard was the collective request from industry ronmental impacts of construction materials meas- • Cradle to gate ‘average’ environmental scores have been calculated. (AIMCC), building actors and consumers. There is also ured over the whole life cycle of the product (from • Cradle to installed strong support from public authorities (Housing, Envi- cradle to grave). The A,B,C ratings rank the performance of each ronment and Architecture Ministries) and the Environ- • Cradle to grave specification against the ‘norm’ for every component. mental Agency (ADEME). The approach called the Environmental Profiles Thus the best performers in each component catego- Specific Product Profiles are individually certified by Methodology and built around a single PCR document ry can be easily identified by the reader, and design- A programme for verified EPDs (FDES) is on the BRE certification. In addition product profile information is used by BRE to produce independently certified pro- ers and specifiers are comparing the performance of way, AFNOR Normalisation is organising the verification will be promoted to the construction industry via the fol- files that have been agreed by industry stakeholders, ‘like’ elements. process. The declarations are registered by AFNOR lowing routes. and ensures that a set of common rules are applied to Normalisation with the report and the attestation pub- provide reliable and credible environmental information • BREEAM and Ecohomes assessor extranet BRE will be releasing a new expanded and updated lished on the AFNOR « construction » website. The op- about competing materials and products. • The Green Guide edition of the Green Guides in late 2007. The Green tion can be included in the INES database (www.inies. Guide will still be available as publication but will prima- • BRE’s Red Book fr), which is independent of the FDES Programme and This system enables manufacturers to demonstrate rily be web based. operated by a technical committee (AIMCC) and repre- • Envest Software the performance of their products in a manner that the sentative of interested parties from construction sector. industry can believe. • The Environmental Profiles website 26 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 27

The declarations can be collective or individual; they Declarations can be company or sector specific. For the Catalan Government, EPDs could collect all contain selected environmental impacts, health infor- About 200 producers published an EPD within 30 prod- these types of information. Thus, on the one hand EPDs mation and comfort aspects. uct groups. could serve as a tool for objective and verifiable communication about the fulfilment of those requirements The EPDs are used in the building assessment HQE asked by the Code, the Catalan Decree and further in France. HQE addresses 14 issues related to the 2.3.3.10 Finland - RT coming legislation. environment; one of them is the “Integrated choice of construction products and systems”. For this reason, New environmental declarations (http://www.rts.fi/ In fact, the main objectives of the inclusion of en- the knowledge of environmental impacts of products RTED/index.htm) have been compiled according to the vironmental labelling in the Decree are to promote the (based on the EPD) is necessary. publication “Methodology for Compiling Environmental Catalan type I ecolabelling programme “Distintiu” and to Declarations for Building Products and Assessing Envi- motivate the building sector. The type III option is seen ronmental Impacts of Buildings” since 2004. as a way to study new product categories and to foster 2.3.3.9 The Netherlands – MRPI the adoption of environmental activities by new building The RT Environmental Declaration is based on the families. In the long run, the intention is twofold: on the national methodology following the basic principles one hand EPDs will be, in most cases, a step to the stated in the ISO standard series 14040 and 14020. type I Distintiu adoption by companies and an informa- It is developed in cooperation with the Confederation tion pool to develop new criteria for the Distintiu; and, of Finnish Construction Industries RT, the Building In- on the other hand, EPDs will be the basis for building formation Foundation RTS, VTT Technical Research environmental assessment. Centre of Finland and companies in the construction business. While the Distintiu product categories have been usually developed to help Catalan companies to mar- The RT Environmental Declaration is a voluntary and ket their existing eco-products, the inclusion of a clause public document providing comparable and impartial on EPDs in the Decree could help foreign companies information on the environmental impacts of building instead, for there is not an EPD system in place in Cata-

materials. It is a source of information for users, design- Figure 7 – Example of an EPD in the Finnish declaration system lonia or Spain yet. ers and constructors. Joint research projects were started by the Environ- 26 EPDs within 13 product groups have been pub- 2.3.3.11 Catalonia (Spain) mental Management Research Group (GiGa) at ESCi, lished (October 2006). Escola Superior de Comerç Internacional (Universitat The Catalan Government, through the Ministry of Pompeu Fabra), the Ministry of Environment and Hous- The eco-profile includes the life cycle stages from Environment and Housing has issued new legislation in ing of the Catalan Government and the Technical Archi- the acquisition of raw materials to the factory gate relation to life cycle information for the building and con- tects Association of Barcelona (CAATB), which led to - Use of natural resources struction sector, effective from August 2006: “Decree start an EPD programme in Catalonia for the building 21/2006, Regulation for the adoption of environmental sector in February 2008. CAATB is the programme op- - Materials and ecoeficiency criteria in buildings”. The Decree intro- erator and EPD will be integrated with other technical - Use of energy duces a very strong Top-Down approach, as it states in information about the product. For CAATB this is seen Figure 6 – Example of a MRPI declaration in the Netherlands - Emissions into air and water chapter 6.2 that: “at least one whole family of products as an opportunity to help their associates, who hold the In 1995 the Netherlands Federation of Suppliers must be labelled through type I or type III (EPD) ecola- responsibility of verifying that a building is complying with to the Construction Industry (NVTB) started the pro- Other environmental aspects included are: belling in each new building” (Fullana et al. 2006). legislation, to facilitate their work. Two product catego- gramme “Environmentally Relevant Product Informa- - Indoor air emissions ries are under development as pilot studies, insulation On the other hand, the Spanish Government has tion” (Milieurelevante Productinformatie = MRPI®). - Service life materials and ceramic products, and the programme is approved the “Technical Code for Edification”, as the expected to be fully operational at the end of 2009. - Service and maintaining Since 1999 the MRPI foundation is the operator of first step for the adoption of the European Directive the MRPI system (http://www.mrpi.nl). The program is - Final disposal and recycling 2002/91/EC, which aims to promote improvements in As the use of EPDs is mandatory for construction based on the Dutch standard NEN 8006 published in the energy efficiency of buildings. Specifically, in chap- companies, this new programme is expected to grow 2004. A manual for compiling environmentally relevant ter 2 (5.2.4) the Code refers to the use of Life Cycle very quickly. product information acts as a general PCR document. Assessment, certifications and other environmental as- A review of the declaration is mandatory; it has to be sessment tools for building and construction products. conducted by one of the 4 authorised institutes (IN- In some aspects (other than labelling), the Code goes TRON, IVAM, TNO-Bouw and Kiwa NV). beyond the Decree. 28 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 29

2.3.4 Other quantitative declarations Although the tool is in an advanced development not intend to release them at any point in the short-term state, the present situation of its use and application future. This tells us something about the difficulty of get- is much more complex. The branch organisation that ting everyone on board in terms of developing criteria 2.3.4.1 Byggvarudeklaration – BVD –VVS Type B, ment. Standardized formats for environmental developed these tools declared recently that they do for which environmental issues have to compete on. version 1.4 (van Rossem 2004) declarations shall enhance the information and make it publicly available. That should lead to In early 1994, the Swedish Eco-cycle Council began the extension of increased knowledge and envi- to discuss the possibility of legislating producer responsi- ronmentally sound ways of building. bility in the building sector. Shortly thereafter the building 2.3.5 Environmental Assessment of Buildings industry formed the “Building Sector’s Eco-Cycle Council” VVS-Type B, version 1.4 contains the following in- and in December 1995 proposed an alternative voluntary formation: One of the most important applications of EPDs in CASBEE evaluation is presented as a measure of industry commitment known as the Action plan for envi- - Product name and common use the building and construction sector is their use for the “BEE (Building Environmental Efficiency) approach” or ronment responsible building products, a wider producer - Company Information: manufacturer, environ- environmental assessment of buildings. Several assess- eco-efficiency indicator. The unique approach of CAS- responsibility. A critical part of this was the commitment by mental policy and management system ment schemes already exist which directly use indicator BEE is that the assessment distinguishes environmental the sector to “develop and use building materials, build- - Supplier Information: environmental policy and results from EPDs for the calculation of results on the impact and quality of building performance. ing systems and building methods that reduce negative management system building level or are planning to integrate EPDs in the environmental impacts and further long-term sustainability future. Some building assessment schemes are using By relating these two kinds of performances, re- of our natural resources”. An important sub-goal in the ac- - Product Information: contents – substances and qualitative environmental information, for them a link to sults are plotted on a graph with environmental impact tion plan included the “development and supply of build- materials according to CAS number EPDs could be beneficial in the future. (loads) L on X axis and quality Q on Y axis (Figure 10). ing product declarations by 1997. The first version of the The best performing buildings score the section rep- BVD format was available in 1997 with an updated version Separate sections addressing the following life cycle The next chapters briefly describe some assess- resenting the lowest environmental impact and highest released in 2000. The VVS industry developed a modified stages: Manufacturers answer a series of yes/no ques- ment schemes. It is obvious that the schemes are com- quality of performance. The criteria are prefixed from version more applicable to the VVS branch requirements. tions. In some cases quantitative data is asked for. plex and the overview doesn’t show all details. level1 to level 5. The higher the Q value and the lower In this project, the VVS – Type B version 1.4 is reviewed for - Use of Resources: raw materials (quantitative the L value, the steeper the slope and the more sustain- its content, however, there are previous versions still in use data), origin of material able the building is. Using this approach, it is possible to and available on company websites and in databases. - Production: Production data is available, en- 2.3.5.1 Japan – CASBEE graphically present the results of building environmental vironmental accounts, suppliers have EMAS, assessments. Figure 10 shows how the assessment According to a study by Kogg & Thidell (2003) in KEMI listed substances used CASBEE (Comprehensive Assessment System for results for buildings can be labelled on a diagram as which actors involved in the development of BVDs were - Distribution of finished product: Mode of trans- Building Environmental Efficiency) is a system for the class C (poor), class B-, class B+, class A, and class interviewed, a number of intended uses for the declara- port (options), through warehouses or delivered Japanese market, which was developed in 2001. CAS- S (excellent). tions were mentioned. These included: directly, packaging type, reusable, recoverable, BEE is composed of four assessment tools, the so- 1. Documentation; for example, assembling infor- take-back called “CASBEE Family”, corresponding to the building In order to manage the system, the assessor should mation on the products which are incorporated - Construction Phase: Assembly instructions are lifecycle, i.e. CASBEE for: fill out two assessment formats: the Assessment Result in buildings. The information can be used both available, safety, waste minimization, worker - Pre-design, Sheet and the Score Sheet. when alterations are made or when the building health and safety - New Constructions, is eventually demolished. More detailed information can be found at http:// - Use Phase: energy required, consumables need- 2. Risk reduction, to avoid the use of certain un- - Existing Buildings www.ibec.or.jp/CASBEE/english/overviewE.htm ed, harmful emissions during use, possible to es- wanted chemical substances or the release of - and for Renovation. timate service life, instructions are provided on – emissions of allergic substances. The purpose maximize service life, resource use, minimize use is then to identify products that should not be of consumables, how to dismantle the product incorporated in the building project. - Demolition: Product can be dismantled in an 3. Proactive material choices based on contents environmentally appropriate way, state how this or information on the products environmental can be done effects based on a life cycle perspective. The overall purpose is to point out the most advan- - Residuals: product is recyclable, packaging is tageous products. recyclable, recovery of materials is possible, energy recycling is possible and recommended 4. Building knowledge and capacity. The Building Sector’s Eco-cycle Council pointed at the need - Waste Products: Part of product not recyclable, to strengthen knowledge and the connection parts of product classified as hazardous waste, between the building process and the environ- risk of harmful emission if disposed Figure 8 – CASBEE approach and definition of the Building Environmental Efficiency (BEE) and related indicators 30 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 31

sites (14 points), water efficiency (5 points), energy and mand for building materials and products creating the atmosphere (17 points), materials and resources (13 fewest environmental impacts while meeting perform- points), indoor air quality (15 points) and innovation and ance, aesthetic, and cost control objectives. Lifecycle design (5 points). The different ratings a LEED building assessment promises to deliver much of the information can obtain are: LEED certification (26-32 points), silver needed to make this type of informed decision, but LCA rating (33-38 points), gold rating (39-51 points) and is not yet viewed as a viable alternative by most manu- platinum rating (52-69 points). The market penetration facturers in the U. S. of LEED has been steadily increasing over the years. Several LCA-based exist and/or are being devel- Currently LEED guidelines have been adopted in oped: all 50 states in the US (largely dominated by California) and over a dozen countries. Since its inception in 2000, Athena Environmental Impact Estimator Figure 9 – Sustainability Ranking of a Building according to the Building Environmental Efficiency (BEE) approach more than 1,400 projects have registered to achieve A not for profit organization, the Athena Institute has various levels of LEED certification. To date, the market developed the Environmental Impact Estimator (EIE) has been dominated by the government and non-profit software. Released in 2002, the software covers 90 The Japanese government (Japanese Ministry of LEED™ is a rating system developed by the USGBC sectors, together accounting for nearly 75 percent of all to 95 percent of the structural and envelope systems Land, Infrastructure and Transport) is spreading this (http://www.usgbc.org) to assess the environmental sus- LEED-registered projects (LEED Workshop Data, July typically used in both residential and non-residential method successfully and the system is now increasingly tainability of building designs. It is a voluntary, consensus- 21, 2004). The largest project type is office buildings, buildings. In contrast to BEES and eLCie, it focuses on becoming a sort of regulatory reference framework. based national standard for developing high-perform- followed by secondary and higher education buildings. materials rather than products. The Estimator is able to ance, sustainable buildings and provides a framework simulate over 1000 different building assembly com- This method has even become a model of the Green for assessing building performance and meeting sus- Despite this significant success, the LEED Sys- binations. Using preset building assembly dialogues, Olympic Building Assessment System (GOBAS) for the tainability goals. LEED focuses on green or sustainable tem has not (yet) included a level of acceptance and a building professional can quickly enter a conceptual 2008 Olympics in China. building, which is the practice of creating healthier and use of product standards, product LCAs and envi- building design and instantly see its cradle-to-grave more resource-efficient models of construction, renova- ronmental product declarations as achieved in the implications in terms of embodied primary energy use, http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/features/fea- tion, operation, maintenance, and demolition. European Union. According to Rob Watson, 10 year global warming potential, natural resource use, and ture_template.cfm?ID=1289 Chair of the LEED Steering Committee, “Full recogni- emissions to land, water and air. Given these capabili- The LEED™ system can be used in three ways to tion of the use of product LCAs to evaluate, specify ties, the Environmental Impact Estimator is the preferred improve the ‘greenness’ of a building design (Version and purchase products is a huge missing piece in the LCA tool in North America for assessing the environ- 2.3.5.2 United States - Green Building Initiatives 2.1, U.S.). LEED System.” The principal achievement of LEED mental impacts of building systems. Its developer, the (LEED) and other LCA-based assessment tools was to define and integrate green building perform- Athena Sustainable Materials Institute, is a lead partner • LEED can serve as a design guide for the design ance requirements in energy, water, materials, site/ in the US LCI Database Project. In response to the oil shocks in the 1970s, atten- team. The LEED credit system is a systematic land-use and indoor environment. tion in the U.S. focused on saving energy in buildings way of ensuring that the most important envi- BEES® through energy conservation (turning off the lights, low- ronmental issues are considered during the de- While the LEED ™ Green Building Rating System is Building for Environmental and Economic Sustain- ering/raising the thermostats), energy efficiency (install- sign of the building. driving consumer demand for green construction prod- ability (BEES) is a free software tool developed by the ing insulation, energy-saving equipment) and renewable • LEED assessment reports are a valuable means ucts, it has not yet moved to incorporate a separate National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST), energy (solar cells, passive solar architecture). Growing of showing the client and other interested par- category of credits for use of ISO-compliant LCAs for a U. S. federal government agency. It measures the en- awareness of buildings’ environmental impact (energy, ties that the design has effectively addressed product specification or purchase. Though it does have vironmental performance and costs of building products air quality, land-use, materials consumption & water environmental issues. a number of “LCA into LEED” workgroups, they are by using the life-cycle assessment approach specified in use) led to pioneering efforts in the late 1980s/early moving forward at a glacial pace. ISO 14040 standards, using the SimaPro software and • A building design can be certified by the U.S. or 1990s to create voluntary groups such as the American the database created by PRé Consultants in the Neth- Canadian Green Building Council. Certification Institute of Architects’ Committee on the Environment erlands. All stages in the life of a product are analyzed: provides increased market exposure and places and in 1993, the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), Other LCA-based assessment tools raw material acquisition, manufacture, transportation, the building in elite company among the most a national, 501(c)3 organization. Fortuitously, other organizations in the U. S. have installation, use, and recycling and waste management. ‘green’ buildings in North America. stepped in and developed LCA- tools to fill this gap. Its generic LCAs are very useful for comparison of ge- Green Building Initiatives (LEED) They have to some measure addressed the following neric product types and will become more so as a great To earn a LEED certification, the applicant project In the U. S the annual sustainable construction mar- factors which reportedly have precluded more exten- number of agricultural-based products are encom- must satisfy all of the prerequisites and a minimum ket has grown from roughly $200 million in 1999 to an sive use of LCA by manufacturers and purchasers. passed in BEES 4.0. Yet, as the same data collection number of points that will allow a LEED rating level. The estimated $15 billion in 2006, its growth driven large- tool has been used for all industries, the resulting data LEED rating system comprises 9 prerequisites and 60 ly by the development and use of the LEED™ Green Related but distinct problems for designers, archi- is considered by most manufacturers to be insufficiently elective points grouped into 6 categories: sustainable Building Rating System. tects, and building owners is how best to satisfy de- specific to warrant evaluation and comparison of brand 32 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 33

products. Additionally, the BEES method of presenting cled Content Packaging; In addition to the LCA-type Assessments are carried out by independent as- the design, construction, maintenance, operation and product LCA results is regarded by building designers data, the SCS specification for carpet also gives points sessor organisations that are licensed and trained by use of federal buildings. as too abstract and complex to be useful. to the following: Waste Minimization Plan; Public Dis- BRE. For each assessment, the assessor will produce a closure; Product Performance including: Texture Re- report outlining the development’s performance against The guideline addresses new and existing buildings. eLCie System™ tention; Tuft Bind; De-lamination; Stain Resistance; each of the criteria and its overall score and BREEAM Information about construction products comes from The eLCie System concept, software and beta ver- Fire Spread; Smoke Density: Total VOC Emissions: rating. Upon satisfactory completion of the assessment, EPDs. The government is supporting the voluntary ap- sion tools were developed over the last 4 years by the Specific VOC Emissions; Carcinogenic VOCs; Anti- the client is presented with a certificate that confirms proach of the AUB scheme. Industry is supporting the International Design Centre for the Environment (IDCE), Fungal Activity; Resistance to Water; Embedded Dirt the development’s BREEAM rating. approach to communicate environmental information a 501c (3) organization. It is a comprehensive package Removal; Extended Product Responsibility, including: with EPDs as well. of tools designed to streamline the use of life-cycle in- Post-Consumer Collection; Recycling Feasibility; Re- Where a design-stage assessment is commissioned, formation through the entire chain of the built environ- use & Recycling Stewardship; and Innovation. BRE recommends that a Post-Construction Review is Up to now there is no certification scheme for sus- ment while meeting the ISO 14025 Standard for LCA carried out to ensure that the end result achieves the tainable building implemented in Germany. But the de- and features: design’s aspirations. mand of the general public and of private investors is 1) The eLCie Industry Wizard™ which enables 2.3.5.3 United Kingdom (BREEAM and Ecohome) growing rapidly; therefore one can expect a certification manufacturers to efficiently collect gate-to-gate data on To achieve a high BREEAM rating, BRE advises system within the near future. processes to be integrated with peer-reviewed cradle- BREEAM is the world’s longest established and that the registered assessor is involved in the design to-gate and gate-to-cradle data. It is used by manu- most widely used environmental assessment method process from the early stages. Their advice will ensure facturers internally to assess how specific materials or for buildings. It sets the standards for best practice in that the desired BREEAM rating is achieved in the most 2.3.5.5 France - HQE manufacturing processes affect the environmental im- sustainable development and demonstrates a level of cost-effective way. The fee for such advice should be pacts of a product. Additionally it is used to develop a achievement. It has become the vocabulary used to de- negotiated directly with the assessor. As an example of the growing green requirements product LCA for certification by an LCA practitioner and scribe a building’s environmental performance. Created in public call for tenders, the French HQE regular fairs, posting potentially on eLCie Online; by BRE, BREEAM is robust in terms of both technical For further information regarding BREEAM please presenting surveys of HQE experiences, have shown 2) eLCie™ provides building designers, builders, standards and its commercial delivery (especially the visits http://www.breeam.org. that a growing number of public tenders in France in- contractors and facility managers with science-based independence of its licensing, quality assurance and clude the application of the “HQE Practice” to the build- yet user-friendly product LCA results in a web-based certification process). ing construction. format developed to meet the needs of non-scientists. 2.3.5.4 Germany It offers several options for accessing product informa- BREEAM Certification is undertaken by licensed as- The HQE method has been tested since 1994 in tion; i) an LCA-based label; ii) a spider diagram showing sessors ensuring that assessment services are offered The environmental assessment of buildings in Ger- building projects (residential and non-residential) and a product’s environmental impacts relative to an indus- competitively by assessors working within a rigorous many is based on the “Guideline for sustainable build- formalized in 1997 by HQE® Association The scheme try average product; iii) a summary product LCI. Core quality assurance framework. BRE trains, examines and ing”, which was drafted by the Federal Ministry for has two dimensions: information is free of charge. licenses organisations and individuals to carry out the Transport, Building and Urban Affairs (BMVBS 2001). 1. The environmental management system of the assessment process and work with the design team. building project. Scientific Certification Systems The guideline makes its contribution by providing 2. The building environmental performances, as- Scientific Certification Systems (SCS) is a for-profit BREEAM assesses the performance of buildings in practical guidance for the design and management of sessed through 14 issues addressing “Site and third party certifier for testing pesticide residues in the following areas: federally owned landholdings, including a checklist. Its Construction”, “Management” (operation phase), fresh produce. The company certifies multiple facets management, energy use, health and well-being, introduction implemented a strategy for federal build- “Comfort” (of users) and “Health” (of users). of the food industry and of the environmentally sound pollution, transport, land use, ecology materials, ing works gearing the design, construction and use of management of forests, marine habitats, and a wide and water buildings and landholdings to sustainability, with the The assessment criteria for construction products variety of manufacturing-related businesses. SCS has main emphasis put on the ecological and economic as- are technical quality, durability, adaptability, ability to developed a standard for evaluating carpet for com- Developers and designers are encouraged to con- pects. One of the practical implications of this is that reduce impact during refurbishment or deconstruc- mercial and industrial use, as well as specifications for sider these issues at the earliest opportunity to maxim- even at the design stage of a building, the economic tion, easy to clean and maintain. Knowledge of envi- paint and panelling. The purpose of the standards is to ise their chances of achieving a high BREEAM rating. impact of specific measures, for instance ecological ronmental impacts of products is based upon EPD and define what an environmentally preferable product is. Credits are awarded in each area according to perform- measures, has to be taken into account and an opti- the choice should take into account the environmen- The specification relies on a point system developed ance. A set of environmental weightings then enables mum strategy for investment sought. The most impor- tal criteria (calculation at the building scale, for a small specifically around the life cycle of the product. SCS the credits to be added together to produce a single tant aspect of the guideline is that all persons involved number of products). The same is required for health includes LCA-type information, giving a point score overall score. The building is then rated on a scale of; cooperate at an early stage in the design and construc- impacts (e.g. emissions to the indoor air). for achieving specific goals in the areas of: Resource tion of a building. Conservation; Production Plant Emissions: Key Sup- PASS, GOOD, VERY GOOD or EXCELLENT French EPD, called “Fiches de Déclaration Environ- plier Emissions; PBT Avoidance: ODC Avoidance; and a certificate awarded that can be used for pro- A Round Table for Sustainable Construction con- nementale et Sanitaire (FDES)”, are done according to Minimizing Waste Generation; Reduced Energy Con- motional purposes. sults the ministry in improving the guideline and bring- NF P 01 010. AIMCC, the Association of construction sumption; Reusable & Recyclable Packaging; Recy- BREEAM covers a range of building types: ing it into practical use. The guideline is a working aid for 34 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 35

products manufacturers, communicates the list of EPDs 2.4 The Energy Sector 2.4.1 ISO-type I ecolabels that have already been done for various construction families of products (http://www.aimcc.org). A public database, called INIES, is available with the public infor- Life cycle communication is also increasingly being Table 6 presents the same statistics already provid- mation relative to FDES (http://www.inies.fr). used in the energy sectors. All three ISO-type labels are ed in Table 3 (first columns on the left). On its right hand applied. ISO-type I, I-like, II labels and claims are usually side, however, it provides existing data on the number Certification projects of the application of the “HQE used in connection with the sale of “green electricity”, of product category groups developed within the main Practice” exist aiming at bringing more credibility and i.e. electricity generated from renewable energy sourc- eco-label schemes at EU and extra-EU level, as well as demonstrating the environmental quality approach that es. On its side, the first certified published EPD ever their degree of diffusion in terms of participating compa- has been followed. 3 phases are covered: brief, design, was on a power plant of Vattenfall in Sweden. nies and eco-labelled products. construction. The audits take place in the 3 phases: end of brief phase, end of design, and end of construction. As is possible to see from the available information, Currently 25 projects are certified, 17 private and 8 pub- it seems that only Germany, Sweden and The Neth- lic buildings. erlands have already developed a national ISO-type I

Product Products Year of Product group Elec- Electricity, Country establish- Firms Products Firms groups tricity, Heat Heat or ment or CHP CHP Germany 1978 89 529 3,650 2 n.a n.a (1.7.2006) Nordic Countries 1989 66 680 >1500 7 21 >21 (2006) Sweden (Falcon) 1992 11 n.a. n.a. 1 n.a. n.a. (October 06) Catalonia (DGQA) 1994 26 171 895 2 2 3 Austria 1991 49 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a n.a. EU (October 2005) 1992 24 309 n.a. 0 0 0 France 1992 19 n.a. n.a. 0 0 0 The Netherlands 1992 69 257 360 1 2 2 (Milieukeur, October 2006) Spain (AENOR) 1994 11 52 275 1 0 0 Figure 10 - Example of reporting of the 14 issues/indicators in the French HQE system Brazil (ABNT – Quali- 1993 10 (under de- n.a. n.a. 0 0 0 dade Ambiental) velopment) China (2005) 1993 56 n.a. n.a. 0 0 0 India 1991 16 n.a n.a 0 0 0 (October 2006) Japan 1989 47 2107 5152 1 Hot-Water 0 0 (October 2006) Supply Sys- tems Using Solar Energy South Korea 1992 7 (groups) 1001 4100 1 Solar Water 0 0 (June 2006) 103 (categ) Heating Sys- tems

Table 6 - Number of product groups, firms and products in the energy sector for the main ISO-type I labelling schemes, as of October 20068

8. The reason why only comparatively few Type I labels cover Green Electricity may be the fact that in many countries the market for green electricity is not open and competitive enough, resulting in little to no pressure on monopoly companies to provide Life Cycle Information on their energy mix. 36 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 37

ecolabel for energy products. In particular, all of them In addition, criteria for heat pumps or other energy Green tariffs proposed in Europe show a great variety els, as well as green electricity marketing offers related to have established criteria and regulations for green elec- equipments like solar water heaters exist in several sys- in terms of extra-price, destinations of the revenues, ad- a mix of sources, also including nuclear or waste. In this tricity. The only information on participating companies tems among which are the Nordic Swan, the Blauer En- ditionality schemes and sources admitted. As far as the respect, communication is not always transparent and and products offered is related to the Dutch system Mi- gel, the Catalan Distintiu and the EU-Flower (criteria for latter are concerned, it is possible to find green tariffs as- consumers do not often have the necessary skills to ori- lieukeur. Within the latter, two utilities (Greenchoice, and heat pumps currently under development). The Distintiu sociated only to electricity generation from solar PV pan- entate themselves among a jungle of tariffs. Windunie) are offering green power programs meeting also has criteria for petrol stations, with two companies the Milieukeur requirements. and three stations labelled so far. The Nordic Swan also has criteria for fireplaces for biofuel, light sources, oil burners/boilers and primary and rechargeable batteries. 2.4.3 ISO-type I-like guarantee labels (green electricity marketing)

Guarantee labels have arisen in many countries being a bridge between ISO-type I (or I-like) labels and 2.4.2 ISO-type II environmental claims (green electricity marketing) around the world to entrust the quality of electricity sold ISO-type III declarations. under a green tariff and also to respond to the confusion While guarantee labels have succeeded in improv- and lack of transparency of some ISO-type II claims. ing transparency of information for consumers, there Green power programs are widely diffused at inter- most striking case in this regard is Germany. The latest Guarantee labels have the function of raising awareness are still large differences among different ISO-type I like national level. Since the first experiences in California, data available (source: Brandi et al. 2004) indicate that on green electricity, and to enable customers (particu- labels in different countries, in terms of main criteria and The Netherlands and Sweden during the 90’s, green over 150 utilities offer more than 300 different products larly individuals) to make their choices on the basis of procedures. electricity marketing has been gradually expanding its and green electricity tariffs to their customers. Of these, established criteria verified by a trustable third party. boundaries and today is adopted by many companies more than half are associated to a guarantee label. A further noteworthy initiative is the Eugene green all around the world. Within Europe, guarantee labels exist in almost all electricity standard (http://www.eugenestandard.org). It Germany is the most exemplary case of an overflow countries where a green electricity marketing program was initiated by WWF and two green power labels, OK- At European level, the most active countries are The of tariffs, brands and guarantee labels. However, a simi- is in place. Power and Naturemade (discussed above), and cre- Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Germany, lar situation can be observed in many other European ated a standard of quality for green power, to provide Switzerland and Finland. More recently, several initia- countries. For example, in Italy several green electric- Among the various labels existing at European level, a benchmark for Type I labels. It thus gave a European tives of green electricity marketing have also been pro- ity tariffs associated to different brands have arisen in a two examples appear of particular interest for different dimension to what were mainly national labels, thereby posed in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, very short timeframe during the year 2006, in prepara- reasons: “100% energia verde” and “Naturemade”. helping international electricity-consuming companies Italy and Spain. tion for the complete opening of the electricity market, The 100% energia verde is a guarantee label es- who want to be sure they are being supplied high qual- which will occur in 2007. tablished in Italy in 2003 by REEF – REnewable Energy ity green power. The Eugene Standard now also serves Green electricity marketing has traditionally been re- Foundation onlus. The label guarantees that electricity as a reference for green power practices outside Eu- lated to the liberalisation of the electricity market. With This has led to a significant amount of offers, prod- is produced from renewable energy sources with low rope (for example in Chile). So far, only OK-Power and the progressive opening of the market, utilities have in ucts, brands and tariffs, which has been experienced in environmental impact. With this respect, the label has Naturemade themselves have are ‘Eugene proof’ labels, fact also started paying attention to the quality of the several other countries at European level (Figure 12). particular stringent criteria for hydropower plants and but other countries have shown much interest, includ- product offered, thus marketing greenness as an added biomass. Stricter requirements are also envisaged for ing Sweden, France, Netherlands and Italy. value of the service provided to customers. Green power marketing has been rapidly increas- wind (on visual impacts). Another interesting aspect is ing. Currently, many electricity companies are advertis- that the label can be granted to different kinds of clients The development of the Eugene standard was as- As a consequence, competition is very fierce. De- ing green tariffs through various media, like dedicated along the electricity value chain: Producers, distributors sisted by the 2-year lasting CLEAN-E project, support- spite still being a niche market, several companies in brochures, TV, and Internet websites. and customers. As far as the latter are concerned, the ed by the European Commission under the Intelligent the countries indicated are offering green tariffs. The guarantee label allows them to use the mark for busi- Energy Europe Programme. ness purposes (e.g. in the case of mineral water as shown in the picture).

Naturemade is a Swiss electricity quality label established in 2000 and managed by AERE. The label is structured in two levels: basic and star. Naturemade star has particularly strict requirements of environmental quality. More specifically, it requires producers to carry out an LCA using Ecoindicator99 evaluation method to obtain the label. Naturmade is actually one of the few cases of labels explicitly requiring LCA information, thus Figure 11 - Example of brands associated to green electricity tariffs proposed in European countries 38 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 39

2.4.4 ISO-type III environmental declarations COUNTRIES EPD SCHEME PUBLISHED EPDS Europe Sweden EPD programme Electricity and District Heat from CHP at Table 7 shows the existing EPDs related to the en- Outside the EU, two relevant EPDs have been (SEMC - Swedish Environmental Manage- Vattenfall AB Nordic Heat Uppsala ergy sector, released within the different programmes. found in Japan and South Korea, respectively. The ment Council Electricity from Enel´s geothermal plant of As one can see, currently the largest portions of EPDs first is referred to a kWh of grid electricity generated Bagnore 3 in the energy sector are being prepared within the from a mix of different sources by Kansai Electric Electricity from Ringhals AB Swedish system. Two companies, Vattenfall and Power. It was issued in 2003. The latter is an EPD of Electricity from the Nuclear Power Plant at Enel, cover the whole range of EPDs issued. The ma- a cubic meter of natural gas produced by Korea Gas Forsmark jority of them (6 out of 8) are related to the genera- Corporation. Electricity from Vattenfall AB´s Swedish tion of electricity from renewable energy sources and Windpower Plants nuclear. The remaining two refer to the production of Electricity from Vattenfall’s Nordic Hydro- district heat. power Generation of district heat and steam from Other EPDs of electricity prepared under the waste handling Swedish scheme have expired. As is the case, for ex- Wind generated electricity from Sclafani ample, of the EPD issued in 2002 by the Norwegian Bagni wind farm company Statkraft, related to the electricity produced Extra-Europe at its 130 MW Trollheim power station. Despite hav- Japan ECO-LEAF Electricity generated from Kansai Electric ing expired in June 2005, the document is still avail- (JEMAI - Japan Environmental Manage- Power distributed to the grid able on the company’s website. ment Association for Industry) Wholesale electricity from J-Power South Korea EDP program Liquified natural gas from Korea Gas With respect to the PCR, it is worth remembering (MoE – Ministry for the Environment) Corporation that the Product Category Rules for Electricity, gas and water supply will soon be revised since it is due Table 7 - ISO-type III environmental declarations in the energy sector as of October 2006 to expire in April 2007.

Besides the Swedish programme, a PCR for Elec- tricity and Heat also exists in the Danish EPD system.

In addition, Energinet - the transmission system operator, annually issues an impact statement for the electricity supplied in Denmark, through the collection of data among electricity and CHP producers operating in the country.

Another example of an EPD-like document which is worth mentioning is the one commissioned by Brit- ish Energy to AEA Technology, and issued in May 2005. The EPD refers to a kWh of electricity generated at the Torness nuclear power plant, and thereafter distributed to customers. The EPD has been developed in accordance with PSR 2004:2 and during the work AEA was in contact with Vattenfall in Sweden to ensure that the PCR was understood and used in a proper way. However, although being verified, the EPD has not been formally certified. It has therefore to be considered as an ISO-type II claim, rather than ISO-type III declaration. 40 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 41

3 The international expert UNEP/SETAC workshop in Barcelona 3.2 Summary of presentations 3.2.1 LCA information in marketing communications: addressing communication effectiveness in the building materials industries (Timothy Smith)

3.1 Objectives Prof. Timothy Smith (University of Minnesota, US) a bigger number in media targeting architects more presented a theoretical framework aimed at address- directly. However, very little quantitative and/or disag- ing and evaluating the effectiveness of communication gregated information communicated. Figure 15 shows of environmental product information. He focused on that information is mainly presented in the form of The objective of the workshop was twofold, i.e. to: The overall goal was to make an important the building and construction sector, reporting the re- qualitative self-claims. step-forward in identifying effective strategies 1 Share with a selected number of experts the ex- sults of a survey of advertisements (ads.) appearing in and communication tools to induce a real perience of industry, the success-stories, the re- the sector-specific journal Builder Magazine in 2004. Information usually refers to a single aspect (e.g. change towards more sustainable behaviour of maining challenges in the two chosen sectors; The latter is the official publication of the National As- energy saving) and no life cycle information in a strict consumers and other stakeholders. This raises a 2 Engage a fruitful debate with them and collect sociation of Home Builders and is the primary national sense is presented in the advertisements. Third-party number of research questions, which are listed their suggestions and recommendations to advertising outlet targeting residential home builders. certifications are being integrated into ads, but still in below and summarized in identify best practices for the future. While the publication addresses mainly home build- minor ways. On the contrary, there is a fair degree of ers (95% of the total circulation of 139 000 copies), it significant sophistication with regard to mode of execu- reaches a non-negligible number of architects (6 500). tion (visual, lexical, etc.). The study classifies environmental and health related claims appearing in advertisements according to three As far as the effectiveness of communication is main characteristics, i.e.: i) Aggregation (qualitative vs. concerned, i.e. to what extent communication influ- quantitative claims); ii) Credibility (self-claims vs. third ences attitudes and eventual purchase decisions, Prof. party verified schemes); iii) Modality (visual vs. lexical). Smith illustrated a theoretical framework of consumer The survey shows that many building product firms are processing of communications. The clear conclusion is attempting to communicate environmental messages that effective environmental communication is not sim- in national campaigns in the US. Approximately 10% ply providing more information (something LCA does of ads contain an environmental message; probably well). Effective information must be:

Figure 12 - Research questions discussed at the expert workshop

For each sector, the workshop was expected to More specifically as far as EPIS and communica- give an answer to the following questions: tion tools are concerned, the following aspects were 1. Who are “the users” of LC information? discussed and assessed: 2. What are their needs? 1. Which is the most appropriate and successful communication format for each stakeholder? 3. Which tools are used today to communicate with whom? 2. How to guarantee credibility of information? 4. Outlook: What are the expectations from indus- • How to ensure transparent and verifiable in- try and users, what are the challenges and op- formation? portunities? • A crucial factor to enhance credibility: the 5. What is the potential role of public administra- involvement of stakeholders. tions to foster the change towards more sus- • What is the potential role of Environmental tainable consumption and production? Product Declarations (EPD) in this context?

6. What are the main recommendations for best 3. Is an integration of communication tools desir- Figure 13 - Environmental/Health advertisements in Builder Magazine 2004. practice in the future? able and feasible? Source: Smith (2005) 42 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 43

• Credible (honesty, sincerity and objectivity of the larations hold the potential to provide process credibility both in terms of scope and methodology. Moreover, information itself and the process generating it, and temporal relevance (i.e. through standardization ef- there is not a generally accepted database for back- not just the source from which the communica- forts within the LCA community). Communicating the ground data. Therefore, at present, EPDs stemming tion originates (in most marketing communica- right amount and format of this information becomes from different systems can neither be compared with tions, the firm). the crucial question. each other nor be combined and used in a consistent • A balance between more/disaggregated com- approach like the one envisaged by ISO standards and plex information and the cognitive capacity of Given the predominance of qualitative self-claims, it CEN activities. the recipient. is clear that so far US companies in the building sector mainly focus on source credibility and on a high level Standard Title Objectives A particularly crucial aspect is the expansion of the of information aggregation. The research underway credibility dimension to include both source credibility examines the way in which additional LCA information ISO 14025 (2006) Environmental labels and declarations Provides the framework for EPDs – Type III environmental declarations (i.e. the firm, brand, spokesperson, etc.) and process is processed and whether process credibility impacts Provides LCA-based information and ad- credibility (systems, methods, standards used in de- communication effectiveness, even in situations where ditional information on the environmental termining the information communicated). As far as the content of the message is not fully processed by the aspects of products. this is concerned, Type-I labels typically help provide recipient (i.e. the association with the process and in- ISO 14040 and Environmental management Specifies the requirements and the proce- source credibility through the associations established creased information leads to improved attitudes toward 14044 (2006) – Life Cycle Assessment dures for life cycle assessment (LCA) between the ecolabel and the brand, while Type-III dec- the ad, the brand, or the company). ISO 21930 Sustainability in building construction Describes the principles and framework (2007) — Environmental declaration of building for the environmental declaration of build- products ing products, including consideration of the building products expected service life, 3.2.2 ISO-type III standardization activities in the building sector seen over a building’s entire life cycle. (Johannes Kreissig) Forms the basis for programmes leading to the environmental declaration of building products consistent with ISO 14025 Johannes Kreissig (PE Europe, Germany) illustrated 1 Voluntary horizontal standardised assessment ISO/TS 21931 Sustainability in building construction — Provides a general framework to improve the standardization activities in the building sector at methods for new and existing construction (2006) Framework for methods of assessment for the quality and comparability of building world (ISO) and European (CEN) level. Three crucial as- works environmental performance of construc- assessment methods pects were emphasized: 2 Assessment of integrated performance of build- tion works — Part 1: Buildings Identifies and describes issues to be taken 1. The building sector is a quite unique case, in ings over the (entire) life cycle of the construction into account which the assessment methods and standards works - for new or existing building properties are related to three different levels, i.e. i) prod- 3 Quantifiable performance aspects. - in the design, construction, operation, uct/process, ii) building, and iii) framework level refurbishment and deconstruction stages 2. Unlike other sectors, several standards cover all Activities are subdivided in three sections, dealing ISO 15686 Buildings and constructed assets Part 1: Methodology for forecasting the sustainability dimensions, i.e. they address envi- respectively with I) the building level; II) the construc- (2000-2006) – Service life planning service life and estimating the timing of ronmental but also economic and social aspects tion product level; III) the description of the building life – Part 1: General principles necessary maintenance and replacement 3. The need for a consistent approach and cycle. Figure 6 summarizes the links between the differ- – Part 6: Guidelines for considering envi- of components framework. ent standardization activities in function of performance ronmental impacts (e.g. environmental vs. socio-economic) and application Part 6 describes how to assess the potential environmental impacts of alterna- The different ISO standards relevant for the building level (e.g. product vs. entire building). tive designs of a constructed asset => sector are summarized in Table 8. They are related to en- interface between LCA and service life vironmental labelling and declarations, LCA, sustainability It is clear that such an integrated approach needs a planning in buildings, and building and construction assets9. high level of consistency, in terms of system boundaries, methodology and background data. Such a consistent Table 8 - ISO standards relevant for the building sector At European level, the scope of CEN TC 350 activi- framework exists in specific EPD programmes (e.g. the ties includes: German AUB Environmental Declaration System), but not at international level.

In fact several studies (INTEND 2005, ERM 2002)

9. For more details refer to ISO website at: www.iso.org/iso/en/CatalogueList- show the differences between different EPD systems Page.CatalogueList?ICS1=91&ICS2=40&ICS3=1&scopelist=ALL 44 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 45

As far as Armstrong Industries is concerned, environmental product information and communication to customers emphasizes that the products and services provided by the company allow to build with environmentally preferable products (recyclable, with recycled content PC/PI, renewable resources), to divert waste from landfills, to reduce energy used for lighting and to contribute to LEED credits. An interesting aspect is that benchmarking with easy to understand entities (e.g. equivalent acres of forest and equivalent number of cars) is used for communication to clients and customers

Figure 14 - Links between the different standardization activities (source: Kreissig 2005)

3.2.3 The experience in the US building sector (Steve Baer) Figure 15 - Example of communication of life cycle information with benchmarks Source: Baer (2005)

Steve Baer (Armstrong World Industries, US) report- 1 BEES v3.0 – Has increased visibility because ed the situation of LCA information and communication of LEED, but is still not robust in terms of in the US building and construction sector. Moreover, data. Uses new TRACI US specific LC impact 3.2.4 EPD as a credible communication tool for sustainable clay brick products he showed an example of environmental product infor- indicators (Fritz Moedinger) mation and communication at Armstrong. 2 Athena – Has a more robust database, is a comprehensive tool, and a modelling tool, In the US, the Building and Construction Sector is which models the entire buildings contribu- Fritz Moedinger (Gasser, Italy, and Tile Brick Eu- In fact, according to the recent Eurobarometer recognizing that the impacts of building construction tion to LCA rope Association) reported the experience of carrying (2005) survey: and operations are significant. The US Green Building 3 US Green Building Council LEED standards out an EPD and using it for communication to clients Council (USGBC) estimates that buildings contribute • For 41 % of the population, the main issue which – Growing in use and number, they drive sup- at Gasser, a brick product manufacturing company in to: 36% of total energy use; 65 % of electricity con- they do not feel informed about is the impact on pliers and provide an opportunity for end-users northern Italy. sumption; 30% of greenhouse gases emissions; 30% health of everyday products; to differentiate. LEED encourages the Recycle of raw materials use; 30% of waste output/136 million • 39% of the population believe that individual of Construction & Demolition waste and encour- The motivations to initiate an EPD at Gasser were tons annually; and 12% of potable water consumption. environmental efforts do not have an impact as ages the selection of products with high PC Re- basically twofold, i.e. to: Industry recognizes that a systems and life cycle ap- long as the big polluters (corporations and in- cycle Content. At present the explicit link with proach is capable of supporting progress in reducing 1 Produce a credible and science-based com- dustry) do not do the same; the whole product life cycle is weak. However, munication tool for sustainable clay bricks, as the footprint associated with buildings. The interest of • 39% of the population would like to reduce work is currently taking place to introduce LCA opposed to the many environmental claims cur- companies is significantly growing within this respect. home energy consumption (electricity, heating, and life cycle approaches into LEED 3.0. rently present on the market, which only contain At the USGBC conference in 2005, more than 7000 household appliances, etc.); people were present. generic and sometimes misleading information • 24% of the population considers environmental 2 Intercept demand from the portion of consum- aspects when making large expenditures (buy- In the US building and interiors sector, several en- ers who look for credible information and may ing a car, heating systems, build a house, etc.). vironmental product assessment and communication include environmental aspects in their purchas- tools are employed, i.e.: ing behaviour. 46 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 47

The 41% and the 24% are the target groups of Gas- at local level, but it is too small to raise the attention The survey results were based on approximately 600 is just slightly lower for technical installations (heating, ser’s EPD. The first group is insecure about what to do of EPD at national and international level. Stakeholders received feedbacks and 309 questionnaires duly com- ventilation, air conditioning, refrigeration – 80%), clean- because of too many declarations and generic informa- are likewise not interested in an EPD, at least if they are pleted. The distribution of respondents is representative ing processes and agents (73%) and building panels tion on the market. They simply do not know whom to not part of the 24% group willing and interested to base of the German conditions with respect to the ageing (windows, doors – 70%). In principle, this demonstrates trust. Indeed, surveys indicate that consumers signifi- investment decisions at least partially on environmental and enterprise structure of the chamber of architects the high potential of ISO-type III environmental product cantly trust environmental associations and scientists aspects. The latter group is greatly interested in an EPD 95% of respondents were architects. declarations in the building sector. As far as this is con- rather than industry marketing people (Eurobarometer and how it is obtained; when they receive the EPD they cerned, the role of architects appears crucial, because 2005, Rubik & Frankl 2005). The second group repre- start to ask questions. Approximately 24% of respondents (37% in the the decision of applying environmental aspects in plan- sents the easiest target for environmental product per- case of members of Friends of the Earth association) ning is strongly under their control, independently of the formance information by means of an EPD. Clearly, there is the need by public authorities to declared always making decisions based on environ- clients’ desires. Architects express a high willingness support more EPDs and bring them to the attention of mental protection aspects during planning, 70% partly to use LCA-data in decision making (82%), especially if the general public. As far as this is concerned, the lack - depending on the project. The large majority (75%) do integrated in usual workflow to reduce workload to ac- of sustainability criteria, the current pending status of it for personal conviction, while the percentage of clients ceptable levels (as strong condition for 48% of respond- IPP legislation, which so far does not support EPD as ordering services to consider environmental protection ents). It is worth noticing that they show a significant much as promised, as well as of the SHE (Sustainable (against payment) is very limited, i.e. respectively 18% interest in life cycle costs, which is higher than the one Housing Europe 2003-08) project, all three are a great in the case of private builders, 10% of public authori- in environmental life cycle information. delusion for Gasser. There are small satisfactions as ties, 2% of enterprises and practically 0% of property well, like the participation in the Italian Association for developer investors. In contrast however, at present there is only limited Innovation Assoscai and the Andil Life III project. knowledge of existing LCA studies (25%) and little use The need to include the use phase into the planning of tools and guidelines already in existence. Moreover, Overall, Mr. Moedinger concluded that he would do of buildings is already understood by architects and en- there is no clear preference with respect to the format it again, for two main reasons: ergy is a focal point concerning environmental aspects of desired information, e.g. with respect to the choice of 1 “Getting to know ourselves” has been of para- in present planning. The survey indicates an overwhelm- indicators and/or a single score indicator (Figure 19). mount importance at Gasser. Employees now ing request for environmental declarations or certifica- have a much higher sensitivity with regard to tions of building products for all building levels, ranging There is an evident gap between the wishes and energy saving, avoiding waste production and from building materials (wall construction, insulation, the current use of life cycle communication by German caring for the environment. Even if this had been roofing), indirect materials (solvents, adhesives), finish- architects. What is clear is their request of life cycle the only result, it would have been worth the ing products (paints, floor coverings). This information cost and additional information (e.g. comfort, indoor Figure 16 – Example of environmental product information at Gasser effort. Actually, Gasser is now saving 700 000 is wanted by more of 90% of respondents. The request air quality) beyond “conventional” LCA information. The experience and impacts of communicating the euro per year in energy costs. EPD were mixed. Image-wise the EPD did not have a 2 The competitiveness of Gasser in the market measurable effect. People are overloaded with labels share of “environmentally-friendly” customers and for most of them an EPD is just another label, which has increased. Gasser is positioned to compete they are unable to distinguish from the others. It some- better, with very strong arguments, in situations times takes effort to convince people that an EPD is a where “environmentally-friendly” products are certification with a different value to strongly competing called for. A very good example of this has been labels in this field (e.g. AUB and Bioedilizia Italia) and big orders by National Parks and for the Winter that it a has scientific-sound basis. Gasser does this Olympics 2006 games.

3.2.5 The user needs – The German experience (Udo Jeske)

Udo Jeske (Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Germa- sector. The survey was carried out in two phases in the ny) presented the results of an on-line survey among period September 2004 – July 2005 within a twin project architects and of interviews with consumer and environ- concerning the German Network on Life cycle Inventory mental organizations, aimed at identifying the needs of Data and the setup of a sector-specific system for ISO- users of life cycle communication in the German building type III environmental declarations of building products. Figure 17 - Format of desired relevant LC information by German architects. Source: Jeske & Klingele (2005) 48 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 49

3.2.6 The experience at Vattenfall (Birgit Bodlund) The main advantages of EPD identified by Vatten- use of life cycle thinking as an integral part in the plan- fall are: ning for refurbishments and investments. EPDs are also 1 The possibility to provide information to cus- mostly used to exchange information along the supply Birgit Bodlund (Vattenfall Generation) started her environmental performance of electricity generation and tomers chain, to orientate investment decisions and to choose among different technical solution alternatives. presentation by providing some introductory notes on delivery at Vattenfall. 2 EPDs are useful tools to orientate purchasing the Vattenfall group, which is Europe’s fifth’s largest decisions generator of electricity (88 TWh in 2004) and the larg- The main motivations for “translating” this experi- Dr. Bodlund concluded her presentation by making 3 Environmental Management est generator of heat. In particular, she pointed out the ence in LCA into credible and transparent life cycle the following final statements: main strategic goals, ambitions and core values of the communication tools for customers and stakeholders 4 To provide support for Sustainability Reporting 1 LCA-based information is useful and is becom- company, which are effectiveness, openness and ac- were threefold, i.e. to: 5 Evidence for continuous improvement ing common practice countability. 1 Respond to Vattenfall’s strategic goals, with 6 Environmental licensing 2 Credibility is needed, and certification improves specific respect to aiming at being the number the credibility Vattenfall retains a long tradition of disclosure and one for the customer and for the environment The EPD process also helped Vattenfall identify and 3 The focus is not just on one environmental issue, reporting. Several publications are publicly available and 2 Respond to Vattenfall’s core values of openness carry out a series of environmental actions, which re- but on several aspects directly accessible from the company’s website, includ- sulted in further benefits in terms of environmental im- and accountability 4 EPD is an effective tool that Vattenfall Nordic coun- ing various editions of Environmental reports, Life Cycle pact mitigations, cost cuts, and improved dialogue with 3 Comply with the new EU directive on fuel mix tries have adopted to measure their progress Assessment reports, and EPDs. suppliers and other stakeholders. In addition, EPDs are disclosure10. used to enable a dialogue with public administrations for 5 EPD is also a powerful communication tool As far as LCA is specifically addressed, Vattenfall has permitting licenses. Generally improved awareness and 6 It is also a precious tool to meet the key com- long-standing experience covering all types of genera- Today, Vattenfall has approximately 1 TWh of electric- commitment among the staff have led to an increased pany value of “Openness and accountability”. tion technologies, ranging from fuel-fired power plants ity licensed under the Swedish Bra Miljoval quality ISO- to nuclear, hydropower and wind, as well as cogenera- type I eco-label system. In addition, the company has is- tion plants for district heating. In addition, she provided sued certified EPDs for Ca 85 TWh (95%) of its electricity quantitative data deriving from the assessment of the production in the Nordic Countries (Figure 20). 3.2.7 The experience at British Energy (Mark Johnson)

Mark Johnson (Environment Team, British Energy) attention on the importance of information and com- addressed the topic of utility sector-specific approach- munication to customers. In particular, he stressed the es for communicating life-cycle information to different right for consumers to know the electricity mix compo- kinds of stakeholders. sition, and the relevant emissions associated to it. In order to meet these requests, British Energy has devel- British Energy is one of the largest UK electricity oped different communication tools in order to enable generators, with a total annual output of 67-74 TWh a dialogue with its stakeholders: dedicated web pages, over the past five years and a station portfolio of 8 nu- sustainable report, etc. clear power plants and 1 coal-fired power station. Some areas for future development include the adop- He showed a map of different stakeholders of British tion of EPDs in the mainstream. The main motivation for Energy, and proposed a categorization of main, general this is an increasing regulation in the area of electricity and environmental concerns of stakeholders. The latter disclosure and, more generally, the need for a greater include aspects such as: engagement with stakeholders, through a constant dia- 1 Greenhouse gas emissions logue with various interested parties, i.e. industry/government and industry/public dialogue. Other important 2 Other emissions triggering factors are the growing community for ethical 3 Renewable electricity investment and the increasing scrutiny by NGOs. 4 Radioactive discharges 5 Production of nuclear waste/spent fuel Summarizing, British Energy thinks that there is an Figure 18 - ISO-type I eco-labels and ISO-type III Environmental Product Declarations used at Vattenfall increasing requirement for companies to engage a wide

10. The EU Electricity Directive 2003/54/EC introduces an obligation for retail After providing a series of qualitative and quantitative range of stakeholders on environmental issues, and dif- suppliers to disclose their fuel mix and some aspects of the environmental information on life-cycle environmental performances of ferent approaches suit different stakeholders. EPDs are impact of the different types of generation involved in the production of electricity sold to customers. different energy technologies, Mr. Johnson focused his seen as precious tools to increase transparency and 50 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 51

credibility of companies adopting them. They eventually approach serving all stakeholders. Finally, Mr. Johnson have to be integrated in the wider context of Corporate underlined the importance of websites as important Social Responsibility (CSR), which is seen as a holistic communication and dissemination media.

Figure 20 - The EDF web indicator

More specific requests for quantified environmen- complex subject might turn into a risky one, and the tal information may arise by skilled participants, such environmental life cycle communication could be con- as business customers, environmental experts, public sidered more as a risk than an opportunity. Despite that, administrations, etc… In those cases, the format of from a methodological research point of view, EDF R&D provided information is under strategic control and is has been involved in the development of the PCR for checked and decided on a case by case basis. Usually, electricity (2004), and belongs to GEDnet. Figure 19 - Environmental reporting and communication media at British Energy information is provided in the form of inventory data, in general of the EDF kWh generation mix. Before developing external communication, an increased effort towards internal communication is need- In any case, high credibility is always needed, indeed, in order to convince management and staff. With 3.2.8 The experience at Electricité de France (Denis Le Boulch) pendently from the skill level of the target recipient of this respect, internal training is considered highly impor- information. Credibility is obvious, but essential for the tant. Training is used also to convince that LCA results company. can represent sale arguments. Denis Le Boulch (EDF R&D) gave an overview of For example, the Sustainable Development Division ongoing activities within EDF with respect to LCA and asks for credible data to be used for web communi- However, EDF is not currently involved in an EPD The main challenge for EDF today is to overcome communication of life cycle information. cation to final consumers. These are presented under programme, because it considers the subject still too the paradox regarding the communication of life cycle the form of the so-called ‘EDF web indicator’ – a sin- complex. Many specific questions about the environ- information: is it a risk or an opportunity? Maybe internal EDF is the largest European utility with a yearly pro- gle indicator profile presenting the CO2 emissions of ment exist and many specific tools (LCA being one of triggering factors and/or external stakeholder pressure duction of 570 TWh (of which 490 TWh in France). EDF EDF electricity generation mix, published monthly on them) are suited to give appropriate answers. Thus, this will help to solve this issue in the future. has a large R&D department with 2400 employees and the corporate website. EDF mix emissions are bench- offices/laboratories in France, Germany, California and marked against European average values. Figures are London. EDF has a longstanding experience in LCA. At calculated with monthly production data and LCA represent, a team consisting of six members deals with sults. The general methodology is validated by the 3rd LCA activities at the R&D division. The main areas in- party consultant PWC. It is worth highlighting that the clude the study of methodological aspects, the applica- internet is used for a real web dialogue with consumers, tion of LCA to EDF France electricity generation system e.g. to respond to questions like “How do you consider and environmental assessment of different technologies the decommissioning phase?” and systems.

LCA-based results are used both for internal and external communication. As far as the latter is concerned, different uses and a different format are applied for different users. 52 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 53

3.3 Discussion help provide source credibility and legitimacy Type-III 2. The independent verification of data and the EPD declarations hold the potential to provide process cred- document system rules compliance. ibility and temporal relevance. In fact, EPDs ensure proc- However, the actual role of EPD is currently ham- The presentations were followed by an intense and ess credibility through two main factors: pered by a series of important current limitations. Also fruitful discussion. The summary of the main discussion 1. The involvement of stakeholders in the open certification is challenged, because of its high costs and points and conclusions is reported in this and the next consultation process for the review and approval because it is not necessarily foreseen by the ISO stand- session. These results are also merged with the out- of Product Category Rules (PCR), where all rel- ard 14025. These aspects are discussed in more detail comes of the survey of EPIS reported in chapter 2. evant assumptions with regards to the EPD and underlying LCA rules are identified and agreed. in the next paragraph. This ensures a third party panel review of the fundamental common ground for assessment As far as credibility is concerned, LCA experts chal- and communication, which is key for compa- lenged the LEED system in the US, judging it too sim- 3.3.1 Effectiveness for change? rability of different declarations (within the same plistic and therefore not credible (so far). In the mean- product group) while, work is currently going on in order to integrate life cycle aspects into the system. The discussion was actually triggered by the very attention on consistency, completeness and reliability direct question: Are life cycle communication tools ef- of information, whereas the latter gives more priority fective, i.e. do they actually contribute to changing the to the diffusion of information to customers, even if not behaviour of consumers? fully complete and consistent. The latter highlighted the problem of time dimension: if consumers are not edu- 3.3.3 Role and limits of EPD The issue of measuring the market impacts of the dif- cated and do not correctly understand the issue, then fusion of ISO-type I ecolabels and other EPIS is a complex even a perfect information tool is useless. As mentioned one. Little information is available in economic terms, e.g. by Smith (2005), the challenge is to find the right bal- There was a strong statement that an EPD is actually limits of current EPD systems, e.g. related to: of increased market shares, revenues, etc. It is certainly ance between more/disaggregated complex informa- not a communication platform (which has to be both cred- - Format and understandability of information ible and visible) but rather a credible information tool. This one of the priorities for future research needs. tion and the cognitive capacity of the recipient. As far - Choice and use of indicators for decision-making is also in line with the conclusions of the Type III Environ- as this is concerned, there is a wide consensus that - Costs and other barriers for SMEs Based on the experience of the presenting compa- ISO-type I labels are more appropriate for communica- mental Declarations International Seminar held in Tokyo - Comparability nies the response to the above question is “not yet”. tion to final consumers, while EPD are more appropriate in 2005 and the outcomes of the LIFE-Project DANTES Both Gasser and Vattenfall reported a very modest di- for business-to-business (B2B) communication. (2005). Elaborating further on this observation and bas- - Verification vs. certification rect impact on the market. ing on previous work discussed within the Task Force and - Need for harmonization at international level Objects of the discussion included: Credibility; the presented at the 12th SETAC Case Study Symposium The discussion which followed showed the differ- role and limits of EPD; comparability and harmoniza- (Frankl 2005), the following proposal was made: ideally, At present these issues strongly hamper the applica- ent focus among academic/research people within tion issues; user needs and format of life cycle com- an EPD should always be accompanied by other commu- bility of EPD in business and even reduce its credibility. the LCA community and industry and business school munication; education; possible integration of life cycle nication interface tools, “translating” the information con- representatives with respect to a set of issues and pri- communication tools; potential role of public adminis- tained in the EPD into an appropriate format and language orities. For instance the first group focuses more of its trations; priorities and next steps. to be easily understood by specific target audiences (see Format and understandability of information also section 3.4). In other words it is proposed to use one EPD as common information basis ensuring transparency The information currently reported in most EPDs is and process credibility but different communication for- still too difficult to be understood by the majority of peo- mats and channels for different target groups, i.e. B2B, ple. Results are often reported in terms of tables and ab- 3.3.2 Credibility business-to-consumers (B2C), business-to-government solute values of mid-term life cycle indicators, which are (B2G) (see also Figure 15). This line of reasoning was fur- generally not understandable for non-experts. The for- ther presented at the 16th SETAC Europe Annual Meeting mat and length of an EPD is generally not standardized All presentations emphasized the importance of Moreover, it is worth recalling Smith’s (2005) conclu- (Frankl & Fullana 2006), collecting more comments. and can be very variable which could possibly lead to credibility. As clearly stated by Le Boulch (2005) a high sion that both source and process (generating the infor- further confusion. Moreover, information recipients need credibility is always needed, irrespective of whether the mation) credibility are needed for effective communica- The proposal obtained a wide consensus as far as a benchmark, i.e. reference values to compare with. target recipient of the communication concerned is an tion. While type-I labels in the present state of the art11 its conceptual structure is concerned. However, the expert or not. fundamental question was raised, whether an EPD is A possible initial solution would be to standardize really necessary or if just a (verified) life cycle information the format of EPDs as much as possible. Moreover, the 11. Type-I labels already exist which follow a process similar to type-III declarations (e.g. the German “natureplus”, see Klingele & Jeske (2005). It might basis with agreed structure is enough. More specifically, complete information should always be presented by be interesting to further discuss the potential of a combination of both labels major concerns were expressed with respect to a set of way of a four-page summary. and type-III being the basic one. 54 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 55

Furthermore, it was proposed to develop sector- ing potential, as it is the most widely agreed upon and a consequence, results are not really comparable. This As far as market and stakeholder pressure is con- specific “average” EPDs, which should serve as bench- known. The principle remains that in the end the deci- inherently reduces the credibility of the tool. cerned, it was observed that credibility will increase with mark value for the specific product group. This kind of sion-maker decides according to his/her own metrics the number of people who care. Today this is limited be- work might be supported and commissioned by the rel- and scale of values, unless he trusts somebody else’s The proposed solution is that EPD programmes cause there is little competition; there are too few EPDs evant industry association. This is actually what is hap- judgment. The latter is a call to the LCA community and should provide a common and agreed modular back- on the market. Therefore, the issue of credibility is also pening in the French building sector. sector-specific experts (i.e. a credible groups of peo- ground database, to be certified just once. Also calcula- very much connected with the diffusion and awareness ple) to provide reference values and guidelines for best tion procedures should be common and certified once. of the tool (see also below). This follows in a similar line with the indication of the practices. However, rather than a problem of EPDs, this This would allow SMEs to supply only their own data recent survey on Consumer demands on type-III envi- is an issue related to the development of appropriate and reduce their costs. Moreover, this would also sig- ronmental declarations carried out in Denmark (Chris- communication interface tools. It is also a problem of nificantly limit the costs of certification (see also below). Need for harmonization at international level tiansen et al. 2006). Among other things, this study education. This challenge indeed appears as important recommends to also present results in graphic form, as the EPD itself. In some EPD programmes this is already so. For in- With a rapidly increasing global market and soci- comparing the impacts of the product with the ones stance, the AUB environmental declaration programme ety, the national structure and organization of ecola- from spending the same amount of money on an aver- for the building sector in Germany has a consistent back- belling and environmental product declarations sys- age product from the same product group. Costs and other barriers for SMEs ground database. The data set is dynamic, i.e. it will be tems actually raises a number of problems. In fact, updated each time a new and verified EPD provides new since several key aspects are diverse in different EPD Of course, any benchmark should carefully repre- It was highlighted that most of Small and Medium information. Also the Japanese Eco-Leaf ISO-III declara- programmes and PCRs (e.g. scope of LCA, exist- sent the whole spectrum of industry, i.e. should refer Enterprises (SME) are not likely to have adequate finan- tion system relies on a nation-wide common database. ence and quality of background database, format, to a real average situation and not just to best available cial, human and time resources to carry out a complete verification and/or certification criteria, etc.), results technologies and best practice. LCA study and an EPD. In many cases, their direct re- The development of the EU European Reference related to the same product category actually differ sponsibility only concerns a very small portion of the Life Cycle Data System (ELCD) with Inventory data and from country to country. In short, different EPDs usu- whole life cycle. Therefore they have little motivation to Impact Assessment factors being set up at the EC Joint ally give incomparable results. In turn, this increases Choice and use of indicators for decision-making participate in EPD programmes. As far as the issue of Research Center in Ispra, within the European Platform confusion on the part of customers and decreases costs and other barriers for SMEs is concerned, tem- for LCA (http://lca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/EPLCA/) will have a process credibility. Clearly, there is a strong need for While the choice of relevant indicators for each prod- plates should be developed and paid by industry as- significant positive impact as a harmonized support tool harmonization at international level. Action should be uct group is made in the PCR, the problem remains of sociations, in order for SMEs to just fill in the required for existing and future EPD systems. The latter should taken as soon as possible, because the longer the how to understand what relative importance different im- information – most likely limited to gate-to-gate data. also refer to the UNEP/SETAC Global Database Regis- issue is left, the more difficult will it be to harmonize pact categories have among each other. Often one op- This would require just one days work and would dra- try, which has a global and more comprehensive scope. different programmes. To this end, GEDNet is cur- tion is better in one impact category but may be worse matically cut costs. (www.lci-network.de/db-registry). rently working on this issue, trying to harmonize both in others. Who decides and how? As far as this is con- ISO-type III programme rules and PCRs. cerned, it is worth recalling the results of the German sur- This possible approach is in line with the mentioned Another issue is the comparability of results among vey, which show that 47% of the respondent architects proposal of developing sector and product group-spe- different countries and EPD programmes (see below). It was highlighted from several parts that a truly glo- would like to receive results in the form of a single score cific “average” EPDs for benchmark. It also implies the bal action is needed. This is a call to the LCA com- indicator and the same share (48%) are ready to include need for a common agreed database for background munity, and the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative Task life cycle environmental aspects in their planning activi- processes and materials (see below). Verification vs. certification Forces to take immediate action to produce guidelines ties, if integration in usual workflow is possible with ac- and obtain effective harmonization, first at regional (e.g. ceptable effort. In other words, LCA/EPD is considered Other approaches are also possible, e.g. the The recently published ISO 14025 norm does not Europe, Asia) and eventually at worldwide level. What is to be too complicated and decision-makers need an Swedish approach of “Stepwise EPD”, which foresees request mandatory certification. During the discussion needed are harmonized PCRs and sector-specific “av- interface (possibly software-based) for a more targeted simplified procedures for the access of SMEs to the the question was raised, whether certification is really erage” EPDs for benchmark, all within a global frame- access to information. It is worth observing however, that EPD system. needed. Some expressed the opinion that certification work supported by UNEP/SETAC. if there was more knowledge and experience on how to is too costly anyway. Others opposed that this is not use EPD-LCA information within a building design con- true if there is a certified background database. Although it was not explicitly discussed at the text, demand for a single score indicator at product level Comparability of results meeting, very similar problems do exist for different would be likely to decrease (see also later). The conclusion was that certification might be ISO-type I ecolabel schemes, since product catego- Despite certification, flexibility in (some) current EPD needed in some sectors. In others, the market (i.e. the ry classification and environmental award criteria are During the discussion it was also suggested, in ex- systems is too large. Different software programmes competitors, NGOs, etc.) will make enough pressure. usually different (sometimes substantially different). treme cases, to use the only indicator of global warm- (and background databases) give different results12. As Therefore the issue of certification vs. verification is an The problem can actually be even worse than for issue to be tackled with in the PCR. In any case, third ISO-type III declarations, because many ecolabelling

12. Even if applied to the same process or product. Of course this has nothing party verification is strongly recommended and first- schemes were founded a long time ago and are well to do with different results stemming from different manufacturing processes party review is not considered appropriate to ensure established. Changes and harmonization are therefore or other product life cycle performances. In that case, these differences are reflected in different specific data. enough credibility. a real challenge in this respect. 56 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 57

3.3.4 User needs and life cycle information for change 3.4 Conclusions and Future Research Areas

What are the user communication needs? Do the The recent study in Nordic countries identifies con- 3.4.1 Main Conclusions currently available and used EPIS meet them? Is the sumer demands on ISO-type III environmental declara- provided life cycle information appropriate to actually in- tions and makes the strong recommendation to present duce a change of behaviour of customers in the building results in graphical form benchmarking the impacts 3.4.1.1 State-of-the-art of environmental prod- and last but not least (slowly) increasing requests for and construction sector as well in the energy sector? of the product with the ones from spending the same uct information and life cycle communication tools information from customers. Relevant stakeholders are The response to these questions is mixed. As already amount of money on an average product form the same in the building and energy sectors final consumers and business clients, public adminis- mentioned, the response according to the presentations product group (Christiansen et al 2006). trations and legislators, financial stakeholders, NGOs held at the meeting would be “not yet”. In general, there A clear outcome of both the survey and the work- and other societal stakeholders at large. Different ap- is little information available on this question so far. Although little discussion was focused on this aspect, shop is that a wide range of environmental product in- proaches suit different stakeholders and consequently recent surveys (Frankl 2005, Menichetti 2006) show formation tools is used in the two sectors. In particular, different product-related communication tools are used As for the building sector, it is worth recalling the that companies are increasingly interested in showing the building and construction sector is very well repre- to communicate with different stakeholders. request of German architects for a tool integrating progress, i.e. the environmental improvement of their sented in ISO-type I ecolabelling systems (e.g. in Ger- life-cycle information in their everyday working de- own products. In current EPDs this is not done (although many 1944 products over 3650 labelled with the Blue In the building sector, the main potential users of sign tools (Jeske & Klingele 2005). Moreover, several possible in principle in the section “other information”). Angel are products related to buildings and construc- life cycle information are home builders, architects, pri- participants at the discussion highlighted the need tions). Furthermore, it is a very active sector in the de- vate subjects and public authorities. The survey in the to look at the whole building level and not just at its In general, it can be said that so far there has been velopment of ISO-type III declarations, for which several US shows that information is predominantly provided in components. This implies looking at the whole life more attention on the supply of life cycle information than sector-specific EPD programmes exist. In turn, several the form of qualitative self-claims (Smith 2005). There is cycle of buildings, including the use phase, which on the demand-side. Overall, there is a clear need for fur- energy companies are very active in the field of LCA and also some concern with respect to too generic informa- has often the most significant share of impacts. The ther work in the area of identifying user needs and adapting are promoting the use of EPDs. At the same time, ISO- tion and sometimes bad and misleading claims being forthcoming work of CEN TC350 goes precisely in the format and contents of life cycle information in order to type II claims and ISO-type I like guarantee labels are present on the market (Moedinger 2005). that direction. induce a real change in the behaviour of consumers. widely used to communicate to customers with respect to “green electricity” (i.e. electricity supply from renewa- The use of ISO-type I ecolabels for building and bles and/or fulfilling certain environmental criteria). The construction is also widely diffused, depending on the differences between the two sectors might also be ex- country. With the only major exception of China, this 3.3.5 Next steps plained by the different scope and nature of the product mostly occurs in developed economies, i.e. in several category, i.e. a wide range of products in the case of European countries plus Japan and South Korea. the building sector and a commodity (electricity and/or heat) in the case of the energy sector. Despite a significant increase of EPD activities in The following answers were given to the direct - Make the use of EPDs visible to architects. Inte- various countries, the diffusion and use of ISO-type III question “Please choose the most important thing to grate the info into public databases/portals; The link with life cycle information obviously differs, quantitative declarations is so far still limited. do next”: - The task force should concentrate on describing i.e. it is limited in ISO-type II environmental claims, it is current tools and recommending best practice - Talk to and engage influential architects and try usually embedded in the criteria of ISO-type I ecolabels, However, the German survey shows that a potential within a global scope. to exploit new communication tools; and it is fully and explicitly expressed in the case of ISO- demand from architects for quantitative information at - Develop the market, i.e. the most important type III environmental declarations. The level of execu- all levels of the building cycles is very significant (Jeske thing is to understand how the process is be- tion is quite sophisticated, e.g. in terms of combination & Klingele 2005). This is a very important observation ing communicated and to explore what is driving of lexical and visual communication. Moreover, in the because architects can ultimately play a major role with the understanding of the different stakeholders; cases where quantitative information is provided, it is respect to the integration of environmental aspects in - Develop a consistent framework for the con- usually combined with qualitative information as well. planning and design, irrespective of actual demand from struction sector, from single products to the their clients. In many cases they can propose innovative whole building level; provide guidance of inte- solutions and convince clients to adopt them. gration/interaction of other products/parts with 3.4.1.2 Who are “the users” of LC informa- building products; tion? Which tools are used today to communi- In the energy sector, ISO-type I ecolabels are not - Help EC to ask business to provide LC infor- cate with whom? widely diffused, i.e. only a few labelling schemes include mation; the product group energy (electricity and/or heat). One Demand for life cycle information is generally increas- example is the Swedish label Bra Miljöval, which is ap- - Communicate experiences with the use of ing because of growing legislation pressure, increasing plied by Vattenfall. As mentioned in sections 2.4.2 and EPDs; NGO scrutiny, growing ethical investment community, 2.4.3 also in the energy sector, the use of ISO-type II 58 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 59

environmental claims dominates communication to ing nothing – Doing good is better than never doing fusion are significantly hampered by a series of barriers. case, according to its own communication and customers with respect to green electricity marketing perfect”; In the USA, the government will do nothing. On the other hand, ISO-type I eco-labels and ISO-type II marketing strategies, a company might use (list (EDF also has its own brand for wind energy). In some Customers will lead the search for (life cycle) informa- environmental claims are much more suited for commu- non exhaustive, ref. ): countries, ISO-type I-like labels offer a higher level of tion. Only 1% of customers ask for info: Why build an nication to customers and stakeholders, but they suffer - ISO-type I ecolabels, ISO-type I like certifica- credibility through third-party verification and guarantee unasked-for complicated system?” from other important limitations. In particular, ISO-type tions, ‘improved’ EPD with benchmarking, mar- committees, usually formed by environmental NGOs II claims rarely give a complete picture of environmental keting brochures, etc. for communication to and consumer associations. Both opinions are fully respectable and contain im- impacts and their credibility can be questioned in some consumers (business-to-consumers B2C) portant elements of truth. This highlights the need for a cases. Moreover, all communication systems are not - ‘Improved’ EPD with benchmarking, ISO-type I However, as illustrated by all three utilities presented parallel strategy: harmonized, neither as far as countries nor product cat- ecolabels, ISO-type I like certifications, specific at the workshop, the use of quantitative life cycle in- egories and industry sectors are concerned. Therefore, - Leaders in business and industry should contin- brochures, etc. for communication to public ad- formation is increasing. First of all, it is used in internal at present it must be stated that comparability of prod- ue and further increase their efforts in marketing ministrations (business-to-government B2G) communication. Secondly, it is used for communication and use of Environmental Product Information ucts is only seldom guaranteed, and even then only in - ‘Improved’ EPD (with or without benchmarking), with planners and politicians, also responding to the in- Schemes even if their communication tools are very specific circumstances. 13 ISO-type I like certifications, eco-design tools, creasing request of transparency from legislators . In imperfect. This has the objective of significantly marketing brochures, etc. for communication to the long term, all present utilities consider EPD as a val- widening the audience and increasing sensitivity Is a better integration of communication tools a pos- clients (business-to-business B2B). uable tool to respond to the demand for openness and and awareness of customers with respect to the sible solution for these challenges? Is this integration fea- accountability in the sector. Vattenfall also uses quan- environmental performance of products. Basing sible and desirable? The response is: Yes. The proposal The term ‘improved EPD’ stands for a declaration devel- titative life cycle information for supply chain manage- on the declarations of presenters about the next is to set up a strategy based on three major action lines: oped in an EPD programme, which overcomes the present ment. Though despite extensive reporting, so far very steps to be done, this is a top-priority. 1. Create a highly credible life cycle information barriers discussed in the previous chapters, e.g. which: few customers on the market ask for Vattenfall’s EPDs. - At the same time, the LCA community and re- basis, building on two main pillars of EPD, i.e. Big users are interested mainly in price; they just thank - Uses a consistent background database in searchers, in collaboration with industry, should the involvement of stakeholders in the develop- when they receive the EPD. creasing comparability, make an effort to set up a consistent framework ment, review and approval of PCRs and the 3rd - Has a standardized reporting format, for life cycle communication tools, improve re- party verification and/or certification. This is key As a concluding remark it is interesting to see how - Reduces costs and increases affordability for liability of data and credibility of the process. to guarantee credibility and accountability the utilities use ISO-type I or II labels to communicate SMEs, Moreover, focus should be given to the setup 2. Develop a set of target-specific “Communica- to final consumers, while they use tailored information - Allows benchmarking with average sector value, of communication interfaces, e.g. suitable and tion interface tools”, which “translate” this in- based on LCA or EPD to target other stakeholders. - Allows monitoring and reporting progress, etc. understandable indicators, which satisfy user formation basis into a communication format 3. Improvement of cooperation and communica- needs (see also section below). EPDs poten- better suited to the recipient’s understanding tion between involved scientific boards/bodies tially have a major role to play in this process, capacity. These tools will take into account the 3.4.1.3 What are the priorities? – The need for a in type-I label managing boards (if applicable) although significant effort is needed in order to difference in target audience, as well as country parallel strategy and type III-declaration programme managers. improve their: and product group-specific aspects. Case-by- • Credibility and comparability (e.g. in terms of As already mentioned, the discussion about priorities reliability of background data and consistent highlighted a different focus among research/academia/ scope) LCA experts and industry. The former focused their attention more on the issue of credibility and a consistent • Affordability (e.g. in terms of decrease of costs framework of the tools, with a particular emphasis on and other barriers for SMEs the needs to improve EPDs and make them more af- • Format and benchmarking (to increase their fordable. On the contrary, while not contesting the va- understandability). lidity of EPD data, some industry representatives clearly stated that the first priority is to involve market actors, Public administrators should support both strate- i.e. increase and improve communication. As a valid ex- gies and facilitate a consistent approach, i.e. their con- ample of this approach, it was mentioned that 7000 ar- vergence in the medium-long term. chitects participated in the last meeting of the US Green Building Council last year. 3.4.1.4 Integration of communication tools – A Too much focus of discussion on EPD was chal- possible solution? lenged with respect to priority-setting: “Who cares? The important thing is how to communicate to the On one hand EPDs are considered a valid and cred- customer to change his/her behaviour, not if our info ible life cycle information basis, but their effectiveness Figure 21 - Proposed future integration of life cycle communication tools is (perfectly) reliable”; “Doing good is better than do- as a communication tool and their affordability and dif- *The term ’Improved EPD’ means an environmental declaration developed in an EPD programme, which overcomes the barriers of present programmes (as discussed in the previous sections) 60 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 61

The proposed approach envisages the following ac- In principle, the proposed approach and strategy As for the energy sector, the following remarks hold: cycle information for the building and construction tivities: applies to any product category. For some specific - With the increase of distributed generation, sector, effective in August 2006: “Decree 21/2006, On the information basis side: product groups, complementary information on health health & safety and life cycle cost information Regulation for the adoption of environmental and - The development of PCRs and average prod- & safety, risk and life cycle costs may be added to sat- might be increasingly requested by users. ecoefficiency criteria in buildings”. This new regula- isfy users’ needs. tion introduces a very strong Top-Down approach, uct-group specific declarations. - Risk is of relevant information for specific energy as it states that: “at least one whole family of prod- - The identification of users’ needs in terms of technologies (e.g. nuclear) As far as the building and construction sector is ucts must be labelled through type I or type III complementary information and the production concerned, the following observations can be drawn: - No sector-specific EPD programmes exist. (EPD) ecolabelling in each new building”. of data. - As shown in the survey, health, safety and life cy- - None of the existing National EPD systems can - Foster the use of life cycle communication tools - The progressive harmonization of PCRs among 14 cle costs are important user needs, which must be considered an ‘Improved EPD’ programme , being used within the framework of Green Public different systems. be included in the final communication tools. e.g. in terms of costs and affordability for SMEs, Procurement (GPP) initiatives. The potential di- consistent background database, etc.) mension and impact of GPP is very significant. On the information use side: - In several EU countries (i.e. Germany, France, UK, Netherlands) a sector-specific declaration - On the contrary, work on PCR harmonization is - Authorities should support stakeholders to include - The development of target-specific Communi- programme exists, which has or is close to hav- more advanced than in other sectors. The PCR EPDs info into their decision-making process; cation interface tools (e.g. interface with ISO- ing all the characteristics of an ‘Improved EPD’ of electricity (2004) was the first one to undergo they should ask for emissions info disclosure. type I or ISO-type I like criteria, eco-design tools, a real open consultation at European level. It is programme. Therefore, in these countries the - As already mentioned, national Ecolabelling pro- benchmarking of environmental declarations, now being reviewed again. An enhanced focus use of EPDs is either already possible today or gramme managers (which include ministry rep- etc.) on distributed generation and renewable energy in the very near future. resentatives in the Competent Bodies) should - The progressive harmonization of ISO-type I la- sources would be recommended. use PCRs in the process of criteria setting. bel criteria with PCRs. A harmonization of PCRs among different systems - Harmonization of background data and compa- - Authorities should help giving importance to EPD. - The progressive harmonization of ISO-type I la- (including cross-sectoral systems like the Swedish EPD rability of results are important at regional level, Focus the indicators set to be understandable/ bels between different countries. system) is needed at European level, at least in the mid- but maybe less so at global level (e.g. electricity comparable. term. This issue is currently being addressed by CEN produced in the US will not be used in Asia). Today, such an approach would allow companies TC 350: WG3 is working on a PCR document for build- - In the future, the few ISO-type I ecolabels includ- One important indication which emerged during the to provide just life cycle information, as long as it is in ing products which should be the “master PCR” for the ing energy as a product category and the many discussion was that ISO-type I and ISO-type III should the standardized format prescribed by the relevant PCR national programs in the future. This might also be the ISO-type I like labels should take into account by all means remain voluntary tools. Authorities should and it is third party verified/certified (according to the starting point for a worldwide harmonization including in the developed PCRs. make sure that LCA and the communication of life cycle specific PCR requirements). This also would allow com- the process, among others, the Japanese EcoLeaf and information does not become a mandatory instrument. panies in the supply chain (in particular SMEs) to pro- the South Korean EDP programmes as well as other 3.4.1.5 Potential role of public administrations Rather, they should promote their use in business as an vide just gate-to-gate information. emerging programmes in other countries (e.g. China). important means towards product innovation and sup- - A harmonization of background data is also need- Public administrations at both national and suprana- port business to take leadership15. This does not exclude In the future, with the improvement of EPD systems, ed. Current work within the European Platform for tional level can potentially play a major role in fostering that mandatory instruments may indirectly trigger the use the same companies might want to apply and to use LCA goes in that direction ( Kreissig et al 2006). the proposed strategy. Possible action lines identified at of voluntary life cycle communication tools (as is currently EPDs as information basis. SMEs could also partici- CEN TC 350 WG is also preparing a technical the workshop include: happening in the energy sector with the EU Directive on pate, profiting from the concept of modular EPDs, as report on this issue, giving guidance and recom- fuel disclosure [Directive 2003/54/EC] and might also described in the ISO 14025 standard. - The setting-up of national and supranational LCA mendations. Where applicable, reference to the databases for background processes and ma- occur with respect to the energy certification of build- UNEP/SETAC Global Database Registry is also ings and the implementing measures of the framework Such an approach is actually followed by one terials. The EC has started to build a European recommended (UNEP/SETAC GDR 2006). Work directive on Energy Using Products [EuP DIR 2005/32/ branch of the building sector in Sweden (water, heat- reference LCA database (ELCD/EPLCA 2006). towards harmonization of data within this initiative EC]). However, a clear distinction has to be made being and ventilation), which developed two tools to assist Other countries are exploring the opportunity is expected in the future as well. tween the possible mandatory use of simplified Life Cycle information users (consumers). The first is an interpre- to replicate this at national level. Finally, UNEP/ - A consistent and holistic framework “product- Thinking tools (in various possible forms, within legislation tative tool allowing users to better understand the in- SETAC is going to make a similar exercise with building” has to be established. Current ISO and measures aiming at reducing overall life cycle impacts of formation presented in the declaration and the environ- worldwide scope within the Global Database CEN work is pointing in that direction. products16) and the mandatory use of full LCA and EPIS mental significance. The second is a decision making Registry (UNEP/SETAC GDR 2006) fulfilling ISO standard requirements. tool to assist users when choosing between potential - Environmental criteria of existing and forthcom- - Foster the use of life cycle communication tools suppliers of components, etc. However, the two tools ing ISO-type I ecolabels should be harmonized within a certain market by regulations. The most have not yet been released and it is unclear whether with existing and future PCRs. The harmoniza- clear example is the one by the Catalan Govern- This was the opinion expressed by the majority of participants. However it is tion of the latter might also help the harmoni- worth highlighting that some experts objected that a combination of manda- they will be in the future. This reflects the difficulties of ment which issued new legislation in relation to life tory and voluntary tools might be more effective. reaching consensus in terms of developing commonly zation of ecolabels, first at European then at For example, the Framework Directive on Energy Using Products (EuP DIR global level. 14. For example, just one large Japanese utility participates in the EcoLeaf 2005/32/EC) refers to the Green Paper on Integrated Product Policy (IPP agreed criteria. system. Despite the “On the way to EPD” and “Stepwise EPD” procedures, no COM(2001) 68 final), which aims to reduce the environmental impacts of SMEs from the energy sector are included in the Swedish EPD system so far. products across the whole of their life cycle. 62 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 63

In any case, the possibility and opportunity of us- Federal Government is very unlikely. However, this cific priorities should be identified and a program - Abiotic resources depletion. ing life cycle information (or parts of it) within legislative situation could be significantly different in the single of work established. For example, is comparabil- mandatory tools, including mandatory EPIS, should be States and/or at local level (e.g. with respect to GPP ity of products really important at global level? It This is of course a general limit of LCA, which is not further carefully studied and explored. initiatives). might well be for a set of building products, which restricted to the sectors of energy and construction, but are easily exported (e.g. insulation materials), but significantly affects them. it has very little significance for electricity. - The whole area of mutual influence of labels and trade. The issue of toxicity is mostly related to chemical products, which can be contained in building products - The possible use of life cycle information (or part 3.4.2 Needs for future research (e.g. insulation materials). The Current research work of it under various forms) for mandatory legis- carried out within the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initia- lative tools, including mandatory EPIS (e.g. the tive programme on Life Cycle Impact Assessment is The discussion and conclusions highlight several Furthermore, the communication needs of other energy label and building certification). expected to soon provide important progress for the needs for further research in three main areas: stakeholders should be addressed in more detail. In the assessment of toxicity in LCA. - The diffusion and effectiveness of life cycle infor- case of the building sector, the crucial role of architects and building planners is recognized. The same type of 3.4.2.3 Limits of LCA and needs for complemen- mation communication tools (the demand-side) As for biodiversity, several proposals exist but there analysis carried out in Germany should be extended to tary assessment tools and indicators - The improvement of life cycle information tools is no general agreement on a methodology to be used a wide set of countries. (the supply-side) in LCA studies. This is a very important issue for all bio- One aspect clearly emerging from the debate is that - The limits of LCA and the need of complemen- based products and services, including building prod- Finally, the communication needs of investors and while current main life cycle communication tools almost tary assessment tools and indicators. ucts, electricity and heat from biomass and biofuels. It is the financial sector in general has been quite unexplored always focus solely on environmental aspects, there is crucial to address, assess and communicate properly the so far. Given the influence of these stakeholders, this is an increasing request for other information with respect potential environmental impacts of renewable resources also another key research field for the future. to the economic, social and health dimensions. In fact, (both materials and energy) in a consistent and holistic 3.4.2.1 Effectiveness of life cycle communica- the whole area of “product sustainability information” is framework, exactly as it is done for industrial materials, tion (demand-side) still to be developed. Future research is needed with otherwise huge issues may arise in the long run. The for- 3.4.2.2 Improvement of life cycle communica- respect to the integration of In different countries an important uptake of EPIS estry industry has already taken the issue seriously by tion tools (supply-side) - Life cycle costing (LCC)17 on the supply side can be observed, e.g. in terms of developing sustainable forestry guidance and labels to 18 labelled product and awarded firms. However, there is - Social aspects ensure production is controlled. Despite several recent In the previous chapters, many aspects of existing much less information about the real impacts on the - And health impacts LCA studies, more effort is required at the level of agri- life cycle communication tools to be improved have market, e.g. in terms of increase of sales and market cultural products, especially in view of their greater use in been identified and discussed. Main research areas in share. It is very uncertain how the information is influ- Some attempts at this are already done in specific sec- future economy as raw material rather than food. this specific respect include: encing the purchasing decision. The issue is complex tors and companies (e.g. FSC certification and BASF eco- - The development of target-specific communi- because there are direct and indirect effects to be efficiency analysis), but a larger effort is required to develop a It is clear that further significant scientific research cation interfaces. One example of which is the considered. Moreover, there is always a gap between consistent and comprehensive framework for assessment efforts are needed in all the mentioned areas. development of eco-design tools for architects. consumer declarations and actual consumer behaviour. and communication of product sustainability performance. People tend to say one thing about their preference for - The development of branch-specific reference da- In the meanwhile, it is paramount that complementary good environmental information and better performing tabase and of appropriate verification procedures. Another issue is related to the limits of LCA with information (either qualitative or quantitative) is integrated in products, and another when it comes down to the ac- - The analysis and exploitation of possible syner- respect to specific environmental issues and impacts. life cycle information tools, recognizing in a transparent way tual decision of purchasing them. gies between ISO-type I labels and ISO-type III While LCA is fully satisfactory regarding “conventional” the limits of LCA rather than using it in an imperfect way. declarations based on similar procedures and impact categories, such as global warming, ozone LCA cannot solve all questions and will give wrong answers Although some information exists (e.g. Rubik & the same information basis. depletion, acidification, eutrophication, etc., it shows if it is asked wrong questions. LCA is a very beneficial and effective decision-making support tool if it is correctly ap- Frankl 2005, EVER 2006), it does not refer to the two - The potential role of inter-programme commu- substantial limits in other areas. Despite considerable plied and used in combination with other assessment tools. key industries: energy and building. This is certainly a nication of scientific bodies/boards in type-I and scientific progress, there is so far no commonly agreed (Future) life cycle communication tools must reflect this. This major area for future research. The focus on market im- type-III label processing to enhance consistency methodology concerning the assessment of: is precisely what is proposed in our conclusions (Figure 15). pacts was also the main object of the 2nd international and credibility of both labels. - Toxicological impacts expert workshop on “Sustainability Communication in It is worth remembering that some current EPDs actually al- - The development of guidelines for SMEs with respect - Biodiversity losses the Building Sector in different World Regions – Con- ready incorporate such aspects under the item “other infor- to existing/developing modular EPD programmes. necting Life Cycle Information with Market Impacts”, 17. Significant work on LCC has been conducted within SETAC Europe at the mation”: For example, Vattenfall’s EPD on electricity include - The analysis of modularity in global B2B com- level of a SETAC LCA Working Group (Hunkeler et al 2007). This work is currently risk assessment (on nuclear) and biodiversity losses infor- organized by the UNEP/SETAC Task Force on Com- continuing. For other references on LCC refer for example to DANTES (2005). munication (problems and solutions) munication of Life Information in Stuttgart in December 18. Work on social aspects and sustainability with respect to life cycle has mation. The challenge is to pass from information provided - The harmonization of PCR and ISO-type I label been carried out both within the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative and SETAC by one company to a commonly agreed methodology for 2006 (for preliminary results see section 3.4.3). Working Groups. The two activity lines have merged into the Working Group criteria. As far as this is concerned, sector-spe- on Modelling and Evaluation for Sustainability (WG-MES 2006). reporting such aspects. 64 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 65

4 Recommendations 3.4.3 Preliminary results from the 2nd Expert Workshop “Sustainability Communication in the Building Sector in different World Regions – Connecting Life Cycle Information with Market Impacts”

A second international expert workshop was organ- ment, health and safety. Since several EPD systems are ized by the UNEP/SETAC Task Force on Communica- already in place in Europe, the commission mandated In the previous chapters the need to develop a parallel Business and industry tion of Life Cycle Information at the University of Stutt- European standardization (mandate M350) to avoid strategy with manifold objectives was highlighted. Such gart, on December 6th, 2006. trade barriers by harmonized EPD systems. CEN TC an approach follows four main lines of interventions: The primary purpose of EPIS, life cycle and sustain- 350 is writing European standards on EPDs for build- 1. Significantly enhancing communication and ability communication tools is to become effective instru- At the Stuttgart workshop, around 50 experts from ing products and the way how to use them in building marketing of EPIS on the market, in order to ments bringing added value, competitive advantage and all over the world were discussing the topic of “Sustain- assessment. Having said that, the European commis- strongly improve knowledge and awareness of fostering innovation in business and industry. Therefore, ability Communication in the Building Sector in different sion sees EPDs as a voluntary effort of the building and customers and other stakeholders on life cycle industry has a major role to play in this respect. World Regions – Connecting Life Cycle Information with construction sector. environmental performances of products. This Market Impacts”. is recognized as a top-priority, even if present Recommendations include: The Asian perspective gave a good insight view communication tools are imperfect. - Industry should take the lead in marketing and The results have shown a complex picture of how into the Chinese situation of the building and con- 2. Improving and harmonizing existing life cycle communication of life cycle information. First-run- to communicate in different markets. Several presenta- struction sector. There is a huge demand for building information tools, starting from their positive as- ners have to push forward dissemination of infor- tions showed the need for communicating environmen- space; in the next 25 years China will more than dou- sets. This includes important efforts to set up a mation, even with imperfect communication tools. tal information in the context, which means communi- ble the available area in buildings. This leads to big consistent framework, improve reliability of data - At the same time, industry can play a key role cating sustainability information. Integrated approaches problems with the availability of resources, the energy and credibility of process. Moreover, a strong in improving the reliability of data. Existing ap- are implemented in a very successful way; an excel- demand and the related environmental impacts since effort towards harmonization is needed, first at proaches dealing with specific data and confi- lent presentation on the BASF Eco-Efficiency approach the energy supply in China is mainly based on coal. regional then at global level. dentiality issues should be further improved. At demonstrated the benefit for the involved parties. Only 3-5% of the new buildings are environmentally the same time, it is crucial that industry contrib- friendly or energy saving buildings. 3. Integrating the different communication tools, utes to the setting-up of 3rd party-verified refer- When researching the role of LCA in environmen- focusing on target-specific communication in- ence background database (this is already hap- tal communication it became obvious that in the B2C Therefore the main challenge is how to lower the en- terfaces. This is highly needed to avoid double pening with the EU Platform for LCA). sector, it has to be a trade between complexity and ergy demands of the construction industry and to raise work, concentrate efforts and resources, while credibility. LCA helps to add credibility in advertising the performance of the new buildings. The life cycle ap- significantly improving understandability and ef- - A particularly pivotal role can be played by in- but the influence of the branding of the company is proach helps to focus on the most important issues. To- fectiveness of communication to stakeholders. dustry associations: It is recommended that often much higher. day a type I label for building products is implemented 4. Implementing a clear shift from pure environmen- they develop product group-specific PCRs, and used, in addition a type III EPD system is on the tal life cycle assessment towards a sustainability produce “average” EPDs for benchmarking, de- Some conclusions from the different regions are way, but more research on databases and certification analysis of products. While several attempts and velop templates to foster and make involvement presented below: procedures is necessary until the whole concept is ap- approaches exist, significant effort is needed to of SMEs easier. The American perspective has shown that LCA is plicable in practice. develop a consistent methodological approach. - Industry should collaborate with research, on the way to being integrated in building assessment academia, LCA experts and EPIS programme schemes like LEED V3 or GreenGlobe. The building as- The UNEP Sustainable Building and Construction Bearing these lines of action in mind, a set of rec- managers to strive for harmonization of EPIS, sessment schemes seem to be the main driver for sus- Initiative (www.sbci.unep.fr) is a new platform to foster ommendations can be drawn for a set of different stake- first at regional and then at global level tainability communication on the product level. Many sustainable development in this sector at international holders, including: - It is recommended that industry look in more material producers already have taken up the topic and level. Key objectives are the implementation of the life - Business and industry detail at the demand-side of life cycle informa- provide environmental information. Nevertheless, to use cycle assessment approach in the building and con- - Policy-makers tion. The communication needs of specific user this information in an efficient and consistent way, an struction sector and to move beyond recommenda- groups should be addressed in particular; not - Research and Academia EPD scheme harmonizing content and format is the tions towards implementation. The SBCI partners with only customers but also other key subjects like most beneficial. the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative to allow consist- - LCA and EPIS community (GEDNet, UNEP/ the financial sector and investors. ent methodological approaches. SETAC, etc.) In Europe, the European Commission pushes the concept of EPDs as a complementary part of the tech- The first general recommendation is that LCA, EPIS Policy-makers nical information of the harmonized product standards. and other product information tools should be imple- The construction product directive (CPD) addresses mented as a combination of voluntary and obligatory Public administrators at both national and suprana- the topic by the essential requirement N° 3 – environ- instruments. tional level can play a major role to improve and foster 66 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 67

the use of EPIS and life cycle communication tools. This ers to integrate LCA with LCC. In the case of the can be done at different levels, e.g.: building sector this aims at closing the gap be- - Foster and encourage incentives for the use of tween architects’ needs and the present state- life cycle communication tools, e.g. within the of-the art of the tools. framework of Green Public Procurement. - Collaborate with industry and other stakehold- - Find appropriate ways to support the participa- ers to develop appropriate target-specific com- tion of SMEs. munication interfaces. In the case of the building industry this includes the development of - Support and develop common background eco-design tools to be integrated into the usual processes and materials or LCA database at workflow of architects and planners. national and supranational level (currently happening in Europe) - Collaborate with industry and other stakeholders to develop and set up a consistent and com- - Facilitate harmonization of EPIS worldwide. prehensive framework for sustainability product - Support the integration of different communica- performance indicators. tion tools, e.g. ISO-type I labels with ISO-type III - Increase the integration of Life cycle thinking, life declaration systems (Ministry representatives of- cycle management and LCA in education and ten make up part of national ISO-type I labelling training programmes. managing boards). This might include using similar processes of EPD (PCR open consultation review and approval) to establish criteria of eco-labels. GEDNet, UNEP/SETAC and LCA community - Ensuring more stringent controls and measures against bad claims. The LCA community, GEDNet and the UNEP+SETAC - Support the integration of life cycle thinking and Initiative play a key role with respect to: Figure 22 – Structure and relationship among Working Area In- terest Groups (WAIG) in the 2nd Phase of the Life Cycle Initiative assessment in public education programmes - Harmonization issues of EPIS. (2007-2012) and training. - Describing the state-of-the art of life cycle com- - Make sure that the use of LCA and of EPIS re- munication approaches in different parts of the The Figure indicates the relationship among the mains voluntary instruments aimed at fostering in- world. WAIG. In this way it is expected that the impact of the novation and competitive advantage. These instru- - Providing guidance for best practice in different Life Cycle Initiative will go beyond the work on meth- ments might help to define policy objectives (e.g. industry sectors at global level. odologies and capacity building, to practical “applica- as it is foreseen by the EuP Directive on Energy tions” that make a difference in the real world and thus using Products). However, this should be a result With this specific regards, the set of recommenda- contribute more effectively to the ongoing international of deep stakeholder involvement and collaboration tions mentioned above is relevant to the activities of the efforts to change unsustainable patterns of consump- and not of a mandatory top-down approach. Phase 2 of the Life Cycle Initiative (2007-2012), which tion and production. are going to be structured in five main Work Area Inter- est Groups (see Figure 24): Research and Academia a. Life Cycle Approaches Methodologies (including As highlighted in previous chapters, there are still data, methods, case studies, etc.) important gaps in respect to both more basic scientific b. Life Cycle Approaches for Resources and Ma- assessment issues and the development of user-friendly terials (including natural resources, chemicals, indicators and communication interfaces. Recommen- water, energy, etc.) dations to research and academia include: c. Life Cycle Approaches for Consumption Clus- - Improve the scientific basis of problematic environ- ters (structured in housing, mobility, food and mental impact assessment indicators still evident consumer products) (e.g. toxicity, biodiversity, abiotic resource depletion) d. Life Cycle Approaches for Capability Develop- - Improve the understandability of indicators. ment (including institutional empowerment, - Collaborate with industry to improve data quality training, curricular development, etc.) and availability. e. Life Cycle Management in Businesses and In- - Collaborate with industry and other stakehold- dustries. 68 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 69

EU Directive 2003/54/EC of The European Parlia- ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management -- 5 References ment and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning Life cycle assessment -- Principles and framework, In- common rules for the internal market in electricity and ternational Standard Organization, Switzerland, 2006; repealing Directive 96/92/EC see also www.iso.org/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage. Eurobarometer (2005) Special EUROBAROMETER CatalogueDetail?CSNUMBER=37456 217 “Attitudes of European citizens towards the en- ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental management -- Baer S. (2005) The experience in the US building ELCD/EPLCA (2006) European Reference Life Cy- vironment”, European Commission, Bruxelles, April Life cycle assessment -- Requirements and guidelines, sector. Annex 2, this report. cle Data System (ELCD) within the European Platform 2005, retrievable at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ International Standard Organization, Switzerland, 2006; on Life Cycle Assessment; http://lca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ barometer/report_ebenv_2005_04_22_en.pdf BMVBS (2001) Guideline for Sustainable Building. EPLCA/ see also www.iso.org/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage.Cat German Federal Ministry for Transport, Building and Ur- Frankl P. (2005) The use of life cycle communication alogueDetail?CSNUMBER=38498&scopelist= ban Affairs, Berlin 2001 ENVIRONDEC (2007) website of the EPD® sys- tools in business - A review from the UNEP/SETAC Life ISO 21930 (2007) Sustainability in building con- tem – a programme for Type III environmental declara- Cycle Initiative”, oral presentation at the 12th SETAC Bodlund B. (2005) The experience at Vattenfall. An- struction -- Environmental declaration of building prod- tions with an international applicability (former Swedish Europe Case Study Symposium, Bologna, Italy, 10-11 nex 2, this report. ucts, International Standard Organization, Switzerland, EPD® system). www.environdec.com January 2005 2007 (under publication as of 31 July 2007), see also Brandi et al. Green pricing, Un prezzo speciale per EPI (2003) L. Piper, M. Carty & M. Stenius, Report of Frankl P. & Fullana P. (2006) Communicating life www.iso.org/iso/en/CatalogueDetailPage.CatalogueDe l’energia verde. Retrievable on-line at http://www.enea. the Conference on Environmental Product Information, cycle information – Building a bridge between industry tail?CSNUMBER=40435&ICS1=91&ICS2=40&ICS3=1 it/com/web/pubblicazioni/GreenPricingLight.pdf Stockholm, Sweden, 29-30 September 2003. and the scientific community finding the balance be- &scopelist=ALL CEC COM (2003) Commission of the European tween simplification and complexity. Oral presentation EPA (1994) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ISO/TS 21931 (2006) Sustainability in building con- Communities, Communication from the Commission to at the 16th SETAC Europe Annual Meeting, Den Haag, (ed.) (1994) “Determinants of Effectiveness for Environ- struction -- Framework for methods of assessment for the Council and the European Parliament: “Integrated The Netherlands, 7-11 May 2006 mental Certification and Labeling Programs” (Washing- environmental performance of construction works -- Product Policy - Building on Environmental Life-Cycle ton: Own publication). Fullana P., Gazulla C., Frankl P.and Samitier S. (2006) Part 1: Buildings; International Standard Organization, Thinking”. Brussels, 18.6.2003 COM(2003) 302 final Type I and type III (EPD) ecolabelling in public policy: the Switzerland, 2006; see also: www.iso.org/iso/en/Cata- EPA (1998): Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) example of Catalonia and the building sector. Oral pres- logueDetailPage.CatalogueDetail?CSNUMBER=40434 Christiansen K. Wesnaes M., Weidema B. (2006) (ed.) (1998) “Environmental Labelling Issues, Policies, entation at the 13th SETAC Europe Case Study Sympo- &ICS1=91&ICS2=40&ICS3=1&scopelist=ALL Consumer demands on Type III environmental declara- and Practices Worldwide” (Washington: Own publications. Report to ANEC, Copenhagen, Denmark, Febru- sium, Stuttgart, Germany, 7-8 December 2006 tion). JEA (2003) The Eco Mark Program. Japan Environ- ary 2006 Hunkeler et al (2007) Environmental Life Cycle Cost- ment Association. http://www.jeas.or.jp/ecomark/eng- ERM (2002) “ Evaluation of Environmental Product ing. Submitted 2007 to SETAC Publications as the Result lish/index.html DANTES (2005) “Demonstrate and Assess New Declaration Schemes”, Final Report to the EC/DG ENV, Tools for Environmental Sustainability” – EU project of the Life Cycle Costing Working Group of SETAC Eu- ERM, Environmental Resources Management (ERM), JEMAI (2004) Chie Nakaniwa, personal commu- (2002-2005). dantes.info/Projectinformation/The_DAN- rope, Edts. David Hunkeler, Kerstin Lichtenvort, Gerald Bruxelles, September 2002. nication within the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative, TES_project.html. Rebitzer; Lead Authors: Andreas Ciroth, David Hunkeler, LCM Programme, TF 3 on Communication of Life Cycle Ernst & Young/SPRU (1998) Integrated product Gjalt Huppes, Kerstin Lichtenvort, Gerald Rebitzer, Ina Information For reference to Life cycle costing also refer to: policy. Report on behalf of EC/ DG Environment, Sci- Rüdenauer, Bengt Steen; Brussels (2007) forthcoming ence and Policy Research Unit - University of Sussex, Jeske U. & Kingele M. (2005) The user needs – The www.dantes.info/Publications/Publications-info/ INTEND (2005) Study of the international situation London, UK German experience. Annex 2, this report publ_State_of_the_art_LCA-LCC_tools.html, and of EPD application. Report of Task 1, EU-LIFE-INTEND project, Final Report to the EC, Macroscopio Spa, Mi- www.dantes.info/Tools&Methods/Environmenta- EuP DIR (2005) Directive 2005/32/EC of The Eu- Johnson M. (2005) The experience at British Energy. lan, 2005 lassessment/enviro_asse_lcc.html ropean Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2005 Annex 2, this report. establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign IPP COM(2001) 68 final. Commission Of The Euro- DEEP (2003) F. Rubik & P. Frankl (eds.), Developing requirements for energy-using products and amending Klingele M., Jeske U. and Schebek, L. (2005) Actor pean Communities, Green Paper On Integrated Prod- Effective and Efficient Product Information Schemes – As- Council Directive 92/42/EEC and Directives 96/57/EC group views and communication of EPDs within the con- uct Policy. Brussels, 07.02.2001 sessing and expanding product information schemes be- and 2000/55/EC of the European Parliament and of the struction sector in Germany. 12th SETAC Europe LCA Case Studies Symp., 2004/2005 European Meeting of tween voluntary and mandatory approaches. Final Report Council; 22.7.2005 EN Official Journal of the European ISO 14025 (2006) Environmental labels and declara- the Internat.Soc.for Industrial Ecology, Bologna, I, Janu- to the EC/DG XII, Heidelberg/Rome, February 2003. Union L 191/29. tions -- Type III environmental declarations -- Principles ary 10-11, 2005. Bruxelles : SETAC, 2005 S.215-18 and procedures; International Standard Organization, EICTA-EIA-JGPSSI (2003) Material Composition EU Directive 2002/91/EC of The European Parlia- Switzerland, 2006; see also www.iso.org/iso/en/Cata- Declaration Guide, draft, September 2003, as retrieved ment and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the Kreissig J. (2005) ISO-type III standardization activi- logueDetailPage.CatalogueDetail?CSNUMBER=38131 from www.eia.org/resources/2003-09-19.10.pdf in Energy Performance of Buildings. ties in the building sector. Annex 2, this report. &ICS1=13&ICS2=20&ICS3=50. September, 2004. 70 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 71

Kreissig et.al. (2006): Internet site on Life-Cycle As- sessment Tools and Services and Life-Cycle Inventory Data in support of European Integrated Product Policy. Final Report of DG Environment Service Contract N° 070501/2004/394597/MAR/G4, Brussels, June 2006

Le Boulch D. (2005) The experience at Electricité de France. Annex 2, this report

Menichetti E. (2006) The use of LCA for environmental communication and sustainable marketing – A methodological framework and sector-specific empiri- cal findings. Presented at SETAC Europe 16th Annual Meeting, Den Haag, May 2006

Moedinger F. (2005) EPD as a credible communication tool for sustainable clay brick products. Annex 2, this report.

Oosterhuis F.H. Rubik F. and Scholl G. (1996) Prod- uct Policy in Europe: New Environmental Perspectives. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands (1996)

Rubik F. & Frankl P. (eds.) (2005) Eco-labelling - 'The Future of Eco-labelling: Making Environmental Product Information Systems Effective. Greenleaf, UK, 2005

Rubik F. & Scholl G. (eds.) (2002) Eco-labelling practices in Europe – An overview of environmental product information schemes. Schriftenreihe des IOEW 162/02, Berlin, March 2002, ISBN 3-932092-62-7

Sharma V.K. & Kurani Y.S. (2003), in EPI (2003), p. 26

Smith T. & S.A. Molina-Murillo (2005) LCA Informa- tion in Marketing Communications: Addressing Com- munication Effectiveness in the Building Materials In- dustries. Annex 2, this report.

TNO (2005) Making Life-Cycle Information and In- terpretative tools available. A. Ansems, S. van Leeuwen with contributions of J. Guinée, P. Frankl, Final Report to EC/DG ENV, TNO Report B&O-A R2005/326, Apel- doorn, The Netherlands (2005).

UNEP/SETAC (2006) Life Cycle Initiative. http://lcini- tiative.unep.fr/

UNEP/SETAC GDR (2006) Global Database Regis- try. http://www.lci-network.de/db-registry

WG-MES (2006) Working Group on Modelling and Evaluation for Sustainability. http://www.wg-mes.com 72 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 73

Annex 1 - List of workshop participants Le Bocq Agathe Electricité de France I France [email protected]

Le Boulch Denis Electricité de France I France [email protected]

Masoni Paolo ENEA A Italy [email protected] Arrufí Marta ADIGSA G Spain [email protected] Menichetti Emanuela Ecobilancio Italia / Univer- C Italy [email protected] Baer Steve Armstrong World I USA [email protected] sity St.Gallen Industries Mestre Anna ADIGSA A Spain [email protected] Bodlund Birgit Vattenfall I Sweden [email protected] Moedinger Fritz Gasser / TBE I Italy [email protected] Cardim Arnaldo Politecnica de A Brazil [email protected] Pernambuco Nakaniwa Chie JEMAI I Japan [email protected] De Haes Udo CML A Netherlands [email protected] Osset Philippe PWC / Ecobilan C France [email protected] Ellingsen Harald Sintef I Norway [email protected]; Rebitzer Gerald Alcan I Switzer- [email protected] Fet Annik Norwegian University of I Norway [email protected] land Magerholm Science and Technology Reigo Lemila EESTI ENERGIA AS I Estonia [email protected] Frankl Paolo Ecobilancio Italia C Italy [email protected] Rydberg Tomas IVL R Sweden [email protected] Frydendal Jeppe LCA Center Denmark C Denmark [email protected] Samitier Salvador Cat. Min. Environment G Spain [email protected] Fullana Pere ESCI A Spain [email protected] Sarrias Maria José Cat. Min. Environment G Spain Garcia Jaume ESCI A Spain [email protected] Saur Konrad FiveWinds A Germany [email protected] Gazulla Cristina ESCi A Spain [email protected] Saur Modahl Ingunn Stiftelsen Østfoldforskn- I Norway [email protected] Jensen Allan Astrup Force Technology C Denmark [email protected] ing Schmincke Eva Five Winds C Germany [email protected] Jeske Udo Forschungszentrum A Germany [email protected] Karlsruhe Smith Timothy University of Minnesota A USA [email protected]; Johnson Mark British Energy I United [email protected] [email protected] Kingdom Weidema Bo 2.-0 LCA Consultants C Denmark [email protected] Jungbluth Niels ESU-services C Switzerland [email protected] Zamarron Francisco Det Norske Veritas Italia I Italy [email protected] Kreissig Johannes PE Europe C Germany [email protected]

Lacam Mathieu Cogema / Areva I France [email protected]

Lai Simona Etex Group I Belgium [email protected]

Lavagna Monica Politecnico di Milano/ A Italy [email protected] Best

I=Industry / A=Academia / G=Government / C=Consultancy I=Industry / A=Academia / G=Government / C=Consultancy 74 Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors Communication of life cycle information in the building and energy sectors 75

Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations

Presentation 1 76

Presentation 2 83

Presentation 3 94

Presentation 4 103

Presentation 5 107

Presentation 6 127

Presentation 7 134

Presentation 8 148

Presentation 9 162

Presentation 10 169 76 Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations 77

“Sector-specific Approaches for Communication of Life Cycle Information To Different Stakeholders” The real question: how to induce change International Expert Workshop, Barcelona 8 Sep. 2005 towards more sustainable behavior?

UNEP/SETAC LCM/TF 3 Stakeholders Communication Comm. Who? Target Real Tools Groups change of Life Cycle Information How to What are their induce real needs? change? How to 1) Drivers Paolo Frankl Università di Roma I “La Sapienza” reach them? 2) Tools Ecobilancio Italia 3) Effectiveness 4) Implications

TF3 - Communication 1 TF3 - Communication 3

TF Members Work Plan / Deliverables • 14 members + additional m. (LCM/TF) TOR/ Def study Revised Work Plan • Background Balance • 6 Universities / Research institutes • Sep. 2003: TF effective • Sep. 2003: Participation • 2 Consulting • Oct. 2003: 1st draft / support EPI conf. • 2 Large companies chapter LCM Handbook • 25/2/04: Official launch • 2 Industry association / public corporation • Oct. 2003: Support & • 22/4/04: Kick-off Prague • 1 Verifying / certifying company • 1 Consumers NGO Report EPI conference • 15/7/04 1st draft chapter • Regional Balance • 3rd q.2004: organize, for LCM Handbook • 8 Europe support, document • 31/12/04 final draft • 3 North America workshop chapter for LCM • 1 Latin America Handbook • 1 Asia • Bologna, 10-12 Jan. • 1 Africa 2005

TF3 - Communication 2 TF3 - Communication 4 78 Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations 79

1st deliverable 2004 Objectives 2005-06 • Chapter on LC • Report on recommended practice on communication within communication of life cycle information the UNEP Handbook on LCM (forthcoming) • Monitor possible international [A.A.Jensen & standardization efforts A.Remmen eds. 2005] • Further workshops in other regions • Thanks to several TF members input! • Reach out to public and private sector • Chie Nakaniwa, • Hamish Will, initiatives • Chris Van Rossem, • Annik Fet • Establish and co-ordinate international • Jeppe Frydendal forum on sustainable product information • Gianluca Donato, • Lennart Karlson schemes

TF3 - Communication 5 TF3 - Communication 7

Activities 2005 so far Main questions review • Which communication tools used in • Monitoring of ISO DIS14025 and practice by industry and business? CD21930 standardization activities

• Distinguish communication tools vs. target • Participation in the Type III Environmental stakeholders Declarations International Seminar, • Final consumers Tokyo, Japan, 15 March 2005 • Business clients • Financial stakeholders • Public administrators and policy makers • Other society stakeholders

TF3 - Communication 8 TF3 - Communication 6 80 Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations 81

Approach Workshop – Expected results

• Focus on specific product categories For each specific sector: • Involve industry and other stakeholders • Who are “the users” of LC information • Identify success stories • What are their needs • Evaluate Integration of tools • Which tools for whom used today • Assess transferability of results • Outlook: Expectations from industry and users Proposal for a Workshop at Barcelona LCM • Recommended practice 2005 7th or 8th Sep 2005

TF3 - Communication 9 TF3 - Communication 11

Workshop Barcelona Workshop – Some research questions • 2 specific sectors – Building For each specific sector: – Energy • What communication format for whom? • Expected deliverable: publishable report • How to guarantee credibility? • Possible future workshops on – Transparent and verifiable information – Electronics – Involvement of stakeholders – Health Care & Detergents – The role of EPDs – Paper products • Integration of tools

TF3 - Communication 10 TF3 - Communication 12 82 Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations 8383

Possible integration of EPIS SECTOR-SPECIFIC APPROACHES FOR COMMUNICATION OF LIFE CYCLE INFORMATION TO DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS • One EPD as information basis but different communication formats and LCA INFORMATION IN MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS: Addressing Communication channels for different target groups Effectiveness in the Building Materials Industries

Other tools / communication interfaces Timothy M. Smith Associate Professor & Director, FPMDI Corporate Environmental Management B2B Department of Bio-based Products/Marketing & Logistics Management Take into account University of Minnesota

Country differences! Sergio A. Molina–Murillo B2G Research Assistant EPD Corporate Environmental Management Different strategies University of Minnesota B2C needed for Health different product groups Safety International Expert Workshop Side-event of the International Conference of Life Cycle Management September 8, 2005 TF3 - Communication 13

LCA INFORMATION IN MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS

Communicating Environmental Information

• Following the scandals of Enron, Tyco, Adelphia, HealthSouth and others, an increasing emphasis has been placed on corporate accountability, meaningful disclosure, and transparency in reporting. – The last decade has produced rapid growth in external reporting in the form of annual corporate and environmental reports. – The Environment Agency of the UK reported that 89% of companies analyzed “discuss their interaction with the environment in their Annual Reports…[but] the vast majority lack depth, rigor, or qualification…” • Only 24% of companies make any quantitative environmental disclosures and only 12% make these disclosures within the audited sections of their reports.

• An apparent disconnect between investments in environmental assessment and reporting and the information finding its way to 30 second TV spots, half-page print advertisements, single column press releases, etc…

Approaches for Communication of Life Cycle information to Different Stakeholders | September 8, 2005 © T. M. Smith and S. Molina-Murillo, 2005 84 Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations Annex 2 - Workshop full presentations 85