Understanding Product

Environmental Footprint and

Organisation Environmental
Footprint methods
2021
Contents

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES OF THE REPORT .................................................. 3

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT (LCA) ............................................................................ 5
KEY ASPECTS OF THE PEF/OEF METHODS ............................................................... 8
ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT CATEGORY AND SECTOR RULES: PEFCRs AND OEFSRs ..11
INVENTORY MODELLING AND CIRCULARITY IN EF ..................................................13
DATA COLLECTION AND QUALITY REQUIREMENTS ..................................................15
IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN THE EF METHODS ...........................................................17
RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ......................................................................................20
DATASETS ........................................................................................................22
EXAMPLES OF EF RESULTS COMMUNICATION.........................................................23
KEY STEPS IN A PEF/OEF STUDY DEVELOPMENT .....................................................24
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS .........................................................................25
DEFINITIONS.....................................................................................................28

2
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES OF THE REPORT

Over the last two decades, the European Commission has been driving a process of
implementation of life cycle thinking in European product policies (Figure 1). In particular,
the Communication COM/2003/302 on the Integrated Product Policy established the
framework conditions for the continuous environmental improvement of all products
throughout the production, use and disposal phases of their life cycle. With the
development, in a first stage, of the International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD),
and thereafter of the European Environmental Footprint methods (EF), the life cycle
approach has become a major lever for guiding European policies and investments towards
the environmental sustainability goals that the European Union has committed itself to
(e.g. COM/2019/640 on the European Green Deal).
The Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) and the Organisation Environmental Footprint
(OEF) are life cycle assessment (LCA) based methods to measure and communicate the
potential life cycle environmental impact of products (goods or services) and organisations,
respectively. Together they form the basis for the EU Environmental Footprint.
The EF builds on existing approaches and international standards (such as ISO 14040 series
and the European ILCD guidelines). The overarching purpose of PEF and OEF is to provide
information that can enable the reduction of environmental impacts of goods, services, and
organisations taking into account all the value chain activities (from extraction of raw
materials, through production and use and to final waste management).
The technical details of the EF methods are laid down in the Annex II of Recommendation
2013/179/EU and in the following updates to the PEF and OEF methods. Additional
guidance documents on the EF methods have been developed during the first applications
of the PEF/OEF in the pilot phase (2013-2018) and in the transition phase (2019-2022).
The European Platform on Life Cycle Assessment (EPLCA) has been launched in 2005 with
the objective of promoting life cycle thinking in business and in policy making in the
European Union, by focusing on underlying data and methodological needs1. The Joint
Research Centre2 actively contributes to the maintenance and improvement of the EPLCA,
providing methodological development and practical application of LCA through its research
activities. The EPLCA and the JRC technical reports and scientific publications represent the
scientific basis of the EF methods, which then have been applied, tested and improved with
strong involvement from industry and other stakeholders.

Who should read this report?

 People who want to know more details about the Environmental Footprint and its
main methodological aspects,
 People who want to have fast and direct access to the most up-to-date documents,
webpages and tools for a more in-depth analysis.

1 COM/2003/302.
2 A summary of JRC publications related to the European Platform on Life Cycle Assessment (EPLCA) is available
here.

3
 Communication on Pathway to a Healthy Planet for All – EU Action Plan: 'Towards Zero Pollution for Air,
Water and Soil’ COM/2021/400

EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 – Bringing nature back into our lives COM/2020/380

A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system COM/2020/381

A new Circular Economy Action Plan – For a cleaner and more competitive Europe COM/2020/98

Communication on The European Green Deal COM/2019/640

 Environmental Footprint transition phase (2019-2022)

 Methodological developments of the Environmental Footprint

Communication on Closing the loop – An EU action plan for the Circular Economy COM/2015/614

 Environmental Footprint pilot phase (2013-2018)

 Methodological developments of the Environmental Footprint
2013/179/EU: Commission Recommendation of 9 April 2013 on the use of common methods to
measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations –
the Environmental Footprint methodology
Communication on Building the Single Market for Green Products – Facilitating better information on
the environmental performance of products and organisations COM/2013/196

Communication on A resource-efficient Europe – Flagship initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy
COM/2011/21

International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) guidance

Sustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy (SCP/SIP) Action Plan
COM/2008/397

International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) – JRC and DG ENV (2005-2012)

Communication on Integrated Product Policy – Building on Environmental Life-Cycle Thinking

COM/2003/302

Figure 1. Timeline of the main milestones in life-cycle-supported policy making in the

European Commission

4
LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT (LCA)

A systemic perspective is needed to support decisions that have effects on the

sustainability of policies, production systems and services, i.e. the environmental, social
and economic spheres in which the concept of sustainability is articulated. This is because
measures aimed at achieving one specific goal (like reducing greenhouse gases) might
have negative consequences that were not considered in the first instance, whether they
be different impact types (i.e. triggering unexpected environmental, social or economic
mechanisms), involving different geographical areas or stages of the value chain of a
product or service (i.e. the life cycle). Including all these aspects in the decision-
making process to avoid so-called "burden shifting" is the great advantage that
the application of life cycle thinking brings to the development of policies,
products and services in today's globalised context.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)3 represents the practical realisation of this concept, aiming to
analyse comprehensively potential environmental implications of a decision-making
process. LCA forms the scientific and methodological foundation of the PEF and OEF
methods.
LCA as it is now brings into play very specific features4:
 Life cycle focus: all stages of the life cycle of products and services are consid-
ered, from raw materials extraction, to processing and manufacturing, distribu-
tion, use, and end of life (Figure 2).
 Multi-criteria analysis: multiple environmental impact categories are included in
the analysis.
 Quantitative methodology: indicators are quantitative and based on mathemat-
ical models describing the cause-effect relationships deriving from different stress-
ors (e.g. emissions, use of natural resources).
 Comparative approach: LCA is primarily designed to allow the choice of the best
option among two or more scenarios, given especially its quantitative nature.
 Global extension: the analysis can adapt to systems extended from the local to
the global scale, capturing their peculiarities in relation to spatial variability.

3
According to ISO 14040, LCA is a compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the potential
environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle. LCA is one of several environmental
management techniques (e.g. risk assessment, environmental performance evaluation, environmental
auditing, and environmental impact assessment) and might not be the most appropriate technique to use in
all situations. LCA typically does not address the economic or social aspects of a product, but the life cycle
approach and methodologies described in this International Standard can be applied to these other aspects.
4 The first life cycle-oriented approaches developed between the 1960s and the 1970s were focused mainly on
accounting resource use and energy. The methodology has progressively evolved to analyse complex
inventories of flows associated to product systems (i.e. resources, energy, materials, emissions and waste),
and to associate to these physical flows potential environmental impact indicators.

5
Figure 2. Generic workflow and applications of an LCA. The steps are detailed in Figure 3

The LCA methodology is standardised by ISO 140405 and ISO 140446 which describe
principles, application, phases of an LCA study (Figure 2 and Figure 3), requirements,
critical review, and reporting. Other ISO standards of the 14040 series complement the
general guidelines such as ISO 140467 for water footprint, and more environmental
management standards are linked to ISO 14040-44 like ISO 140068 (eco-design), ISO
140259 (environmental labelling), ISO 1406410 (carbon footprint of organisations), ISO
1406711 (carbon footprint of products), ISO 1407212 (organizational LCA).

5 ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Principles and framework.
6 ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Requirements and guidelines.
7 ISO 14046:2014 Environmental management — Water footprint — Principles, requirements and guidelines.
8 ISO 14006:2020 Environmental management systems — Guidelines for incorporating ecodesign.
9 14025:2006 Environmental labels and declarations — Type III environmental declarations — Principles and
procedures.
10 ISO 14064-1:2018 Greenhouse gases — Part 1: Specification with guidance at the organization level for
quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals.
11 ISO 14067:2018 Greenhouse gases — Carbon footprint of products — Requirements and guidelines for
quantification.
12 ISO 14072:2014 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Requirements and guidelines for
organizational life cycle assessment.

6
 1 – Goal and Scope 2 – Life Cycle Inventory 3 – Life Cycle Impact
Definition Analysis Assessment
• Reasons and intended Collection of primary and Calculation of potential impact
applications secondary data on elementary associated to the defined
• Functional unit and non-elementary flows impact categories from
• System boundary exchanged through the inventory data.
• Impact categories ecosphere and the
• Allocations technosphere: Optional grouping,
• Data requirements • input of energy, raw normalisation, and weighting.
• Assumptions and materials, and other
limitations. physical inputs
• output of products, co-
products, waste, emissions.

Data calculation relating to

unit processes, functional
unit, and allocations.

4 – Interpretation

Interpretation of LCIA results, hotspot analysis to find relevant processes and flows, sensitivity
analysis of modelling choices, recommendations. The interpretation may involve iteratively
reviewing the choices made in the previous stages of the LCA.

Figure 3. Standardised steps of LCA according to ISO 14040-44. Two-way arrows suggest
the iterative nature of an LCA. For the technical terms please refer to the section
“Nomenclature and Definitions”

An important effort towards the harmonisation of LCA has been made by the European
Commission Joint Research Centre with the development of the European International Life
Cycle Data System (ILCD). The aim of the ILCD was to provide in depth guidelines for the
application of LCA to the European context, both from a procedural and a scientific point
of view, defining specific rules for the many options left open by the ISO13, in order to
enhance scientific robustness, consistency, reproducibility, and comparability of LCA
studies. Based on this background, the European Commission adopted in 2013 the
Recommendation on the Product and Organisation Environmental Footprint14 capitalizing
on the methodological foundations of the ILCD, and advancing on scientific development
to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and
organisations, in support to the European market and policymaking.
The necessary limitations to be taken into account in LCA are several. The large amount of
data needed to cover all material and energy flows related to the studied systems brings
with it a certain degree of uncertainty, especially regarding the life cycle stages farthest
up or down in the supply chain. In addition, when performing LCA studies it is often
necessary to make assumptions about processes for which data are not available or to use
average data in terms of spatial and temporal resolution (e.g. national, annual), due to the
fact that very complex and often globalised value chains are analysed. Notwithstanding, in
order to ensure the reliability of results despite the many assumptions taken, the standards
regulating LCA define some rules to address these issues.

13 M. Wolf, R. Pant, K. Chomkhamsri, S. Sala, D. Pennington (2012): International Reference Life Cycle Data
System (ILCD) Handbook – Towards more sustainable production and consumption for a resource-efficient
Europe. JRC Reference Report, EUR 24982 EN. European Commission – Joint Research Centre. Luxembourg.
Publications Office of the European Union; 2012.
14 2013/179/EU: Commission Recommendation of 9 April 2013 on the use of common methods to measure and
communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations.

7
KEY ASPECTS OF THE PEF/OEF METHODS

The PEF and the OEF are designed to measure and communicate the life cycle
environmental performance of products and organisations. Together, the PEF and OEF,
constitute the EF methods, grounded on the LCA standard methodology. A calculation
based on the general PEF/OEF methods gives quantitative information on the impacts of
the product or organisation, taking into consideration the entire value chain (from the
extraction/growing of resources to the end of life stage), i.e. following a life cycle approach.
Following the framework standardised by ISO 14040-44, the EF is structured in similar
steps, yet providing further specifications necessary to achieve a higher degree of
robustness, consistency, reproducibility, and comparability (see Figure 4 for a simplified
overview).

1 – EF Goal and Scope

2 – EF Inventory Analysis 3 – EF Impact Assessment
Definition
Functional unit shall be Detailed modelling The mandatory steps are:
defined according to “what”, requirements and data (e.g. classification, characterisation,
“how much”, “how long”, “how electricity, transport, normalisation, and weighting.
well”. agricultural production). Results shall be calculated as
characterised, normalised and
In the system boundary cut- Data quality requirements weighted for each impact
off shall be avoided unless (semiquantitative) are category: and as a single
following specific rules. provided and shall be met by score based on the weighting
specific (primary) and generic factors provided.
A default set of 16 impact (secondary) data.
categories shall be
considered.(*) Allocation for recycling shall
be applied using the circular
footprint formula.

4 – Interpretation and Reporting

Interpretation shall include robustness assessment (completeness, sensitivity, consistency),

hotspot analysis (most relevant impact categories, life cycle stages, processes, flows), and
uncertainty (qualitative or quantitative using e.g. Monte Carlo simulation). Results shall be
reported for the total life cycle, and the total life cycle excluding the use stage.

5 – Verification and validation

Minimum requirements on reviewers and review panels are defined depending on the intended
application.
(*) Climate change, particular matter, ionising radiation, photochemical ozone formation, acidification, ozone depletion,
eutrophication (terrestrial, marine, freshwater), ecotoxicity (freshwater), human toxicity (cancer, non-cancer), land use,
water use, resource use (minerals and metals, fossils).

Figure 4. Steps of the EF method. The main additions to ISO 14040-44 are shown in the
white boxes and will be detailed further in this document

A practitioner conducting an EF study shall perform all the steps illustrated in Figure 4,
starting from the definition of the system boundary under study (step 1), the functional
unit (FU), i.e. the reference unit defining qualitative and quantitative aspects of the
function, and the reference flow, i.e. the amount of product or the output from the
product system needed to provide the defined function.
The PEF method requires to define the functional unit as:
 what: the function or service provided;
 how much: the extent of the function or service;

8
  how long: the duration or the lifetime;
 how well: the expected level of quality.
For example, concerning the analysis of a decorative paint, the functional unit is “to protect
and decorate 1 m2 of substrate for 50 years at a specified quality level (minimum 98%
opacity)”15.The reference flow is the amount of product needed to fulfil this defined function
and measured in kg of paint (Figure 5).
In the case of OEF, the organisation is the reference unit for the analysis. In the most
general sense, the overarching function of the organisation, for the purpose of calculating
the OEF, is the provision of goods and services over a specified reporting interval (e.g. one
year). The product portfolio (PP) refers to the amount and nature of goods and services
provided by the organisation over the reporting interval. For example, in the case of an
organisation producing decorative paints, the product portfolio could be the type and
amount of paintings produced in a year, with the detail of the function that each product
is able to grant. The OEF may be also limited to a clearly defined subset of the product
portfolio of the organisation (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Example of a functional unit and product portfolio

The PEF and OEF methods provide guidance for the collection and modelling of inventory
data (step 2), including allocation rules for recycled materials and data quality
requirements (see sections “Inventory Modelling and Circularity in EF” and “Data Collection
and Quality Requirements”). In step 3 all inventory flows are translated into impact
indicators for each mandatory impact category (see section “Impact Assessment in the EF
Methods”). Interpretation and reporting in step 4 shall include mandatory assessments as
illustrated in Figure 4. Step 5, verification and validation of the EF studies by a verifier is
mandatory whenever the EF study, or part of the information therein, is used for any type
of external communication. Verification means the conformity assessment to check
whether the EF study has been carried out in compliance with the PEF and OEF methods.
Validation means the confirmation that the information and the data in the EF study and
their communication are reliable, credible and correct.
An EF study following the general method shall follow the principles of relevance,
completeness, consistency, accuracy, and transparency. However, EF results for a
product/organisation as obtained from the general EF method are not directly comparable

15 Zampori and Pant, 2019, section 3.2.1.

9
to results of other products/organisations. This is due to the fact that specific products and
sectors can be characterised by peculiarities and uniqueness, and in the application of the
EF method and of LCA in general, some methodological and data choices can be left to the
user’s discretion. Therefore, the EF methods foresee the development of Product
Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCRs) and Organisation
Environmental Footprint Sector Rules (OEFSRs). The PEFCRs and OEFSRs as
described in the next section, establish category and sector requirements of EF studies
allowing comparability.

10
ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT CATEGORY AND SECTOR RULES:
PEFCRs AND OEFSRs

PEFCRs and OEFSRs are specific rules that complement the general PEF and OEF methods
by providing further specification at the level of a specific product category or sector. These
rules help to place the focus of the PEF/OEF studies on those aspects and parameters that
matter the most, and hence contribute to increased relevance16, reproducibility17 and
consistency18 of the results versus a study based on the general requirements of the EF
methods. The latter, although more prescriptive than LCA ISO standards 14040-44, may
leave the user a minor margin of discretion in their application. It is for this reason that
comparison and comparative assertion19 are only allowed if an EF study is based on specific
sector rules. Moreover, PEFCRs and OEFSRs reduce the effort as well and the cost of
performing an EF study.
The process of developing category and sector rules is generally very articulated and
implies several steps (see Figure 6). It is chaired by a Technical Secretariat representing
at least 51% of the EU market in terms of turnover in the EU20 and involves the main
stakeholders and experts for the specific product and sector21. The process to develop
OEFSRs is formally equivalent to that of PEFCRs.

Technical secretariat
established
No

Yes
Preparatory documents
EC decides if the
are sent to EC (DG ENV First RP/RO
work can start
EF Team)

First
Supporting studies First PEFCR/OEFSR draft
consultation

Second PEFCR/OEFSR Second

Second RP/RO consultation
draft

Final PEFCR/OEFSR Final PEFCR/OEFSR draft Panel review

approval

Figure 6. Process flow to create/revise a PEFCR or an OEFSR. RP: representative product;

RO: representative organisation

16 All methods used and data collected for the purpose of quantifying the PEF shall be as relevant to the study
as possible.
17 It should be possible to reproduce the results of the PEF/OEF studies, based on the transparency of input
data and assumptions.
18 Strict conformity to the EF method shall be observed in all steps of the PEF/OEF studies to ensure consistency
across the different part of the methodology.
19 Comparative assertion: environmental claim regarding the superiority or equivalence of one product versus
a competing product that performs the same function (ISO 14040).
20 Should the Technical Secretariat not reach 51% of the EU market, the Commission needs to actively
participate in the work of the Technical Secretariat.
21 The process as shown in Figure 6 is built to allow and facilitate building consensus among the different
stakeholders representing the EU market and the reference sector (e.g. technology).

11
A key step of the development of the PEFCR is the definition of the Representative
product (RP), i.e. the average product sold in the EU market that is representative for the
considered product group. The RP may be a real or a virtual product (i.e. non-existing
product calculated based on weighted average of sales in the European market and taking
in consideration all the existing technologies covered by the product category)22. The
environmental performance of the RP represents the benchmark, to which regards the
environmental performance of other products is compared. Similarly to PEFCR, a
Representative Organisation (RO) is set in the OEFSR23, whereas a benchmark
organization is not defined24 (Figure 7).

Representative
organisation

Benchmark
environmental
performance

Representative
product

Product A Product B Product C

Product Product
portfolio portfolio

Figure 7.Representative product and benchmark, and representative organization

(average based on technology and market share)

Twenty-one PEFCRs/OEFSRs have been developed in the pilot phase (see section “Relevant
Documents”) and more are under development. The updated list is available on the
European Commission web site.

22 For instance, a real product can be chosen when produced with one single technology for 100% of the market.
A virtual product can be developed attributing different production technologies to the functional unit (e.g. 1
kg of product) in proportion to their respective market share (e.g. 200 g related to technology A, 350 g to
technology B, 450 g to technology C).
23 The RO is a real or virtual organization calculated based on average European market characteristics of all
existing technologies, production processes, organisation types in the sector.
24 The OEFSRs developed so far evaluated the possibility to establish a benchmark, but it was found that this
was neither possible nor meaningful at this stage. However, the development of benchmark for an OEFSR is
not excluded a-priori.

12
INVENTORY MODELLING AND CIRCULARITY IN EF

An inventory of all input and output, elementary (resources, emissions) and non-
elementary (energy, waste, materials) flows shall be compiled for all processes included in
the value chain. All flows have to be modelled until the elementary flow level to calculate
the associated impact on the life cycle of the product or organization in scope (e.g. from
the output waste, the specific air, water and soil emissions generated by the treatment
processes are determined).
The mandatory life cycle stages included in an EF study are:
 Raw material acquisition and pre-processing: e.g., extraction of resources, pre-
processing of all materials (including recycled materials), agriculture, forestry,
packaging production, and transportation associated with these activities.
 Manufacturing: all processes taking place from the entry to the exit gate of the
production facility (e.g., chemical processing, manufacturing, assembly).
 Distribution: transport and storage of the finished product(s), including the
refrigeration and warehouse activities consumptions (e.g., energy).
 Use stage: product(s) use for the defined function and lifetime, including all
necessary inputs (e.g., energy, maintenance materials, coolant).
 End of life: all activities occurring from the moment the product(s) cease to perform
its function and is disposed or recycled. This includes e.g., collection and transport,
dismantling, sorting, processing into recycled material, landfill, incineration.
For certain products (i.e. intermediate), a limited number of life cycle stages shall be
considered (i.e. excluding the use and end-of-life)25.
One crucial aspect of an inventory analysis in LCA studies is to accurately and consistently
model waste and recycled materials, and to allocate environmental burdens and credits to
users and producers of such flows. The PEF and OEF methods provide an approach that
has been developed through a dedicated consensus-building process for this specific
purpose: the Circular Footprint Formula (CFF). All waste flows produced during the
manufacturing, distribution, use, and end of life stage shall be modelled according to this
formula, as well as all recycled or recyclable material entering or leaving the system (i.e.
recycled material used in the manufacturing stage and recycling of material from the
product’s end of life). The CFF is built up on three parts, namely a material, an energy,
and a disposal formula (Figure 8 and Table 1. Parameters of the Circular Footprint
Formula). Summing up their results, gives the overall amount of emissions and resources
that belong to the system’s inventory due to recycling, disposal, and energy recovery
processes.
The material part of the formula applies to all stages of the value chain where recycled
materials substitute virgin raw materials26. The formula addresses the need of a consistent
method to allocate environmental burdens (and credits) to suppliers and users of recycled
material and it is based on market characteristics. The underlying rationale of the formula
is that when there is low offer and high demand of recyclable material, more credits are
attributed to recyclable material production (i.e. manufacturers that enable recycling of
materials at the end of life benefit from lower environmental burdens). On the contrary,
when there is high availability and low demand, more credits are given to recycled material
users. The energy part of the formula relates to the quantity of material that is used for
energy recovery at the end of life. In this case, credits are attributed to energy recovery,

25 Intermediate products are those for which all stages of the life cycle are considered from the extraction of
resources through the production process to the factory gate (cradle-to-gate).
26 i.e. at each point of substitution, where the emissions of virgin and recycled material production are quantified
and allocated to the corresponding percentage of virgin and recycled material.

13
corresponding to the avoided emissions and resource use of the substituted energy
sources. Finally, the disposal part of the formula calculates emissions and resource use
related to the disposal of all materials that are not recycled or used for energy recovery.

Circular Footprint Formula = Material + Energy + Disposal

Product manufacturing End of Life Burdens of Burdens of

recycling substituded

OUT
outgoing
material
– virgin
material
✕ 1–A

Material Material
Burdens of
virgin
material
Burdens of
materials
Material
disposal

Disposal
Burdens of Burdens of
IN
recycled substituded
A ✕ ingoing
material
– virgin
material Burdens of
Burdens of
substituted
Material Material
energy
recovery
– energy
sources

Energy Energy

Allocation factor of burdens and credits, based on supply and demand of recycled material
A
Example:
A=0.2. Low offer of recyclable materials and high demand. Focus on recyclability at end of life
A=0.8. High offer of recyclable materials and low demand. Focus on recycled content
A=0.5. Equilibrium between offer and demand. Focus both on recyclability at end of life and recycled content

Figure 8. Example on a fictive product, showing the basic elements included in the circular
footprint formula

Table 1. Parameters of the Circular Footprint Formula

CFF formula Parameters

Material Proportion of recycled material entering the system (i.e. recycled content)
Proportion of material that will be recycled in a subsequent system
Emissions and resource use to produce virgin and recycled material
Emissions and resource use for the recycling processes
Quality ratio of recycled and recyclable material
Quality of the substituted virgin material
Energy Proportion of material used for energy recovery at the end of life
Lower heating value
Efficiency of energy recovery
Emissions and resource use for energy recovery
Emissions and resource use of substituted energy sources

Disposal Emissions and resource use of disposed material

Recycled content values shall be specific to the supply chain or the application. To ensure
transparency in the calculation of recyclable materials and recycling output rate,
recyclability shall be evaluated and declared, based on company or industry data. In
addition, including a quality parameter allows capturing multiple recycling loops, including
downcycling (i.e. obtaining material of lower quality than the original). Default, sector-
specific values of the CFF parameters are provided in a document (the “Annex C”, see
section “Datasets”),27 that can be used when company-specific values are not mandatory
and company-specific data are not available.

27 https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/LCDN/developerEF.xhtml.

14
DATA COLLECTION AND QUALITY REQUIREMENTS

All activities run by a company carrying out a PEF or an OEF require collecting company-
specific data for all known inputs and outputs of the processes involved. The data can be
for instance on energy consumption, water consumption, land use, materials, emissions
(air, soil, water), waste, products and co-products. The datasets created shall be EF-
compliant28 (see section “Datasets”). Primary data (company and site-specific) shall be
collected for foreground processes (i.e. under direct control of the organisation) and, if
possible, for background processes (i.e. not under direct control of the organisation). The
PEF/OEF method provides a Data Needs Matrix (DNM) to evaluate the data requirements
of all processes modelled in the system according to the level of influence the company
has on the process (i.e. the process is run by the company, the process is not run by the
company but company-specific data are available or the process is not run by the company
and company-specific data are not available).
Secondary data (from e.g. sector-specific databases or literature) shall also be EF-
compliant and may be used to model processes that are included in the system boundary
for which primary data are not available (e.g. not run by the company). In lack of a
PEFCR/OEFSR, secondary data may be used for background processes only.
Data quality rating is calculated for primary data when EF-compliant datasets are
developed, and for secondary data when they are applied to an EF study. Data quality
requirements are defined by the EF method (Table 2). PEFCRs and OEFSRs further specify
the processes for which primary data are required and the data quality requirements of
secondary data, following a materiality principle (i.e. considering their relevance within the
EF profile and the effort needed in data collection). Each PEFCR and OEFSR provides also
requirements on the secondary datasets to be used to carry out PEF and OEF studies.

Table 2. Data quality requirements29

Minimum requirements Completeness

Methodological appropriateness and consistency

Data quality criteria (scored)* Technological representativeness

Geographical representativeness
Time-related representativeness
Precision
Documentation Compliant with the EF specific format (see section “Datasets” of this
document)
Nomenclature Compliant with the EF specific nomenclature (see section “Datasets”
of this document)
Review Review by qualified reviewer
Separate review report
* The “representativeness” characterises to what degree the processes and products selected are depicting the
system, while the precision indicates the way the data is derived and related level of uncertainty

The four data quality criteria in Table 2 are scored from 1 to 5, corresponding to “excellent”,
“very good”, “good”, “fair”, and “poor” quality level. The average value determines the
overall data quality. EF-compliant datasets developed from company-specific data shall be
of excellent quality ( 1.5), whether they relate to processes run by the company or not.

28 Datasets following the required EF structure, nomenclature, and modelling rules which can be used to perform
a PEF/OEF study. For further information on data please refer also to the section “Datasets” and to the
following document: Fazio S., Zampori L, De Schryver A, Kusche O, Thellier L, Diaconu E. Guide for EF
compliant data sets, Version 2.0 Luxembourg, 2020, ISBN 978-92-76-17951-1 (online), doi:10.2760/537292
(online).
29 Zampori and Pant, 2019, section 4.6.5.

15
Secondary data from EF-compliant datasets to be applied on processes not run by the
company shall be of at least good quality ( 3.0).
All new datasets created when conducting a PEF or an OEF study shall be EF-compliant. If
secondary datasets are used, they shall be EF-compliant. If EF-compliant datasets are not
available, proxies can be used under specific circumstances.30
The EF-compliant datasets are covered by a royalty-free right of use, exclusively in
developing PEF and OEF studies in compliance with any of the PEFCRs and OEFSRs31. Data
and information on nodes (i.e. data repositories managed by different data providers in
the EF data network) and accessibility are available on the EF data network web site.

30 Zampori and Pant, 2019, section 4.6.2.

31 The European Commission is dealing with the cost of such royalty-free rights.

16
IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN THE EF METHODS

The purpose of life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) is to group and aggregate the
information collected from the life cycle inventory of a product (or organisation) and to
assess their respective contributions to each EF impact category. EF impact categories are
able to cover a broad range of relevant environmental issues following the general
requirements of comprehensiveness of PEF and OEF studies. Table 3 illustrates the impact
categories considered in PEF/OEF and the indicators used to assess them. Overtime, the
set of models has been updated to reflect the best available practices to address each
impact category. The updating has been based on the discussions and agreements
achieved within the working groups of the Environmental Footprint and in the UNEP Life
Cycle Initiative32. An evolution of the selected LCIA models, starting from those in 2013
recommendations up to 2021, is available on the EF resources web site.

Table 3. Impact categories included in PEF/OEF and details of the methods and indicators
used to assess them

Impact category Impact category Indicator Description

(unit of measure)

Radiative forcing as global Increase in the average global

Climate change,
warming potential – GWP100 (kg temperature resulting from greenhouse
total
CO2 eq) gas emissions (GHG)

Depletion of the stratospheric ozone

Ozone Depletion Potential – ODP
Ozone depletion layer protecting from hazardous
(kg CFC-11 eq)
ultraviolet radiation

Human toxicity, Comparative Toxic Unit for

cancer humans (CTUh) Impact on human health caused by
absorbing substances through the air,
water, and soil. Direct effects of
Human toxicity, Comparative Toxic Unit for products on humans are not measured
non-cancer humans (CTUh)

Impact on human health caused by

Particulate Impact on human health (disease particulate matter emissions and its
matter incidence) precursors (e.g. sulfur and nitrogen
oxides)

Ionising
Human exposure efficiency Impact of exposure to ionising radiations
radiation, human
relative to U-235 (kBq U-235 eq) on human health
health

Photochemical Potential of harmful tropospheric ozone

Tropospheric ozone concentration
ozone formation, formation (“summer smog”) from air
increase (kg NMVOC eq)
human health emissions

Acidification from air, water, and soil

emissions (primarily sulfur compounds)
Accumulated Exceedance – AE
Acidification mainly due to combustion processes in
(mol H+ eq)
electricity generation, heating, and
transport

32 https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org. The recommendations of the UNEP Life Cycle Initiative and those in the
European EF are generally aligned, but some differences may exist.

17
 Eutrophication, Accumulated Exceedance – AE
terrestrial (mol N eq)

Eutrophication and potential impact on

Fraction of nutrients reaching
Eutrophication, ecosystems caused by nitrogen and
freshwater end compartment (kg
freshwater phosphorous emissions mainly due to
P eq)
fertilizers, combustion, sewage systems

Fraction of nutrients reaching

Eutrophication,
marine end compartment (kg N
marine
eq)

Ecotoxicity, Comparative Toxic Unit for Impact of toxic substances on

freshwater ecosystems (CTUe) freshwater ecosystems

Soil quality index, representing

Transformation and use of land for
the aggregated impact of land
agriculture, roads, housing, mining or
use on: Biotic production; Erosion
Land use other purposes. The impact can include
resistance; Mechanical filtration;
loss of species, organic matter, soil,
Groundwater replenishment
filtration capacity, permeability
(Dimensionless – pt)

Depletion of available water depending

Weighted user deprivation on local water scarcity and water needs
Water use
potential (m3 world eq) for human activities and ecosystem
integrity

Resource use,
Abiotic resource depletion – ADP
minerals and
ultimate reserves (kg Sb eq)
metals
Depletion of non-renewable resources
and deprivation for future generations
Resource use, Abiotic resource depletion, fossil
fossils fuels – ADP-fossil (MJ)

Classification implies assigning all input and output flows collected in the inventory to the
relevant impact categories. For example, during the classification phase, all inputs and
outputs that result in greenhouse gas emissions are assigned to the climate change
category (see Figure 9). In some cases, an input or output may contribute to more than
one EF impact category.
Characterisation is the process to model environmental mechanisms linking the
environmental pressures represented by inventory data (i.e. inputs of resources or
emissions associated with the product life cycle) to each EF impact category, and to
quantify the impact magnitude. Each impact category hence refers to a stand-alone
characterisation model attributing characterisation factors to the relevant flows in the
inventory (Figure 9). For example, the climate change impact category is captured by a
global warming potential indicator (GWP), which considers the radiative forcing of different
substances (e.g. carbon dioxide, methane, dinitrogen oxide, etc.) emitted to air during the
life cycle stages. The impact is calculated multiplying the physical quantities associated to
the flows in the inventory by the characterisation factors provided by the models.

18
 EF Impact Assessment

EF Inventory Analysis Classification Characterisation Normalisation

CH4, N2O, CO2, … Climate change LCI x CFs = kg CO2 eq kg CO2 eq / 8095.5 kg CO2 eq/person

SO2, NH3, … Acidification LCI x CFs = mol H+ eq mol H+ eq / 55.6 mol H+ eq/person

Organic chemicals, metals, … Ecotoxicity LCI x CFs = CTUe CTUe / 42683.2 CTUe/person

Surface water, groundwater, … Water use LCI x CFs = m3 eq m3 eq / 11468.7 m3 eq/person

… … … …

Aggregation Weighting

Climate change + acidification + Climate change x 21.06 %

ecotoxicity + water use + … = Acidification x 6.20 %

Ecotoxicity x 1.92 %
EF weighted single score (points)
Water use x 8.51 %

Figure 9. Steps of the impact assessment phase. LCI: Life Cycle Inventory; CFs:
characterisation factors. The numerical normalisation and weighting factors reported in the
figure are available here

Two other key steps in the impact assessment are normalization and weighting. These
steps are mandatory for PEF/OEF, whereas these are optional for ISO 14040 series.
The environmental impact scores of life cycle assessments are often presented in units that
are difficult to grasp. Normalisation is the calculation of the magnitude of the category
indicator results relatively to a reference system. The aim of normalisation is to understand
better the relative contribution of the studied system to the reference system for each
indicator result, and which impact categories are more critical for the product system under
study. Some examples of reference values are: the per capita impacts of an average person
in a given area or the absolute impacts linked to the activities taking place in the region
considered (e.g. the EU or worldwide) over one year. Normalised results are dimensionless.
For example, the normalised value of 0.5 for GWP of a certain product would mean that
this is responsible of half of the GWP emitted by an average person per year. The updated
list of normalisation factors for the PEF/OEF methods is available here. Methodological
details are available here. The normalisation set used in the EF was developed considering
statistical data on emissions and resources used globally over one year per capita.
Weighting is the process of converting normalised results of the different impact
categories by using numerical factors based on the expressed relative importance of the
impact categories considered. It may include aggregation of the weighted indicator results.
A study for defining the weighting factors for the 16 EF impact categories was conducted
by JRC in 2018 based on input from environmental experts and stakeholders. The results
of the study are available in a JRC technical report. The updated list of weighting factors
for the PEF/OEF methods is available here. Any weighting includes the use of value choices
and cannot be based on natural science alone.
Interpretation of EF results follows the life cycle impact assessment stage. At this point
results can be used for hotspot analysis to identify the most relevant impact categories,
life cycle stages, processes, and elementary flows33. EF results allow optimising
environmental performances of products (e.g. ecodesign) and organisations. The single
score can serve for marketing purposes and, when calculated in accordance with
PEFCRs/OEFSRs, can be used for comparison and comparative assertions.

33 Zampori and Pant, 2019, section 6.

19
RELEVANT DOCUMENTS

Suggestions for updating the

Product Environmental Footprint
(PEF) method
The PEF method is available here
Zampori L, Pant R

2019

This JRC technical report is a working document and does not modify Recommendation
2013/179/EU on the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle
environmental performance of products and organisations
EUR 29682 EN

Existing PEFCRs are reported below. The whole documentation is available here.
Beer Dairy Household liquid Decorative paints
laundry detergents

Hot and cold water Intermediate paper Feed for food pro- IT equipment
supply pipe systems product ducing animals

Leather Metal sheets Packed water Pasta

Pet Food Photovoltaic elec- Rechargeable bat- T-shirt

tricity production teries

Thermal insulation Uninterrupted Power Wine PEFCRs under devel-

Supply opment

20
 Suggestions for updating the
Organisation Environmental
Footprint (OEF) method
The OEF method is available here.
Zampori L, Pant R

2019

This JRC technical report is a working document and does not modify Recommendation
2013/179/EU on the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle
environmental performance of products and organisations
EUR 29681 EN

Existing OEFSRs are reported below. The whole documentation is available here.
Copper production Retail

All the other supporting documents including updates of the EF impact assessment method
are available on the European Platform on LCA web site.

21
DATASETS

EF-compliant datasets
Any requirements on how to calculate a PEF or OEF would remain difficult to implement on
the ground, if no data can be generated and provided that complies with the EF method
requirements. Data related harmonisation has to take place to ensure data is understood
and used in a consistent and correct manner.
EF-compliant datasets follow the rules described in the dedicated guidelines. The following
figure describes the main elements of an EF-compliant dataset. It includes also metadata
(i.e. additional information attached to describe the data).

The Circular Footprint Formula – Annex C

As described in the section “Inventory modelling

and circularity in EF” default values for the CFF
are reported in the excel file (Annex C) available
here.

Where to find EF data?

In the EF framework, dataset repositories are How to access datasets

provided and available here.

22
EXAMPLES OF EF RESULTS COMMUNICATION

The examples reported in this section are built on real case studies34. Note that
comparisons, comparative assertions, and benchmarking against a representative product
are not possible without a PEFCR or OEFSR.
PEFCR-based factsheet

PEF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT

LAUNDRY LIQUID Except for the end of life our laundry liquid performs
DETERGENT better than the representative product at all lifecycle
stage.
SCORING METHOD *Results in µpt/dose
Our detergent Representative
product
This environmental product declaration is Raw materials 5.5 8.1
based on the European Product Environmental
Manufacturing 0.6 2.0
Footprint method (PEF). PEF category rule
PEF = (PEFCR) for the laundry liquid detergents was Packaging 0.7 0.5
designed by a committee of industry experts
13.3 µpt and validated by a steering committee chaired
Distribution 0.4 1.2
End of life 6.1 6.1
by the EC.
(30% better of Total 13.3 17.9
the The PEF and PEFCR allow calculating the The use phase accounts for 26.65 µpt/dose, in line with
representative environmental performance of laundry liquid the representative product.
product) detergents according to the functional unit.
The single score in micropoints (µpt) is the For the detailed results, please contact
result of characterisation, normalisation, [email protected]
weighting and aggregation of all environmental
indicators at each stages of the product ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS
lifecycle. The PEF score is compared with the
score of a representative laundry liquid In a detailed evaluation, Climate change, Resource use
detergent with average European (fossils) and Particulate matter are the most relevant
characteristics (18 µpt/dose). The closer this impact indicatos.
score is to zero, the less impact it has on the
Climate Particulate Resource
environment.
change matter use (fossils)
Functional unit: 1 dose of product per 1
wash. 39% 6% 21%

Non PEFCR-based factsheet

34 Numbers and figures reported may have been modified for the explanatory purposes of this report.

23
KEY STEPS IN A PEF/OEF STUDY DEVELOPMENT

This section displays the key steps of an EF study development. The list is not
exhaustive and the purpose is to orientate the reader in understanding the overall EF
method and its supporting documents. Links to the category rules and the method’s
guide are available by clicking on the book icons. For simplicity, the links to the
study phases refer to the PEF method. For the OEF please refer to the specific
guidelines.

The company decides to Check for internal resources,

carry out a PEF or an OEF external experts, training

Additional elements covered

by the PEFCR/OEFSR

YES
Check for existing Carry out a PEF/OEF based
PEFCR/OEFSR on PEFCR/OEFSR

NO

Goal definition Scope definition

Intended application(s) Functional unit and reference
Carry out a PEF/OEF based Reasons flow
on the general PEF/OEF Target audience System boundary
method (no PEFCR/OEFSR) Commissioner EF impact categories
Identity of the verifier Additional information
Assumptions/limitations

Life cycle impact assessment Life cycle inventory

Classification Definition of data needs and
Characterisation quality requirements
Normalisation Primary and secondary data
Weighting collection

Interpretation
Completeness check
Sensitivity check
Consistency check Reporting
Hotspot analysis (impact
categories, life cycle stages,
processes, elementary flows)

Verification and validation

PEF/OEF study
PEF/OEF report
Communication vehicles

24
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

 Who can I contact if I have questions on PEF and OEF?

The EF helpdesk is available for any technical information, the contact details are at The
Environmental Footprint transition phase - Environment - European Commission
(europa.eu). For questions on the development of PEF and OEF please write to: env-
[email protected]. For specific questions on EF datasets, you can contact
the data provider directly. For information about a specific PEFCR or OEFSR you can contact
the corresponding Technical Secretariat. Contact details are reported in the PEFCR and
OEFSR documents. For PEFCRs and OEFSRs under development, contacts are available on
the website.

 What kind of benefits can organisations draw from EF?

Increased number of EU policies are making reference and requirements based on EF
methods. Performing an EF study can support alignment and compliance with these
policies, including removing potential obstacles to cross-border trading. An internal use of
the EF allows identifying the most relevant activities and materials to improve
environmental performance, identify environmental risks along the value chain, optimize
production processes, and select suppliers based on their environmental profile (“green
supply chain”). Moreover, a growing number of consumers are sensitive to environmental
issues when taking their customer loyalty decisions. The EF helps building up profile and
reputation, and protecting/increasing market share. Having one method, unnecessary
costs are avoided and competition between organisations is based on common rules
reducing unfair practices and greenwashing. Finally, banks and finance institutions are
increasingly linking risk profile to environmental profile, making EF studies useful to
support sustainable investments.

 Can the EF be used to model future product scenarios?

The EF method requires to model the actual situation of the market. Therefore, future
projections (e.g. for efficiency improvements) shall not be part of the EF calculations.
Standard LCA studies on prospective scenarios aligned with the EF can be done, but
compliance with the EF method shall not be stated.

 What should be the approach to conduct a PEF or OEF study without an

existing PEFCR or OEFSR?
A PEF and an OEF study can be carried out also when specific category and sector rules
have not been defined for the product or the industrial sector in scope. In this case, the
version in force of the PEF and OEF methods shall be used.

 Is it mandatory to follow the requirements set out by PEFCRs and OEFSRs?

When available, a PEFCR or an OEFSR shall be used, in particular when results are used
for public communications.

 When/how new PEFCRs and OEFSRs can be developed?

So far, the European Commission invited interested industries/organisations to apply for
the development of new PEFCRs and OEFSRs. All calls are published on DG ENV website.
The list of available PEFCRs and OEFSRs is updated once new documents are developed.

25
  Where can I find training material on the PEF and OEF?
Trainings are available at the following link:
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/ef_trainings.htm

 Is the EF method aligned with the recommendations of the UN Life Cycle

Initiative?
The European Commission is a funding partner of the Life Cycle Initiative and contributes
to consensus building and scientific development. The general recommendations and the
methods provided in the context of the Life Cycle Initiative and the European
Environmental Footprint are in general aligned. However, some differences may exist. The
EF provides additional methodological and procedural guidance to improve harmonization,
robustness, consistency, and comparability of results. Where operational improvements
are proposed by the Life Cycle Initiative, these can be evaluated and included in periodic
updates of the EF method.

 Are PEF and OEF studies verified?

The verification and validation of PEF and OEF studies is mandatory whenever the PEF
study, or part of the information therein, is used for any type of external communication.
The verification may take place at the end of the PEF study or in parallel. Further
information on verification and validation is available in the most recent guidance
documents, including the requirements for the verifiers.

 Are EF datasets available for free?

The access to EF-compliant datasets is granted for free by data providers only to users
developing PEF and OEF studies within existing PEFCRs and OEFSRs. For any other use,
the access follows the license policy of the data provider. The data in the nodes owned by
the European Commission are always free to use.

 What is the Circular Footprint Formula for?

The CFF is meant to quantify the inventory of resources used and emissions associated of
recycled content, recyclability, disposal, and energy recovery.

 Where can I find default values for the Circular Footprint Formula param-
eters?
Default values are available under Annex C at the following link:
https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/LCDN/developerEF.xhtml
Guidance on the end-of-life modelling of specific representative products is also available
in the PEFCRs.

 How is the transport modelled in PEF/OEF?

Modelling requirements, allocation rules, and default scenarios are available in section
4.4.3 of the PEF and OEF methods at the following links:
https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/suggestions-updating-product-environmental-
footprint-pef-method

26
https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/suggestions-updating-organisation-
environmental-footprint-oef-method
The transport datasets give the possibility to adjust the payload and utilization, including
the empty return rate.

 What allocation rules should be used in the EF of multi-functional systems?

Allocation rules are set out by the most recent guidelines and follow ISO 14044. The
decision hierarchy determines that preference is given in descending order to subdivision
and system expansion, allocation based on relevant underlying physical relationships (e.g.
mass), allocation based on other relationships (e.g. economic). Specific allocation rules
can be defined in a PEFCR or OEFSR that shall be followed when conducting a PEF/OEF in
compliance with the PEFCR/OEFSR.

 How can a single score from the various impact categories be derived?
Details on the methodology and weighting factors can be found on the most updated
version of the EF guidelines and at the following link:
https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/EFtransition.html

 What would then be the unit of the EF overall single score?

The overall single score is dimensionless, and measured in “points”, multiple (e.g. kilo-
points) or sub-multiples (e.g. micro-points). Specific information is available on the
normalisation and weighting reference documents.

For more information concerning the status of the EF pilot and transition phases please
visit DG ENV website.

27
DEFINITIONS

Allocation: partitioning the input or output flows of a process or a product system between
the product system under study and one or more other product systems.
Background processes: those processes that are operated as part of the system but that
are not under direct control or decisive influence of the producer of the good (or operator
of the service, or user of the good).
Benchmark: in the context of PEF, the term ‘benchmark’ refers to the average
environmental performance of the representative product sold in the EU market.
Characterisation: calculation of the contribution of each classified elementary flow to an
impact category. The characterisation is done by means of characterisation factors specific
for a certain flow within the impact category considered.
Characterisation factor: factor derived from a characterisation model which is used to
convert an inventory flow to the unit of the impact category indicator.
Circular Footprint Formula (CFF): formula used to allocate to the system under study
the burdens of ingoing virgin and recycled material, outgoing recyclable material, disposal,
and energy recovery.
Circularity: contribution of a system to the circular economy, which embraces a concept
of economic growth decoupled from resource use through reduction, reuse, and recycling.
Classification: assigning the elementary flows to one or more impact categories according
to their potential to contribute to them.
Completeness analysis: verifying whether the information on life cycle stages and
impacts is sufficient to reach conclusions according to the goal and scope of the study.
Consistency analysis: verifying whether assumptions, methods, and data are
consistently applied throughout the study and are in accordance with the defined goal and
scope
Cut-off: omission of not relevant life cycle stages, processes, and elementary flows from
the system. The EF processes and elementary flows that (cumulatively) account for less
than 3.0% of the material and energy flow may be excluded, as well as the environmental
impact for each impact category may be excluded from PEF study. The processes subject
to cut-off shall be made explicit and justified.
Ecosphere: the biosphere of the Earth and the interaction between living and non-living
components.
EF-compliant dataset: Dataset developed in compliance with the EF requirements
provided at https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/permalink/Guide_EF_DATA.pdf.
Elementary flow: in the LCI, an elementary flow is the material or energy entering the
system being studied that has been drawn from the environment without previous human
transformation, or material or energy leaving the system being studied that is released
into the environment without subsequent human transformation. Elementary flows include,
for example, resources taken from nature or emissions into air, water, soil.
Environmental Footprint (EF): comprehensive assessment of environmental impacts
over the life cycle of products and organisations. It includes the Product Environmental
Footprint (PEF) and Organisation Environmental Footprint (OEF) methods.
Foreground processes: those processes of the system that are regarding their selection
or mode of operation directly affected by decisions analysed in the study. The foreground
processes are hence those that are under direct control of the producer of the good or
operator of the service or user of the good or where he has decisive influence.

28
Functional unit: the reference unit defining qualitative and quantitative aspects of the
function, to be used as a reference unit for an EF study.
Grouping: sorting and ranking of impact categories.
Hotspot analysis: analysis of the main contributing life cycle stages, processes, and flows
to the impacts of the life cycle of a product, service or organisation.
Impact category: class representing environmental issues of concern to which life cycle
inventory analysis results may be assigned.
Life cycle Assessment (LCA): compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the
potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle.
Life cycle environmental performance: quantified measurement of the potential
environmental performance taking all relevant life cycle stages of a product or organisation
into account, from a supply chain perspective.
Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA): phase of life cycle assessment aimed at
understanding and evaluating the magnitude and significance of the potential
environmental impacts for a product system throughout the life cycle of the product.
Life cycle inventory (LCI): phase of the LCA involving the compilation and quantification
of inputs and outputs for a product throughout its life cycle.
Non-elementary flow: flows exchanged within the technosphere (e.g. electricity, waste).
Normalisation: calculation of the magnitude of the category indicator results relatively to
a reference system. Normalisation transforms an indicator result by dividing it by a selected
reference value.
Organisation Environmental Footprint (OEF): method to measure and communicate
the potential life cycle environmental impact of an organisation or result of an OEF study
based on the OEF method.
Organisation Environmental Footprint Sector Rules (OEFSRs): sector-specific, rules
that complement general methodological guidance for OEF studies by providing further
specification at the level of a specific sector.
Primary data: company and site-specific data in a life cycle inventory.
Product Environmental Footprint (PEF): method to measure and communicate the
potential life cycle environmental impact of a product or result of a PEF study based on the
PEF method.
Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCRs): product category
specific rules that complement general methodological guidance for PEF studies by
providing further specification at the level of a specific product category.
Product portfolio: a set of products or services provided to the market by an
organization.
Reference flow: the amount of product or the output from the product system needed to
provide the defined function.
Representative organisation (RO): reference, real or virtual (non-existing)
organisation for which the OEF is calculated. The virtual RO should be calculated based on
average European market sales-weighted characteristics of all existing
technologies/production processes/organisation types covered by the sector or sub-sector.
Other weighting sets may be used, if justified.
Representative product (RP): reference, real or virtual (non-existing) product for which
the PEF is calculated. The virtual RP should be calculated based on average European
market sales-weighted characteristics of all existing technologies/materials covered by the
product category or sub-category. Other weighting sets may be used, if justified, for

29
example weighted average based on mass (ton of material) or weighted average based on
product units (pieces).
Secondary data: data not from a specific process within the supply-chain of the company
performing an EF study. This refers to data that is not directly collected, measured, or
estimated by the company, but sourced from a third-party database or other sources (e.g.
industry average data, literature studies, engineering studies and patents), and may also
be based on financial data, and contain proxy data, and other generic data.
Sensitivity analysis: estimation of the effects of the choices made regarding methods
and data used.
System boundary: defines the life cycle stages and processes included in the system
evaluated.
Technosphere: the sphere of human technological activity or the technologically modified
environment.
Unit process: the smallest element of a system for which input and output inventory data
are quantified.
Weighting: Weighting is a step that supports the interpretation and communication of the
results of the analysis. Results are multiplied by a set of weighting factors, which reflect
the expressed relative importance of the impact categories considered. Weighted EF results
may be directly compared across impact categories, and also summed across impact
categories to obtain a single overall score. Weighting includes the use of value choices and
cannot be based on natural science alone.

30
 doi:XX.XXXX/XXXXXX
31 ISBN XXX-XX-XX-XXXXX-X