Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0 - (c) 2011
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Global Protocol on Packaging
Sustainability 2.0
(c) 2011
A global project by4 Guidance for Use – Introduction 6
A Common Language 6
Range of Business Decisions 7
Choice of Indicators for Business Decisions 8
Relevance and Significance 8
Life-Cycle Phases 8
Parts of Business 8
Role in Decision-Making 9
Level at which Indicator is Utilized 9
Alignment with other Objectives and Processes 9
Role in Communication 10
Internal vs. External Communication 10
Availability of Data 11
Physical Property Data 11
Data for Driving Selected Indicator 11
Linkages between Different Indicators 11
Types of Packaging 13
Functional Unit, Functional Equivalence and Reference Flow 14
Choosing an Appropriate Functional Unit 14
The Functional Unit in Packaging 15
Primary & Secondary Functions and Functional Equivalence in Packaging 15
Levels of Significance 16
Systematic Use of Life Cycle Assessment in Product Development
Guidance on Tools 17
Life Cycle Assessment 17
Tools and Expertise 18
Ecodesign Tools 19
The Future of LCA in the FMCG Sector 20
GPPS Indicator and Metric Overview 21
Environmental – Attribute Indicators / Metrics 22
Introduction 22
Packaging Weight and Optimization 23
Packaging to Product Weight Ratio 24
Material Waste 24
Recycled Content 25
Renewable Content 26Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Table of contents
27 Chain of Custody 5
27 Assessment and Minimization of Substances Hazardous to the Environment
28 Production Sites Located in Areas with Conditions of Water Stress or Scarcity
28 Packaging Reuse Rate
29 Packaging Recovery Rate
30 Cube Utilization
34 Environmental – Life Cycle Indicators / Metrics
34 Introduction to Life Cycle Assessment
38 Impact on Climate / Atmosphere
38 Global Warming Potential (GWP)
40 Ozone Depletion
42 Impact on Human Health
42 Toxicity, Cancer
43 Toxicity, Non-Cancer
44 Particulate Respiratory Effects
45 Ionizing Radiation
47 Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP)
49 Impact on Ecosphere
49 Acidification Potential
51 Aquatic Eutrophication
52 Freshwater Ecotoxicity Potential
54 Impact on Resource Base
54 Non-Renewable Resource Depletion
57 Indicators from Inventory Data
57 Introduction
57 Cumulative Energy Demand (CED)
59 Freshwater Consumption
62 Land Use
68 Economic – Indicators / Metrics
68 Introduction
68 Total Cost of Packaging
69 Packaged Product Wastage
70 Social – Indicators / Metrics
70 Introduction
70 Packaged Product Shelf Life
70 Community Investment
71 Corporate Performance Attributes
71 Instructions
73 Annex 1: Cube Utilization - Protocols for Product Volume (PV)6 Guidance for Use – Introduction
A Common Language
The Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainabil- Economic and social metrics
ity was created to provide the consumer goods A complete sustainability assessment should
and packaging industries with a much needed take into account economic, social and environ-
common language with which to discuss and mental aspects. Any business decision almost
assess the relative sustainability of packaging. invariably includes an economic analysis, and
That common language consists of a frame- environmental indicators are taken into ac-
work and a measurement system. The metrics count to an increasing extent, whereas social
presented in this report deliver the measure- indicators are generally considered at a corpo-
ment system, which, alongside the framework, rate level and are slowly being introduced as
offer a standardised way to address a range of considerations at product level. The metrics pro-
business questions about packaging sustain- posed here include some, but not a full range
ability, either within a company or between of economic indicators. This is not because they
business partners. are considered irrelevant, but because economic
analysis tools already exist and are already rou-
You could consider these metrics to be the
tinely used. We encourage companies to follow
words in the language and this document as
prevailing corporate social responsibility guide-
the dictionary. The framework provides the
lines and we have added two packaging-related
context for the language.
social metrics for consideration. Social indicators
No need to use every metric for packaging as well as social life cycle assess-
Just as it is not necessary to use every word in ment (S-LCA)1 approaches are still in the early
the dictionary in every conversation, so it is not phase of development. We expect to be able
necessary to use every metric in each discus- to expand the selection of social metrics as this
sion about the sustainability of packaging. The area of research progresses in the future.
range of metrics aims to cover the full breadth
Modular and flexible
of environmental and social aspects which may
The metrics described in this document can be
be needed to answer a range of business ques-
put to use in many different ways. They can in-
tions, but in each case the number and type
form internal decision making, allow communi-
of metrics used will depend on the business
cation between business partners or with other
question being asked. Just as in the dictionary
stakeholders, or provide overall packaging sys-
analogy, sometimes a single word conveys the
tem evaluations. The protocol is designed to al-
message correctly and concisely; some business
low this level of flexibility, but each different use
questions around packaging may just require a
for the protocol will have different implications
single metric. Similarly, just as some sentences
for the selection of relevant metrics, the data re-
need to be more complex and lengthy, broader
quired and how the results are used. This guid-
assessments of packaging sustainability will re-
ance aims to help the reader use the protocol
quire the use of a range of different metrics.
appropriately for all of its potential applications.
1
http://www.uneptie.org/shared/publications/pdf/DTIx1164xPA-guidelines_sLCA.pdfGlobal Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Guidance for use – Introduction
7
Range of Business Decisions
The GPPS metrics can be used to answer a wide cator to ensure that weight reductions aiming
range of business questions, either within a to reduce environmental impacts in transpor-
business or between business partners. The tation are not annihilated by a reduction in
business decisions these metrics address can cube utilization. Another example would be
vary greatly. The number and type of metrics to couple a recycled content indicator with an
used will depend on the business question be- indicator of packaging weight to highlight po-
ing asked. A simple question about the weight tential environmental burden shifting between
or recycled content of specific packaging op- recycled content and packaging weight due to
tions will require the use of just one metric. By recycling-induced property losses.
contrast, an overall assessment and comparison
Level 3. Comparative analysis of one or more
of entire product and packaging systems will
packaging formats/material across multiple
require a lifecycle approach and the use of a
formats for same functional unit, such as com-
wide range of metrics.
paring drink packs from glass, plastics, metal
For example, one of the pilots shared during or beverage carton to see trade-offs with each
the GPPS development aimed to compare the material choice. In this case, life cycle assess-
overall sustainability performance of shelf- ment (LCA) may be required.
ready packaging with a normal packaging
Level 4. Full system design and analysis that
delivery system. Since an overall comparison
would compare packaging formats/materials
was required, it was necessary to look at full
with information on the product as well. This
life-cycle metrics for both environmental and
would involve a LCA that would incorporate
social areas, and also to include an economic
elements of both the product and the packag-
assessment.
ing across the supply chain. In this case, vari-
Business decisions may be considered at a ous product factors or losses would need to be
number of different levels: incorporated, such as use, waste, spoilage and
damage.
Level 1. Simple analysis where, beyond cost
considerations, a single indicator is sufficient to
track a change, such as packaging weight, cube
utilization, etc.
Level 2. Optimization analysis for a given func-
tional unit (FU) where multiple indicators could
be used in order to increase the environmental
relevance as compared to using a single indi-
cator. For example, using a weight reduction
indicator together with a cube utilization indi-8 Choice of Indicators
for Business Decisions
The indicators and metrics fall into three cat- aging alternatives, for example between an
egories: Environmental, Economic and Social. agro-sourced material and a fossil fuel-sourced
In the Environmental area these metrics are material the set of metrics chosen for the com-
divided into Attribute Indicators and Life Cycle parison would have to be a combination of the
Indicators. Choosing the indicators that are relevant indicators of both materials in order
best for you depends on a number of factors to ensure that there is no shift of environmen-
including: what the business question is; what tal burden between the compared alternatives.
you are comparing, where in the packaging de- Taking into account the significance of impacts
sign process the assessments are being applied, in absolute terms as well as the significance of
how the results are being used and where in differences observed is also crucial for good de-
the supply chain they are being applied. There cision making.
is no single formula or “right answer” in deter-
mining how many indicators or which indica- Life Cycle Phases
tors to use. Using only one or two indicators
The adoption of packaging indicators by an or-
can answer a specific question, but may not
ganization should be consistent with life cycle
give a clear (or complete) picture of actual im-
thinking2. The life cycle indicators automati-
pacts. In many cases a set of five to 10 indica-
cally incorporate the impacts from all phases of
tors that clearly represent the company goals
the packaging life cycle. In selecting packaging
may be more appropriate (and easier to action)
attributes, it is also useful to include attributes
than a list of 40. The following six points should
that address upstream, use phase, transporta-
help you choose appropriate indicators, under-
tion, and end-of-life characteristics of the pack-
standing that this is an ongoing process which
age. This helps facilitate life cycle thinking and
will need to be revisited over time.
consideration of each of these phases in tangi-
ble, familiar measures by packaging designers
Relevance and Significance and others who influence packaging decisions.
The selection of a particular metric depends on
the business question being asked, and also of- Parts of Business
ten reflects an organization’s most significant
An indicator may be more relevant to one part
areas of activity and influence. For example, a
of a business than other parts of the business.
company working primarily with fiber-based
For example, packaging reuse rate may be rel-
packaging will select the metrics most pertinent
evant in one region, but not relevant in anoth-
to that material and ignore those that relate
er. A packaging manufacturer may have one
to other materials for processes. The selection
division that uses entirely renewable materials,
may also be directly influenced by the severity
while other divisions use none.
of an issue in context, such as water scarcity in a
particular locale. In a comparison of two pack-
2
an approach in which all of the phases of the life-cycle are considered during decision-making,
possibly but not necessarily involving the use of life-cycle assessmentGlobal Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Choice of Indicators for Business Decisions
9
Role in Decision-Making Alignment with other
As with the adoption of any other metric, it is Objectives and Processes
important to consider how the packaging indi- When adopting indicators and incorporating
cator is intended to influence decision-making, them into company policies and processes, it
as well as any unintended impacts it may have is helpful if the responsibility for measure-
on decisions and incentives. In order to ensure ment and tracking of metrics is in close prox-
that a metric informs the decision-making, it imity to the decision point and decision-maker.
must at minimum be visible to and understood Indicators that are measured separately from
by the parties who influence decision-making. other processes will generally have a lesser ef-
However, its impact can be augmented by as- fect on decision-making and suffer a greater
signing responsibilities related to the metric time lag until results are seen. For example, if a
to those with the greatest ability to influence metric such as package to product weight ratio
packaging decisions, taking into account the is adopted with the purpose of encouraging
following factors: more efficient packaging design, then its meas-
urement and the gathering of relevant data
Level at which Indicator is Used should ideally be done as part of the design or
Throughout the process of selecting appropri- design-approval process. This way, designers
ate indicators, it is important to determine the and decision makers are aware of the metric
level at which the indicator will be used. Many at the time they are making the decisions that
of the metrics could be assessed at packaging impact it. This embedded approach is more ef-
component or product level, at business unit fective at giving the metric a role in decision
level or at the corporate level. Some metrics making than assigning the data capture and
may be used at one level for one purpose (e.g. metric calculation to someone else as part of a
managing the average percentage of recycled yearly reporting process.
content in a product line) and then aggregated
at a higher level (e.g. company-wide for CSR
reporting). Keep in mind that the approach to
data collection, availability of data, demands
on data accuracy, and meaningful units of
measurement may vary at each of these levels.10 Role in Communication
Internal vs. External Communication
Understanding how the indicators will be used organization may contain a mix of indicators
in communication will help in their selection. intended for internal and external communica-
For example, are the indicators being used by tion. In addition, some indicators may warrant
marketing to show how a product package has different metrics for different audiences. For
been improved, or are they being used for cor- example, the package-to-product ratio may be
porate reporting to show some improvement relevant for both internal and external audi-
over time, e.g. reduction of GHG per unit sold? ences. However, note that even for a single in-
If the indicators are being used in a decision- dicator, the specific metric and functional unit
making process then it is also crucial that the that will be meaningful may differ depending
audience be presented with clearly-stated on the audience.
goals in order to understand what is important
Note that specific guidance is given within
for the company.
ISO 14040/44 for life cycle assessment based
The use of indicators for external communica- comparative assertions to be disclosed to the
tions such as marketing claims or corporate Public. For declarations, labels and claims pro-
reporting requires a greater level of accuracy, visions are available in, e.g. ISO 14021 or the
documentation and transparency of data than FTC Guidelines on environmental marketing
that which is required for tracking and commu- claims (FTC 260). This protocol is not intended
nicating progress internally. Aggregate data to replace any of the existing standards and
may be suitable for internal use as long as the guidelines which still need to be adhered to in
data gaps are not material and the limitations any external communication related to sustain-
are adequately communicated. However, in ability performance of packaging and products.
such a case it is vital that the internal audience
be made aware of the limited purpose and
suitability of the data so that external claims
are not made without proper substantiation.
A set of packaging indicators adopted by anGlobal Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Role in Communication · Availability of Data
Availability of Data 11
An indicator is only as good as its data. Having energy use or other impacts based on detailed
sufficient data is therefore essential when se- LCA studies. in many cases there may not be
lecting indicators. The availability of data and sufficient data on the specific life cycle under
of resources to obtain the necessary data will focus; or the data in the tool may not have
impact the number of metrics that can feasi- the capability to discern variations in factors
bly be adopted and the value of the metrics such as recycled content. Other indicators may
themselves. There are two categories of data: be important to you but may need additional
physical property data a company has on each work or time before they can be of value. A
packaging component as well as the product good example of this could be the Fresh Water
itself (readily available data or obtained from Used from Stressed or Scarce Sources indicator.
your supply chain) and data that is used to This particular indicator/metric may be impor-
drive selected indicators (mainly in streamlined tant to your company but the mapping of these
LCA tools). The source of the data that you use stressed source areas is not developed at this
should be documented for each metric. time; however, it may be appropriate to use at
a later date.
Physical Property Data
Each indicator has different data needs (com- Linkages between Different Indicators
ponent weight, material type, product size or The metrics presented in this report are not all
volume, country of origin, etc). Some of these independent. In some cases there is a link be-
data may already be in a company’s specifica- tween two separate indicators, or alternatively,
tion/ERP system or may require collection from the same data may be used to calculate different
the supply chain. This may not be a limiting fac- metrics. For example, if the metric “Packaging
tor for a one-time analysis, but may be a factor to product weight ratio” is calculated, then the
if you are reviewing a company’s improvement metric “Packaging Weight” will also have been
over time or requiring the indicator’s use for all calculated, and little effort would be needed
new product development. If the indicator is to additionally calculate “Packaging weight
important for one of the reasons stated above, reduction”. If any of the lifecycle indicators
the company may want to begin collecting this are calculated, this would have required col-
data for future use. lection of the data for many of the packaging
attribute indicators. This means that it is often
Data for Deriving Selected Indicators not as onerous as first thought to calculate a
Many indicators (and the tools that use them) given range of metrics.
require background data based on LCA mate- Figure 1 will help the user understand the
rial and process data. These are then used to amount of work that will be needed to calcu-
drive the analysis. For example, many stream- late the different indicators.
lined LCA tools use data that estimate the GHG,12
Substances Hazardous to the Environment
Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential
Non-Renewable Resource Depletion
Production in Areas of Water Scarcity
Packaging Weight and Optimization
Packaging to Product Weight Ratio
Freshwater Ecotoxicity Potential
Particulate Respiratory Effects
Cumulative Energy Demand
Ionizing Radiation (Human)
Global Warming Potential
Freshwater Consumption
Packaging Recovery Rate
Aquatic Eutrophication
Packaging Reuse Rate
Acidification Potential
Life Cycle Indicators
Toxicity (non Cancer)
Renewable Content
Chain of Custody
Recycled Content
Land Occupation
Ozone Depletion
Toxicity (Cancer)
Cube Utilization
Material Waste
Packaging Weight and Optimization
Packaging to Product Weight Ratio
Material Waste
Recycled Content
Renewable Content
Attributes
it will it easier to calculate or measure the attributes and indicators presented in columns.
By calculating or measuring the attributes and indicators that are presented in the rows,
Chain of Custody
Substances Hazardous to the Environment
Production in Areas of Water Scarcity
Packaging Recovery Rate
Cube Utilization
Packaging Reuse Rate
Life Cycle Indicators
Cumulative Energy Demand
Freshwater Consumption
Land Occupation
Global Warming Potential
Ozone Depletion
Life Cycle Indicators
Toxicity (Cancer)
Toxicity (non Cancer)
Particulate Respiratory Effects
Ionizing Radiation (Human)
Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential
Acidification Potential
Aquatic Eutrophication
Freshwater Ecotoxicity Potential
Non-Renewable Resource Depletion
is automatically derived will likely be derived will help to derive
Figure 1. There are sometimes strong synergies between the different indicators. This figure shows how
the different indicators are related. The colours in the boxes show the degree of relatedness between the
calculated indicators (shown in the rows) to the other indicators (shown across the top of the columns). If
the box is green, then the other indicator will have been calculated as well, automatically. Blue boxes show
other metrics that will likely have been calculated as well. Light grey boxes denote where calculation of
the indicator in the row will at least help in calculation of the other indicator in the column.Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Types of Packaging
Types of Packaging 13
Figure 2 describes some commonly used defini- is designed to ensure damage-free handling
tions of types of packaging used in the value and transport of a number of sales or grouped
chain. The concepts of primary, secondary and packages. The term “transport packaging”
tertiary packaging are standardized in ISO CD does not include road, rail, ship or air contain-
18601. Sales packaging is also a term which is fre- ers. Transport packaging is normally a shipping
quently used. The use of several terms may be unit such as an outer case, a pallet, or a crate.
required in order to provide an exhaustive de-
Sales Packaging is packaging with which the con-
scription allowing the determination of where
sumer leaves a store. Depending on the location
the packaging item in question will be discarded
and type of retail activity, sales packaging can be
and made available to recovery operators.
composed of one or several levels of packaging.
Selecting the optimum balance among these
The following additional terms are also fre-
three levels of packaging is a critical element in
quently used to describe packaging levels:
packaging design.
Figure 2. Common terms used to describe packaging types.
Primary Packaging constitutes the packaging de- Packaging constituent: a packaging element
signed to come into direct contact with the product. that cannot be easily separated from the rest
of the packaging (EN 13427, ISO/CD 18601), for
Secondary Packaging (or group packaging)
example, a sealing layer in a laminated film.
groups a given number of primary packaging
units together into a convenient unit at the Packaging component: part of packaging that
point of sale. Secondary packaging typically can be separated by hand or by using simple
has one of two roles: it can be a convenient physical means (EN 13427, ISO/CD 18601), for
means to replenish the shelves; or it can group example, a packaging film.
primary packaging units into a package for
Packaging system: the complete set of packag-
purchase. It can be removed without affecting
ing for a given product, encompassing one or
the product’s properties, and generally defines
more of primary, secondary and transport terti-
the unit handled by the retailer.
ary packaging depending on the packed prod-
Tertiary Packaging (or transport packaging) uct (ISO/CD 18601).14 Functional Unit,
Functional Equivalence and Reference Flow 3
Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a methodol- which all environmental impacts of a given
ogy that evaluates the potential impact of the study are reported. It is also the unit driving the
use of a product by parsing its function. The data collection process. A reference flow is a
functional unit characterizes this function by quantified amount of the product(s), including
naming and quantifying the qualitative and product parts, necessary for a specific product
quantitative aspects of the function(s) through system to deliver the performance described by
questions such as “what”, “how much”, “how the functional unit. A functional unit may have
well”, and “for how long”. It is the unit to several reference flows.
Product Function Functional unit Reference flow
Car Enabling people One person traveling 100 km Passenger car A consuming x L of petrol / 100 km
to travel
Shoes Protecting foot Protect one foot during 1 pair of dedicated walking shoes or
500 km of walking 2 pairs of standard shoes
Packaging Protect product Protect 100g of products until Required primary, secondary &tertiary
being on the table of the consumer packaging to deliver adequate protection
for a specified distribution system.
Light bulb Illuminate Lighting 10 square meters 15 daylight bulbs of 10000 lumen
with 3000 lux for 50000 hours with with a lifetime of 10000 hours.
daylight spectrum at 5600 K
Table 1. Examples of functions, functional units and reference flows in Life Cycle Assessment.
Choosing an Appropriate Functional Unit
A well defined functional unit allows compari- this case be based on the delivery of a certain
son of two essentially different systems or prod- number of uses in the case of a detergent or
ucts on an equivalent basis. The functional unit number of servings in the case of foodstuffs,
is just as important for comparisons made us- thus better reflecting the service provided to
ing attribute metrics, such as packaging weight, the consumer.
as it is in LCA. For example, if a comparison of
packaging weights of a concentrated product In the case of paint, an ill-defined functional
and a non-concentrated one is based on a func- unit would be 1 m2 covered, as this only com-
tional unit defined as “protect 1kg of product pares the capability of the compared paints to
from factory to consumer”, the concentrated cover a surface but says nothing about how long
product will be disadvantaged as the true func- the paint will protect the surface and thus noth-
tion of the product is not taken into account. ing about how much paint will be required over
A more appropriate functional unit would in an extended period of time. A more reasonable
3
More details can be found in ISO 14040/44Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Functional unit, functional equivalence and reference flow
15
functional unit for a paint system would be 1 to the customer. For a material supplier the
m2 adequately protected for 10 years. Such a functional unit typically equals the reference
functional unit allows taking into account the flow, e.g. in case of a plastic pellet provider the
increased quantities of less durable paint that appropriate reference flow is kg of pellets de-
would be required to re-paint a surface. livered to the converter.
The Functional Unit in Packaging Primary & Secondary Functions and
In the case of packaging, which is intimately Functional Equivalence in Packaging
connected with the product contained, it is A product or packaging can have different
important that the functional unit reflects the functions (primary and secondary functions).
packaging performance required with respect What all packaging has in common is that it
to the packaged product. This might include: enables delivery of a given quantity of product
required strength of the packaging, required from a producer to a customer or a consumer.
protection during transportation, preserving Therefore, “contain and protect” is the primary
the quality of foodstuffs, protection against function of packaging. There is a multitude
light penetration, prevention of residue pro- of secondary functions of packaging: it might
duction etc. You may also need to consider le- offer convenient handling, aid storage and
gal requirements in relation to the packaged use with open- and re-close features, it may
product (e.g. foodstuffs), and the performance be recyclable or recoverable, or reinforce the
of the packaging in relation to machinery. brand experience with appearance. When com-
paring scenarios it is crucial to make sure that
The functional unit will change along the value
primary functions are the same and that sec-
chain. A typical packaging functional unit for
ondary functions are as similar as possible. The
a brand owner or a retailer would be to fulfill
functional equivalence forms the basis for any
packaging functions for 100g of product from
comparison in LCA.
factory to consumer. For a converter supplying
packaging film to a customer, the functional The more functions two packaging alternatives
unit could be surface area in square meters of have in common the more meaningful it be-
a film with a specified performance delivered comes to attempt direct comparisons.16
Levels of Significance
The metrics proposed in this protocol are - even thumb that differences in LCA metrics such as
in the case of life cycle assessment indicators climate change or energy consumption of less
- only attempts to estimate “the true” environ- than 10% should not be considered significant
mental consequences by estimating potential as long as the differences of compared alterna-
impacts. Nevertheless, such estimates are very tives are not one-directional. More sophisticat-
useful to improve decision making with the ed uncertainty analysis methods are required
intention of improving sustainability perform- with other metrics, such as those relating to
ance of packaging and other products just as toxicity impacts. While this may seem limiting,
economic models are useful to estimate finan- it often allows identification of clear and un-
cial impacts and benefits. As with any compari- ambiguous differences between packaging op-
son of estimates, it is important to understand tions as well as the identification of potential
the uncertainty involved in the calculation of hot-spots in a studied packaging system. As an
the metrics, and the significance of any differ- analogy, while LCA will distinguish chalk from
ences observed with respect to uncertainty. The cheese, it will not tell Brie from Camembert!
accuracy of a result will vary depending on the
type of metrics used and the types of uncertain-
ty involved. With simple metrics, such as pack-
aging weight, the level of accuracy will simply
reflect the accuracy of the measurement tools
employed. However, in the more complex life-
cycle metrics, the result is a calculation based
on a model rather than a direct measurement,
and will depend on the accuracy and relevance
of the data employed in the model as well as
the accuracy of the model itself. This will give
a larger margin of error in the final result, so
comparisons between different systems should
be made with caution taking uncertainty into
account. LCA practitioners often use a rule ofGlobal Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Systematic use of life cycle assessment in product development – Guidance on tools
Systematic Use of Life Cycle Assessment in Product Development – 17
Guidance on Tools
Historically the packaging industry has account- Using such environmental attributes is thus not
ed for the environmental impacts of packaging sufficient for companies seeking to continu-
through attributes such as packaging weight ously reduce packaging environmental impacts
reduction, recycled content, and recovery as they are limited to answering very specific
rates of used packaging. Although such indi- questions. A decision support tool giving feed-
cators are relatively easy to measure, they are back to the designer on the environmental con-
not directly related to environmental impacts; sequences of decisions taken in the packaging
rather, they are input information to estimate development process over the entire packaging
environmental impacts. A reduced or increased life cycle is therefore required.
attribute value may or may not lead to reduced
environmental impacts. Life Cycle Assessment
Example: design guidelines for packaging The appropriate tool for considering environ-
weight reduction would encourage a designer mental impacts over the packaging life cycle
to combine materials in multilayer structures ef- is life cycle assessment (LCA). LCA can be per-
ficiently combining strengths of individual ma- formed at different levels depending on the
terials in order to save packaging weight. Such type of questions being asked, the purpose of
guidelines are in direct conflict with guidelines the study, or the state of development of a new
on recyclability, which would call for use of a product or a new packaging. The work to per-
single material in a packaging format which is form a LCA can range from a couple of hours to
easily identified, separated and recycled. While more than 100 days of work. Practitioners gen-
a gauge reduction of one material, provided erally classify LCAs in two different categories in
that physical performance is conserved, will terms of level of detail: simplified, streamlined
most certainly lead to an improvement of en- or screening LCAs and comprehensive, detailed
vironmental performance, the same gauge or full LCA. LCA tools can also be separated into
reduction achieved by a switch to another ma- two major classes: highly flexible conventional
terial does not automatically translate into im- LCA software and tailored and rapid Ecodesign
proved environmental performance. tools with a lower degree of flexibility (Table 2).
Type of LCA tool Strengths Weaknesses Application
Ecodesign Quick, low cost, Low flexibility Design process, environmental
consistent, can be used No capacity to capture specificities information, well suited for non-expert
by non-experts in a well-framed process
Limited possibility to support
environmental claims
Conventional Robustness, flexibility More costly and long, requires Internal evaluation of a product and
Can support marketing expert knowledge comparison with alternatives
claims after external To support marketing claims about the
peer review environmental impact of a product
Table 2. Types of LCA tools and area of application as a function of strength and weakness.18
Conventional LCA Tools
Comprehensive LCA’s are performed using con- consumer goods (FMCG) sector where system-
ventional software packages where the user atic product assessment using conventional
will go through the full procedure of goal and LCA tools for all product developments would
scope definition, inventory assessment, impact generate excessively high costs. Nor is it an eco-
assessment and interpretation. A wide range nomically viable solution for small and medium
of LCA tools are available for this purpose (1). sized enterprises (SMEs). In addition to this
Conventional LCA tools allow for flexibility on the time required to complete a conventional
all levels of a LCA. This flexibility also contrib- LCA study is such that results are frequently
utes to some of their draw-backs: they require obtained at the end of the packaging develop-
considerable expertise and are laborious and ment when a product is ready to be launched.
costly. Few companies can afford to employ At this late stage, the freedom for change has
in-house LCA expertise, let alone systematically been reduced to a minimum and the cost for
use LCA to support decision making in product change is at its maximum (Figure 3). Life cycle
development. As a consequence, many studies assessment results thus become at best a strate-
are outsourced to LCA consultants. Although gic tool for future improvement of the packag-
such an approach is feasible for companies ing life cycle or at worst an expensive way of
with products that do not change frequently, it documenting success or failure.
is not an efficient approach for the fast-moving
Cost for Change Conventional LCA
Design freedom
Ecodesign tools
Concept Final Industrial Post-launch
Opportunity Ideation Launch
exploration business plan development assessment
I/R strategy I/R exloration I/R execution I/R assessment
Figure 3. Evolution of cost for change and freedom of change in the innovation process4 .
4
Lundquist, L., The role of environmental impact assessment at Nestlé, The Role of Impact Assessment in Transitioning to a Green Economy, Interna-
tional Association for Impact Assessment 30th Annual Conference, Geneva, Switzerland, April 7, 2010 (Reproduced with permission).Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Systematic use of life cycle assessment in product development – Guidance on tools
19
Ecodesign Tools
There is thus a rationale for simplified and packaging developer a comprehensive assess-
tailored LCA-based tools which open LCA to ment of the packaging format being assessed.
non-experts, allowing rapid assessment of en-
Whereas both tool types require the same level
vironmental consequences of design decisions
of expertise with respect to interpretation of
already at the concept stage. The vast amount
results, the advantage of ecodesign tools is
of LCAs performed in the past affords an un-
their relative simplicity and user-friendliness
derstanding of where the hot-spots are in the
as well as the speed of assessment. LCA results
packaging value chain. This understanding lays
obtained using the same tool will be more con-
the foundation for efficient streamlining and
sistent than comparisons of LCA studies using
automation of LCA. Various sector-specific tools
conventional LCA tools since the same meth-
have been developed or are currently being
odology, hypotheses and data are used for all
developed; these tools are publicly available
studies. The disadvantage of ecodesign tools
(2,3). Many value chain operators have also
is the fact that although they might be more
developed in-house tools adapted to specific
consistent they are not more precise or reli-
company needs. Such tools aim to preserve the
able than a comprehensive LCA generated with
integrity of the LCA approach in highlighting
conventional LCA software. They will especially
environmental issues at each life stage, while
encounter limits as soon as the product or pack-
doing so more quickly and cheaply. The com-
aging to study falls out of the scope defined
monality between streamlined automated tools,
for the tool. Nevertheless, they constitute an
or ecodesign tools as they may also be called,
affordable and practical compromise between
is that many of the LCA steps requiring consid-
the use of simple environmental attributes and
erable expertise have been pre-defined for the
conventional LCA software, thus providing a
user and the interface emulates the develop-
better base for decision-making in the FMCG
ment process prompting a packaging developer
sector. A combination of ecodesign tools and
only for inputs with which she or he works on
expert work using conventional LCA software
a daily basis. Typically, ecodesign tools have the
provides a very good basis to tackle most of the
following features pre-defined: functional unit,
issues regarding packaging and sustainability
system borders, inventory data for materials
within a company.
and processes, including recovery and disposal
operations, and impact assessment methods.
Frequently such tools also combine life cycle
environmental impacts, such as global warm-
ing potential, with packaging-specific environ-
mental attributes such as packaging-to-product
weight ratio, recycled content, fraction of re-
cyclable material and so on, thus offering the20
The Future of LCA in the FMCG Sector
LCA is becoming an integral part of the indus- are much stricter. However, they are very useful
trial decision-making process. It is used, for for informed internal decision making in the
example, to make tactical decisions in product development process as well as for business-to-
and process design or improvement, or as a business communication. Needless to say, LCA-
support for strategy, or in supply chain man- based claims and comparative assertions made
agement and procurement. The increased use to third parties should comply with the require-
of LCA has boosted demand for streamlined ments stipulated in ISO 14040 and 14044, re-
and tailor-made LCA-based tools. This demand gardless of the LCA tool used to generate the
will certainly give rise to the development of results of the claim. It is our hope that the align-
a wide variety of tools, which once integrated ment achieved in this project will pave the way
or interlinked with existing management tools to a further alignment of ecodesign tools so as
will be capable of providing different levels of
to facilitate LCA-based information exchange
information for different users.
between partners of the packaging value chain.
In most cases, ecodesign tools do not constitute They will thus allow not only individual value
a replacement of conventional LCA for envi- chain members to meet their environmental
ronmental claims made to third parties; the objectives more efficiently, but also allow the
requirements for this kind of communication entire packaging value chain to do the same.
References
1. European Commission - Joint Research Center. Site on LCA Tools and Services. EUROPA.
[En ligne] [Citation : 12 01 2011.] http://lca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/lcainfohub/toolList.vm.
2. COMPASS - Comparative Packaging Assessment. [En ligne] Sustainable Packaging Coalition. ht-
tps://www.design-compass.org/.
3. Sustainable Packaging Alliance. PIQET Log-in. [En ligne] Sustainable Packaging Alliance.
http://piqet.sustainablepack.org/login.php.Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
GPP Indicator and Metric Overview
GPPS Indicator and Metric Overview 21
ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTES & LIFE CYCLE INDICATORS
ATTRIBUTES
Packaging Weight and Optimization Assessment and Minimization of Substances Hazardous to the Environment
Packaging to Product Weight Ratio Production Sites Located in Areas with Conditions of Water Stress or Scarcity
Material Waste Packaging Reuse Rate
Recycled Content Packaging Recovery Rate
Renewable Content Cube Utilization
Chain of Custody
LIFE CYCLE INDICATORS – INVENTORY
Cumulative Energy Demand Land Use
Fresh Water Consumption
LIFE CYCLE INDICATORS – IMPACT CATEGORIES
Global Warming Potential Photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP)
Ozone Depletion Acidification Potential
Toxicity, Cancer Aquatic Eutrophication
Toxicity, Non-Cancer Freshwater Ecotoxicity Potential
Particulate Respiratory Effects Non-Renewable Resource Depletion
Ionizing Radiation (Human)
ECONOMIC & SOCIAL ATTRIBUTES
ECONOMIC
Total Cost of Packaging Packaged Product Wastage
SOCIAL
Packaged Product Shelf-Life Community Investment
CORPORATE PERFORMANCE CHECKLIST
ENVIRONMENT
Environmental Management System Energy Audits
SOCIAL
Child Labor Freedom of Association and/or Collective Bargaining
Excessive Working Hours Occupational Health
Responsible Workplace Practices Discrimination
Forced or Compulsory Labor Safety Performance Standards
Remuneration22 Environmental – Attribute Indicators / Metrics
Introduction
An attribute is an indicator that provides par- Generally these metrics have to be used and
tial and/or indirect information with respect to interpreted depending on the specific business
the environmental performance of packaging case to be supported.
across its life cycle. An attribute can provide
Several of the environmental attributes are
quantitative or qualitative information about
based on ISO standards and European Standards
an individual life cycle step or operation in the
(EN 13427 – 13432), depicted in Figure 4, linked
packaging life cycle or a qualitative piece of in-
to the European Packaging and Packaging
formation related to the management of oper-
Waste Directive which are currently serving
ations or the supply chain. Many attributes are
as a base for work within ISO on standards
indispensable pieces of information required
for packaging and the environment. A Guide
for the preparation of a comprehensive life cy-
to using these standards has been published
cle assessment of packaging.
by EUROPEN, The European Organization for
It is important to note that attributes provide Packaging and Environment (www.europen.be).
information, but not assessment. They do not
necessarily indicate positive or negative envi-
ronmental consequences and have to be used
in connection with life cycle indicators and
other attributes. Their validity depends on the
specific case at hand. Not all metrics are valid
for all applications.
EN 13427
Packaging-Umbrella
Standard
EN 13428
EN 13429
Packaging-Prevention Recovery
Packaging-Reuse
by source reduction
EN 13432
EN 13431
EN 13430 Packaging-
Packaging-Energy
Packaging-Recycling Composting and
Recovery
Biodegradation
Figure 4. The EN Suite of standards supporting the European Parliament and Council Directive on Packaging
and Packaging Waste [94/62/EC].Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Environmental – Attribute Indicators / Metrics
23
Packaging Weight and Optimization
Includes Primary, Secondary What to Measure
and Tertiary Packaging Packaging Weight: Determine the weight of
packaging constituents, components or pack-
Definition
aging systems which change hands in the pack-
The weight and identity of a packaging con-
aging supply chain. As per EN13428 and/or ISO/
stituent, component or system which changes
CD18602 (once finalized) determine and sub-
hands in the supply chain and demonstration
stantiate the single performance criterion that
that the packaging has been optimized by
prevents further reduction in quantity (weight
weight or volume in accordance with EN 13428
or volume) of the materials used. Performance
or ISO/CD 18602, once finalized.
criteria include: product protection, packaging
Metric manufacturing process, packing/filling process,
Weight per packaging constituent, component logistics, product presentation and marketing,
or system and demonstration of optimization user/consumer acceptance, information, safety,
as described by EN 13428 or ISO/CD 18602 once legislation and, other (specify).
finalized. Communicating Packaging Weight Reduction:
Examples Packaging weight reduction can be calculated
as the difference between the immediate previ-
1. Proof of minimum adequate
ous and present packaging design. For environ-
packaging weight
mental relevance, packaging weight reduction
· (yes / no)
should be communicated by material category.
2. Packaging weight In cases where a weight reduction is achieved
· Kilograms / packaging constituent, at the expense of a weight increase in another
component, or system material category in the same packaging com-
ponent or in another part of the packaging
system, for example an increase of secondary
packaging, this should be clearly communicat-
ed and the increase quantified.
What Not to Measure
N/A24
Packaging to Product Weight Ratio Material Waste
Definition Definition
The ratio of the weight of all packaging mate- The mass of material waste generated during
rial used to the weight of the product or func- the production and transport of packaging
tional unit delivered. materials, packaging constituents, packaging
components or packaging systems.
Metric
Weight of all packaging components used in Metric
the packaging system per functional unit. Mass per packaging constituent, packaging
component, or packaging system.
Examples
• Packaging weight (kg) / FU Examples
• Kilograms / FU
What to Measure
Calculate the total weight of the packaging What to Measure
components used in the packaging system ac- Only measure material destined for landfill and
cording to the protocol for Packaging Weight final disposal. Measurement should include the
and Optimization. Determine the ratio to the scrap, unwanted surplus material, unwanted by-
mass of product or amount of product service products and broken, contaminated or otherwise
delivered per functional unit. This measure- spoiled material associated with the conversion
ment should take all components in a packag- of packaging materials into packaging compo-
ing system into account in order to avoid hiding nents, assembly of packaging components into
the shifting of weight between packaging levels, units of packaging, filling of packaging units and
i.e., between primary, secondary and tertiary the transport of packaging materials, packaging
packaging. Comparisons of packaging to prod- components, units of packaging or packaging
uct weight ratios for an incomplete packaging systems. Note that this is an operational param-
system, i.e. primary or primary and secondary eter which can be measured by any individual
packaging is only justified if the packaging lev- operator within the supply chain as a measure of
els left out of scope remain identical. operational efficiency. Such information can be
communicated between two parties in the sup-
What Not to Measure
ply chain to demonstrate operational efficiency,
N/A but the metric is not suitable, nor intended, to
be cumulated across the entire supply chain.
What Not to Measure
Do not report materials which are reused or
recycled.Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Environmental – Attribute Indicators / Metrics
25
Recycled Content
Definition
The ratio of recycled material (post-consumer
and pre-consumer as defined by ISO 14021) to
total material used in packaging constituents,
packaging components, or packaging systems.
Metric
Percent recycled material of total quantity of
material used per packaging constituent, pack-
aging component or packaging system. Pre-
consumer and post-consumer recycled content
can be calculated separately to provide a great-
er level of detail
Examples
• % recycled content / packaging constituent,
component, or system
What to Measure
Measure post-consumer recycled material and
pre-consumer as per ISO 14021. For additional
guidance, refer to ISO 14021.
What Not to Measure
N/A26
Renewable Content
Definition • Material level: The renewable material con-
The ratio of renewable material used to total tent is the percentage of renewable mate-
material used in packaging constituents, com- rial of the total material used in packaging
ponents, units of packaging or packaging sys- constituents, components, units of packag-
tems. ing or packaging systems.
Note 1: Renewable material is material that is • Carbon level: The renewable carbon content
composed of biomass from a living source and is the percentage of renewable carbon of
that can be continually replenished. To be de- the total carbon in packaging constituents,
fined as renewable, virgin materials shall come components, units of packaging or packag-
from sources which are replenished at a rate ing systems.
equal to or greater than the rate of depletion.
Metric
Biomass is defined as material of biological ori-
• The percent by weight on material level ac-
gin excluding material embedded in geological
cording to the amendment to ISO 14021.
formations or transformed to fossilized mate-
rial and excluding peat. This includes organic • The percent by weight on carbon level ac-
material (both living and dead) from above cording to ASTM D6866. This metric shall
and below ground, e.g. trees, crops, grasses, be applied when the source of the material
tree litter, algae, animals and waste of biologi- (renewable or non-renewable) is unknown.
cal origin, e.g. manure.
Examples
Note 2: the above definitions are taken from • % of total material weight / packaging con-
the text of the final draft amendment to ISO stituent, component, or system
14021 which is due for publication in the near
future. • % renewable carbon to total carbon / pack-
aging constituent, component, or system
The renewable content can be defined on two
levels: What to Measure
Measure renewable content either as percent
by weight of total material used or as percent
renewable carbon of total carbon.
What Not to Measure
NAGlobal Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0
Environmental – Attribute Indicators / Metrics
27
Chain of Custody Assessment and Minimization of Sub-
Definition stances Hazardous to the Environment
The linked set of organizations, from point of Definition
harvest or extraction to point of purchase, that Assessment and minimization of substances,
have held legal ownership or physical control or mixtures, hazardous to the environment in
of raw materials or recycled materials, used packaging constituents, components, or systems
in packaging constituents, packaging compo- that are at risk of entering the environment.
nents, or packaging systems.
Metric
Metric Meeting the requirements of EN 13428 or ISO
Unknown, known or sourced-certified. 18602 (when published) on heavy metals and
dangerous/hazardous substances.
Examples
N/A Examples
Statement that the relevant requirements of
What to Measure
the standard have been met.
Chain of custody is measured in order to en-
sure reliability, performance and transparency What to Measure
in the supply chain. The chain of custody will The assessment should include substances classi-
be deemed “known” if each party in the sup- fied as presenting an environmental hazard ac-
ply chain is under contractual obligation and is cording to the UN Globally Harmonized System
able to disclose proof of their material source(s) for Classification and Labelling of Chemicals
through purchasing agreements, inventory and its amendments and meeting the criteria
records, etc. For additional guidance, refer to of labelling with the environmental hazard
any relevant source certification system pro- pictogram. Or for those following EN13428, EU
tocols, such as the Forest Stewardship Council substances included in the EU “N” List. For ad-
(FSC) guidelines, Sustainable Forestry Initiative ditional guidance, refer to standards ISO 18602
(SFI) and Programme for Endorsement of Forest (currently a CD), EN 13427:2004, EN 13428:2004;
Certification (PEFC). Although at this time cer- CEN CR 13695-1:2004 and CEN CR 13695-2:2004
tification schemes exist primarily for forestry, and any other relevant legal lists that apply to
this metric can apply to any raw material used any specific region.
for packaging. Several initiatives are underway
What Not to Measure
to establish chain of custody systems for other
materials. Substances or mixtures used within the manu-
facturing or converting process but not present
What not to Measure in packaging.
N/A28
Production Sites Located in Areas with Packaging Reuse Rate
Conditions of Water Stress or Scarcity Definition
Definition The number of times packaging accomplishes the
The number of facilities involved with the same use, rotation or trip for which it was conceived
production of packaging materials (including and designed within its life cycle. Demonstration of
recycled materials), packaging constituents, reusability must first be established in accordance
packaging components or units of packaging with EN 13429 or ISO/CD18603 once final.
and/or filling and sealing of units of packaging
Metric
that operate in areas identified as stressed or
scarce fresh water resource area. • Reusable – Yes or No according to EN 13429
or ISO/CD 18603
Metric
• Rate expressed as number of cycles and ei-
• Number (or percent of facilities owned by a
ther the top-up or loss rate in steady-state
single operator) located in an area identified
operation of reuse scheme.
as a stressed or scare water resource area.
The approach or tool used to determine wa- Example
ter stress or scarcity should be identified. • Yes or No
Examples • Reuse rate
• Number of cycles prior to withdrawal
Single sites: Yes, no, not applicable
for recovery
Multiple sites: Yes (percent of facilities in said • % loss per cycle of re-use
areas), no, not applicable • % top up rate
What to Measure What to Measure
Use the Global Water Tool5 or ETH Water Determine if packaging conforms to definition
Scarcity Index6 to identify if a site involved in of reusability per EN 13429 and ISO/CD 18603.
the production of packaging materials (includ- If packaging is deemed reusable per referenced
ing recycled materials) packaging components standards and guidelines, include all reused pack-
or units of packaging and/or filling and seal- aging components or packaging units. This metric
ing of units is located in an area of stressed or can be used for primary, secondary and tertiary
scarce water resources in terms of fresh water packaging. In cases where several packaging lev-
consumption versus fresh water availability. els are being reused, their individual rates should
be reported separately and not be cumulated.
What Not to Measure
Do not measure or report plants which do not What Not to Measure
use water in the manufacturing process. N/A
5
http://www.wbcsd.org/templates/TemplateWBCSD5/layout.asp?type=p&MenuId=MTUxNQ&doOpen=1&ClickMenu=LeftMenu=LeftMenu
6
http://www.ifu.ethz.ch/staff/stpfiste/index_ENYou can also read
