LCA Food 2012 in Saint Malo, France! - Manifestations et colloques ...

PARALLEL SESSION 5A: FOOD LABELLING 8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
Table 2. Detailed results for 100 g of grape juice
Life cycle steps GHG emissions (g eq. CO2) Water consumption (L) Wate pollution (g eq. PO4 3-
Production of ingredients 68 0.54 0.47
Production of packaging 88 0.17 0.02
Transformation 4.0 0.20 0.002
Retail 9.3 0.67 0.02
Transport 37 0.14 0.04
Use 4.3 0.25 0.01
End of life 6.5 0.10 0.03
TOTAL 137 2.1 0.59
Aggregation of multiple criteria provides customers with simple, easy-to-understand information. The label
displayed on the product must be quickly understood so that customers can really use it as a criterion for
shopping. It also can be used as a decision-making tool to prioritize and grade the environmental stakes both
by eco-design manufacturers and policy-makers.
Consumers, especially those unaware of environmental issues, clearly ask for simplicity: 61% of them
prefer a scale without figures and 48% prefer a unique score (Casino-IFOP, 2012).
The results of the survey led by Casino on customers’ perception of the Environmental Index [8] indicate
that the Environmental Index is not easy to understand at a first glance and requires a certain amount of effort
on the part of customers. Nonetheless, the score seems to be clearer than LCA indicators as 57% of customers
preferred the unique score versus 24% for the separated indicators. Moreover, for young people, 76%
of the customers determined correctly between two products the one which has the lowest impact with the
Environmental Index whereas only 21% determined correctly with separated indicators (21% do not know
and 37% have a wrong answer). Finally, it is interesting to notice that even if the Environmental Index is not
known yet, the old label, the Carbon Index, is currently known by 35% of the consumers.
3.2 High involvement by suppliers
The LCA methodology was adapted to better fit environmental labelling cost and efficiency constraints.
Indeed, the methodology has been established with suppliers, who, as data collectors for LCA calculations,
know the kind of data they can provide at an acceptable cost. Data collection is easily handled by manufacturers,
especially for those who have already participated to the Carbon Index. Nonetheless, time spent on
data collection seems to be important as several departments within a company and a supplier’s own supplier
can be involved in the process.
The implication of manufacturers in the calculation of the Environmental index is very important and
positive as it can serve as a way for companies to manage their own information flows and to be responsible
for the release of this information. Because lots of data are collected from suppliers, the calculation of impact
will likely be highly representative of the actual product that is to be labelled. The initiative may thus be the
first step for setting up an eco-design approach on manufactured products.
The evaluation of these points will be conducted with partners during the analysis of the project feedback
in June 2012.
3.3 A flexible methodology for a unique format
The methodology chosen, specifically for aggregation, will allow an interesting degree of upgrading
without having to change the format of the Environmental Index, to which consumers are becoming familiarised.
It can be adapted to any geographic context by modulating the references used for the normalisation
and to non-food products by choosing the relevant indicators. The addition or change of environmental criteria
or any methodological change due to future ADEME-AFNOR recommendations can also be implemented
without impacting the format of the Environmental Index.
4. Discussion
Reference data for the normalisation method may be homogenised and further specified. A public study
that assesses the impact of food consumption in France for those three indicators in the same scope may be
necessary.
447