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

GROUP 3, SESSION A: LABELLING, CONSUMERS, DIET 8 th Int. Conference on LCA in the
Agri-Food Sector, 1-4 Oct 2012
90. Carbon labels worldwide- a review of approaches and indices
Michael M. Blanke * , Florian Schaefer
INRES – University of Bonn, Auf dem Hüegel 6, D-53121 Bonn, Germany, Corresponding author. E-mail:
mmblanke@uni-bonn.de
This contribution does not provide a simple summary of carbon labels worldwide, but a critical review of
existing international labelling policies and their background and ways of communicating their LCA foods
results to the consumer. Advantages and disadvantages from both the manufacturer and consumer angle are
presented.
Carbon Footprint is a tool to allocate products or services a numeric value for their specific impact on climate
change based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Accounting greenhouse gas emissions over the whole
life cycle of products or services allows allocating each product a unique Carbon Footprint. This is a first
steps to communicate the sustainability performance of products or services to the consumer.
A thorough market analysis conducted in 2011 resulted in the categorisation of seven schemes, into which
the carbon labelling and consumer communication of carbon footprint LCA Foods results can be categorised:
(1) Presentation or label of a single static numeric value on the product in the shop; examples are activities
by the Carbon Trust, UK and the single carbon footprint value as operated by Tesco’s supermarkets in the
UK (but not in Tesco’s stores abroad). However, this labelling policy is restricted to ca. 20 food and nonfood
products (orange juice, skimmed milk, Walker’s crisps, sliced bread, and light bulbs as the non-food
product) out of their ca. 70,000 in-store products viz 0.03% of products on offer. A similar policy is operated
by KEITI with their “CO2 low label” or “COOL” in South Korea. The consumer, however, may find it difficult
to judge and memorise numeric values, particularly if expressed on different units (e.g. packet size, litre,
100 g). Similar schemes operate in Thailand and Japan.
(2) Carbon reduction labels (Climatop) offer an answer or alternative to the static CO2 value. They indicate
the activity in the field of carbon footprint, without giving a single static CO2 value. Climatop in Switzerland
is presented as an example and labels for green and white asparagus are discussed. Climatop labels have a
life-span of two years, which encourages the manufacturer to further improve the carbon footprint.
(3) The colour schemes offer another alternative, where consumers do not need to memorise or interpret a
carbon label. The French Casino supermarkets react to the French carbon footprint laws, “Grenelle 2” and
Grenelle 2” by operating a green- yellow colour code called ‘Indice Carbone’, where the product is visually
ranked within the best and worst product in the market.
(4) Air freight labels on the produce, operated by Tesco and Marks and Spencer in the UK (and KaDeWe in
Germany and CoOp , Switzerland) indicate the food items with the largest carbon footprint, are easy to handle
by the supermarkets and understand by the consumer; they also give regional produce a chance, if within
that season.
(5) Carbon Zero initiatives like the CarboNZero in New Zealand and CarbonFree in the USA may cause
ambiguity and the consumer think the production of this particular food is carbon neutral. These schemes,
however, are based on a thorough carbon footprint or complete LCA and subsequent purchase of golden
carbon certificates.
(6) QR codes on the products are a fairly new alternative since 2011, where the new generation of mobile
phones access the internet in the shop and relevant information is available e.g. for a carbon footprint, which
varies seasonally or the LCA is more complicated than a single value.
(7) Sustainability reports are the last option, favoured e.g. by companies in Germany, to report their carbon
footprint both in the printed and online versions of their sustainability report, which have to follow the standards
and guidelines for sustainability reports, e.g. by dnv.
791