Development of environmental footprint product category rules for Finnish food sector in alignment with Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) method

Abstract Purpose This study aimed to address the pressing need for harmonised life cycle assessment (LCA) practices in the food sector by developing methods that enable comparable, accessible, acceptable, and applicable environmental footprint assessments of food products. Specifically, the study reviewed existing LCA guidelines and Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCRs), which were used as a basis to formulate comprehensive methodological guidance for the external communication of environmental information about food products marketed in Finland. Methods To support the development of methodological guidance for assessing the environmental footprint of food products in the Finnish market, the relevant scientific literature, LCA standards and reports, and policy documents were reviewed. The methods’ adoptability and practical applicability were further assessed based on their data requirements and through consultations with key stakeholders for accessibility and acceptability. Particular attention was paid to four impact categories, climate change, water use, and freshwater, and marine eutrophication, in both the harmonisation of LCA methodologies and the formulation of Finnish Food LCA guidance. Results and discussion Through the methodological review and stakeholder consultations, several inconsistencies, inapplicability, and accessibility issues were identified in the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) and PEFCR methods, which were subsequently harmonised for the overall Food LCA guidance. Key adjustments included selecting accessible methods for greenhouse gas (GHG) and land use and land use change (LULUC) emissions, omitting circular footprint formula (CFF) due to its complexity and deviation from the attributional approach, recommending only economic allocation, replacing the functional unit with the declared unit to ensure applicability across all food products, clarifying water scarcity and eutrophication assessment, and including an approach for eutrophication assessment in Baltic Sea conditions, and providing detailed guidance on peat modelling. Conclusions The study identified several inconsistencies in current approaches and highlighted broader development needs for enhancing the harmonisation of food LCAs and the European Commission’s PEF method, including needs for standardised methods for animal production emissions, improved modelling of soil carbon, crop sequences, and organic fertilisers, region-specific eutrophication models, integration of social and economic sustainability dimensions, and clear guidance on the inclusion of nutritional aspects to enable fair product comparisons while avoiding greenwashing.