Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
1
2
Organisation Environmental Footprint 3
Sector Rules (OEFSR) 4
Retail 5
6
7
8
version of April 29, 2015 9
10
11
2
12
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title Organisation Environmental Footprint Sector Rules (OEFSR): Retail
Contracting organisation
Technical Secretariat: Quantis; Carrefour; Colruyt Group; Kering; Office Depot Inc.; Oxylane Group (Decathlon SA); Picard; PERIFEM; ADEME; EAA; ENEA; GLOBAL 2000 – Friends of the Earth Austria.
Liability statement
Information contained in this report has been compiled from and/or computed from sources believed to be credible. Application of the data is strictly at the discretion and the responsibility of the reader. Quantis is not liable for any loss or damage arising from the use of the information in this document.
Quantis project team
Sebastien Humbert (sebastien.humbert@quantis-‐intl.com, +41 79 754 75 66), main contact Carole Dubois (carole.dubois@quantis-‐intl.com) Cécile Guignard (cecile.guignard@quantis-‐intl.com) Simone Pedrazzini (simone.pedrazzini@quantis-‐intl.com) Angela Adams (angela.adams@quantis-‐intl.com)
Technical Secretariat contacts
Quantis: Sebastien Humbert (sebastien.humbert@quantis-‐intl.com, +41 79 754 75 66), main contact Carrefour: Pascal Léglise, Lea Lim, Gwendolyn Bailey Colruyt Group: Frederic Vermeiren, Steven Van Hemelryck, Mieke Vercaeren Kering: François-‐Xavier Morvan Office Depot Inc.: Shela Fletcher Oxylane Group (Decathlon SA): Emilie Aubry Picard: Arnaud Brulaire PERIFEM: Sophie Gillier ADEME: Romain Poivet EAA: Hanna Schreiber ENEA: Paolo Masoni GLOBAL 2000: Martin Wildenberg, Kewin Comploi
Associated files
OEFRetail_ScreeningReport_2015-‐04-‐29a.pdf OEFRetail_Screening_ANNEX-‐I_ProductPortfolio_2015-‐02-‐16a.xlsx PEF-‐OEF_DistUseDefaultData_2015-‐03-‐01_v1.pdf PEF-‐OEF_EOLDefaultData_2015-‐03-‐01_v1.xls TemplateforComments-‐2ndConsultationMay2015-‐Retail-‐COMMENTERNAME.xlsx
13
14
3
15
Note for the reader: This document is not a standalone document but should be read in parallel to 16 the OEF guide. 17
18
19
20
21
22
Editing note: Original text included in the template provided by the European Commission is in grey. 23
Editing note: Text highlighted in yellow should be text that will either be updated or removed at the 24 time of publication. 25
Editing note: All other editing notes will also either be integrated into the text, addressed, 26 disregarded and all removed at the time of publication. 27
28
4
Executive Summary 29
This document is the Organisation Environmental Footprint Sector Rule (OEFSR) for the Retail 30
sector. It aims to provide instructions on how to conduct an OEF study for all retailers (all types and 31
sizes, both food and non-‐food oriented, etc.). 32
The system boundaries and main life cycle stages considered to assess the OEF of a retailer are 33
depicted below (Figure 1), using typically a reporting unit of 1 year of activity. 34
35 Figure 1 System boundaries of a retailer 36
Each of these life cycle stages shall include all the associated impacts such as materials, 37
infrastructure, energy, processing, wastes, transportation as well as employees related activities. 38
A screening study of a virtual organisation with a product portfolio covering the range of typical 39
product groups (goods and services) for both food-‐ and non-‐food-‐specialized retailers was 40
performed to support the writing of this OEFSR. This screening study is available in Annex I and is 41
provided by way of example (keeping in mind its limitations and where it deviates from the present 42
OEFSR). 43
44
5
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 4 45
Abbreviations and acronyms, ............................................................................................ 9 46
Glossary, ......................................................................................................................... 11 47
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 13 48
2. General information about this OEFSR ...................................................................... 13 49
2.1. Technical Secretariat ............................................................................................. 13 50
2.2. Consultation and stakeholders .............................................................................. 14 51
2.3. Date of publication and expiration ......................................................................... 14 52
3. Methodological inputs and compliance .................................................................... 14 53
3.1. Sector .................................................................................................................... 14 54
3.2. Sector classification (NACE) ................................................................................... 15 55
3.3. Geographic region ................................................................................................. 15 56
3.4. Language(s) of OEFSR ............................................................................................ 15 57
4. OEFSR review and background information .............................................................. 15 58
4.1. OEFSR review panel ............................................................................................... 15 59
4.2. Review requirements for the OEFSR document ...................................................... 15 60
4.3. Reasoning for development of OEFSR .................................................................... 16 61
4.4. Conformance with the OEFSR Guidance ................................................................. 16 62
5. Representative organization and supporting studies ................................................ 16 63
5.1. Representative organisation .................................................................................. 16 64
5.2. Supporting studies ................................................................................................. 16 65
6. Benchmark and classes of environmental performance ............................................ 17 66
7. Conducting the OEF for retailers ............................................................................... 17 67
7.1. Defining the goal and scope ................................................................................... 17 68
7.1.1. Defining the goal of the study ............................................................................. 17 69
6
7.1.2. Defining the unit of analysis ................................................................................ 17 70
7.1.3. Defining the product portfolio ............................................................................ 18 71
7.1.4. Defining the system boundaries – life cycle stages and processes ....................... 21 72
7.1.5. Defining the impact assessment .......................................................................... 22 73
7.1.5.1. Selection of the EF impact categories assessed and their indicators ................. 22 74
7.1.5.2. Evaluation of the most relevant impact categories ........................................... 22 75
7.1.5.2.1. Using only normalization at midpoint with equal weighting .......................... 23 76
7.1.5.2.2. Using a combined approach of normalization at midpoint with equal weighting 77
and damage approach ..................................................................................................... 24 78
7.1.6. Additional environmental information ................................................................ 24 79
7.1.7. Assumptions/limitations ..................................................................................... 24 80
7.2. Modeling the resource use and emissions profile .................................................. 25 81
7.2.1. Data quality requirements .................................................................................. 25 82
7.2.2. Requirements regarding foreground specific data collection ............................... 27 83
7.2.3. Requirements regarding background generic data and data gaps ........................ 28 84
7.2.4. Data gaps ............................................................................................................ 28 85
7.2.5. Requirements for multifunctional products and multiproduct processes allocation86
28 87
7.2.6. Modeling the different life cycle stages ............................................................... 29 88
7.2.6.1. Modeling the production stage ........................................................................ 29 89
7.2.6.2. Modeling the logistics stage ............................................................................. 30 90
7.2.6.3. Modeling the retailer place .............................................................................. 31 91
7.2.6.4. Modeling the distribution stage ....................................................................... 33 92
7.2.6.5. Modeling the use stage .................................................................................... 33 93
7.2.6.6. Modeling the end-‐of-‐life stage ......................................................................... 34 94
7
7.2.6.7. Modeling the support activity .......................................................................... 36 95
7.2.6.8. Modeling employees related activities ............................................................. 36 96
7.3. Calculating resource use and emissions profile ...................................................... 37 97
7.4. Calculating the impact scores and identification of the most relevant impact 98
categories ....................................................................................................................... 37 99
7.4.1. Calculation of the impact scores ......................................................................... 37 100
7.4.2. Identification of the most relevant impact categories ......................................... 37 101
7.5. Interpretation ........................................................................................................ 38 102
8. Reporting, disclosure and communication ................................................................ 38 103
8.1. OEF external communication report ...................................................................... 38 104
8.2. OEF performance tracking report ........................................................................... 39 105
9. Verification ............................................................................................................... 39 106
10. References .............................................................................................................. 39 107
11. Supporting information for the OEFSR .................................................................... 39 108
12. List of annexes ........................................................................................................ 40 109
12.1. Annex I – Default data for the distribution, storage and use stage and to model 110
end-‐of-‐life ....................................................................................................................... 40 111
12.2. Annex II – Foreground data .................................................................................. 40 112
12.3. Annex III – Background data ................................................................................ 40 113
12.4. Annex IV – Normalisation factors ......................................................................... 40 114
12.5. Annex V – Conversion factors from midpoint to endpoint to identify most relevant 115
impact categories ............................................................................................................ 41 116
12.6. Annex VI – Screening study of the OEF of a virtual retailer associated with this 117
OEFSR 45 118
12.7. Annex VII – Supporting studies ............................................................................ 45 119
8
12.8. Annex VIII – Background information on methodological choices taken during the 120
development of the OEFSR .............................................................................................. 45 121
12.9. Annex IX – Sector classification (NACE) ................................................................ 45 122
123
9
Abbreviations and acronyms1,2 124
ADEME French Environment and Energy Management Agency CH Country code for Switzerland (in ecoinvent datasets) DALY Disability-‐adjusted life years DC Distribution center ENVIFOOD The ENVIFOOD protocol is a harmonized framework assessment
methodology for the environmental assessment of food and drink products launched by the European Food Sustainable Consumption and Production Round Table (http://www.food-scp.eu/node/72)
EAA Environment Agency Austria EF Environmental Footprint EMAS Eco-‐Management and Audit Scheme ENEA Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable
Economic Development EOL end of life G gram GLO Location code for “global” in ecoinvent datasets ILCD International reference life cycle data system IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ISO International Organization for Standardization JRC Joint Research Centre kg kilogram km kilometre kWh kilowatt hour L litre LCA Life Cycle Assessment LCI Life Cycle Inventory LCIA Life Cycle Impact Assessment m metre MJ mega joules (MJ) mL millilitre NACE Nomenclature Générale des Activités Economiques dans les
Communautés Européennes OEF Organisation Environmental Footprint OEFSR Organisation Environmental Footprint Sector Rules PDF Potentially disappeared fraction of species PCR Product Category Rule PEF Product Environmental Footprint PEFCR Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules PERIFEM French Technical Association of Trade RER Location code for “Europe” in ecoinvent datasets
1 Editing note: We suggest that the terms, glossary, abbreviations, and units be treated consistently among PEFCRs/OEFSRs, being (it is just a proposal): that general PEF/OEF terms, glossary, abbreviations, and units are presented in the PEF/OEF; then PEFCRs/OEFSRs only introduce additional terms, glossary, abbreviations, and units specific to the category/sector, and the screening only introduce terms, glossary, abbreviations, and units that are neither presented in the PEFCRs/OEFSRs or PEF/OEF. Other approaches are possible but we suggest the TAB/SC to decide the approach and that all pilots treat this consistently. 2 Editing note: In the table below, in green are those abbreviations and acronyms that should be in fact only in the OEF?
10
SCP Sustainable Consumption and Production TS Technical Secretariat UCTE Union for the Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity US Country code for USA (in ecoinvent datasets) 125
11
Glossary3,4 126
This glossary defines key terms used in this OEFSR and the retail sector. Many of the terms are based 127
on the OEF Guide (European Commission 2013) unless otherwise noted. For further clarifications, 128
please refer to the OEF Guide. 129
130
Cradle to grave An assessment, including raw material extraction, processing, distribution, storage, use, and disposal or recycling stages. All relevant inputs and outputs are considered for all of the stages of the life cycle.
Directly attributable Refers to a process, activity or impact occurring within the defined Organisational Boundary.
Downstream Occurring along a product supply chain after exiting the Organisational Boundary.
Environmental impact Any change to the environment, whether adverse or beneficial, that wholly or partially results from an Organisation’s activities or products. [Eco-‐Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) regulation]
In-‐house products All products that are manufactured or significantly transformed by the retailer. (OEFSR Retail Technical Secretariat)
Input Product, material or energy flow that enters a unit process. Products and materials include raw materials, intermediate products and co-‐products. (International Organisation for Standardization (ISO) 14040:2006)
Life cycle Consecutive and interlinked stages of a product system, from raw material acquisition or generation from natural resources to final disposal. (ISO 14040:2006)
Life cycle approach Takes into consideration the spectrum of resource flows and environmental interventions associated with a product or organisation from a supply chain perspective, including all stages from raw material acquisition through processing, distribution, use, and end-‐of-‐life processes, and all relevant related environmental impacts (instead of focusing on a single issue).
Life cycle assessment (LCA)
Compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle (ISO 14040:2006)
National and international brands
Products produced by another company that are either sold nationally or internationally. (OEFSR Retail Technical Secretariat)
Organisation environmental footprint sector rules (OEFSRs)
Are sector-‐specific, life cycle based rules that complement general methodological guidance for OEF studies by providing further specification at the sectorial level. OFCRs can help shifting the focus of the OEF study towards those aspects and parameters that matter the most, and hence contribute to increased relevance, reproducibility and consistency.
3 Editing note: We suggest that the terms, glossary, abbreviations, and units be treated consistently among PEFCRs/OEFSRs, being (it is just a proposal): that general PEF/OEF terms, glossary, abbreviations, and units are presented in the PEF/OEF; then PEFCRs/OEFSRs only introduce additional terms, glossary, abbreviations, and units specific to the category/sector, and the screening only introduce terms, glossary, abbreviations, and units that are neither presented in the PEFCRs/OEFSRs or PEF/OEF. Other approaches are possible but we suggest the TAB/SC to decide the approach and that all pilots treat this consistently. 4 Editing note: In the glossary below, in green are those terms that should be in fact only in the OEF?
12
Other products All products that are not manufactured nor significantly transformed by the retailer (includes own brands, national and international brands). (OEFSR Retail Technical Secretariat)
Output Product, material or energy flow that leaves a unit process. Products and materials include raw materials, intermediate products, co-‐products and releases. (ISO 14040:2006)
Own brands All products sold under a brand managed by the retailer that are not manufactured nor significantly transformed by the retailer. (OEFSR Retail Technical Secretariat)
Product Any goods or service. (ISO 14040:2006) system boundary Definition of aspects included or excluded from the study. For example,
for a “cradle to-‐grave” environmental footprint analysis, the system boundary should include all activities from the extraction of raw materials through the processing, manufacturing, use, repair and maintenance processes as well as transport, waste treatment and other purchased services such as e.g. cleaning and legal services, marketing, production and decommissioning of capital goods, operation of premises such as retail, storage, administration offices, staff commuting, business travel, and end-‐of-‐life processes.
System boundary diagram
Schematic representation of the analysed system. It details which parts of the Organisation supply chain are included or excluded from the analysis.
Unit of analysis The unit of analysis defines the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the function(s) and/or service(s) provided by the Organisation being evaluated; the unit of analysis definition answers the questions “what?”, “how much?”, “how well?”, and “for how long?”.
Upstream Occurring along the supply chain of purchased goods/services prior to entering the Organisational Boundary.
Waste Substances or objects which the holder intends or is required to dispose of. (ISO 14040:2006)
131
13
Organisation Environmental Footprint 132
Sector Rules 133
Retail 134
1. Introduction 135
The Organisation Environmental Footprint (OEF) Guide provides detailed and comprehensive 136
technical guidance on how to conduct an OEF study. OEF studies may be used for a variety of 137
purposes, including in-‐house management and participation in voluntary or mandatory programmes. 138
This OEFSR shall be used in parallel with the OEF Guide. Where the requirements in this OEFSR are in 139
line with but at the same time more specific than those of the OEF Guide, such specific requirements 140
shall be fulfilled. 141
2. General information about this OEFSR 142
2.1. Technical Secretariat 143
The technical secretariat responsible for the development of the OEFSRs for the retail sector is 144
composed of the following 12 organisations: 145
1. Quantis (Coordinator): Sebastien Humbert (main contact), Carole Dubois, Cécile Guignard, 146
Simone Pedrazzini, Angela Adams 147
2. Carrefour*: Pascal Léglise, Lea Lim, Gwendolyn Bailey 148
3. Colruyt Group*: Frederic Vermeiren, Steven Van Hemelryck, Mieke Vercaeren 149
4. Kering*: François-‐Xavier Morvan 150
5. Office Depot, Inc.*: Shela Fletcher 151
6. Oxylane Group (Decathlon SA)*: Emilie Aubry 152
7. Picard*: Arnaud Brulaire 153
8. French Technical Association of Trade and Retail (PERIFEM): Sophie Gillier 154
9. French Environment and Energy Management Agency (ADEME): Romain Poivet 155
10. Environment Agency Austria (EAA): Hanna Schreiber 156
11. Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic 157
Development (ENEA): Paolo Masoni 158
12. GLOBAL 2000-‐Friends of the Earth Austria: Martin Wildenberg, Kewin Comploi 159
160
14
where * indicates that the organisation is a retailer that will be performing a supporting study. 161
2.2. Consultation and stakeholders 162
A 1st public consultation on the scope document for the OEFSR Retail was performed from February 163
7th, 2014 to March 7th, 2014. A 1st physical consultation was held in Brussels on February 21st, 2014. 164
A 2nd public consultation on the scope document for the OEFSR Retail was performed from April 165
22nd, 2014 to May 20th, 2014. A 1st public consultation on the draft screening and draft OEFSR 166
documents for the Retail pilot was performed from April 29th, 2015 to May 27st, 2015. 167
Documents related to the OEFSR Retail are available at the following web-‐link in the dedicated wiki 168
page: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/fpfis/wikis/display/EUENVFP/OEFSR+Pilot:+Retail 169
2.3. Date of publication and expiration 170
Version number: Draft version for the second online consultation 171
Date of publication/revision: XX 172
Date of expiration: Once an updated version is published or 5 years after its publication. 173
3. Methodological inputs and compliance 174
This OEFSR is in conformance with the OEF Guide5. It is also compliant with the draft version of the 175
following PEFCRs: SPECIFY WHICH PEFCR AND THE VERSION & YEAR. 176
3.1. Sector 177
This OEFSR addresses the activities related to the retail sector that covers all activities involving the 178
sale of products to consumers. 179
This OEFSR can be used by all different types of retailers (e.g., independent stores, chains, 180
franchises, etc.) selling food, fast-‐moving consumer goods (e.g., shampoo), durable goods (e.g., 181
dishwasher), consumables (e.g., t-‐shirt) and services (e.g., oil change) to the end user for personal, 182
professional or household use and consumption to assess their OEF, over part or full of their 183
product portfolio, including the full life cycle of the product portfolio chosen. 184
185
5 See European Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU on the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations, http://eur-‐lex.europa.eu/legal-‐content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013H0179
15
A retailer may engage in the following two major types of activities: 186
• The sale of products: retailing logistics that include all activities necessary for the service of 187
buying and selling products 188
• The production and service provision of in-‐house products: where the retailer has control 189
(taking into account both financial and operational control) 190
3.2. Sector classification (NACE) 191
This OEFSR applies to the sector NACE Rev. 2 Division 47 (retail trade, except of motor vehicles and 192
motorcycles). 193
Furthermore, for retailers producing in-‐house products, NACE divisions C10-‐32 are considered. 194
Depending on further activities of the retailer, other NACE codes may apply. For a detailed 195
explanation of the divisions, see Annex IX. 196
3.3. Geographic region 197
This OEFSR was developed in a European context but can be used to assess the OEF of business units 198
or supply chain outside Europe. It is a priori not forbidden to use it to conduct ones OEF outside of 199
Europe. 200
3.4. Language(s) of OEFSR 201
The language of this OEFSR is English. It is not foreseen to make this document available in other 202
languages. The original in English supersedes translated versions in case of conflicts. 203
4. OEFSR review and background information 204
4.1. OEFSR review panel 205
[Name, contact information and affiliation of the chair and the other members of the review panel.] 206
Editing note: Not reviewed yet. 207
4.2. Review requirements for the OEFSR document 208
[Specify the requirements for the crucial review of this OEFSR document]. 209
Editing note: The Commission intends to clarify the contents of this section in a new version of the 210
Guidance. 211
16
4.3. Reasoning for development of OEFSR 212
[Describe application contexts of OEFSR. Describe any attempt to harmonize OEFSR or align with 213
existing sector guidance.] 214
The retail being a complex world, this OEFSR aims at helping fostering the use of life cycle 215
assessment in the retail sector through a practical application of the OEF Guide to the retail sector. 216
No attempt has been done to harmonize or align this OEFSR with other sector guidance outside the 217
OEF Guide, the OEF Guidance, the UNEP-‐SETAC Organization LCA guide, and the ISO 14040, 14044, 218
14046, 14072 standards. 219
4.4. Conformance with the OEFSR Guidance 220
[Summarize the conformity assessment against the ‘Guidance for the Implementation of the EU OEF 221
during the Environmental Footprint (EF) pilot phase’.] 222
This draft OEFSR has been prepared in conformance with the “Guidance for the implementation of 223
the EU Organisation Environmental Footprint (OEF) during the Environmental Footprint (EF) Pilot 224
Phase” version 3.1. 225
Deviations from the Guidance version 3.1 are the following: (i) no direct vs indirect separation of 226
activities has been done. 227
5. Representative organization and supporting studies 228
5.1. Representative organisation 229
The representative organization used to help develop this OEFSR is based on a virtual retailer and is 230
described in Annex VI. This virtual retailer is a retailer situated “somewhere in Europe”, selling both 231
food & beverage and non-‐food & non-‐beverage products (i.e. goods and services) for a consumer 232
“population” of about 3’000’000 people. It has some in-‐house products but mainly provides out-‐of-‐233
house products. 234
5.2. Supporting studies 235
Supporting studies related to the OEFSR Retail are available at the following web-‐link in the 236
dedicated wiki page: 237
https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/fpfis/wikis/display/EUENVFP/OEFSR+Pilot:+Retail 238
Editing note: Not done yet. 239
17
6. Benchmark and classes of environmental performance 240
Due to the large variety of product portfolios possible among retailers, it is not possible to establish 241
a single benchmark and classes of performance for the sector. 242
7. Conducting the OEF for retailers6 243
7.1. Defining the goal and scope 244
7.1.1. Defining the goal of the study7 245
When a retailer prepares its OEF, it shall list the goals of the study based on the requirements of the 246
OEF Guide (chapter 4.2)8. It is important to make sure that the scope and system boundary, the 247
impact categories assessed as well as the level of details in which the assessment is going are aligned 248
with the goal of the study. 249
This OEFSR cannot be used as a basis for comparative assertions. 250
7.1.2. Defining the unit of analysis 251
The unit of analysis (or “reporting unit” in ISO/TS 14072) of the OEF of a retailer shall be the 252
following: 253
• The retailer, as a product provider (i.e., taking into account the life cycle impacts of the 254
products provided), over a 1-‐year time interval. 255
When assessing the life cycle impacts of the products sold during the 1-‐year time interval, the 256
impacts of their storage, even if existing before the start of the 1-‐year time interval shall be 257
6 Editing note (esp. for EC and other OEF pilots): Since we expect that the main reason for people to read this document is to get information on how to conduct an OEF for retailer, we suggest to have the following sections (from sections “B.6 Goal and scope” to section “B.8 Interpretation” of the template in Guidance for organizations v3.1a) being all regrouped under one chapter, being named for example “Conducting the OEF for retailer” as presented here. We suggest to start the titles by “Defining the…” as this language might be more understanding for new comers. 7 Editing note: This section is missing in the template. We suggest adding it as we feel it is important to add somewhere what the “goal” of a study is since this may influence the way the unit of analysis, the product portfolio and the system are defined. We suggest having this section added in the template for all OEFSR and OEF studies. 8 Editing note: We aim to make this more concrete for the users of the OEFSR based on the experience we will gain through the supporting studies (e.g. correlation between specific goals that may be identified and the requirements in the OEFSR)?
18
included. The impacts of the products available in the inventory during the 1-‐year time interval but 258
that will be sold only after that 1-‐year time interval should be assessed but reported separately 259
(typically in the additional information section) from the main OEF results. 260
The final result may be expressed, in addition to the basic reference of 1 year (and as additional 261
information), using a different reference, for example per amount of product consumed. This way of 262
presenting the information may then be used in communication and/or in comparison (but in no 263
way in a comparative assertion) with alternative retailing systems. 264
7.1.3. Defining the product portfolio 265
The Product Portfolio considered for the organisation includes the following: 266
• the products (goods and services)9* provided for sale10 (both in-‐house products (i.e., 267
products that are manufactured or significantly transformed by the retailer) and other 268
products (i.e., own brands that are not manufactured nor significantly transformed by the 269
retailer, as well as national and international brands) 270
The product portfolio may cover the entire range of products provided for sale or a sub-‐set of them. 271
The product portfolio covered shall be clearly specified in the OEF study. If only a sub-‐set of the 272
product portfolio is covered by the OEF study, then it shall be clearly stated in the OEF study that not 273
all the entire range of products provided for sale is covered. 274
The product portfolio shall be represented by product categories: one (in rare cases where the 275
retailer is specialized in one specific product category) or several product categories. The product 276
categories chosen shall “capture” the entire product portfolio selected in the scope of the study and 277
shall follow the list of major retail trade sectors11 : 278
• food 279
• beverage 280
• tobacco 281
• fruit and vegetables 282
• meat and meat products 283
• fish, crustaceans and molluscs 284
• bread, cakes, flour and sugar confectionery 285
9 According to ISO, a product is any good or service (ISO 14040:2006). 10 i.e., that products provided for sale but which ended up not sold and thrown away (e.g., fresh food getting out of date) are also included in the Product Portfolio. 11 European Commission Joint Research Centre: Best Environmental Management Practice in the Retail Trade Sector, 2013, http://susproc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/activities/emas/documents/RetailTradeSector.pdf
19
• automotive fuel 286
• information and communication equipment 287
o computers, peripheral units and software 288
o telecommunications equipment 289
o audio and video equipment 290
• textiles 291
• hardware, paints and glass 292
• carpets, rugs, wall and floor coverings 293
• electrical household appliances 294
• furniture, lighting equipment 295
• cultural and recreation goods 296
o books 297
o newspapers and stationery 298
o music and video recordings 299
o sporting equipment 300
o games and toys 301
• clothing 302
• footwear and leather goods 303
• dispensing chemist 304
• medical and orthopaedic goods 305
• cosmetic and toilet articles 306
• flowers, plants, seeds, fertilisers, pet animals and pet food 307
• watches and jewellery 308
• other 309
310
The number of categories defined will depend on the goal of the study and the product portfolio 311
subject to the OEF study. 312
Each category may be divided into several sub-‐categories where deemed necessary. Indeed, when 313
defining the product categories used to divide the product portfolio, the retailer could easily “go into 314
details” for some products if deemed pertinent and considering other factors (e.g., whether data are 315
available or can be easily modelled, time and budget restraints, if a specific environmental strategy 316
is planned for the product, etc.). This refining process can be done throughout the study, whenever 317
deemed necessary. 318
20
The list used in the screening study presented in Annex VI can be used as an example for selecting 319
the product categories within the product portfolio. 320
It is advised to present the product portfolio in a table using for example the Table 2 of Annex VI as a 321
template. 322
Approach to assess each product category of the product portfolio 323
Three approaches may be used to analyse each category of the product portfolio: bottom-‐up 324
(process-‐based), top-‐down (input/output) or hybrid (mix of both). Because the process-‐based 325
approach is more detailed (i.e., in terms of the inventory and impacts considered) and provides for 326
easier tracking of future improvements, this approach should be used for OEF assessment. 327
Alternative methods (such as input/output or hybrid) could be used if justified. 328
Approach using a representative product 329
In order to model the impacts of each product category, one needs to define one (or several) 330
representative product per product category. The representative products for each category shall be 331
selected based on the most commonly sold product within the sector and category (based on 332
statistics or expert judgement) or, where such an assessment would lead to a misrepresentation of 333
the environmental impacts of the product category, a product that from an environmental impact 334
perspective represents the category the closest 12. When selecting the representative product, one 335
also needs to consider the availability of the product in the LCI databases. If the main product does 336
not exist in a LCI database, one can look at a dataset from a product that is as close as possible from 337
the main product of the category assessed. 338
When selecting the representative product(s), one should keep in mind that the purpose of the 339
representative products(s) is to estimate the environmental impact of the overall product category 340
sold, with the ultimate goal to reduce it by introducing specific measures. The level of accuracy in 341
estimating the product category footprint is therefore connected with its overall relevance both in 342
terms of magnitude and of possibility of reduction. Therefore a retailer should reduce the 343
uncertainty in assessing the environmental footprint of a product category where necessary by an 344
iterative approach introducing a more detailed representation of the product category. 345
The list used in the screening study presented in Annex VI is an example of selecting representative 346
product(s) for each product category within the product portfolio. 347
12 As an example where expert judgement might be better than the actual most commonly sold product is if the most commonly sold product is the product with the lowest impact within that product category. Indeed, choosing the most commonly sold product in that case would certainly underestimate the impact of the overall product category. A product that may not be the most commonly sold but with slightly more impacts than the most commonly sold product would in that case be a better fit to calculate the overall product category impacts and therefore be a better representative product than the most commonly sold product.
21
When modelling the products of the product portfolio, the retailer shall consider that all products in 348
the product portfolio are ready to be sold, and therefore including everything that is “with them” 349
when sold (typically with all required packaging included but also any protection device or user 350
manual). 351
7.1.4. Defining the system boundaries – life cycle stages and processes 352
Organisational boundaries13 353
[Define Organisational boundaries: specify the characteristic processes, activities and facilities to be 354
included in the Organisational boundaries (i.e. to highlight those activities under the control of the 355
organization)]. 356
OEF boundaries 357
[Specify all attributable life-‐cycle stages and processes that can be associated to the organisation. 358
(Products and waste streams should be clearly identified). Justify with reasoning any deviation from 359
the default cradle-‐to-‐grave approach (e.g. exclusions of life cycle stages and processes), referring to 360
the results of the screening and approval processes for decisions taken.] 361
System diagram 362
[Provide a system diagram clearly indicating the processes that are included in the Organisational 363
boundaries. Provide a second diagram indicating the OEF boundaries] 364
System boundaries -‐ upstream processes/scenarios 365
[Specify upstream scenarios (e.g. raw material production, raw material extraction). If necessary, a 366
more detailed description can be provided in Annex (optional).] 367
System boundaries -‐ downstream processes/scenarios 368
[Specify downstream processes in terms of selected scenarios for e.g. use phase and end of life. If 369
necessary, a more detailed description can be provided in Annex (optional).] 370
371
The entire life cycle (from cradle to grave) of a retailer is included in the system boundaries. The 372
following seven life cycle stages shall be included: production and service provision, logistics, retail 373
place, support, distribution of sold products to the client, use of sold products, end-‐of-‐life of sold 374
products. The entire life cycle (from cradle to grave) of a retailer is depicted in Figure 2 below 375
includes all organisation, upstream and downstream activities associated with the product portfolio 376
of the organization assessed. 377
13 Editing note: The below five sections in grey will be completed based on the learning of the supporting studies (for example will be to provide instructions on how to define these).
22
378 Figure 2 System boundaries for the organisation assessed 379
380
7.1.5. Defining the impact assessment14 381
7.1.5.1. Selection of the EF impact categories assessed and their 382
indicators 383
[If applicable, identify the most relevant EF impact categories for the product portfolio in scope.] 384
The OEF shall be performed for the full list of required impact categories in the OEF guide, using the 385
indicators described therein. 386
7.1.5.2. Evaluation of the most relevant impact categories 387
All impact categories shall be reassessed for each retail OEF study, as the most relevant impact 388
categories can be different among retailers depending on their specificities (for example due to their 389
product portfolio and specialities that can be very different from other retailers). 390
Both normalization at midpoint and damage approach shall be performed and results presented in the 391
report. 392
Disclaimer (by the European Commission): 393 Within the Environmental Footprint (EF) pilot phase normalisation and equal weighting were 394
foreseen to be used in the EF screenings to identify the most relevant impact categories. The use of 395 14 Editing note: there is one section in the template named “6.3 Selection of the EF Impact categories indicators”. However, we feel that in the Goal and scope, what is important to mention is general information about the impact assessment phase, being the selection of EF impact categories assessed, EF impact categories indicators chosen, and whether (and if yes, how) normalization, weighting and/or additional impact assessment steps are done. Therefore, we suggest to rename this section a general “Defining the impact assessment” and then have some sub-‐sections as suggested here.
23
normalisation and weighting for this purpose remains the objective for the EF pilots and beyond15. 396
However, currently EF […] results after the normalisation and equal weighing present some 397
inconsistencies stemming from errors at various levels of the assessment. Therefore, screening results 398
after normalisation and equal weighting are not sufficiently robust to apply for product comparisons 399
in an automatic and mandatory way in the EF pilots, e.g. to identify the most relevant impact 400
categories. The interpretation of the results reflects these limitations. 401
To avoid potential misinterpretation and misuse of the EF […] results we highlight that the results 402
after normalisation and equal weighting, -‐ without further error checking and possibly corrections, -‐ 403
are likely to overestimate or underestimate especially the relevance of the potential impacts related 404
to the categories Human toxicity -‐ cancer effect, Human toxicity -‐ non-‐cancer effect, Ecotoxicity for 405
aquatic fresh water, water depletion, resource depletion, ionizing radiation and land use. 406
7.1.5.2.1. Using only normalization at midpoint16 with equal 407
weighting 408
The identification of the most relevant impact categories for a retailer may be performed by 409
summing the most relevant impact categories identified with the normalization approach suggested 410
by PEF/OEF (see normalization factors in Annex IV) and applying an equal weighting among impact 411
categories17. 412
Once you have identified the most relevant impact categories for your organization, you could, as an 413
additional interpretation compare them to the one found for the virtual retailer in the OEF screening 414
study (see Annex VI). For example, for a retailer selling a broad range of products including food and 415
non-‐food, it is important to understand why the most relevant impact categories identified would 416
change as compared to the list below: 417
-‐ Human toxicity, both cancer and non-‐cancer effects 418
-‐ Mineral, fossil and renewable resource depletion 419
15 Editing note: The TS Retail does not support fully this approach but a combined normalization at midpoint and damage approach to identify the most relevant impact categories as presented in this document. 16 Editing note: The Retail pilot doesn't support the use of this approach alone but suggest to use the followings approach which combines normalization at midpoint and damage assessment. 17 Editing note: The issue of equal weighting has been raised at the Technical Advisory Board level and we expect it to be resolved before the end of the pilot. The Retail pilot doesn't support the use of equal weighting.
24
7.1.5.2.2. Using a combined approach of normalization at 420
midpoint with equal weighting and damage approach 421
The identification of the most relevant impact categories for a retailer may be performed by 422
summing the most relevant impact categories identified with 1) the normalization approach 423
suggested by PEF/OEF (see normalization factors in Annex IV), applying an equal weighting among 424
impact categories18, and with 2) the damage approach suggested in Annex V. 425
Once you have identified the most relevant impact categories for your organization, you could, as an 426
additional interpretation compare them to the one found for the virtual retailer in the OEF screening 427
study (see Annex VI). For example, for a retailer selling a broad range of products including food and 428
non-‐food, it is important to understand why the most relevant impact categories identified would 429
change as compared to the list below: 430
-‐ Climate change 431
-‐ Human toxicity, both cancer and non-‐cancer effects 432
-‐ Particulate matter 433
-‐ Eutrophication (considering all three impact categories for marine, terrestrial and 434
freshwater) 435
-‐ Land use 436
-‐ Water resource depletion 437
-‐ Mineral, fossil and renewable resource depletion 438
7.1.6. Additional environmental information 439
Retailers may report additional environmental information deemed necessary and as described in 440
the OEF Guide. For example, retailers having EMAS might wish to include EMAS indicators. 441
7.1.7. Assumptions/limitations 442
[Report sector-‐specific limitations and define the assumptions necessary to overcome these.] 443
In an OEF, in practice not all data primary data are available to model processes, such as 444
infrastructure and equipment (e.g., industrial refrigeration systems in distribution centers) and 445
consumables, therefore generic datasets are often used to overcome this lack of primary data. 446
However, currently background LCI databases are not containing generic processes for everything 447
18 Editing note: The issue of equal weighting has been raised at the Technical Advisory Board level and we expect it to be resolved before the end of the pilot. The Retail pilot doesn't support the use of equal weighting.
25
and therefore proxies (e.g., materials of a home fridge used as a proxy for materials for industrial 448
refrigeration system) often need to be used to model the impacts of what one wants actually to 449
model. This is a source of uncertainty in the results of any PEF and OEF that needs to be kept in 450
mind. Within the interpretation process, one needs to identify in an iterative way the proxies that 451
make the largest uncertainty and refine them as much as practically possible (within time and data 452
availability constraints) to bring them as close as possible to the actual process that need to be 453
modelled. 454
455 As the Retail sector is made by very different organizations, there are several main limitations of a 456
general OEF Retail. The OEFSR Retail provides common guidelines to the retail sector but the way 457
different organizations apply those guidelines may not be exactly the same. For example, an 458
organization producing its own products will have a different way to include the impact of 459
production than an organization only designing the products with subcontracted manufacturing. 460
Also, an organization already involved in products LCA will have more detailed results regarding its 461
products than another organization and therefore will have a different level of precision in the 462
values used and results. Besides, in function of the objective of the organization, the calculation can 463
be different. 464
465 Another limitation is the fact that it is very difficult to compare organizations among each other. 466 467
A limitation that is valid for any PEF and OEF results, that is important to keep in mind is that the 468
results are relative expressions and do not predict impacts on category endpoints, the exceeding of 469
thresholds, safety margins or risks. This disclaimer has to be put in any OEF assessment report. 470
7.2. Modeling the resource use and emissions profile19 471
Sources of data shall always be clearly quoted. 472
7.2.1. Data quality requirements 473
[Provide guidance on data quality assessment scoring with respect to time, geographical and 474
technological representativeness. Specify if there are any additional criteria for the assessment of 475
data quality (compared to default criteria reported in the OEF Guide)] 476 19 Editing note: In the original template, there is a section “resource use and emissions profile”. However, as seen in the original template, this section is more about how to MODEL the LCI rather than CALCULATING the LCI results. We suggest therefore to add “Modeling the” at the beginning. This title could still be changed to “Modeling the system” or something like that?
26
The assessor has to remember that OEF, like LCA, is in practice an iterative/incremental process. 477
Ideally, primary data would be used for all stages, but in practice, only secondary data will be 478
available for some processes to be modeled. Indeed, since the LCA approach aims to model reality, 479
LCA must, by definition, simplify where necessary. Also, depending on the goal of the study, there 480
may be no need to spend lots of time or energy to collect primary data for processes that are not 481
relevant to the goal specified. 482
As a rule of thumb, primary data shall be collected for the activity data for the foreground system. 483
Primary data shall be used for the amount of products sold by the retailer. 484
Secondary data may be used for upstream and downstream retailer’s activities, except for in-‐house 485
products, where primary data shall be used for activity data. 486
Special attention shall be given to obtain data with the highest quality that will influence expected 487
hotspots (for example based on the screening presented in Annex VI). 488
Once draft results are obtained and preliminary indication about unexpected hotspots, every 489
possible effort shall be done to increase the amount of primary data used in the modelling of every 490
leading activity data or elementary flow, whether they occur in the organization or in up-‐ or 491
downstream activities20. For example, for transport, the section from the last supplier could be well 492
known by the retailer, so it should use primary data on this section (e.g., amount of t.km and other 493
main factors like loading rates and empty section rates). It may use secondary data on upstream 494
sections from “n-‐1” suppliers. 495
Retailers are encouraged to use as much as possible primary data and/or put in place processes to 496
collect primary data for activities under their control. 497
To sum up those points for the OEF study within a retailer, primary data shall be used for: 498
1. Main characteristics of the retailer such as number of employees, type and amount of 499
energy consumption, water use, refrigerant use and leakage in activities under your control, 500
size of buildings; amount fuel used for transport or km driven by company vehicles, business 501
travel, commuting; waste generated. 502
2. On amount of products sold by the retailer (ideally mass or volume or at least in value, types 503
of major categories). 504
3. On leading flows and leading upstream/downstream activities identified by the screening 505
study (especially for activities related to “own” products). 506 20 For leading activity data or flows in background activities it might be difficult to obtain primary data and in these cases, it is permitted to use secondary data on these important flows but paying attention to use the one of higher quality possible. In order to save time and widespread OEF study practice within retail sector, it is recommended to use a smart mix of primary and secondary data on leading upstream/downstream activities and flux.
27
If for any reason no primary data is available and secondary data may be used. However, this shall 507
be clearly stated in the report both next to the data as well as in the limitations section. The 508
influence of the use of secondary data instead of primary data should be evaluated and stated. 509
Secondary data may be used: 510
1. On flows and activities identified by the screening study of being of lower importance as 511
compared to some other flows and activities. 512
2. When primary data are not known or reachable with the constraints of the study. 513
3. When primary data are assessed as being of higher uncertainty than a secondary data. 514
The interpretation of the results should reflect the amount of primary data that were used in the 515
modeling. 516
7.2.2. Requirements regarding foreground specific data collection 517
[Specify: 518
i) Unit processes for which primary specific data are required (e.g. foreground processes) and how 519
they are to be collected. 520
ii) Define the data collection requirements for the following aspects for each site: 521
• Data collection coverage 522
• Location of data collection (domestically, internationally…) 523
• Term of data collection (year, season, month…) 524
• When the location or term of data collection must be limited to a certain range, provide a 525
justification and show that the collected data will serve as sufficient samples.] 526
Provide a list of substances/elementary flows in the foreground system that shall be collected. This 527
list shall be added as an Annex; 528
Include one or more examples for compiling foreground data, including specifications with respect 529
to: 530
• Substance lists for activities/processes included; 531
• Units; 532
• Nomenclature for elementary flows (in line with ILCD Data Network entry level requirements).] 533
28
7.2.3. Requirements regarding background generic data and data 534
gaps21 535
[Specify: 536
i) Unit processes for which secondary generic data may be used (e.g. background processes) 537
ii) Sources of secondary generic data. 538
iii) Provide generic substance to replace the actual substance in the BOM based on relevant 539
properties (e.g. physical, chemical, processing, etc) 540
All generic data shall be specified in Annex]. 541
7.2.4. Data gaps 542
Editing note: Any proposal on how to treat data gaps? 543
7.2.5. Requirements for multifunctional products and multiproduct 544
processes allocation 545
[In case applicable, specify multi-‐functionality solutions and clearly justify with reference to the OEF 546
multi/functionality solution hierarchy. Where subdivision is applied, specify which processes are to 547
be sub-‐divided and how to subdivide the process by specifying the principles that such subdivision 548
should adhere to. Where system expansion is used, specify which processes are added to the 549
system. Where allocation by physical relationship is applied, specify the relevant underlying physical 550
relationships to be considered, and establish the relevant allocation factors or rules. Where 551
allocation by some other relationship is applied, specify this relationship and establish the relevant 552
allocation factors or rules.] 553
Allocations are applied typically for transports, distribution centre and supermarket infrastructure, 554
water and energy consumption. Allocation may also occur in factories producing different co-‐555
products, both for in-‐house and out-‐of-‐house products. As a rule of thumb, allocation among co-‐556
products in factories should be based on economic approach. 557
For transport, if primary data about load is not available or if several different products are 558
transported in the same truck without clear indication of which product is the main driver of the 559
21 Editing note: One should speak here about background life cycle inventory databases, their source, their strength and limitations, etc. However, this will be done once the topic will have been addressed at the TAB level.
29
need for transport, mass-‐based allocation shall be used (instead of volume-‐based, except when it 560
can be demonstrated that volume-‐based is more realistic). 561
For the distribution centre and supermarket infrastructure, water and energy consumption as well 562
as chilled or cold storage at user, allocation based on volume and duration should be used. 563
Alternative approaches may be used but justification on why it is better than volume and duration 564
shall be provided. 565
7.2.6. Modeling the different life cycle stages 566
7.2.6.1. Modeling the production stage 567
Both the production and service provision of in-‐house and other products are included in this stage. 568
Thus, some activities will be included within the organisational boundary while others will not. Some 569
details of this life cycle stage are presented in Figure 3 below. 570
571 Figure 3 Some details for production & service provision life cycle stage 572
573
Activities from raw material acquisition through processing and production per plant (or processing 574
site) are included in this life cycle stage. 575
The production of all products included in the product portfolio shall be included. 576
For in-‐house products, the production stage modelling should be based as much as possible on 577
primary data collected in the manufacturing plants to model the product production (energy and 578
water consumption, material inputs, equipment and building and emissions and wastes, all of this 579
reported per unit of product). 580
30
For the out-‐of-‐house products, secondary data (e.g., from generic database) may be used for the 581
production of the product. Whenever there is a PEFCR available, it shall be used to represent that 582
product in the product portfolio22. 583
Packaging may be already included in the default dataset used to model the production of the 584
product. If information is available and deemed necessary (typically for in-‐house products), 585
packaging may be modelled based on observed materials, measured weights and based on 586
processes from generic databases. If some products are not available in the databases, models as 587
presented in the OEF retail screening report may be used or proxies or data from literature may be 588
considered. 589
In case no primary data is available for transport23 from the farm or suppliers to the factory, default 590
data presented in Annex I shall be used. 591
7.2.6.2. Modeling the logistics stage 592
Logistics typically comprises the transportation from factories to distribution centres, the 593
distribution centres, and the transportation from the distribution centres to the retailer places. The 594
logistics associated with the products are included in this stage. Transport to 595
warehouses/distribution centres, between warehouses and distribution centres and the transport 596
from the warehouses/distribution centres are included as shown in Figure 4 below. In addition, 597
sorting, transport and handling in the warehouse are included in this life cycle stage. 598
599
22 Editing note: The TS OEFSR Retail is aware that this rule may cause significant amount of work to « remodel » the representative product based on the PEFCR in case the PEFCR compliant product is not readily available in the generic database used by default by the retailer doing its OEF and neither in a format that can be imported easily. The TS OEFSR Retail is also aware that this rule may cause inconsistencies among product categories assessed in the product portfolio in case the different PEFCR used to model the different product categories of the product portfolio contains inconsistencies (e.g. in the system boundary, in allocation rules, in how deforestation has been considered in background agro-‐food data, etc.). 23 Any transport occurring before the factory is part of the production stage and not the logistics stage.
31
600 Figure 4 Schematic for the logistics life cycle stage 601
A warehouse is described as a physical building that solely stores products whereas a distribution 602
centre is a physical building that may store products but it is mainly where product sorting and 603
distribution to consumers occurs. 604
Primary data for the amount of product transport, type of transport (e.g., rail or truck, truck size, 605
ambient, chilled or frozen transport, electricity or diesel powered train) and average distance 606
between a distribution centre and a retailer should be considered for the modelling. In case such 607
data is not available, the default data presented in Annex I shall be used. 608
Transport from a distribution centre to another distribution centre should be included (if any), based 609
on primary data on the amount of products transported, the distance between the distribution 610
centres and the transport mode used. 611
All the distribution centres shall be modelled through primary data and including: building (including 612
parking) production and end-‐of-‐life; equipment and machinery production, use (except energy 613
already considered in the total energy consumption) and end-‐of-‐life; energy consumption; 614
refrigerant gas leakages (emissions plus production of replacement refrigerant gas). 615
7.2.6.3. Modeling the retailer place 616
This stage includes all sales methods used by a retailer. Figure 5 shows the retailer place system 617
boundary, which shall be adapted according to the activities of the retailer conducting the study. 618
Shopping malls and shops are “brick and mortar” stores where the retailer sells products to its 619
clients. Tele-‐commerce indicates any sale that is conducted through catalogues and telephones 620
while e-‐commerce indicates all sales that are performed in a virtual manner (i.e., online). Self pick-‐621
up is when the customer purchases a product online but then drives to a physical building to pick up 622
the product. 623
32
624
625 Figure 5 Some details for the retail place life cycle stage 626
The retail place shall be modelled including the following elements: building production and end-‐of-‐627
life, equipment production and end-‐of-‐life, energy consumption, refrigerant gases leakages 628
(emissions and production of replacement gas), repacking activities (new packaging production and 629
end-‐of-‐life), losses treatment and other services at the retail place. Primary data shall be collected 630
also to assess the e-‐commerce: building, energy consumption, number of servers required for the 631
activity and other IT equipment. 632
Other services at the retail place correspond to services sold by the retailer that are physically 633
located at the retail places, e.g., gas station, printing centre or banking services. For such services, 634
the impacts related to the production and end-‐of-‐life of the infrastructure and the equipment 635
necessary for the service brought back to one year of use, as well as their use during one year shall 636
be included in the retail place life cycle stage. Particular attention shall be paid for the modelling of 637
these services as the products they sell are modelled in the product production, use and end-‐of-‐life 638
stages while the services are modelled in the retail place. For instance, the paper used by the 639
printing service is considered as the other products of the retailer but the printing of this paper is 640
part of the service, i.e., the paper production is considered in the product production stage, the 641
printing of this paper is considered at the retail place stage, the use stage of the paper printed is 642
considered to have no impact and the treatment of the printed paper at its end-‐of-‐life is included in 643
the end-‐of-‐life stage (in comparison with this, the printing paper sold as paper by the retailer will 644
have a use stage as it will be printed at home). Regarding the gas station, the production of the gas 645
shall be included in the product production stage, the sale of the gas in the retail place stage 646
(through the gas station activity) and its combustion is included in the use stage (no end-‐of-‐life as no 647
product remains after combustion). 648
33
Primary data shall be used as much as possible to model the retail place. In case no such data is 649
available, the default data listed in Annex I shall be used. 650
Example provided in Annex I and Annex VI can be used to model the impacts of services (as 651
opposition to the goods within the product portfolio) provided by the retailer. 652
7.2.6.4. Modeling the distribution stage 653
This stage includes the following: 654
• Distribution of the sold product performed by the retailer (e.g., home delivery) 655
• Transport of the sold product by the client (e.g., by own car) 656
Primary data should be used as much as possible for distribution modelling. In case no such data is 657
available, the default data listed in Annex I shall be used. 658
7.2.6.5. Modeling the use stage 659
This life cycle stage includes the use stage impacts of the products sold. The use stage includes the 660
use of materials, energy and the emissions associated with goods/services occurring downstream of 661
the organisational boundary in relation to the product portfolio. The use stage is included for 662
products for which it is feasible to establish a use stage scenario. Note that not all products have use 663
impacts and for some of them it may not be possible to determine a typical use, as too many uses 664
are possible. In this latter case, no use stage impact may be considered for the product. Clear 665
justifications shall be provided in case where the use life cycle stage is excluded. The use stage of the 666
products shall include the use stage impacts of all product sold during the year but on their entire 667
lifetime: for instance for a fridge, if its lifetime is 15 years, then the use stage impacts of that fridge 668
sold shall be the cumulated impacts over the 15 years of its lifetime. 669
In case there is an existing PEFCR for the products for which the use stage needs to be modelled, the 670
retailer shall use the use stage assumptions and data provided through the PEFCR24. If no such 671
document exists, default data listed in Annex I shall be used. 672
24 Editing note: The TS OEFSR Retail is aware that this rule may cause significant amount of work to « remodel » the representative product based on the PEFCR in case the PEFCR compliant product is not readily available in the generic database used by default by the retailer doing its OEF and neither in a format that can be imported easily. The TS OEFSR Retail is also aware that this rule may cause inconsistencies among product categories assessed in the product portfolio in case the different PEFCR used to model the different product categories of the product portfolio contains inconsistencies (e.g. in the system boundary, in allocation rules, in how deforestation has been considered in background agro-‐food data, etc.).
34
7.2.6.6. Modeling the end-‐of-‐life stage 673
The end-‐of-‐life stage includes the treatment of products and their packaging occurring downstream 674
of the organisational boundary in relation to the product portfolio. 675
In case there is an existing PEFCR for the product(s) covered, the retailer shall use the end-‐of-‐life 676
stage assumptions and data provided through the PEFCR25. If no such document exists, the default 677
model and parameters (e.g. fate for the various materials and their recycling rates, etc.) listed in 678
Annex I shall be used. 679
The default end-‐of-‐life scenarios presented in Table 1 may be used as a guidance when no better 680
data or information is available. 681
Table 1 Default end-‐of-‐life scenario that can be considered (based on Annex I). 682
Product End-of-life per product category (“average” means the average scenario for
this packaging defined in Annex I)
Apples No product end-of-life. Plastic packaging average end-of-life fate
Meat and meat
alternatives No product end-of-life. Plastic packaging 100% trashed.
Milk No product end-of-life. Plastic, aluminium and paper packaging average end-of-
life fate
Pasta No product end-of-life. Plastic packaging average end-of-life fate
Sunflower oil No product end-of-life. Glass packaging average end-of-life fate, plastic and
aluminium packaging trashed
Frozen pizza No product end-of-life. Cardboard with plastic layer packaging 100% trashed
Chocolate bar No product end-of-life. Cardboard and aluminium packaging average end-of-life
fate
Chips No product end-of-life. Laminated pouch 100% trashed
Roast and ground coffee No product end-of-life. Laminated pouch 100% trashed
Beer No product end-of-life. Glass and steel packaging average end-of-life fate
Bottled water No product end-of-life. PET and PE packaging average end-of-life fate
Cigarettes Cigarette butt (plastic) 100% to trash. Packaging components (aluminium,
cardboard, plastic) 100% to trash (as consumed “on the go” no recycling)
Dog food No product end-of-life. Plastic packaging average end-of-life fate
25 Editing note: The TS OEFSR Retail is aware that this rule may cause significant amount of work to « remodel » the representative product based on the PEFCR in case the PEFCR compliant product is not readily available in the generic database used by default by the retailer doing its OEF and neither in a format that can be imported easily. The TS OEFSR Retail is also aware that this rule may cause inconsistencies among product categories assessed in the product portfolio in case the different PEFCR used to model the different product categories of the product portfolio contains inconsistencies (e.g. in the system boundary, in allocation rules, in how deforestation has been considered in background agro-‐food data, etc.).
35
Goldfish Product end-of-life not considered. Packaging (plastic bag and water) average
end-of-life fate
T-shirt T-shirt 100% to trash assumed. Cardboard and plastic packaging average end-of-
life fate
Leather shoes Shoes 100% to trash assumed. Cardboard and paper packaging average end-of-
life fate
Jewel Jewel recycling. Plastic packaging average end-of-life fate
Paint Paint remains to hazardous wastes (10%), used paint on wall disposed with
building (90%). Steel packaging average end-of-life fate
Office chair Chair 100% trashed. Corrugated board packaging average end-of-life fate
Refrigerator
Fridge dismantled and metals recycled, plastics trashed. Refrigerant gas leakage
(5% assumed). Corrugated board, plastic and paper packaging average end-of-life
fate
Plate Plate landfilled. Corrugated board and paper packaging average end-of-life fate
Cell phone Phone recycling (metals recycled, plastic trashed). Cardboard, plastic and paper
average end-of-life fate
Toner cartridge Cartridge recycling (metals recycled, plastic trashed). Laminated pouch 100%
trashed
Printing paper Paper product and packaging average end-of-life fate
DVD DVD plastic and paper and plastic packaging average end-of-life fate
Playball Playball 100% trashed. No packaging
Toy Toy 100% trashed. Cardboard average end-of-life fate
Aspirin No product end-of-life. Aluminium, plastic and cardboard packaging average end-of-life fate
Laundry detergent No product end-of-life. Plastic packaging average end-of-life fate
Automotive oil Used oil disposed to hazardous waste incineration. Plastic packaging 100%
trashed
Battery Product recycling (metals recycling). Plastic packaging average end-of-life fate
Roses Roses composting. Plastic packaging average end-of-life fate
Fertilizers Product recycling (metals recycling). Plastic packaging average end-of-life fate
Reusable shopping bag Plastic product average end-of-life fate. No packaging
Gas station Considered in retail place stage
Gasoline No end-of-life for product, no packaging
Printing center Considered in retail place stage
Printed paper Paper product and packaging average end-of-life fate
ATM Considered in retail place stage
Commercial space rented End-of-life for building is considered in the dataset for the building production
Utility vehicle For the car: plastic trashed, metals recycled. No packaging
683
36
7.2.6.7. Modeling the support activity 684
This stage includes all support activities that are necessary for the retailer. Some details of this life 685
cycle stage are presented in Figure 6 below. 686
687
688 Figure 6 Some details for the support life cycle stage 689
690
Support modeling should be based on Annex I but by using as many as possible primary data in place 691
of default data recommended in Annex I. 692
For each of these services, if primary data is available on the building, energy consumption, IT 693
equipment, transports that are related to these activities, these data shall be considered for the 694
modelling. If no such data exist, the expenses may be considered and Input/Output databases may 695
be used to assess the impacts related to these expenses (as shown in Annex I). 696
7.2.6.8. Modeling employees related activities 697
If primary data is available on employees-‐related activities, these shall be used. If no such data is 698
available, default data provided in Annex I shall be used. 699
37
7.3. Calculating resource use and emissions profile26 700
In practice, this step is done automatically within the LCA software used. The results may be 701
available openly in the software and can – in general – be reported in a support such as Excel, if 702
deemed necessary. 703
7.4. Calculating the impact scores and identification of the most 704
relevant impact categories27 705
7.4.1. Calculation of the impact scores 706
The impact scores for all impact categories shall be calculated and presented using the 707
characterization factors available on the European Platform on Life Cycle Assessment (version 708
1.06)28. 709
The normalized results and damage results for all impact categories shall be calculated and 710
presented using the approach described in chapter 7.3.1.2 “Evaluation of the most relevant impact 711
categories”. 712
7.4.2. Identification of the most relevant impact categories 713
The identification of the most relevant impact categories for a retailer shall be performed using the 714
approach described in chapter 7.3.1.2 “Evaluation of the most relevant impact categories”. 715
716
26 Editing note: We feel that this section, which is missing from the template, is of high importance for the (especially new) assessor to understand the different steps of an OEF. Therefore we suggest to add it here (in between the section about LCI modelling (originally “Resource use and emissions profile” and now “Modeling the resource use and emissions profile”) and Impact assessment). We propose to bring to the TAB with this text as proposal to be put in every PEFCR and OEFSR. 27 Editing note: We feel that this section, which is missing from the template, is of high importance for the (especially new) assessor to understand the different steps of an OEF. Therefore we suggest to add it here (in between the section about LCI modelling (“Resource use and emissions profile”) and Interpretation). We propose to bring to the TAB with this text as proposal to be put in every PEFCR and OEFSR. 28 http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/uploads/CF-‐v1.0.6-‐FEB2015.rar; In practice, these characterization factors should be present in LCA tools. If they are not, you should 1) include the characterization factors of PEF/OEF into the LCA software, or 2) ask your LCA tool provider to include these characterization factors, or 3) contact other LCA tool providers to see if they can provide them. In case you have no software and competences to do the OEF internally, you can 1) subcontract it to an organization which knows (and has the software) how to do it, or 2) internalise it by acquiring a software that contains compliant PEF/OEF characterization factors (and compliant LCI database?) and the competences needed to do it. Note that some LCA tools provide directly pre-‐calculated impacts scores associated with processes.
38
7.5. Interpretation 717
All impact categories having a visible impact at one or the other level shall be considered for the 718
assessment. 719
The impact categories identified as being “most relevant” in section 7.4.2 “Identification of the most 720
relevant impact categories” should be subject to a special care in interpretation. 721
The limitations of the OEF shall be clearly stated and described. 722
8. Reporting, disclosure and communication 723
Editing note: To be filled later. 724
[Specify and describe 2-‐4 best ways of communicating the results of an OEF-‐profile for this sector to 725
different stakeholders. Other vehicles than those cited below may be chosen. In all cases the 726
principles laid down in the Commission Communication Building the Single Market for Green 727
Products Facilitating better information on the environmental performance of products and 728
organisations, namely transparency, availability, reliability, completeness, comparability and clarity.] 729
8.1. OEF external communication report 730
[This could take the form of several sub-‐types of reports, each of which constitutes a different 731
option for communication vehicles. For example, self-‐standing OEF report, OEF information provided 732
as part of the sustainability report or as a part of an Environmental Management System, answer to 733
stakeholder or investor questionnaires or other forms to be explored during the development of the 734
OEFSR. 735
In the case of a self-‐standing OEF report, the OEFSR shall: 736
i) Specify and justify any deviations from the default reporting requirements presented in 737
chapter 8 of the OEF Guide, as well as specify and justify any additional reporting 738
requirements and/or differentiate reporting requirements depending on, for example, 739
the type of applications of the OEF study and the type of sector being assessed. 740
ii) Specify whether the OEF results shall be reported separately for each of the selected life 741
cycle stages.] 742
iii) Specify the format for reporting any additional environmental information. 743
In case other reporting vehicles are chosen, the format may be adapted to the specificities of the 744
vehicle, whilst respecting the communication principles cited above.] 745
39
8.2. OEF performance tracking report 746
[In case an OEF performance tracking report is listed among the communication options, the OEFSR 747
shall specify and describe the requirements for an OEF performance tracking report, allowing for the 748
comparison of an OEF profile of a specific sector over time with respect to its original or previous 749
OEF profile.] 750
9. Verification 751
Editing note: To be filled later. The Commission will clarify the contents of this section. 752
[Specify the requirements for verification to be used, depending on the intended application and 753
communication vehicles used.] 754
10. References 755
European Commission. (2008). Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European 756
Community, Rev. 2 (2008). 757
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ramon/nomenclatures/index.cfm?TargetUrl=DSP_NOM_DTL_VIEW&S758
trNom=NACE_REV2&StrLanguageCode=EN&IntPcKey=18510944&IntKey=18510944&StrLayoutCode759
=HIERARCHIC&IntCurrentPage=1 760
European Commission. (2013). 2013/179/EU: Commission Recommendation of 9 April 2013 on the 761
use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of 762
products and organisations. Annex III: Organisation Environmental Footprint (OEF) Guide. Official 763
Journal of the European Union, L 124, Volume 56, May 4th, 2013. 764
http://eur-‐lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:124:SOM:EN:HTML 765
European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Prospective Technological Studies 766
(IPTS) (2013a). JRC Scientific and Policy Reports. Best Environmental Management Practice in the 767
Retail Trade Sector. European Union, 2013. 768
11. Supporting information for the OEFSR 769
Open stakeholder consultations 770
The results of the open stakeholder consultations are available at: XXX 771
OEFSR Review Report 772
Editing note: This will be filled later once the review report is available. 773
Cases of deviations from the default approach 774
40
One major deviation from the OEF guide is the fact that the classification of direct vs indirect 775
boundary / impacts as defined in the OEF guide is not the same as what is used by the retail sector. 776
In order to avoid confusion, it is therefore recommended to avoid the concepts of direct vs indirect 777
classification in the presentation of the results. This topic is still being explored by the TS. 778
12. List of annexes 779
12.1. Annex I – Default data for the distribution, storage and use stage 780
and to model end-‐of-‐life 781
See the document PEF/OEF Default data to be used to model distribution, storage and use stage 782
“PEF-‐OEF_DistUseDefaultData_2015-‐03-‐01_v1.pdf”. 783
See the document PEF/OEF Default data to be used to model end-‐of-‐life “PEF-‐784
OEF_EOLDefaultData_2015-‐03-‐01_v1.xlsx”. 785
12.2. Annex II – Foreground data 786
[Including a list of mandatory substances/elementary flows in the foreground system to be 787
collected.] 788
12.3. Annex III – Background data 789
[List of generic data that shall be used within the OEFSR pilot.] 790
12.4. Annex IV – Normalisation factors 791
The normalised results using the ILCD method can be calculated and presented using the 792
normalization factors from the 2015 JRC technical report "Normalisation method and data for 793
Environmental Footprints"29 and presented in Table 2 below. 794
29 https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/eur-‐scientific-‐and-‐technical-‐research-‐reports/normalisation-‐method-‐and-‐data-‐environmental-‐footprints
41
Table 2: Normalization factors at midpoint level 795
796 If you use an LCA tool, these normalization factors should be normally present in the LCA tool that 797
you are using. If they are not, you should 1) include the normalization factors of PEF/OEF into the 798
LCA software, or 2) ask your LCA tool provider to include these normalization factors, or 3) contact 799
other LCA tool providers to see if they can provide them. In case you have no software and 800
competences to do the OEF internally, you can 1) subcontract it to an organization which knows (and 801
has the software) how to do it, or 2) internalise it by acquiring a software that contains compliant 802
PEF/OEF normalization factors (and compliant LCI database?) and the competences needed to do it. 803
Note that some LCA tools provide directly pre-‐calculated impacts scores associated with processes. 804
12.5. Annex V – Conversion factors from midpoint to endpoint to 805
identify most relevant impact categories 806
This method suggests converting the different impact categories contributing to similar area of 807
protection (human health or ecosystem quality) in a similar unit that can be directly compared in 808
absolute value (using typical damage units as DALY for human health or PDF·∙m2·∙y for ecosystem 809
quality). In a first step, the impact categories climate change, water resource depletion, and mineral, 810
fossil and renewable resource depletion can be kept as three additional independent impact 811
categories at midpoint since it is more difficult and uncertain to group them with other impact 812
42
categories that can be easily grouped as either impacting human health or ecosystem quality. In a 813
second step, it still possible to use a damage approach to assess the overall importance of climate 814
change and water resources depletions in terms of contribution to damage to human health or 815
ecosystems as compared to the contribution of the other impact categories that are expressed in 816
DALY or PDF·∙m2·∙y respectively in the first step. Some midpoint categories such as ozone depletion or 817
photochemical ozone formation are contributing to both impacts on human health and ecosystems 818
but current knowledge in LCIA only allows expressing them for human health. 819
The uncertainties associated with the different conversion factors from midpoint to damage or 820
simplifications due to damage assessment have to be kept in mind during results interpretation. 821
However, based on our expert knowledge in LCIA, those uncertainties are lower than the uncertainty 822
associated with weighting of different midpoint categories when deciding on priorities among 823
midpoint categories. 824
Table 3 presents the conversion factors from midpoint to endpoint that can be used to identify the 825
most relevant impact categories. 826
43
Table 3: Factors to convert midpoint (from PEF/OEF impact categories list) to endpoints 827
Midpoint category Conversion
factor
Unit Reference
Climate change 1 kg CO2-eq/kg CO2-eq Left at midpoint unit in a first
step; In a second step can also
be converted to DALY and
PDF·m2·y using De Schryver
et al. 2009 (see below)
2.55E-7 DALY/kg CO2-eq De Schryver et al. 2009
0.266 PDF·m2·y /kg CO2-eq De Schryver et al. 2009
Ozone depletion 0.00105 DALY/kg CFC-11 eq Goedkoop et al. 2001, Jolliet
et al. 2003, Humbert et al.
2012
Human toxicity, cancer effects 13 DALY/CTUh Humbert et al. 2012
Human toxicity, non-cancer
effects
1.3 DALY/CTUh Humbert et al. 2012
Particulate matter 0.0018 DALY/kg PM2.5 eq Humbert 2009
Ionizing radiation (human
health)
2.1E-8 DALY/kBq U235 eq IMPACT 2002+ (Jolliet et al.
2003, Humbert et al. 2012)
(for U235 to air)
Ionizing radiation (ecosystem
quality)
5.48E-4 PDF·m2·y /CTUe Humbert et al. 2012
Photochemical ozone formation 1.28E-6 DALY/kg NMVOC Goedkoop et al. 2001, Jolliet
et al. 2003, Humbert et al.
2012
Acidification 6.73E-3 PDF·m2·y/mol H+ eq 1.31 mol H+ eq/kg SO2 in
ILCD, 8.82E-2 PDF·m2·y /kg
SO2 in IMPACT 2002+
(Jolliet et al. 2003, Humbert et
al. 2012)
Terrestrial eutrophication 1.15 PDF·m2·y/mol N eq 13.5 mol N eq/kg NH3 in
ILCD, 15.57 PDF·m2·y /kg
NH3 in IMPACT 2002+
(Jolliet et al. 2003, Humbert et
al. 2012)
Freshwater eutrophication 34.9 PDF·m2·y/kg P eq Humbert et al. 2012
Marine eutrophication 12.5 PDF·m2·y/kg N eq Bulle et al. 2013 (IMPACT
World+, value in September
2013)
44
Freshwater ecotoxicity 5.48E-4 PDF·m2·y/CTUe Humbert et al. 2012
Land use 0.12 PDF·m2·y/kg C deficit Proxy, based on Eco-indicator
99 (Goedkoop et al. 2001) and
based on the fact that impacts
on ecosystem quality,
expressed in PDF·m2·y as
used in Eco-indicator 99
(Goedkoop et al. 2001) and
IMPACT 2002+ (Jolliet et al.
2003, Humbert et al. 2012) are
- in general - fairly
proportional to the land use
ILCD impact category
expressed in kg C deficit.
Water resource depletion 1 m3 water eq/m3 water
eq
Left at midpoint unit in a first
step;
In a second step can also be
converted to DALY and
PDF·m2·y using, for e.g.,
Pfister et al. 2009 or Boulay et
al. 2011. In the present
assessment we used Pfister et
al. 2009
Mineral, fossil & renewable
resource depletion
1 kg Sb eq/kg Sb eq Left at midpoint unit
Sources:
Bulle, C., et al. (2013). IMPACT World+. Available at http://www.impactworldplus.org/en/.
Boulay, A.-M., Bulle, C., Bayart, J.-B., Deschênes, L. and Margni, M. (2011). Regional characterization of
freshwater use in LCA: modeling direct impacts on human health. Environ Sci Technol 45(20): 8948-8957.
De Schryver, A.M., Brakkee, K.W., Goedkoop, M.J. and Huijbregts, M.A.J. (2009). Characterization Factors
for Global Warming in Life Cycle Assessment Based on Damages to Humans and Ecosystems. Environmental
Science and Technology 43: 1689-1695.
Goedkoop, M. and Spriensma, R. (2001). The Eco-indicator 99: A Damage Oriented Method for Life Cycle
Assessment, Methodology Report, second edition. PRé Consultants, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
Humbert, S., De Schryver, A., Margni, M. and Jolliet, O. (2012). IMPACT 2002+: User Guide, Draft for
version Q2.2 (version adapted by Quantis). Available at http://www.quantis-intl.com/impact2002.
Jolliet, O., Margni, M., Charles, R., Humbert, S., Payet, J., Rebitzer, G. and Rosenbaum, R. (2003). IMPACT
2002+: A New Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methodology. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 8
(6): 324-330.
Pfister, S., Koehler, A. and Hellweg, S. (2009). Assessing the environmental impacts of freshwater
45
consumption in LCA. Environmental Science and Technology 43: 4098-4104.
12.6. Annex VI – Screening study of the OEF of a virtual retailer 828
associated with this OEFSR 829
See documents “OEFRetail_ScreeningReport_2015-‐04-‐29a.pdf” and “OEFRetail_Screening_ANNEX-‐830
II_ProductPortfolio_2015-‐02-‐16a.xlsx”. 831
These documents present the screening study the OEF of a virtual retailer that was performed 832
during the drafting of this OEFSR. 833
It can be used as an example of an OEF study and report template but keeping in mind its limitations 834
and especially the fact that specific retailer could have very different organizational structure and 835
product portfolio than the one used for the virtual retailer to perform the OEF screening. 836
12.7. Annex VII – Supporting studies 837
Editing note: To be filled later. 838
12.8. Annex VIII – Background information on methodological choices 839
taken during the development of the OEFSR 840
[Provide detailed information about the justification for methodological decisions taken (e.g. 841
selection of impact categories, additional environmental information, etc.)] 842
12.9. Annex IX – Sector classification (NACE) 843
The retail sector is defined using NACE (Nomenclature générale des Activités Economiques dans les 844
Communautés Européennes NACE Rev. 2) codes. NACE is a detailed system for statistically 845
classifying economic activities in Europe. 846
The non-‐financial business economy includes the industry, construction and distributive trades and 847
services sectors that are divided amongst a number of different sections. As shown in Figure 7 848
below, Section G includes wholesale and retail trade and the repair of motor vehicles and 849
motorcycles and is divided into 3 divisions. 850
46
851 Figure 7 NACE Section G and its divisions 852
This OEFSR covers the retail trade sector, as defined by – but not limited to – NACE Rev. 2 853
Division 47 (retail trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles). However, all activities that a 854
retailer engages in should be included in their OEF. The main reason for this decision is that the 855
European Commission focuses on division 47 (i.e., retail trade) in the document “Best Environmental 856
Management Practice in the Retail Trade Sector” (European Commission, 2013a). 857
According to official definition provided by the Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the 858
European Community, Rev. 2 (European Commission, 2008), division 47 includes the resale (sale 859
without transformation) of new and used goods mainly to the general public for personal or 860
household consumption or utilisation, by shops, department stores, stalls, mail-‐order houses, door-‐861
to-‐door sales persons, hawkers, consumer cooperatives etc. 862
Division 47 is composed of the following nine groups and all groups are included in this OEFSR: 863
• retail sale in non-‐specialised stores (Group 47.1); 864
• retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialised stores (Group 47.2); 865
• retail sale of automotive fuel in specialised stores (Group 47.3); 866
• retail sale of Information and communications technology equipment in specialised stores 867
(Group 47.4); 868
• retail sale of other household equipment in specialised stores (Group 47.5); 869
• retail sale of cultural and recreation goods in specialised stores (Group 47.6); 870
• retail sale of other goods in specialised stores (Group 47.7); 871
• retail sale via stalls and markets (Group 47.8); 872
• retail trade not in stores, stalls or markets (Group 47.9). 873
Note that the NACE division 47 excludes the following and therefore these activities will not be the 874
focus of this OEFSR but should a retailer be engaged in these activities, they should be included in 875
their OEF: 876
• sale of farmers' products by farmers, see division 01; 877
• manufacture and sale of goods, which is generally classified as manufacturing in divisions 10-‐878
32; 879
• sale of motor vehicles, motorcycles and their parts, see division 45; 880
47
• trade in cereal grains, ores, crude petroleum, industrial chemicals, iron and steel and 881
industrial machinery and equipment, see division 46; 882
• sale of food and drinks for consumption on the premises and sale of takeaway food, see 883
division 56; 884
• rental of personal and household goods to the general public, see group 77.2. 885
Thus, production, transformation and manufacturing of goods are excluded from this division. 886
Nevertheless, for some retailers the production of in-‐house products is an important activity to take 887
into account. To cover activities related to the production of in-‐house products, the NACE codes 888
classified as manufacturing in divisions C 10-‐32 are added when relevant. 889
890
-‐-‐END-‐-‐ 891
