A comparative study of carbon footprint

and assessment standards

..............................................................................................................................................................

Tao Gao*, Qing Liu and Jianping Wang

Institute of Project Management, School of Mechanics and Civil Engineering, China
University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, China
.............................................................................................................................................
Abstract
This paper focuses on the research methods and steps involved in carrying out studies on different types
of carbon footprints. Furthermore, a comparative study of different carbon footprint assessment
standards was carried out to identify their similarities, differences and deficiencies. Goals, principles,

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/9/3/237/812115 by guest on 14 October 2023

research boundaries, calculation methods, data selection and other aspects of organizations footprint and
product carbon footprint were analysed, respectively. Organizations carbon footprint assessment
standards—ISO14064 and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) protocol and product carbon footprint assessment
standards—PAS2050, TSQ0010, ISO14047 and Product and Supply Chain GHG Protocol were analysed
comparatively. The selection of GHG, system settings, quantification and carbon footprint, selection of
date and treatment of specific emissions are the most important part of the study of the carbon footprint
and assessment standards, especially for organizations and products. Guidelines had been made on these
issues from existing assessment standards, but further improvement is still needed.

Keywords: carbon footprint; carbon emissions; assessment standards; comparative study

*Corresponding author:
gaotaogtao@163.com Received 28 February 2013; revised 23 April 2013; accepted 24 April 2013
................................................................................................................................................................................

1 INTRODUCTION have made a lot of achievements. The carbon footprint and as-
sessment standard is one of the most basic and crucial research
Global warming is a fact, and evolves into a full range of issues of in low-carbon research. However, due to this issue consistent
politics, economy, society, technology, environment and ecology on results have not been achieved yet, and hence, concerned re-
a global scale from a single scientific problem [1]. It becomes one of search were greatly affected. Research on the carbon footprint
the tremendous challenges for human being. Global warming and a and assessment standards has become a hot topic for govern-
series of problems have aroused intense concerns of the internation- ments and researchers.
al community. A series of international conventions like the United This paper focuses on the research methods and steps involved
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992), The in carrying out studies on different types of carbon footprints.
Kyoto Protocol (1997), Bali roadmap (2007), Copenhagen Furthermore, a comparative study of different carbon footprint
Agreement (2009) were signed, which reflect the determination assessment standards was carried out to identify their similarities,
and efforts by the government in response to global warming. differences and deficiencies.
According to consensus, countries have made commitments to
emission reductions and action plan. Thus, the innovative concepts
of low-carbon economy, low-carbon city, low-carbon life, carbon 2 BACKGROUND
trade, carbon tax, means to reduce carbon emissions become the
important development strategy of the whole world. Related 2.1 Concept of carbon footprints
research studies were carried out by governments, organizations and The carbon footprint originates from the concept of ecological
researchers on the economic, social and other aspects, and all the footprint, which is a measure of human demand on the Earth’s
stakeholders are trying to find a low-carbon development path. ecosystems. It is a standardized measure of demand for natural
Current research studies on the low-carbon issue, focused on capital that may be contrasted with the planet’s ecological cap-
emissions accounting and reduction, carbon emissions trading acity to regenerate. It represents the amount of biologically pro-
platform, carbon tax and carbon emission policy [2][3][4][5], ductive land and sea area necessary to supply the resources a

International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2014, 9, 237–243

# The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use,
please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
doi:10.1093/ijlct/ctt041 Advance Access Publication 25 June 2013 237
T. Gao et al.

human population consumes, and to assimilate the associated The methods used to determine the carbon footprint should
waste. Using this assessment, it is possible to estimate how much not be specified in the definition. It is only necessary that the
of the Earth (or how many planet Earths) it would take to method satisfactorily meets the requirements of the definition.
support humanity if everybody followed a given lifestyle. So a carbon footprint can be analysed for various different func-
However, a widely accepted and concrete definition of a carbon tional units at different scales and using different methods.
footprint does not exist at present. But the notion of what a foot- There are three principal methods to calculate carbon emissions:
print is does exist. A mostly recognized concept was proposed by input –output (IO) analysis [10][11][12][13], life-cycle assess-
Wiedmann et al.: the carbon footprint is a measure of the total ment (LCA) [14][15] and IO –LCA.
amount of carbon dioxide emissions directly and indirectly caused The method depends on a functional unit via scale in practice
by an activity or accumulated over the life stages of a product. (Figure 2) [16]. Consumer products prefer bottom-up LCA,
Meanwhile, the carbon footprint is a measure of carbon dioxide while studies at the national level would apply top-down IO ana-
emissions [6][7]. lysis. Hybrid methods which combine the strength of both LCA
and IOA are an active area of research and are being increasingly
used in practice.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/9/3/237/812115 by guest on 14 October 2023

2.2 Classifications and methods of carbon
footprints 2.3 Assessment standards of carbon footprints
The carbon footprint mainly applies to personal, products, orga- In order to make the results of carbon emissions accounting
nizations, cities and countries, etc [6][7][8]. A personal carbon comparable, governments and international organizations, such
footprint is carbon dioxide emissions caused by each person’s as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the
clothing, food, housing and traffic of daily life. A product carbon World Resources Institute (WRI), the World Business Council for
footprint measures the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over the Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the British Standards
entire life of a product (goods or services), from the extraction of Institution (BSI), have introduced different kinds of carbon foot-
raw materials and manufacturing right through to its use and the print assessment standards mainly for organizations and products
final re-use, recycling or disposal. An organizational carbon foot- through a large number of research studies since the end of the
print measures the GHG emissions from all the activities across last century. After years of development, a higher awareness of as-
the organization, including energy used in buildings, industrial sessment standards of carbon footprint, such as ISO14064, GHG
processes and company vehicles. A country carbon footprint Protocol, PAS2050, has been created. Implementation of these
focuses on carbon dioxide emissions in the entire country gener- standards played a huge role in promoting global carbon emission
ated by the overall consumption of materials and energy, vegeta- reduction.
tion and other carbon sequestrations, as well as the indirect and However, there are still many problems in the application of
direct emissions caused by import and export activities, to these standards, such as carbon emissions accounting methods
analyse the carbon dioxide emissions of the entire country. are uniform. The boundary definition is unscientific, and carbon
Different footprint boundaries of person, product, organiza- emission factors are uncertain. These issues need further research
tion and country are illustrated in Figure 1. Meanwhile, there are and analysis, especially in organization and product fields.
some crossovers among the four types. For example, the produc-
tion process itself is part of the product life cycle, but would also
be included in the organizational footprint [9].
3 ORGANIZATIONAL CARBON FOOTPRINT
AND ASSESSMENT STANDARDS
3.1 Organizational carbon footprint
An organizational carbon footprint refers to the direct and in-
direct carbon dioxide emissions generated within the range
defined by the organizations (enterprises or projects)

Figure 1. Different carbon footprint boundaries of person, product, organization

and country. Figure 2. Applications and corresponding methods of the carbon footprint.

238 International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2014, 9, 237– 243

 Carbon footprint and assessment standards

themselves. The results of assessment can only focus on the 3.2 Assessment standards of an organizational
carbon emissions inventory of sources and information of carbon footprint
greenhouse gas emissions can also be a complete carbon inven- The GHG Protocol, a collaboration of the WRI and the WBCSD
tory report to public carbon footprints of organizations. in 2004, provides the foundation for sustainable climate strat-
Currently, a terminal consumption analysis method based on egies and more efficient, resilient and profitable organizations.
the IO analysis is the major method for organizational carbon The standards follow an inclusive, consensus-based multi-
footprint evaluation. The key steps in calculating an organiza- stakeholder process with balanced participation from businesses,
tional carbon footprint are shown in Figure 3: government agencies, non-governmental organizations and aca-
demic institutions around the world. For organizations (corpor-
(1) Defining organizational boundaries: It is an important pro- ate, project), they introduced The GHG Protocol: A corporate
cedure to set clear, explicit boundaries on which parts of the accounting and reporting standard (2004). It provides sector-
organization are included in the organizational carbon foot- specific and general calculation tools and deals with the quanti-
print. Meanwhile, an organization may comprise one or fication of GHG reductions, resulting due to the adoption of

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/9/3/237/812115 by guest on 14 October 2023

more facilities, which usually apply control and equity share mitigation methods in its project protocol [17].
approaches to consolidate facility-level GHG emissions and In March 2006, ISO released the ISO14064 standard, which is an
removals at the organization level. international standard for the determination of boundaries, quanti-
(2) Establishing operational boundaries: The operational fication, mitigation and removal, used to guide the government and
boundary determines which emission sources will be quan- companies to measure and control the GHG emissions, as well as
tified. It should include the full range of emissions from carbon trading, and got a wide range of global consensus [18].
activities under operational control. All material Scope 1
and 2 emissions should be included, but Scope 3 emissions
3.3 Comparative analysis of organizational carbon
can be chosen to include [14]. (Scopes 1, 2 and 3 are shown
in Figure 2). footprint assessment standards
(3) Calculating carbon footprint: The accuracy of the footprint Both GHG Protocol and ISO14064 provide requirements for
relies on collating consumption data for all of the emission quantifying the GHG impact of an organization, while harmon-
sources within the established boundary. It is important to ization on all qualification methodologies was sought during the
clarify any gaps in the data and list any assumptions that development of both standards, some minor differences do
have been made in calculating the footprint. The carbon remain. Table 1 provides the details of each aspect of the meth-
footprint is typically calculated using activity data collated odologies, the differences between them and estimates whether
multiplied by standard emissions factors, although there are the difference may affect the final result.
other calculation methods, such as calculation of the use of By comparative analysis of the two organizations carbon
models or measurement. footprint assessment standards, some differences can be seen.
(4) Reporting and verifying: Organizations should prepare a The GHG Protocol is the first standard for corporate GHG emis-
report to facilitate inventory verification, participation in a sions evaluation. As a voluntary initiative, the GHG Protocol
GHG program, or to inform external or internal users. not only pays attention to the procedure of analysis, while a
Meanwhile, a third-party verification of carbon footprint greater emphasis on analysis results, which are utilized for emis-
was suggested to be carried out, to add credibility and confi- sions reduction and carbon trading. As an international stand-
dence to carbon reporting for public disclosure. ard, ISO14064, formed on the basis of the GHG Protocol, is
focused on the guiding, framework and the certification process.
So, it is mainly used for corporate GHG accounting certification
to reflect the corporate social responsibility.
Both of the standards select the six GHGs in the Kyoto
Protocol. For the setting of the system boundaries, two standards
have the same organizational boundary settings; the difference
is the settings of the operational boundary. As for the quantiza-
tion of carbon footprint, the two standards are given several dif-
ferent quantization methods. However, the quantization based
on GHG activity data multiplied by GHG emission or removal
factors is recommended and widely used. Meanwhile, owing to
several complementary standards had been published, such as the
GHG Protocol for Project Accounting (2005), Land Use, Land-Use
Change and Forestry Guidance for GHG Project Accounting
(2006), Guidelines for Quantifying GHG Reductions from
Grid-Connected Electricity Projects (2007) and Corporate Scope
Figure 3. Assessment procedures of the organizational carbon footprint. 3 (value chain) Accounting and Reporting (2011), the selection

International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2014, 9, 237– 243 239

T. Gao et al.

Table 1. Contrastive analysis of the GHG Protocol and ISO14064.

ISO14064 GHG protocol

Essential information
Publisher ISO WBCSD&WRI
Date 2006 2004, 2011 (revise)
Type Official official
Availability Instructional operability
Property International standard Voluntary initiatives standard
Objects Organizations Organizations
Applications Mainly used in industry enterprises Various industries, governments, (NGOs), carbon trading platform
Goal, scope and principle
Goal Specifies principles and requirements for the design, development, management, reporting and verification of an organization’s GHG
inventory.
Principle Essentially the same drawing on ISO 14044, including relevance, completeness, consistency, accuracy and transparency.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/9/3/237/812115 by guest on 14 October 2023

GHG Six GHGs in the Kyoto Protocol
GWP The second report of IPCC (1996)
System boundary
Organizational Same methods to consolidate organization facility-level GHG emissions and removals: by control or by equity share.
boundary
Operation Both divide the whole emissions to three parts: direct emission, energy indirect emission and other indirect emissions.
boundary
Energy indirect emission was denoted as indirect emissions from the Energy indirect emission was denoted as indirect emissions only
generation of imported electricity, heat or steam consumed by the from the generation of imported electricity consumed by the
organization. organization.
Quantification
Quantization Calculation, detection, combination of detection and calculation.
method
Mainly use GHG activity data multiplied by GHG emission or removal Refer to emission factors and direct monitoring, as well as
factors cross-industry tools and industry-specific tools.
Double counting Not expected The method was proposed to avoid double counting

and collection of GHG activity data and emission factors are

more clear and operational when using the GHG Protocol.
These complementary standards also provide a specific and op-
erational guidance especially to system boundaries defined,
quantization of GHG emission and carbon footprint assessment
of specific industries, such as the power industry.

4. PRODUCT CARBON FOOTPRINT AND

ASSESSMENT STANDARDS
4.1 Product carbon footprint
A product carbon footprint is carbon dioxide emissions caused
by products (goods or services) in its life cycle. To achieve this,
an LCA method is needed to enhance the credibility and con- Figure 4. Assessment procedures of the product carbon footprint.
venience of carbon footprint calculation. ISO released
ISO14040/44 standards, developed frameworks and steps for the
environmental management standard assessment with the LCA chosen product’s life cycle. To perform a product life cycle
method in 1996. analysis, start by breaking down the selected product’s func-
Currently, LCA analysis is the major method for project tional unit into its constituent parts. Focus on the most sig-
carbon footprint evaluation. The key steps in calculating a nificant inputs first, and identify their respective inputs,
product carbon footprint are shown in Figure 4: manufacturing processes, storage conditions and transport
(1) Product life cycle analysis: it is an essential procedure for requirements.
carrying out the product life cycle analysis to identify all (2) Defining system boundary: the relevant boundaries for the
materials, activities and processes that contribute to the carbon footprint analysis must be determined after product

240 International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2014, 9, 237– 243

 Carbon footprint and assessment standards

life cycle analysis had been done to determine which unit and procedures of the four standards are similar, there are still
processes shall be included within the product carbon foot- some differences. Table 2 shows the details of each aspect of the
print study. methodologies, the differences among the four standards.
(3) Calculating carbon footprint: The accuracy of the footprint By comparison of the four product carbon footprint assess-
relies on collating consumption data for all of the emission ment standards, we can see that the core content of the study
sources within the system boundary of the entire life cycle of and application of product carbon footprint assessment stan-
product. The key point in collecting data include material dards are still concentrated on greenhouse gas choice, system set-
amounts, activities and emission factors across all life cycle tings, quantification and carbon footprint and treatment of
stages. Calculated based on the carbon footprint equation specific emissions and removals and other aspects.
may ensure that all input, output and waste are included, Six GHGs in the Kyoto Protocol were selected in the four
without missing. standards. GHG and ISO can be applied to both B2B and
(4) Reporting and communication: Organizations should B2Ccarbon footprint assessment, and TS-Q0010 only applies to
prepare a report to report the results of the quantification of B2C carbon footprint assessment. The PCR, as outlined in ISO
the product carbon footprint and the achievement of the 14025, was preferentially recommended to settle the system

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/9/3/237/812115 by guest on 14 October 2023

goal and scope and to demonstrate that the provisions of boundaries by the four standards.
this standard have been followed. Meanwhile, communica- Four standards gave different methods to the quantization
tion may take the form of a declaration, a label, a claim, a product carbon footprint, but quantization based on GHG ac-
report or a performance tracking report based on product tivity data multiplied by GHG emission or removal factors is
carbon footprint standards. suggested and most widely used. Activity data and emission
factors can come from either primary or secondary sources.
Primary data come from direct measurements on product’s life
4.2 Assessment standards of a product carbon cycle, while secondary data refer to external measurements that
footprint are not specific to the product, but rather represent an average
The British Standards Institution, Carbon Trust and Department or general measurement of similar processes or materials,
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) published a usually find in types of databases, such as multi-sector life cycle
Publicly Available Specification (PAS) to specify requirements databases, industry-specific databases and country-specific data
based on LCA and Product Category Rules (PCRs) for assessing sources.
the life cycle GHG emissions of goods and services in 2008 In order to get an accurate study of product carbon footprint,
(revised in 2011) [19]. researchers and organizations paid more attention to specific
In April 2009, The Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and emissions and removals, such as land use change, delayed emis-
Industry issued a Technical Specification TSQ0010 ‘General sions, renewable power resources and carbon storage. Treatments
principles for the assessment and labeling of Carbon Footprint of specific emissions and removals are given in the four standards,
of Products’, after a carbon footprint trial project and the criteria although the approach is different and not complete.
for developing CF PCRs were released in March 2009. The PAS2050, TSQ0010 and Product Life Cycle Accounting
The WBCSD and WRI develop a standard under their GHG and Reporting Standard have been officially released. Most of
Protocol Product/Supply Chain Initiative: A Product Life Cycle the existing carbon footprint assessment cases are carried out
Accounting and Reporting Standard [20], meanwhile, issued a based on the PAS2050 assessment standard, while TSQ0010 stan-
Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard ‘Guidelines for dards are only used in Japan and the applications of Product Life
Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting’ as a comple- Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard have just begun. These
mentary standard. three standards are mainly used in the food, drinks, drinks, cloth-
Since 2007, ISO started developing an international standard ing, cosmetics and other areas of life. At the same time, combined
ISO 14067 on the Carbon Footprint of Products (Part 1: quanti- with the existing assessment standards, ISO is being prepared for
fication and Part 2: communication), and there is already a pro- ISO14047, which is expected to be released in 2013.
posal for a standard on the Carbon Footprint of Organizations.
Businesses can use the standard to assess the carbon footprint of
its products throughout the life cycle; the carbon footprint of in- 5 CONCLUSION
formation can be used for internal management or external an-
nouncement and exchange [21]. The international standard is The carbon footprint has started becoming synonymous to a
expected to be formally promulgated in 2013. comprehensive GHG account, over the life cycle stages of any
product or activity. The carbon footprint study is the basis of
low-carbon research. The carbon footprint has been commercia-
4.3 Comparative analysis of product carbon lized and is being utilized by organizations to count themselves
footprint assessment standards and their products’ carbon and adopt measures to cut down
The four standards provide principles and requirements for emissions, to meet the green consumer expectations of consu-
quantifying the GHG impact of a product; while methodologies mers or governmental request, and provides enormous

International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2014, 9, 237– 243 241

T. Gao et al.

Table 2. Contrastive analysis of assessment standards of product carbon footprint.

PAS 2050 TS-Q 0010 Product Life Cycle Accounting and ISO14047 (As far as known)
Reporting Standard

Essential information
Organization BSI JIS WBCSD&WRI ISO
Date 2008, 2011 2009 2011 Expected to release in 2013
Type version Official version Official version Official version CD edition
Operating Operability Operability Operability Instructional
availability
Properties Open standard Technical regulation Voluntary initiatives International standard
Objects Product/serve
User fields Mainly used in foods, drinks, Mainly used in foods and Mainly used in foods, drinks and ——
clothing and cosmetics, etc. on a consumer goods in Japan cosmetics, etc. on a global scale
global scale

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/9/3/237/812115 by guest on 14 October 2023

Goal, scope and principles
GHG Six GHGs in the Kyoto Protocol
GWP Fourth report of IPCC (2007)
System boundary
System boundary B2B&B2C B2C B2B&B2C B2B&B2C
Use phase Obligatory; disclose use profile; Included Cradle to Gate or Cradle to Grave Included
if product is supplied to the
consumer
Allocation System boundary expansion; Preference for PCR Adapted from ISO 14044, 4.3.4.2 Adapted from ISO 14044, 4.3.4.2
Economic Spec. rules for EoL
Cut off rules 1% of GHG emissions; 95% 5% of GHG emissions (to be Significance as principle; 80% Adapted from ISO 14044:2006,
complete discussed more) complete 4.2.3.3.3
Quantification
Function unit Preference for PCR
Data quality Specific rules Specific rules Pedigree matrix Pedigree matrix
Data type No IO data, transparent process data Prefer process data, but IO data Prefer process data, but IO data are Prefer process data, but IO data are
are acceptable if there are no acceptable if there are no process acceptable if there are no process
process data. data. data.
Quantization Preference for quantization based on GHG activity data multiplied by GHG emission or removal factors.
method
Treatment of specific emissions and removals
Capital goods Excluded Excluded Relevance criterion Relevance criterion
Reduction Code of practice require reporting Could be included, if both CFP Important aim, not many rules Not specified
are certified.
Land use change Describes procedure and provides Not specified Proposal to use PAS2050 Proposal to use IPCC guidelines for
default soil emissions per country National GHG inventories
Carbon storage Provides calculation method Not specified Major discussion point, probably Probably included
included
Delayed emissions Describes calculation method Not specified Major discussion point, Probably Probably included
included
Renewable power Describes additionality and double Can be included if it is paid as Not specified Not specified
resources counting in renewable electricity actual cost
generation
Reporting and communication
Communication Not included in PAS, but in the Code Adapted from ISO 14025 Not for comparison Adapted from ISO 14025
of practice

opportunities to encourage enterprises to improve production footprint, selection of date and treatment of specific emissions
efficiency and reduce resource consumption and waste, and are the most important part of the study of the carbon footprint
promote the development of innovation and technology, to help and assessment standards, especially for organizations and pro-
open new business opportunities, and promote corporate social ducts. Guidelines had been made on these issues from existing
responsibility and achieve sustainable development. assessment standards, but it still needs further improvement.
However, as carbon footprint reports are increasing in re- Because carbon emission has been commercialized, and has
sponse to business and legal requirements, most of the calcula- been found to influence businesses, legal guidelines are neces-
tions are following the GHG protocol and PAS worldwide. Since sary to guide and monitor these calculations, so that enterprise’
it has been extended to cover the natural system as well, it and their products’ carbon footprint analysis will be included in
becomes essential to deal with the unavoidable emissions. The the decision-making stage. Meanwhile, as the strong measures
type of GHG, system settings, quantification and carbon and tools for the global problem of climate warm, research of

242 International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2014, 9, 237– 243

 Carbon footprint and assessment standards

carbon footprint and assessment standards need to be carried [8] Finkbeiner M. Carbon footprinting—opportunities and threats [J]. Int J
out within the global scope, to solve problems such as carbon Life Cycle Assess 2009;14:91– 4.
leakage and border-tax adjustments . [9] Matthews HS, et al. The importance of carbon footprint estimation bound-
aries [J]. Environ Sci Technol 2008;42:5839– 42.
[10] Huang AY, Lenzen M, Weber C, et al. The role of input – output analysis for
the screening of corporate carbon footprints. Econ Syst Res 2009;21:217– 42.
FUNDING [11] Matthews HS, et al. Estimating carbon footprints with input-output models
[R]. Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Carnegie Mellon
This work was supported by Soft Science Research Projects of University, 2008.
Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the [12] Minx J, et al. Input – output analysis and carbon footprinting: an overview
People’s Republic of China (No. 2011-R1-15) and Humanities of applications. [J]. Econ Syst Res 2009;21:187– 216.
and Social Sciences Fund of Ministry of Education of the [13] Wiedmann T, Wood R, Lenzen M, et al. The carbon footprint of the
People’s Republic of China (No. 11YJCZH125). UK—results from a multi-region input – output model. Econ Syst Res
2010;22:19 –42.
[14] Hammerschlag R, Barbour W. Life-cycle assessment and indirect emission

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/9/3/237/812115 by guest on 14 October 2023

reductions: issues associated with ownership and trading [R]. Institute for
REFERENCES Lifecycle Environmental Assessment, Seattle, Washington, USA, 2003.
[15] Weidema BP, Thrane M, Christensen P, et al. Carbon footprint: A catalyst
[1] The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate for life cycle assessment [J]. J Ind Ecol 2008;12:3 – 6.
Change 2007. Synthesis Report [R]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 2007, 10. [16] Peters GP. Carbon footprints and embodied carbon at multiple scales. [J]
[2] Lenzen M, et al. Shared producer and consumer responsibility: theory and Curr Opin Environ Sustainability 2010;2:245– 50.
practice [J]. Ecol Econ 2007;61:27 –42. [17] WRI. The greenhouse gas protocol: a corporate accounting and reporting stand-
[3] Lenzen M, Wood R, Wiedmann T. Uncertainty analysis for multi-region ard (Revised Edition) [M]. World Business Council for Sustainable
input – output models—a case study of the UK’s carbon footprint. Econ Syst Development, Geneva, Switzerland, 2011.
Res 2010;22:43– 63. [18] ISO. ISO14064-The greenhouse gas [R]. International Organization for
[4] Larsen HN, Hertwich EG. The case for consumption-based accounting Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.
of greenhouse gas emissions to promote local climate action [J]. Environ [19] BSI. PAS 2050-Specification for the Assessment of the Geneva, Switzerland,
Sci Policy 2009;12:791– 8. Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Goods and Services [M]. British
[5] Hertwich EG, Peters GP. Carbon footprint of nations: a global, trade-linked Standards Institution, London, UK, 2008.
analysis. Environ Sci Technol 2009;43:6414 – 20. [20] WRI. Product life cycle accounting and reporting standard [M]. World Business
[6] Wiedmann T, Minx J. A definition of Carbon Footprint [J]. ISA Res Rep Council for Sustainable Development, Geneva, Switzerland, 2011.
2007;7:1– 7. [21] ISO. Carbon footprint of products (ISO/CD 14067-1, Under Development)
[7] Weidema BP, Thrane M, Christensen P, et al. Carbon footprint. [J] Ind Ecol [R]. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland,
2008;12:3 – 6. 2010.

International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2014, 9, 237– 243 243