Certifiably more sustainable and circular industrial bio-based systems
Industrial bio-based systems use renewable biological resources to produce bio-based products and materials. A plethora of sustainability certification schemes and labels (CSLs) exist to allow traceability and transparency of sustainability impacts along value chains and trading, within the EU and globally. Given the rapid proliferation of these schemes, methods to evaluate their performance is crucial. The EU-funded SUSTCERT4BIOBASED(opens in new window) project developed a methodology to assess the effectiveness, robustness and comprehensiveness of existing sustainability CSLs for industrial bio-based systems. It is part of the BIOBASEDCERT Monitoring Tool (BMT) being jointly developed by three Horizon Europe projects: SUSTCERT4BIOBASED, STAR4BBS and HARMONITOR.
Meeting sustainability and circularity requirements
The BMT evaluates requirements on three levels: system (governance, transparency and operational robustness), content (sustainability and circularity) and outcome (implementation impacts). SUSTCERT4BIOBASED led the BMT content level development. “SUSTCERT4BIOBASED focused equally on the three pillars of sustainability – environmental, social and economic – and included circularity aspects such as resource efficiency and recyclability as a fourth category. The BMT content level provides assessment of each CSL based on the fraction of applicable requirements (dependent on the CSL’s scope) covered in these four categories,” explains project coordinator Iris Vural Gursel of Wageningen Research(opens in new window). The BMT was tested on nine selected international and EU schemes and labels. Rather than comparing the CSLs, the project assessed them individually to identify opportunities for each CSL owner to enhance their schemes’ performance, encouraging them to do so.
Insights and recommendations based on assessment results
The assessments showed that the CSLs generally addressed the requirements in social and environmental categories, with economic and circularity categories receiving less emphasis. Suggested improvements to the social category include explicit requirements on fair contract practices, social security benefits and maternity leave. Inclusion of more explicit requirements on greenhouse gas emission reporting, air quality monitoring, energy use efficiency and renewable energy use would be positive additions to the environmental category. More specific requirements on business plans, record keeping of fraudulent practices and economic risk management could improve the CSLs’ coverage in the economic category. Circularity requirements beyond waste management, such as the reuse or recycling of residual flows and resource efficiency, are recommended. Furthermore, CSLs for bio-based products could include requirements on design for recyclability and strategies for product-life extension.
Cost-benefit analysis leveraging ‘true cost accounting’
Adopting CSLs is voluntary so cost-benefit analyses are key. Internal costs of certification include costs for compliance, such as training and audit fees, while internal benefits include price premiums and an improved market position. “SUSTCERT4BIOBASED used ‘true cost accounting’ to incorporate externalities as well – environmental and social costs and benefits which are not reflected in transaction prices and generally not included in cost-benefit analyses,” explains Vural Gursel. A cost-benefit analysis of adopting CSLs in sugar cane, cotton and wood bio-based value chains showed that internal benefits generally outweighed internal costs. Analyses of externalities were impeded by a lack of data, both due to organisations’ reluctance to share it and lack of voluntary measurements. “Further research is needed, which will require standardised reporting requirements on key environmental and social externalities across certification schemes for bio-based value chains,” underscores Vural Gursel.
Uniting efforts on CSLs
The outcomes were used to provide recommendations to the four key target groups: policy makers, CSL owners, industrial actors and regional bioeconomy actors. With everyone on the same page about the current state and future direction of certification schemes, Europe’s path to a green transition to a circular and sustainable bioeconomy just got shorter.
