What is the difference between Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Carbon Footprint?

Are you considering to measure the environmental impact of your product or service, but unsure whether to go for a carbon footprint or a life cycle assessment (LCA)? In this article, we explain what both approaches entail, how they differ, and what factors to consider to make sure you choose the method that best aligns with your goals.

Carbon footprint, also referred to as the climate change impact, captures all greenhouse gas emissions associated with a certain activity.  It is a broad concept, which can be applied for different purposes and at different scales. Broadly speaking, we can differentiate between a Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) and a Corporate Carbon Footprint (CCF):

• A product carbon footprint, as the name already implies, refers to the GHG emissions associated with a single product or service, throughout its entire life cycle – from raw material extraction to end-of-life.
• A corporate carbon footprint (or organisational carbon footprint) includes all GHG emissions resulting from a company’s operations. Usually, the GHG Protocol is used as standard, which differentiates between emissions from scope 1 (direct emissions), scope 2 (indirect emissions from purchased energy) and scope 3 (indirect emissions from upstream and downstream activities).

A life cycle assessment (LCA), also referred to as environmental footprint, captures the environmental impact of a product or services across it’s entire life cycle, and considers multiple impact categories. Next to climate change, it assesses impact categories like water use, land use, eutrophication, acidification, and fine particulate matter formation. It therefore gives a complete and holistic overview of a product’s environmental impact, and avoids any ‘burden shifting’, where improvements in one impact category or one life cycle stage my lead to increased impacts in another impact category or life cycle stage.

Read this article for a more detailed explanation of LCA.

A product carbon footprint (PCF) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) both consider the product level, use the same system boundary and are based on the same underlying methodology; the ISO 14067 standard for carbon footprinting at product level is consistent with the LCA standards ISO 14040 and 14044. The key difference is that the carbon footprint focuses exclusively on one impact category (climate change), whereas an LCA considers a broad range of environmental impact categories.

When it comes to data collection, the data required for an LCA is not significantly different from data required for a PCF. In other words, with almost the same data, you can obtain much more insight when opting for an LCA instead of a PCF.

However, because LCAs account for multiple impact categories, the analysis is inherently more complex, and the results may be harder to interpret. Additionally, some of the impact categories are subject to less scientific consensus, meaning that different methodologies exist to calculate certain impacts — such as mineral resource depletion or toxicity.  To simplify interpretation, results can be aggregated into a single score or endpoint impact category. You can read this introduction to LCA for more details.

While carbon footprints are widely used at both product and corporate level, LCAs are primarily used at product or service level. Although the European Commission has introduced the Organizational Environmental Footprint (OEF) framework, it has not yet been adopted as widely as the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF). That said, LCA or PCF results can still serve as valuable input for corporate-level assessments, especially when quantifying Scope 3 emissions.

Choosing between a carbon footprint and a full LCA depends primarily on the goal and scope of your study:

In case your focus is on the organisational/corporate level, it makes most sense to apply the carbon footprint only. In this way you also meet requirements as set out by the GHG Protocol, the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi), the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the voluntary reporting standard for SMEs (VSME) and B Corp certification.

In case you focus on the product level, you can either consider the PCF or LCA.

• You can go for a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) if you want to assess a broad range of environmental impacts. LCAs are becoming increasingly relevant and are gradually becoming the standard method for quantifying environmental impact in European regulations.  For example, the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) method is proposed as a basis for substantiating environmental claims in the draft Green Claims Directive, and is also the methodological foundation for many ecolabel initiatives. With an LCA you can substantiate (comparative) claims with a PEF and ISO compliant study, share the environmental profile of your product with other actors in the supply chain, or gain insights into environmental hotspots during product development.
• You can choose a Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) In case your focus is primarily on climate change, for example in case you have specific carbon reduction targets, you are applying for funding that only requires reporting on GHG emissions, or you want a quick scan focussing only on the carbon footprint.

Would you like more information on carbon footprint and LCAs, or which method fits best to your situation? Don’t hesitate to get in touch with us! At Foodprintsight, we offer tailored solutions – from quick carbon scans to full ISO-compliant LCAs – adjusted to match your goals, timeline, and budget.