A survey of 277 German participants demonstrates that a Product Carbon Footprint （PCF） label is not yet a suitable instrument for communication with consumers because of the lack of standardized PCF calculation with...A survey of 277 German participants demonstrates that a Product Carbon Footprint （PCF） label is not yet a suitable instrument for communication with consumers because of the lack of standardized PCF calculation within Europe. Most consumers do not understand either the PCF statement or the PCF calculation. The public message of a PCF label does not conform to the terms of sustainability. At first sight, PCF seems to be an opportunity to communicate the sustainability aspects of food to consumers, but too many different approaches to defining PCF exist in Europe. Additionally, the use of a ＂green＂ PCF label may distort trading conditions because of the lack of PCF-issuing authorities in accordance with World Trade Organization （WTO） standards. Hence, PCF may ultimately deceive consumers through its misapplication if the PCF calculation is not aligned to internationally accepted standards.展开更多
文摘A survey of 277 German participants demonstrates that a Product Carbon Footprint （PCF） label is not yet a suitable instrument for communication with consumers because of the lack of standardized PCF calculation within Europe. Most consumers do not understand either the PCF statement or the PCF calculation. The public message of a PCF label does not conform to the terms of sustainability. At first sight, PCF seems to be an opportunity to communicate the sustainability aspects of food to consumers, but too many different approaches to defining PCF exist in Europe. Additionally, the use of a ＂green＂ PCF label may distort trading conditions because of the lack of PCF-issuing authorities in accordance with World Trade Organization （WTO） standards. Hence, PCF may ultimately deceive consumers through its misapplication if the PCF calculation is not aligned to internationally accepted standards.
