Hence , the Verifiable Credential technology seems to be more suitable , as Hyperledger Indy provides an out of the box application layer that supports data exchange . The certifiers only need to be listed as trusted issuers in the verifiable data registry without the need to run any additional IT infrastructure to issue VCs for PCF . Furthermore , the VC technology is an open standard with opensource libraries available . Potentially , any interested party can develop their own application and be ready to receive VCs and exchange PCF with drastically reduced efforts as compared to the techniques .
3 BACKGROUND ON PCF ACCOUNTING
There exist a variety of norms and standards , which provide guidance for PCF accounting . The basis are life cycle assessment ( LCA ) standards such as ISO 14044 [ 9 ]. With PCFs being a single score impact category extract from a Lifecycle Assessment , more impact category specific norms such as the ISO 14067 [ 10 ] or documents such as the GHG-Protocol for PCF accounting were defined . They partially diverge due to their wide applicability , but still leave enough room for interpretation . Hence , for comparability reasons , individual industries defined the Product Category Rules ( PCRs ) or even Product Specific Rules ( PSRs ) and derived requirements ( sub specifications of PCRs ). They intend to provide a high comparability of LCA results for PCFs within homogeneous product groups . The European initiative Product Environmental Footprint ( PEF ) tried to tackle this challenge . All these documents assume a conventional assessment of PCFs , with one practitioner modelling the entire value chain , including the process steps outside the practitioner ’ s foreground system . Therefore , the practitioner must make assumptions with industrial averages or request life cycle inventory data from suppliers . For confidentiality reasons , suppliers are commonly reluctant to share this data . The WEF white paper “ Share to Gain ” [ 11 ] makes it even clearer . For successful collaboration in the context of data sharing , stakeholders need an understanding how to promote value together . Three factors are identified as key for success , all covered by the TSX approach . First , a clear value proposition for data sharing , second a mutually beneficial agreement and third the use of secure technologies and common standards are required . PCF aggregation solves this issue , with a practitioner connecting a PCF of an upstream supplier to their life cycle inventory – instead of an emission factor from a database . Initiatives such as Pathfinder ( WBCSD ) and others are currently defining PCF aggregation specific standards with data exchange formats for intra-value chain exchange of PCFs and fit frameworks . Apart from formats and rules for the calculation of PCFs , third party verification of results is an essential part of TSX . Scalable auditing mechanisms for PCFs on company level enable significant cost savings compared to individual PCF verifications . A standard for PCF programs of companies to be audited would enable a significant scaleup and increase in trust among sharing network participants .
These currently established standards of measuring the environmental impact of industrial production will become the foundation of the TSX for PCF calculations . They will be used in unison with the VC technology to enable sharing of PCF data between companies and stakeholders .
IIC Journal of Innovation 37