FLAVOURS & FRAGRANCES principles for calculating PCFs, they permit considerable flexibility regarding key methodological choices, such as the allocation approach utilised.
The World Business Council for Sustainable Development( WBCSD) Partnership for Carbon Transparency( PACT) methodology has been developed as a supplementary framework to existing standards for PCF calculation, such as ISO 14067 and the GHG Protocol, with the objective of facilitating cross-industry PCF data exchange. PACT establishes specific methodological parameters, including system boundaries, cut-off criteria and allocation procedures.
For the chemical sector, the Together for Sustainability( TfS) guideline offers a detailed, sector-specific methodology, building upon ISO standards, the GHG Protocol and the PACT methodology. The TfS guideline delivers explicit rules governing PCF calculation, encompassing such key methodological aspects like allocation methods, biogenic carbon accounting, chain of custody models and carbon capture and storage practices. 4
Figure 2 – PCF benchmark study for L-Menthol( in kg CO 2 eq. per kg of product 2 }
Over45 % lower compared to average coal-based production technology 3 4 '
-------��-------�------------------
Figure 2- PCF benchmark study for L-Menthol
With chemicals being the predominant ingredient in fragrance mixtures, it does not come as a surprise that the predominant standard used in the fragrance and flavor industries for PCF quantification is TfS. At an even more granular level, Product Category Rules( PCRs) provide tailored methodologies for PCF calculation applicable to individual products or product groups. It should be noted that PCRs accepted for the PCF calculation in the chemical industry are listed in the TfS guideline.
Figure 1 depicts how the degree of methodological specification varies across the mentioned standards. It is important to note that the most critical methodological aspects are consistently addressed across all major standards, such as the prohibition of accounting for avoided emissions and carbon credits. Not following any of these will lead to incomparable and confusing results, e. g. providing negative PCFs for electricity produced from palm oil mill effluent( POME)-basedbiogas due to subtracting avoided emissions from the product PCF. 5
1 Total PCF; PCF calculation according to IPCC 6th AR incl. direct land use change and GWP100 factors with climate carbon feedbacks( ISO14067 and Together for Sustainability( TIS) guideline: 2025, Version 3.0).
2 Unpacked product.
' Inventory data: BASF own estimations of bill of materials and energies( in house technology and business intelligence experts). Assumptions: average of two production pathways using coal-based formaldehyde and coal-based acetylene, respectively; coal-based generation of steam and
electricity in China. 4 TUV Rheinland certification6( acc. to ISO 14067: 2018) confirms calculation of benchmarks acc. to ISO standards based on data provided by BASF.
5 Data source BASF ' s Product Carbon Footprints: BASF ' s Strategic CO 2 Transparency Tool( SCOTT), June 2025. TUV Rheinland certified in accordance
to ISO 14067:2018 that the calculated and reported product carbon footprint( PCF) are in line with ISO 14067 and Together for Sustainability( TIS) specific requirements. Responsibility for the accuracy of the input data used( consumption data) remains with BASF SE.
Nonetheless, certain calculation rules may remain undefined or present conflicting guidance depending on the chosen framework. For example, the treatment of biogenic carbon uptake varies: ISO 14067 and TfS allow for the inclusion of biogenic carbon uptake in cradle-to-gate PCF values, whereas the GHG Protocol does not permit this approach.
Ongoing efforts aim to address these inconsistencies through the development of additional standards that provide clearer rules for PCF calculation, such as the forthcoming ISO 14077 standard on mass balance accounting rules in life cycle assessment.
Moreover, harmonisation initiatives are underway. In particular, the ISO and GHG Protocol have announced plans to collaborate on the publication of joint standards for both product and corporate GHG accounting. In the meantime, it is important to convey together with the PCF value the applied calculation methodology to enable an assessment of the comparability of PCF data from different sources.
Differences in secondary databases
Secondary databases play an important role in the calculation of PCFs, especially in contexts where access to primary PCF data remains constrained. Results from the IFRA & IOFI sustainability survey indicate that fewer than half of respondents were able to quantify their product-related Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. Moreover, the majority of participants relied on proxy values. i. e. approximations of PCFs derived from the best available data.
Lifecycle assessment( LCA) databases, such as Ecoinvent and Sphera, are extensively utilised across various industrial sectors for both LCA and PCF quantification. However, depending on the database used, the PCF value can significantly vary.
Kim et al. report that the discrepancies in PCF values for identical plastic materials provided by
JAN / FEB 2026 SPECCHEMONLINE. COM
47