Leather LCA by LWG versus PEFCR Leather: what are the methodological differences?

The European Union is working on the environmental display of various products through the PEFCR (Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules). Among these, leather products remain a subject under study through PEFCR Leather.

Private life-cycle analysis projects have also been launched. Footbridge has developed an automated LCA calculation solution for leather products. Meanwhile, LWG (Leather Working Group), the organization that created a certification label for sustainable practices in the leather industry, has just published a leather impact analysis report.

This article analyzes the two methodical approaches and their differences.

Overview of LWG certification for leather products

LWG certification is an international label designed to promote responsible and sustainable practices in leather production. It is aimed primarily at tanneries, brands and the entire leather supply chain. Here are the key points of this certification:

1. The aim of certification :

• To encourage environmentally friendly and socially responsible leather production.
• Reduce the environmental impact of tanneries by optimizing their management of water, chemicals and waste.
• Create transparency in the supply chain to ensure sustainable practices.

2. Evaluation criteria :

LWG certification is based on an environmental audit protocol structured into several components:

Consumption of natural resources:

• Efficient water management, including wastewater treatment.
• Optimization of energy use to reduce CO₂ emissions.

Chemicals management:

• Strict control of substances used to avoid pollutants.
• Compliance with international regulations (REACH, ZDHC).

Waste management:

• Reduction of solid waste and implementation of recycling programs.

Transparency and traceability:

• Implementation of systems to guarantee that leather comes from legitimate and ethical sources.

3. Types of certification:

Tanneries and suppliers can obtain different levels of certification depending on their performance:

• Gold: Best environmental performance.
• Silver: Good practice with some room for improvement.
• Bronze: Minimal compliance, with room for improvement.
• Interim Audits: For new tanneries entering the process.

4. Benefits for certified companies :

• Enhanced reputation: Brands using LWG-certified leather demonstrate their commitment to sustainability.
• Compliance with consumer expectations: Responds to growing demand for environmentally-friendly products.
• Increased efficiency: Reduce operational costs by optimizing resources.
• Market access: Major international brands prefer certified partners.

5. Challenges and limitations :

• Compliance costs: Some small tanneries may find it difficult to invest in the necessary technologies.
• Balance of criteria: Although the focus is on the environment, other dimensions such as animal welfare are not always covered in detail.

Strengths and weaknesses of LWG certification for measuring the environmental quality of a product

LWG certification is widely recognized for assessing the environmental impact of leather production, but it has both strengths and limitations when it comes to measuring the environmental quality of a product. Here is an analysis of the main strengths and weaknesses:

LWG’s strengths

A comprehensive, standardized approach

• Structured protocol: LWG offers a clear methodology for assessing environmental impacts, particularly in terms of water, chemical and waste management.
• Certification levels (Gold, Silver, Bronze): to differentiate tanneries’ environmental performance.

Reduced environmental impact

• Encourages practices that reduce the ecological footprint, notably through better management of natural resources and waste.
• Promotes the use of modern technologies for wastewater treatment and energy optimization.

International recognition

• Certification is accepted and recognized by many major brands, making it an influential tool for steering the sector towards more sustainable practices.

Transparency and traceability

• Promotes a more responsible supply chain by ensuring that leather is sourced from tanneries respecting strict environmental standards.
• Supports consumers’ expectations in terms of ethics and sustainability.

Continuous improvement

• Encourages tanneries to improve their practices through regular audits and clear objectives.
• Stimulates innovation in sustainable production technologies.

LWG’s weaknesses

Limited focus on the environment

• Lack of an end-product approach: certification mainly evaluates tannery practices and does not take into account the entire product life cycle (manufacture, transport, use, end-of-life).
• Does not directly measure the environmental impact of the final product, but rather the conditions of production, in particular tanneries.
• Certification is obtained through an annual audit of the factory, with no continuous monitoring or control of goods flows.

Omissions on other sustainable dimensions

• Animal welfare: Although the certification includes traceability requirements, it does not focus specifically on animal treatment conditions.
• Social impact: Certification does not cover social aspects (working conditions, fair wages) in detail.

Accessibility and cost

• Small tanneries or those in developing countries may find it difficult to meet the high requirements of certification, which limits inclusiveness.
• Audits and the necessary investment may also be an obstacle for some companies.

Criticism of potential greenwashing

• Some brands may use the LWG label to display environmental commitment without examining other negative impacts (such as the overall sustainability of the finished product).
• Certification, while important, is not an absolute guarantee of environmental sustainability.
• LWG Bronze certification is fairly straightforward to obtain, but does not represent a significant environmental commitment (unlike LWG Gold). The factory is still LWG certified, however, which can be confusing.

Complexity for the consumer

• The meaning of the levels (Gold, Silver, Bronze) can be difficult for the general public to understand, making the impact of the label less clear to end consumers.

Summary of PEFCR Leather: Methodology, Advantages and Disadvantages

PEFCR Leather is a standardized methodology defined by the European Union to assess the environmental footprint of leather products. Based on the general framework of the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF), it aims to provide a robust and harmonized assessment of the environmental impacts over the entire life cycle of leather products.

Objectives and methodological principles

1. Standardization: the aim is to establish uniform rules for assessing the environmental impact of leather products, enabling fair comparisons between manufacturers and products.
2. Complete life cycle (Cradle-to-Grave): the method includes all stages, from cattle rearing to the end-of-life of the product (waste or recycling).
3. Environmental indicators: impact analysis covers 16 categories, including :
   • Global warming potential (GWP).
   • Eutrophication.
   • Acidification.
   • Water consumption.
   • Abiotic depletion.
4. Functional unit: The functional unit is based on mass (kg) to ensure inter-product comparability.
5. Impact allocation : Allocation distributes the impacts of upstream stages (breeding, slaughtering) according to economic or mass criteria.

The benefits of PEFCR Leather methodology

Standardized, robust approach:

• Enables fair comparisons between products and companies, thanks to a methodology harmonized at European level
• Enhances the transparency and credibility of environmental assessments.

Full life-cycle coverage:

• Analyzes all stages, including use and end-of-life, providing a global view of environmental impacts.

Adaptability to different product categories:

• Applicable to various types of leather products (shoes, bags, furniture, etc.).
• Integrates the specificities of manufacturing processes and materials.

Incentive for environmental improvement:

• Identifies environmental “hot spots” in the supply chain.
• Encourages manufacturers to reduce their impacts through technological innovation and sustainable practices.

International recognition:

• Helps align the leather industry with European climate targets and consumer expectations of sustainability.
• Disadvantages of the PEFCR Leather methodology

Complexity and cost of implementation:

• Requires detailed data and technical expertise, which can be difficult for smaller companies.
• Audits and analyses can be costly and time-consuming.

Focus on mass as a functional unit:

• The choice of mass (kg) does not always reflect product specificities, such as differences in leather thickness or quality (often better expressed in m² surface area).

Partial approach to livestock farming:

• Livestock impacts are included, but attributed according to economic or mass criteria, which may underestimate the real impacts of the agricultural production chain.

Limitations of secondary data:

• A significant proportion of data comes from secondary databases (e.g. Agri-footprint), which may introduce uncertainties and fail to reflect local or temporal variations.
• EF databases are opaque, difficult to access and not exhaustive (e.g. low-impact textile materials such as organic cotton).

Social and animal dimensions not taken into account:

PEFCR focuses exclusively on environmental impacts and does not cover animal welfare or social conditions in the supply chain.

Lack of flexibility for specific scenarios:

Standardization can be rigid and may not always reflect local peculiarities, especially for companies outside the EU or with unique processes.

PEFCR requires strict application of the methodology and database, and prohibits the inclusion of specific data (e.g. renewable energy used by a plant).

What are the methodological differences between LCA carried out by LWG and PEFCR Leather?

The Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) carried out by the Leather Working Group (LWG) and the Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR) Leather have methodological similarities, but they differ in several key aspects, including objectives, scope, impact allocation and data granularity. Here is a detailed comparison of the two approaches:

1. Study objectives

LCA LWG:

• Provide a scientific assessment of the environmental impacts associated with bovine leather production.
• Identify “hot spots” in the production process to guide tanneries’ sustainability efforts.
• Help brands make data-driven decisions in their supply chain.

PEFCR Leather:

• Establish a standardized, harmonized methodology at European level for assessing the environmental footprint of leather products.
• Enable direct comparisons between similar products on a common basis.

2. Scope of analysis

LWG LCA :

• Cradle-to-gate: Analysis limited from farm to finished leather production, excluding product use and end-of-life.
• Focuses on manufacturing processes (tanning, post-tanning) and upstream impacts (breeding and slaughter).

PEFCR Leather:

• Cradle-to-grave: Includes the complete product cycle, including use and end-of-life.
• Takes a broader approach to assessing impacts on the total sustainability of leather.

3. Allocation of environmental impacts

LWG LCA:

• Uses a mixed allocation based on the economic value and mass fraction of hides.
• Average economic impact of leather: 1.8% of the total value of the animal, and 7.8% for the mass fraction.
• Reflects variations according to market conditions and geographical regions.

PEFCR Leather:

• Follows stricter, standardized rules for allocation, defined by European directives.
• Generally uses economic allocations (e.g. 3.5%) or fixed mass allocations (7%), as default values validated by experts.

4. Data and representativeness

LWG LCA:

• Combination of primary data for manufacturing processes and secondary data for breeding and slaughtering (databases such as Agri-footprint).
• Global representativeness: Analysis carried out in 16 countries for raw materials and 18 countries for manufacturing processes.

PEFCR Leather:

• Uses mainly secondary data in line with PEF standards and specific to European regions.
• Emphasis on data quality and completeness to ensure comparable results between manufacturers.

5. Environmental impact categories

LWG LCA:

• Analyzes six main categories:
• Global warming potential (GWP).
• Abiotic depletion.
• Eutrophication.
• Water use and consumption.
• Freshwater ecotoxicity.
• Focuses on categories relevant to finished leather, including chemical impacts.

PEFCR Leather:

• Adopts a broader, standardized framework, incorporating mandatory categories for all PEF products:
• GWP, acidification, terrestrial ecotoxicity, etc.
• Uses weighting and standardization methods to make results comparable.

6. Leather-specific approaches

LCA LWG:

• Focuses on the differences between chrome tanning and chrome-free tanning (glutaraldehyde), measuring specific impacts.
• Highlights the impacts of waste flows and water management in the industrial process.

PEFCR Leather:

• Provides more generic rules for leather, not limited to specific processes or methods.
• Designed to accommodate a wide range of leather products, not just cattle.

7. Limitations and applicability

LCA LWG:

• Allows a targeted analysis applicable to LWG-certified tanneries, but does not cover the entire life cycle.
• More suitable for specific operational improvements.

PEFCR Leather:

• Aims to harmonize environmental approaches to enable comparisons between products.
• Requires detailed data and can be costly for small companies to implement.

In conclusion

If LWG certification is a globally recognized standard for promoting sustainable practices in the leather industry, PEFCR Leather represents a powerful methodological framework for assessing and comparing the environmental impacts of leather products.

LWG certification is a valuable tool for encouraging sustainability in leather production, by emphasizing responsible environmental practices. However, it does not directly measure the environmental quality of the finished product, and has shortcomings in areas such as animal welfare and social impact. To complement its action, it may be necessary to integrate this certification into a broader approach, taking into account the entire product life cycle and other aspects of sustainability.

PEFCR Leather’s main assets lie in its standardization, its global vision of the life cycle, and its potential to encourage sustainable practices. However, its complexity, cost of implementation, and certain limitations linked to data or impact allocation make it a demanding method, requiring adjustments to better meet the various needs of industry and the eco-design objective.