Page 88 - Read Online

Liu et al. Carbon Footprints 2024;3:20 https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/cf.2024.27 Page 5 of 8

involved in carbon footprint monitoring, accounting, evaluation, verification, certification, information
disclosure, and public welfare supervision. Additionally, it has enhanced the capacity and expertise of these
professional and technical service institutions to conduct international business.

However, there are still many problems in promoting carbon footprinting in metropolitan cities, foremost
among which is the lack of a unified and up-to-date product carbon footprint database . In China, the
[9]
majority of product carbon footprint accounting relies on international commercial software, such as
Germany’s GaBi and the Netherlands’s SimaPro. However, these tools lack unified evaluation standards,
[10]
comprehensive factor databases, and consistent calculation methods . A critical issue is the significant gap
in domestic measurement foundations for carbon emission factors, which are essential for accurate carbon
footprint assessments. For instance, China's electricity emission factors are divided into five distinct
categories, with data updates lagging behind the actual needs. As of 2017, the National Development and
Reform Commission released the 2015 national grid average emission factor, which remained in use until
the end of 2021. Similarly, the average emission factors for regional power grids have only been publicized
for 2010 to 2012, while provincial power grid data are only available for the years 2010, 2012, and 2016.
Given the increasing shift toward cleaner energy sources in China's power supply, the lag in updating these
factors results in carbon emission accounting that deviates from reality. Consequently, the measured carbon
emissions of domestic products tend to be overestimated, which undermines their international
competitiveness. The lack of a unified database further exacerbates this issue. Discrepancies in data from
different sources lead to inaccurate carbon footprint measurements, complicating the precise accounting of
carbon emissions. Moreover, differing calculation methods and standards across regions and enterprises
hinder the comparability and verification of results. At an international level, the absence of standardized
carbon footprint data poses a barrier to international cooperation and carbon trading efforts. Second,
product-level carbon management lags behind organizational-level carbon management. To promote
carbon emission reduction, Shanghai launched a pilot carbon trading program in 2012 and established a
national carbon trading platform in 2021. Procedures, standards, and management norms for carbon
emission trading have been gradually constructed. However, the definition of product carbon footprint
remains unclear, and no leading department has been designated to oversee this. Additionally, the carbon
footprints of industrial products, construction products, and everyday consumption products span various
industries and involve multiple enterprises across both upstream and downstream sectors. The complexity
of data collection and accounting is further exacerbated by differences in industry, scale, and geographic
location. As a result, the key market participants have limited willingness to actively engage in the
accounting of product carbon footprints or disclose carbon emission information. Third, a unified product
carbon labeling certification system has not yet been established. As China's carbon labeling system is still in
its early stages, there are various domestic standards, some of which are of low quality. These labels can be
divided into three categories: the first is those developed by government departments or public non-profit
organizations; the second includes labels certified by third-party independent organizations; and the third
consists of labels added by enterprises themselves. The constant influx of these different types of carbon
labels into the market has led to consumer confusion and, in some countries, skepticism, which could
undermine trust in carbon labels. Furthermore, the cost of carbon footprint certification is high. A simple
certification process can cost between 30,000 and 50,000 yuan per product, while a complex process can
approach 100,000 yuan. Companies also need to undergo multiple certifications to meet the requirements of
different export markets and customers. Even companies that are committed to carbon reduction efforts
often struggle to convey accurate and reliable low-carbon information about their products to the market
through a uniform, credible, and easily understood label. These issues highlight that current carbon
footprint assessments focus primarily on individual enterprises. The lack of industry-specific parameter
factors affects the accuracy of carbon footprint measurements for key carbon-emitting industries. This gap
could hinder the achievement of carbon neutrality goals.