By Daniel Olausson, Chief Strategy Officer at BIMobject and Co-Founder at CarbonZero
From project to ongoing responsibility
An EPD is not a static deliverable. It has a limited validity, it requires maintenance, and it often becomes a foundation for other types of reporting, whether for internal decision-making or external frameworks such as Digital Product Passports. What initially appears as a project gradually reveals itself as a strategic consideration, shaped by new product introductions, changing supplier data, and the continuous need for more accurate and comparable information.
At this stage, the key question shifts. It is no longer about how to create an EPD, but about how to manage product sustainability data in a way that remains workable over time and justifies the investment beyond achieving regulatory compliance.
Why your approach to EPDs matters
The approach an organisation takes to producing EPDs plays a significant role in how this challenge unfolds. It influences not only the cost and speed of individual declarations, but also how data is structured, maintained, and reused across the organisation. In practice, most organisations tend to operate within one of three broad approaches, often without explicitly defining them as such.
The project-based approach
The first is a project-based approach, which is typically where many organisations begin. In this model, external consultants are engaged to produce an EPD for a specific product, with data collected, modelled, and documented within the scope of that individual project. This approach is effective in the short term, particularly when the internal organisation lacks the resources or expertise to manage the process independently. At the same time, it often leads to repetition, as each new EPD requires similar work to be carried out again, while updates can become time-consuming and knowledge remains largely externalised. For organisations with a limited number of products, this may be sufficient, but it becomes increasingly difficult to sustain as the need for more declarations grows.
The generator-based approach
The second approach can be described as tool-based, where organisations adopt software to support the LCA and EPD process. This typically improves consistency, reduces manual work, and enables internal teams to take greater ownership of the process. It represents a clear step forward, particularly in terms of efficiency and control. However, the key drawback of EPD generators is their lack of flexibility. Once a generator is set up, you are confined to working with a static set of inputs, and any changes to the setup will usually entail additional fees and setup time. As such, EPD generators are a great option for manufacturers with large product ranges of near-identical products - minimizing the need for setup adjustments and maximizing output potential.
The system-based approach
A third, increasingly relevant approach takes a more data-centric perspective. Instead of starting with the EPD as the primary output, the focus is placed on building a structured and reusable foundation of product sustainability data. Materials, components, transport flows, and other parameters are defined in a way that allows them to be used across multiple products and outputs. In this model, EPDs become one of several possible outcomes, alongside product carbon footprint reports, internal analyses and, in the long run, digital product passports. The benefit lies not only in speed, but in continuity, as updates can be applied across entire product portfolios and data can be reused rather than recreated. Over time, this shifts sustainability work from a series of isolated tasks to a more integrated and ongoing capability within the organisation - continuously growing internal knowledge and ownership.
Choosing the right path
There is no single approach that is universally right. The appropriate choice depends on factors such as the size and complexity of the product portfolio, the level of internal expertise, and the organisation’s long-term ambitions. For some, a project-based model may be entirely sufficient, while others will quickly encounter its limitations as requirements increase. What is often underestimated, however, is how early decisions shape future flexibility, particularly when the number of products grows and expectations around transparency and reporting continue to evolve.
A shift in perspective
The conversation around EPDs is still frequently framed in terms of time and cost per declaration. In practice, the more strategic consideration is how sustainability data is managed over time, and whether the organisation is building a system that can support ongoing needs rather than repeatedly solving the same problem. The distinction may seem subtle, but it has significant implications for how effectively an organisation can respond to both current and future demands.
.jpg)