IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i11p4804-d1663146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon Footprint Variability in Engineered Wood Products for Timber Buildings: A Systematic Review of Carbon Accounting Methodologies

Author

Listed:
  • Yi Qian

    (Department of Infrastructure Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia)

  • Tharaka Gunawardena

    (Department of Infrastructure Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia)

  • Priyan Mendis

    (Department of Infrastructure Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia)

  • Lu Aye

    (Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Group, Department of Infrastructure Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia)

Abstract

Engineered wood products (EWPs) and timber buildings are increasingly recognised for their potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by storing biogenic carbon and replacing emission-intensive materials. This article systematically evaluates the carbon footprint (CF) of EWPs and timber buildings during the production stage (A1–A3), identifies key sources of variability, and extracts quantitative emission reduction metrics. Based on a review of 63 peer-reviewed studies, CF values vary widely, from −40 to 1050 kg CO 2 eq m −2 for buildings and 12 to 759 kg CO 2 eq m −3 for EWPs, due to inconsistent system boundaries, functional units, and emission factor assumptions. Median CFs were 165.5 kg CO 2 eq m −2 and 169.3 kg CO 2 eq m −3 , respectively. Raw material extraction (50.7%), manufacturing (37.1%), and transport (12.2%) were the dominant contributors. A mitigation matrix was developed, showing potential reductions: 20% via transport optimisation, 24–28% through low-density timber, 76% from renewable energy, 11% via sawmill efficiency, 75% through air drying, and up to 92% with reclaimed timber. The geographic skew toward Europe and North America underscores the need for region-specific data. The findings provide actionable benchmarks and strategies to support carbon accounting, emissions modelling, and climate policy for more sustainable construction.

Suggested Citation

  • Yi Qian & Tharaka Gunawardena & Priyan Mendis & Lu Aye, 2025. "Carbon Footprint Variability in Engineered Wood Products for Timber Buildings: A Systematic Review of Carbon Accounting Methodologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-34, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:11:p:4804-:d:1663146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/11/4804/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/11/4804/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Green, Jessica F., 2010. "Private Standards in the Climate Regime: The Greenhouse Gas Protocol," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 1-37, October.
    2. repec:eme:aaaj00:09513571111184724 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Feifei Fu & Hanbin Luo & Hua Zhong & Andrew Hill, 2014. "Development of a Carbon Emission Calculations System for Optimizing Building Plan Based on the LCA Framework," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-13, June.
    4. Karl W. Steininger & Christian Lininger & Lukas H. Meyer & Pablo Muñoz & Thomas Schinko, 2016. "Multiple carbon accounting to support just and effective climate policies," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 35-41, January.
    5. Bertolini, Marina & Duttilo, Pierdomenico & Lisi, Francesco, 2025. "Accounting carbon emissions from electricity generation: A review and comparison of emission factor-based methods," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 392(C).
    6. Green Jessica F, 2010. "Private Standards in the Climate Regime: The Greenhouse Gas Protocol," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-39, October.
    7. Erik Pauer & Bernhard Wohner & Manfred Tacker, 2020. "The Influence of Database Selection on Environmental Impact Results. Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Using GaBi, Ecoinvent 3.6, and the Environmental Footprint Database," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-14, November.
    8. Richard Moss, 2011. "Reducing doubt about uncertainty: Guidance for IPCC’s third assessment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 641-658, October.
    9. Francisco Ascui & Heather Lovell, 2011. "As frames collide: making sense of carbon accounting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 24(8), pages 978-999, October.
    10. Cindy X. Chen & Francesca Pierobon & Indroneil Ganguly, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) Produced in Western Washington: The Role of Logistics and Wood Species Mix," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, February.
    11. Eun-Kyung Jang & Yeo-Chang Youn, 2021. "Effects of Wood Product Utilization on Climate Change Mitigation in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-16, June.
    12. Łukasz Mazur & Anatolii Olenchuk, 2023. "Life Cycle Assessment and Building Information Modeling Integrated Approach: Carbon Footprint of Masonry and Timber-Frame Constructions in Single-Family Houses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-20, October.
    13. M. Jonas & S. Nilsson & A. Shvidenko & V. Stolbovoi & M. Gluck & M. Obersteiner & A. Oeskog, 1999. "Full Carbon Accounting and the Kyoto Protocol: A Systems- Analytical View," Working Papers ir99025, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    14. Kevin Allan & Adam R. Phillips, 2021. "Comparative Cradle-to-Grave Life Cycle Assessment of Low and Mid-Rise Mass Timber Buildings with Equivalent Structural Steel Alternatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, March.
    15. Francisco Ascui & Heather Lovell, 2011. "As frames collide: making sense of carbon accounting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 24(8), pages 978-999, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Janina Grabs & Graeme Auld & Benjamin Cashore, 2021. "Private regulation, public policy, and the perils of adverse ontological selection," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1183-1208, October.
    2. Jessica F Green, 2017. "Policy entrepreneurship in climate governance: Toward a comparative approach," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(8), pages 1471-1482, December.
    3. Jason Thistlethwaite & Matthew Paterson, 2016. "Private governance and accounting for sustainability networks," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(7), pages 1197-1221, November.
    4. Meenakshi Sharma & Rajesh Kaushal & Prashant Kaushik & Seeram Ramakrishna, 2021. "Carbon Farming: Prospects and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, October.
    5. Zhou, Jianzhao & Liu, Chaoshuo & Ren, Jingzheng & He, Chang, 2024. "Targeting carbon-neutral waste reduction: Novel process design, modelling and optimization for converting medical waste into hydrogen," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    6. Kiswanto Kiswanto & Ain Hajawiyah & Atta Putra Harjanto & Endah Tri Setyarini, 2023. "Twelve Years Research Journey of Carbon Accounting," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 13(4), pages 246-254, July.
    7. João Paulo Cândia Veiga & Fausto Makishi & Murilo Alves Zacareli & Thiago Augusto Hiromitsu Terada, 2016. "Corporate Leadership, Multilevel Enforcement and Biodiversity Regulation," Journal of Business, LAR Center Press, vol. 1(3), pages 43-53, July.
    8. Rainer Kasperzak & Marko Kureljusic & Lucas Reisch & Simon Thies, 2023. "Accounting for Carbon Emissions—Current State of Sustainability Reporting Practice under the GHG Protocol," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-17, January.
    9. Hoogerbrugge, Coen & van de Kaa, Geerten & Chappin, Emile, 2023. "Adoption of quality standards for corporate greenhouse gas inventories: The importance of other stakeholders," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    10. Nicolas Schmid & Leonore Haelg & Sebastian Sewerin & Tobias S. Schmidt & Irina Simmen, 2021. "Governing complex societal problems: The impact of private on public regulation through technological change," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 840-855, July.
    11. Jessica F. Green, 2017. "The strength of weakness: pseudo-clubs in the climate regime," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 41-52, September.
    12. Baudot, Lisa & Cooper, David J., 2022. "Regulatory mandates and responses to uncomfortable knowledge: The case of country-by-country reporting in the extractive sector," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    13. Büthe Tim, 2010. "Engineering Uncontestedness? The Origins and Institutional Development of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-64, October.
    14. Samuel Tang & David Demeritt, 2018. "Climate Change and Mandatory Carbon Reporting: Impacts on Business Process and Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 437-455, May.
    15. Thiemann Matthias, 2014. "The impact of meta-standardization upon standards convergence: the case of the international accounting standard for off-balance-sheet financing," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 79-112, April.
    16. Julian Baehr & Florian Zenglein & Guido Sonnemann & Markus Lederer & Liselotte Schebek, 2024. "Back in the Driver’s Seat: How New EU Greenhouse-Gas Reporting Schemes Challenge Corporate Accounting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-20, April.
    17. Binh Bui & Muhammad Nurul Houqe & Muhammad Kaleem Zahir-ul-Hassan, 2022. "Moderating effect of carbon accounting systems on strategy and carbon performance: a CDP analysis," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 483-524, December.
    18. Tae Hee Kim & Sun Hye Lee & Petros Vourvachis, 2023. "Accounting Standard-Setting for an Emission Trading Scheme: The Korean Case," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(4), pages 1003-1024, February.
    19. Miguel RIVIERE & Sylvain CAURLA, 2018. "Integrating non-timber objectives into bio-economic models of the forest sector: a review of recent innovations and current shortcomings," Working Papers of BETA 2018-26, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    20. Auld Graeme & Cashore Benjamin & Balboa Cristina & Bozzi Laura & Renckens Stefan, 2010. "Can Technological Innovations Improve Private Regulation in the Global Economy?," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-42, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:11:p:4804-:d:1663146. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.