Environmental and Climate Declarations as Tools for Exporting Russian Construction Materials

Environmental protection, climate change, and the protection of the planet’s biodiversity are becoming top priorities in modern society. Environmental agreements, while important and necessary, including for achieving sustainable development goals, impose additional restrictions on products and producers of these products. These restrictions can be used by countries to create barriers to the import of construction materials. Countries that have ratified environmental agreements may restrict the import of products that do not meet environmental requirements or criteria in one way or another. International environmental management tools are described, in particular environmental and climate declarations, which can serve as tools for solving the problem of possible restrictions and barriers in the export of construction materials produced in the Russian Federation.

.V. DERBENEV, Engineer (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.),
D.M. VADIVASOV, Engineer-Ecologist (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)

Association “Non-profit Partnership “Coordination and Information Center of the CIS Member States on the Convergence of Regulatory Practices” (Association “NP KITS SNG”) (36, bldg. 1, Lyusinovskaya Street, Moscow, 115093, Russian Federation)

1. Lin D. et al. Ecological footprint accounting for countries: updates and results of the national footprint accounts, 2012–2018. Resources. 2018. Vol. 7. No.  3. 58 p.
2. Marmul L., Krukovskaya E. Certification of agrarian enterprises-producers of organic products in order to enter European markets. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies. 2018. Vol. 4. No.  4, pp. 209–216.
3. Prieto-Sandoval V. et al. Challenges for Еco labeling growth: lessons from the EU Ecolabel in Spain. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 2019, pp. 1–12.
4. Strazza C. et al. Using environmental product declaration as source of data for life cycle assessment: a case study. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016. Vol. 112, pp. 333–342.
5. Hauschild M.Z. et al. Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 2013. Vol. 18. No. 3, pp. 683–697.
6. Esnouf A. et al. A tool to guide the selection of impact categories for LCA studies by using the representativeness index. Science of the Total Environment. 2019. Vol. 658, pp. 768–776.
7. Ingrao C. et al. How can life cycle thinking support sustainability of buildings? Investigating life cycle assessment applications for energy efficiency and environmental performance. Journal of cleaner production. 2018. Vol. 201, pp. 556–569.
8. Gundes S. The use of life cycle techniques in the assessment of sustainability. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2016. Vol. 216, pp. 916–922.
9. Evangelista P.P.A. et al. Environmental performance analysis of residential buildings in Brazil using life cycle assessment (LCA). Construction and Building Materials. 2018. Vol. 169, pp. 748–761.
10. Najjar M.K. et al. Life cycle assessment methodology integrated with BIM as a decision-making tool at early-stages of building design. International Journal of Construction Management. 2019. DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2019.1637098
11. Curran M.A. (ed.). Goal and scope definition in life cycle assessment. Springer, 2016.
12. Hauschild M.Z., Rosenbaum R.K. & Olsen S.I. (Eds.), Life Cycle Assessment. Theory and Practice. Springer International Publishing AG. 2018. 1216 р.
13. Francart N. et al. Requirements set by Swedish municipalities to promote construction with low climate change impact. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019. Vol. 208, pp. 117–131.