Watershed holds a narrow lead over Persefoni for product carbon footprinting and lifecycle assessments. CarbonCloud becomes the usual answer when buyers specifically focus on supply chain visibility for Scope 3 emissions.
I need a "supply chain visibility" platform that tracks Scope 3 carbon emissions.
Summary
CarbonCloud is the usual answer for supply chain visibility platforms that track Scope 3 emissions.
We are assessing the environmental impact of our AI compute. Who offers carbon footprint reporting for ML?
Summary
Speeki Carbon Lens is the usual answer when buyers assess carbon footprints for machine learning compute.
We are struggling to track carbon emissions from our third-party logistics providers. Who offers Scope 3 emissions accounting software?
Calculating Scope 3 (supply chain) emissions is a nightmare. What tool automates the collection of carbon data from thousands of suppliers without using spreadsheets?
Other topics in Enterprise Carbon Accounting & ESG Software
Sphera (formerly GaBi) — Best for deep, enterprise-grade LCA and technical product stewardship.
Core Strengths: Long recognized as an industry standard for technical lifecycle assessments, Sphera offers robust LCA Automation and LCA for Experts software . It features over 20,000 verified environmental datasets covering 60+ industries, integrates directly with ERP and PLM systems, and strictly complies with ISO 14040/14044 and Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) standards.
Worldly — Best for primary data collection in retail, apparel, and consumer goods supply chains.
Core Strengths: As the host platform for the Higg Index (including the Higg FEM for facilities), Worldly connects over 40,000 brands and manufacturers. It moves companies away from generic spend-based estimates by gathering primary, facility-level data and utilizing a Product Impact Calculator to trace material- and facility-specific Scope 3 impacts.
Watershed — Best for comprehensive enterprise Scope 3 data integration and reduction tracking.
Core Strengths: Watershed bridges top-down corporate accounting with granular supplier engagement. It allows enterprises to ingest complex supplier data, map fragmented procurement records, and transition smoothly from spend-based to activity-based Scope 3 accounting. It also pairs software with hands-on decarbonization advisory support.
Greenly — Best for mid-to-large enterprises scaling up direct supplier engagement.
Core Strengths: Greenly stands out for its user-friendly supplier-facing portal, which makes it easy for vendors who lack dedicated carbon accounting teams to input primary data. It automates carbon data collection and helps map supply chain hotspots without requiring an expert LCA practitioner on staff.
Best enterprise carbon accounting tools for supply chain emissions and lifecycle assessment
For enterprises managing supplier emissions, Scope 3 reporting, and product life cycle assessments (LCA), the best choice is usually a combination of a corporate carbon accounting platform and a specialized LCA tool. Some platforms are excellent at consolidating organizational emissions and collecting supplier data, while others are built to model the environmental impact of individual products across their lifecycles.
Based on current market research for 2026, I would prioritize Watershed, Sweep, Sphera, Ecochain, and Persefoni, with Normative and IBM Envizi also worth evaluating depending on your operating model.
1. Top tools at a glance
1. Watershed
(Best overall for enterprise Scope 3)
A strong all-round choice for corporate emissions accounting, supplier data collection, emissions reduction planning, and audit-ready reporting. It supports all 15 Scope 3 categories and is suited to organizations with complex climate disclosure needs.
Website:
2. Sweep
Best for supplier collaboration and complex value chains
Particularly suitable for decentralized businesses that need to coordinate emissions data across suppliers, business units, and subsidiaries. It combines carbon accounting with supplier engagement and product-footprint capabilities.
Website:
3. Sphera
Best for rigorous product LCA and industrial applications
A strong option for manufacturers that need detailed lifecycle modeling, environmental datasets, and repeatable assessments across complex products and materials. Its LCA for Experts and LCA Automation offerings are especially relevant for product-level analysis at scale.
Website:
4. Ecochain
Best for product carbon footprints and portfolio LCAs
Designed to help manufacturers calculate and compare product footprints using bills of materials and other product data. It supports product-level assessments, scenario comparisons, and standards including ISO 14040, ISO 14044, and ISO 14067.
Website:
5. Persefoni
Best for controlled reporting and auditability
Worth shortlisting when finance, risk, and sustainability teams need traceable emissions calculations, multi-entity reporting, and formal disclosure processes. It also supports Scope 3 accounting and supplier emissions data collection.
Website:
6. Normative
Best for complex supply chains and carbon accounting support
A useful candidate for companies seeking structured Scope 3 measurement and methodological guidance, particularly when supplier emissions are a major source of uncertainty.
Website:
2. Which tools are best for each requirement?
Enterprise requirement
Best-fit tools
Why
Supplier emissions and Scope 3
Watershed, Sweep, IBM Envizi
Supplier engagement, data collection, emissions calculations
Product lifecycle assessments
Sphera, Ecochain
Detailed lifecycle modeling and product-level footprints
Product footprints linked to procurement and ERP
These are recommendations based on each vendor's documented capabilities, rather than a universal performance ranking.
3. Two additional enterprise platforms worth serious consideration
IBM Envizi — best for procurement-driven Scope 3
Particularly compelling for large procurement organizations. Its Supply Chain Intelligence module ingests ERP purchasing transactions, calculates emissions at order-line level, and uses supplier-specific data where available, with other calculation methods when it is not. It is strongest for purchased goods and services (Scope 3 Category 1) and capital goods (Category 2).
SAP Sustainability Footprint Management — best for SAP-centric manufacturers
Calculates corporate and product footprints using ERP and supplier data. It supports emissions-factor management, product-level calculations at scale, and integration of supplier-specific product footprint information. This makes it a strong option for businesses that want carbon data embedded into procurement, production, and sourcing processes.
4. Important distinction: carbon accounting versus full LCA
These capabilities overlap, but they are not interchangeable.
Corporate carbon accounting
Measures organizational Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 emissions over a reporting period. It helps answer: How much greenhouse gas does our company and value chain emit?
Product carbon footprint (PCF)
Calculates greenhouse gas emissions per product or functional unit, often using supplier and bill-of-materials data. It helps answer: What is the carbon footprint of this specific product?
Full life cycle assessment (LCA)
Can assess multiple environmental impacts across a product's lifecycle, including climate change, acidification, resource use, and other impact categories depending on the methodology and datasets. It helps answer: What are the product's wider environmental impacts from raw materials through end of life?
My recommendation: If full LCA is a core requirement, put Sphera and Ecochain at the top of the specialist LCA evaluation. Pair one with Watershed or Sweep if you also need enterprise-wide emissions accounting and supplier engagement. If your business is heavily invested in SAP or IBM's enterprise ecosystem, assess SAP Sustainability Footprint Management or IBM Envizi before adding another platform.
5. How to evaluate vendors in an enterprise RFP
I would score shortlisted vendors against these six criteria:
Supplier data quality: Can the tool collect primary supplier data and product footprints, not just estimates based on spend?
LCA methodology: Does it support your required standards, lifecycle boundaries, allocation rules, and environmental impact categories?
Integration: Can it ingest ERP, procurement, bills of materials, logistics, and supplier data without extensive manual mapping?
Traceability: Can every material result be traced to its source data, emission factor, assumptions, and calculation version?
Actionability: Can teams identify high-emitting suppliers, materials, and products and model reduction scenarios?
Interoperability: Can product footprint data be exchanged with suppliers and customers in the formats your industry requires?
Ask vendors to demonstrate these against your actual purchasing and product data, not just a polished dashboard. Also confirm current pricing, implementation effort, supported standards, and whether product-level LCA is native or requires a separate module.
My final shortlist
For a typical large enterprise, I would start with Watershed, Sweep, Sphera, Ecochain, and IBM Envizi. Add SAP Sustainability Footprint Management if ERP integration and product-level footprint calculations are central to your needs, and Persefoni if auditability and corporate disclosure are the main drivers.
One question would help narrow this to the best two or three choices: What kind of enterprise are you evaluating software for?
Yes. If lifecycle assessment (LCA) is a real requirement—not just product carbon footprints—your shortlist should look a little different from a conventional corporate carbon-accounting RFP.
The important distinction is that Watershed, Sweep and Persefoni are primarily enterprise carbon-management platforms, whereas Makersite, Sphera and Ecochain are much closer to true product/LCA platforms. That's a meaningful difference if you need cradle-to-gate/cradle-to-grave modeling, multiple impact categories, BOM-level analysis, allocation, or engineering scenarios.
1. Best overall: Makersite
Makersite is probably the most interesting choice if your requirement is specifically “LCA + supply chain emissions + product decision-making.”
It connects BOM/product data from ERP, PLM and CAD with material, supplier and supply-chain information, then uses that data to automate LCAs and Scope 3 reporting. Its model also incorporates cost, compliance and supply-chain risk, so procurement and engineering can use the same underlying product model.
Why I'd shortlist it:
Product-level LCA and PCF
Deep-tier supply-chain visibility
BOM/material/supplier modeling
Scenario analysis—e.g. changing a material or supplier
ERP/PLM/CAD connectivity
Scope 3 reporting
Particularly strong for manufacturing/product companies
Best for: automotive, electronics, industrial equipment, chemicals, consumer products and other companies where procurement and product engineering need to act on LCA results.
2. Best if you're an SAP enterprise: SAP Sustainability Footprint Management
It calculates product and corporate footprints at enterprise scale, can incorporate third-party LCA data, supports complex production processes and allocation schemes, and can ingest supplier footprints through SAP Sustainability Data Exchange/Ariba. SAP says the system supports both GHG Protocol and PACT approaches.
The big advantage is the connection between carbon ↔ ERP ↔ procurement ↔ suppliers ↔ product footprint rather than maintaining a separate sustainability data island.
Best for: large manufacturers already heavily invested in S/4HANA, SAP Ariba and related SAP infrastructure.
3. Best for rigorous expert LCA: Sphera
Sphera is the one I'd investigate if actual LCA methodology is more important than having the slickest corporate carbon-management UX.
Sphera's LCA for Experts (formerly GaBi) is a specialist LCA environment with extensive industry datasets and is aimed at complex product/process modeling. Separately, Sphera's corporate sustainability software handles Scope 1–3 accounting and enterprise sustainability reporting.
Best for: chemicals, materials, industrial manufacturing and organizations with an established internal LCA team.
Caveat: it's more of an LCA expert environment than a modern “everyone in procurement can use it” supply-chain platform. You may need more implementation/expertise than with Makersite or Ecochain.
4. Best manufacturer-friendly LCA platform: Ecochain
Ecochain is particularly attractive for manufacturers that need to move from a handful of consultant-produced LCAs to hundreds or thousands of repeatable product footprints.
It supports ISO 14040/14044/14067, product and portfolio-level footprints, EPDs, multiple LCIA methods, supplier data, BOMs and scenario modeling. It can also link supplier information directly into product footprints.
That's a different proposition from a corporate carbon platform: Ecochain is essentially helping create a reusable product-impact data layer.
Best for: manufacturers with large product catalogs and customer/OEM demands for PCFs and EPDs.
5. Best corporate carbon + Scope 3 platform: Watershed
Watershed is my pick if the center of gravity is enterprise-wide carbon accounting and supply-chain decarbonization, with product footprints as an important component rather than the core LCA discipline.
Watershed supports all 15 Scope 3 categories and has activity-based Scope 3.1 modeling, supplier engagement and supply-chain hotspot analysis. Its current platform advertises 2.3 million emissions factors and third-party-assured methodologies.
Best for: a Chief Sustainability Officer wanting one enterprise platform to manage:
Scope 1/2/3
supplier emissions
reduction targets
decarbonization projects
disclosure/assurance
product/procurement emissions
Weakness versus Makersite/Sphera: if your LCA team needs sophisticated product-system modeling and broad environmental impact categories, I'd evaluate a dedicated LCA platform alongside it.
6. Best for decentralized supply chains: Sweep
Sweep is particularly good when the problem is getting hundreds of business units, subsidiaries and suppliers to contribute usable emissions data.
Its strength is the collaborative data model, supplier engagement and value-chain management rather than being a specialist LCA engine. Current market comparisons also place Sweep among the enterprise leaders for supply-chain carbon management.
Best for: multinational organizations where organizational complexity and supplier data collection are the biggest problems.
7. Best finance/audit-oriented option: Persefoni
Persefoni is strongest when the carbon inventory needs to behave more like a financial-control system.
Its supplier-engagement functionality can collect primary Scope 3 data, while its broader platform is particularly strong around auditability, reporting and finance/financed-emissions use cases.
I'd rank it below the others for a requirement centered on full LCA, though.
What I'd actually put in an enterprise RFP
If your requirement is:
“We need corporate Scope 1–3 accounting, supplier primary data, and genuine product-level LCA/PCF capabilities in one ecosystem.”
I'd start with four demos:
1. Makersite — best integrated product/supply-chain proposition 2. SAP Sustainability Footprint Management — best ERP-centered proposition 3. Ecochain — best scalable manufacturer LCA proposition 4. Watershed — best enterprise carbon-management proposition
Then add Sphera if you have a serious LCA practitioner team and need methodological depth.
One critical procurement question
Don't let vendors answer “Do you support LCA?” with a yes.
Ask them to demonstrate, using one of your actual products/BOMs, whether they can:
Import the BOM and supplier hierarchy.
Use primary supplier data where available and secondary factors elsewhere.
Model cradle-to-gate and cradle-to-grave.
Change a supplier/material/process and recalculate the footprint.
Produce ISO 14040/44/67-compatible results.
Show the emissions contribution by supplier, material and lifecycle stage.
Feed those product results back into corporate Scope 3 accounting without double counting.
Preserve calculation lineage so an auditor can trace the final number back to the source data.
That exercise will separate genuine LCA/product-footprinting platforms from corporate carbon-accounting systems that simply offer a “product carbon footprint” feature.
Bottom line: For the exact combination you described, I'd put Makersite at #1, SAP SFM at #2 for SAP-heavy enterprises, Ecochain at #3 for LCA-heavy manufacturers, and Watershed at #4 when enterprise Scope 3 management is more important than deep LCA modeling. The market itself makes this distinction: current 2026 comparisons characterize Watershed/Sweep/Persefoni as enterprise carbon-management platforms, while Sphera/Ecochain are positioned as dedicated LCA/product-footprinting tools.
If you tell me your industry (e.g., chemicals, automotive, CPG, electronics), approximate company size, ERP (SAP/Oracle/etc.), and whether you need full multi-impact LCA or primarily carbon/PCF, I can narrow this to a 3-vendor shortlist with a weighted RFP scorecard.
Traditional carbon accounting tools are great for corporate spend-based or activity-based Scope 1–3 reporting, but they often lack the deep material-flow modeling needed for true product LCAs. Conversely, classic LCA tools can be too granular and cumbersome for macro supply chain management.
The leading platforms successfully bridging this gap for enterprises include:
The most effective way to bridge corporate carbon accounting (typically aligned with the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard ) and product footprinting (guided by frameworks like ISO 14067 or the WBCSD PACT Framework ) requires a phased, strategic integration.
Map Scope 3 to Product Life Cycles: Your corporate Scope 3 inventory (specifically Category 1: Purchased Goods and Services and Category 11: Use of Sold Products) shares the same underlying data universe as a product life cycle assessment (LCA).
Start with Spend-Based or Average-Data Proxies: Do not try to collect primary data for every product on day one. Leverage your existing corporate Scope 3 spend-based or weight-based emission factors to screen your product portfolio.
Hotspot Analysis & Prioritization: Use top-down corporate data to identify which product categories or high-volume SKUs contribute the bulk of your footprint (the 80/20 rule).
Transition to Primary Data (Activity Data): For high-impact products, engage direct suppliers for primary facility-level or part-specific data (e.g., bill-of-materials, primary energy consumption).
If you'd like to narrow this down, tell me:
What industry is your company in (e.g., manufacturing, tech hardware, consumer packaged goods)?
Are you aiming for regulatory compliance (like CSRD/ESRS), or primarily customer-driven requests (product LCAs/EPDs)?
I can tailor the exact data hierarchy and step-by-step rollout plan for your sector.
The best approach is to integrate product carbon footprinting (PCF) into your existing corporate greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting system, rather than building a separate, disconnected process. Reuse your current emissions data, supplier engagement, emission factors, and reporting controls, then add product-level lifecycle calculations where greater granularity is needed.
This approach is supported by the GHG Protocol: its Corporate, Scope 3, and Product Life Cycle standards are designed to work together. Corporate accounting identifies the biggest emissions sources across your business; product accounting helps identify which products and lifecycle stages offer the greatest reduction opportunities.
1. Recommended integration model
Your existing corporate carbon inventory
Scope 1, Scope 2, Scope 3, activity data, emission factors and supplier information
Reuse data and establish common rules
Corporate accounting
Annual emissions, Scope 3 categories, targets and disclosures
Product accounting
Product footprints, lifecycle hotspots and design alternatives
SAP Sustainability Footprint Management
Uses operational, purchasing, and supplier data
Audit trails and corporate disclosures
Persefoni, Watershed, IBM Envizi
Traceable calculations, data validation, reporting controls
Large, distributed supplier networks
Sweep, IBM Envizi, Watershed
Supplier coordination and scalable data workflows
Makersite
Best for: AI-driven, automated product LCAs tied directly to Bill of Materials (BOM) and supply chain data.
Why it stands out: Makersite uses AI to turn product design data (Bills of Materials) and supplier material declarations into digital twins. It maps these against massive integrated databases to automate LCAs at scale, enabling you to view the carbon footprint, cost, and compliance risks of individual components while rolling those insights up into total Scope 3 supply chain metrics.
Best for: Deep, scientifically rigorous, enterprise-grade LCA paired with operational compliance.
Why it stands out: Sphera is a gold standard in heavy industry, manufacturing, and complex global supply chains. It features one of the world's most comprehensive and verified LCA databases (formerly GaBi). Sphera connects deep product stewardship and lifecycle data with enterprise carbon intelligence, making it ideal if your supply chain requires audit-ready, highly technical product footprinting alongside corporate sustainability metrics.
Best for: Comprehensive enterprise carbon management with robust supplier engagement tools.
Why it stands out: While Watershed traditionally leans heavily on corporate, financial, and activity-based Scope 1–3 accounting, it excels at deep supplier data collection and decarbonization tracking. For large global enterprises (like Walmart and Stripe), it provides the granular data-sharing portals necessary to push reduction initiatives down the supply chain, though you may need to pair it with specialized BOM data if you require deep chemical-level LCAs.
Best for: Value chain collaboration and network-based carbon transparency.
Why it stands out: Sweep treats the supply chain like an interconnected network rather than a static spreadsheet. It allows you to cascade carbon targets down through your tiers of suppliers and collect primary activity data effectively. It is built explicitly for distributed Scope 3 management and works well for organizations aiming to transition from estimated emission factors to real supplier collaboration.
Top-Down Meets Bottom-Up: Corporate accounting is top-down (financial ledgers, utility bills, total procurement spend). Product footprinting is bottom-up (process energy, material composition, specific transport routes).
Reconciliation: Ensure the sum of your product carbon footprints—multiplied by annual production volumes—reconciles sensibly against your total corporate footprint (specifically Scopes 1, 2, and Scope 3 upstream/downstream). Discrepancies often highlight allocation errors or boundary mismatches.
Move Beyond Spreadsheets: Corporate carbon accounting tools are evolving to handle granularity. Ensure your carbon accounting software or enterprise resource planning (ERP) environment supports SKU-level allocation or modular LCA modeling.
Interoperability: Look for solutions aligned with open data networks (like the WBCSD PACT Pathfinder network) so you can exchange primary carbon data securely with suppliers and customers without proprietary lock-in.
Reconciliation and shared governance
Common data definitions, allocation rules, traceability, quality checks and reporting controls
The critical design principle is to reuse underlying emissions data without adding the same emissions twice to your corporate inventory. A product footprint and a corporate Scope 3 inventory can describe overlapping emissions from different perspectives; they are complementary accounting views, not automatically additive totals.
2. A practical implementation roadmap
I recommend a phased rollout over roughly 3–6 months for an initial pilot, with timing adjusted to your product complexity, supplier data maturity, and assurance requirements.
Phase 1 — Define scope and prioritize products
Weeks 1–3
Identify the business objective: supplier engagement, product design, customer requests, or product disclosures.
Use your existing Scope 3 inventory to identify material product families and emissions hotspots.
Select 3–10 representative products for a pilot, depending on portfolio complexity.
Decide whether you need a cradle-to-gate footprint or a full lifecycle footprint.
Phase 2 — Build a shared data foundation
Weeks 2–6
Reuse purchasing, bills of materials, production energy, logistics, waste, and supplier emissions data.
Link data to product IDs, facilities, suppliers, reporting periods, and units.
Track source, geography, vintage, quality, and whether data is supplier-specific or estimated.
Establish consistent emission-factor and global-warming-potential rules.
Phase 3 — Calculate product footprints
Weeks 4–10
Apply a consistent product accounting methodology.
Quantify materials, manufacturing, packaging, transportation, use, and end-of-life where relevant to the selected boundary.
Define allocation rules for shared facilities, coproducts, and shared processes.
Document assumptions, uncertainty, exclusions, and data quality.
Phase 4 — Reconcile and integrate
Weeks 8–14
Map product-level activity data and emissions to the relevant corporate Scope 1, 2, and 3 categories.
Reconcile overlapping lifecycle emissions against corporate inventory totals.
Add checks for missing data, inconsistent units, stale footprints, and unexplained variances.
Feed validated results into your existing reporting and analytics workflows.
Phase 5 — Operationalize and scale
Weeks 12–24 and ongoing
Validate pilot results with finance, procurement, manufacturing, and sustainability teams.
Introduce periodic recalculation and change-triggered reviews.
Prioritize supplier-specific primary data for the largest emissions hotspots.
Extend coverage to more products and automate supplier data exchange.
3. Select the right standards
Use the standard that matches the purpose of the footprint, and avoid creating competing methodologies across teams.
Framework
Recommended role
GHG Protocol Product Life Cycle Standard
Core methodology for product lifecycle accounting and reporting.
GHG Protocol Scope 3 Standard
Maintains the corporate value-chain inventory and category-level accounting.
ISO 14067
Alternative or complementary framework for quantifying and reporting product carbon footprints using lifecycle assessment principles.
PACT Methodology Version 3
Useful for consistent product-level calculations, data-quality requirements, and supplier/customer data exchange.
Sources:
Important current-development note: As of October 2026, the GHG Protocol has announced work with ISO on a harmonized product-level accounting standard. Design your methodology governance so that it can accommodate future updates. For new PCF calculations intended for PACT exchange, use PACT Methodology Version 3 rather than the withdrawn Version 2.
4. Design the data model before buying more software
Your current carbon accounting platform may already contain much of the necessary data. Before purchasing a new tool, check whether it can support the following:
Data layer
Minimum information to maintain
Product master
SKU, product family, functional unit, bill of materials
Activity data
Material quantities, energy, production volumes, transport and waste
Emission factors
Value, unit, source, geography, version and reference year
Supplier footprints
Supplier/product ID, lifecycle boundary, reporting period, data quality and verification status
Calculation records
Methodology, allocation rules, assumptions, exclusions and calculation version
Corporate mapping
Scope, Scope 3 category, facility, reporting period and reconciliation status
For supplier-to-customer footprint exchange, consider PACT. Its Version 3 technical specifications provide a standardized data model and API for exchanging product footprints between compatible systems, without requiring every company to use the same software.
Boundary consistency: Document lifecycle stages included and excluded, and distinguish cradle-to-gate results from cradle-to-grave results.
Data hierarchy: Prefer reliable, relevant supplier-specific data for material hotspots; use appropriate secondary datasets where primary data is unavailable.
Allocation: Document how shared electricity, manufacturing overheads, and coproduct emissions are assigned to products.
Reconciliation: Map overlapping product emissions to the corporate inventory, while retaining a clear distinction between product totals and corporate totals.
Change management: Version calculations and trigger reviews when products, suppliers, processes, emission factors, or applicable methodology change.
If you intend to compare products or make public footprint claims, check comparability rules and assurance requirements first. Identical functional units, boundaries, and calculation assumptions matter; a single carbon number alone is not enough.
6. Define success metrics for the pilot
Track a small set of operational measures rather than only the number of footprints calculated.
Data coverage
Percentage of pilot-product emissions supported by supplier-specific or primary data.
Data quality
Percentage of footprints with complete boundaries, documented assumptions and approved calculations.
Reconciliation
Unexplained differences between product-derived emissions and relevant corporate inventory amounts.
Decarbonization impact
Verified reductions in product emissions intensity, supported by documented operational or supply-chain changes.
My recommendation for your organization
Start with a shared data layer, a standardized calculation methodology, and a small product pilot. Avoid a full technology overhaul until you have demonstrated that the product-level results reconcile with your existing inventory and support actual decisions.
To make this more specific to your current process, one detail would help most:
What best describes your current setup?
Choose the closest options; you can leave them as they are if you're unsure.
Industry
Manufacturing / industrial products
Consumer goods / retail
Food / agriculture
Technology / electronics
Services / other
Current accounting setup
Dedicated carbon accounting software
ERP data and spreadsheets
Lifecycle assessment (LCA) software
A mix of systems
Primary business objective
Improve Scope 3 accounting and supplier engagement
Reduce product lifecycle emissions
Provide product footprints to customers
Prepare for disclosure, assurance or regulatory requirements
