Collecting environmental product declarations (EPDs) is a starting point for a building assessment. Product results still need to be connected to the project’s quantities, assessment boundaries and scenarios. EN 15978:2026 addresses environmental performance at building level using life cycle assessment (LCA), which evaluates potential environmental impacts over a defined life cycle.

A method for the whole building

In its 17 April 2026 announcement, CEN-CENELEC describes EN 15978:2026 as applying to new and existing buildings and refurbishment. It covers calculation, reporting and communication, combining EN 15804 product declaration modules with other necessary information. Design for circularity is addressed as a technical characteristic supporting environmental performance.

The Polish Committee for Standardization catalogue records the national adoption, PN-EN 15978:2026-08, published on 19 August 2026. It replaces PN-EN 15978:2012, the Polish adoption of the previous European edition, EN 15978:2011. The published scope also references generic data selected in accordance with EN 15941.

Connect each declared unit to a project quantity

Our practical recommendation is to build a data register linking each assessed building component to its quantity and environmental dataset. Keep the EPD identifier, product coverage, declared unit, source and conversion basis together. That connection makes the calculation traceable when specifications change.

For example, an area-based tile declaration needs a matching area quantity and a check that its thickness and product specification represent the selected tile. A mass-based dataset requires a mass quantity or a supported conversion. Record densities, dimensions and conversion factors where used. A conversion should explain the relationship between the project item and the dataset; it cannot correct a product mismatch.

Review modules and project scenarios

An EPD’s factory results and scenarios do not supply every input for a particular building. We recommend checking which results can be used directly and which assumptions need a project-specific basis. Keep transport, installation, use and end-of-life assumptions visible rather than treating the product’s headline figure as a whole-building total.

Review the assessment period and expected service lives together when modelling replacement. Avoid double counting where product datasets and project calculations cover the same process. Check the applicable treatment of information beyond the system boundary and keep it identifiable in reporting. These are practical review points; the applicable standard and assessment brief determine the calculation rules.

Make the data trail reviewable

Before final reporting, we recommend checking:

  • Coverage: reconcile the components included in the model with the project scope and record exclusions.
  • Units: retain quantities in units such as kg, m² or m³, with the conversion to each dataset’s declared unit.
  • Compatibility: review indicator definitions, life cycle coverage and dataset methods before combining results.
  • Gaps: identify generic data and explain its selection, representativeness and limitations.
  • Reporting: document boundaries, assumptions, data sources and revisions so another assessor can follow the work.

Agree the assessment basis with the project team and check any receiving scheme’s requirements. EPD programme rules remain relevant to the source declarations; they do not by themselves define the building assessment. Use the EPD search to locate product documents, or contact EPD Portal about declaration publication.

Frequently asked questions

Does a collection of EPDs constitute a building assessment?
No. The project also needs defined boundaries, quantities, scenarios, calculation and reporting.
Does EN 15978 replace the product rules in EN 15804?
No. The building method uses product environmental information as input to a different assessment level.
Can an older EPD be used?
Assess its status, representativeness and compatibility with the required method and indicators. Publication year alone is not enough to decide suitability.