{"id":22062,"date":"2026-05-22T14:46:50","date_gmt":"2026-05-22T12:46:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ecochain.com\/?post_type=customers&p=22062"},"modified":"2026-05-22T14:46:50","modified_gmt":"2026-05-22T12:46:50","slug":"how-koninklijke-van-wijhe-verf-scaled-70-verified-epds-and-turned-product-footprint-data-into-innovation-with-ecochain","status":"publish","type":"customers","link":"https:\/\/ecochain.com\/de\/customers\/how-koninklijke-van-wijhe-verf-scaled-70-verified-epds-and-turned-product-footprint-data-into-innovation-with-ecochain\/","title":{"rendered":"How Koninklijke Van Wijhe Verf scaled 70+ verified EPDs and turned product footprint data into innovation with Ecochain"},"content":{"rendered":"

Van Wijhe Verf<\/span><\/a>, a Dutch paint and coatings manufacturer, needed to move from fragmented product footprint calculations to a scalable, verification-ready EPD approach. When market demand for transparency increased, their existing setup could not support portfolio-wide publication or defensible raw material modeling. With Ecochain, they built a structured LCA foundation that enabled them to scale EPDs, identify product hotspots, and embed sustainability into procurement and product development decisions.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Challenge: Data fragmentation blocking portfolio-scale EPDs<\/h2>\n

Van Wijhe Verf has taken sustainability seriously for years. As early as 2010, the company made a clear decision: if you want to steer on sustainability, you need numbers. Without data, sustainability remains a story \u2013 not something you can manage, improve, or defend. Becoming B Corp certified reinforced that commitment.<\/span><\/p>\n

When Rik Koelma, Sustainability Data Analyst, stepped into his role in 2023, market expectations were shifting fast. Construction companies and real estate developers started increasingly asking for <\/span>Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs)<\/span><\/a>. Not because <\/span>CPR regulation<\/span><\/a> strictly required it yet, but because their own sustainability targets demanded transparency in tenders.<\/span><\/p>\n

Internally, Rik realized the existing setup was not built for what was coming next. The company needed to move from isolated calculations to a scalable, verification-ready product impact foundation.<\/span><\/p>\n

The four key challenges Van Wijhe Verf faced<\/h3>\n
    \n
  1. Fragmented systems with one-person dependency<\/b> \u2013 The previous internal setup relied on manual processes and complex technical infrastructure that few people could understand or maintain. This created knowledge silos where only one person could operate the system, making it impossible to scale, train others, or continue the work if that person left.<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. Incomplete Scope 3 coverage<\/b> \u2013 Van Wijhe Verf already had Scope 1 and 2 under control, gas consumption and electricity were being tracked properly. They had also been doing some Scope 3 work, including product-level LCA modeling. However, when working toward more complete EPD reporting, it became clear that certain Scope 3 categories were still missing. One example Rik flagged was the upstream impact of solvents used in paint formulations. The goal was to close these remaining gaps, not to rebuild their footprint approach from scratch.<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. No direct access to LCI databases for filling primary data gaps <\/b>\u2013 Primary product data often isn’t available when doing a life cycle assessment, and without direct access to established life cycle inventory (LCI) databases like ecoinvent or Nationale Milieudatabase (NMD), the alternative is often guesswork \u2013 generic reference data that doesn’t reflect actual production methods. This was Rik\u2019s reality. Modeling product footprints was possible, but not fully defensible. To build verification-ready models at scale, Rik needed LCA software with built-in access to those databases \u2013 so that where primary data was missing, structured secondary data could fill the gap without compromising accuracy.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. No scalable, verification-ready foundation for EPDs<\/b> \u2013 Moving from calculating a few product footprints to publishing dozens of verified EPDs required detailed raw material modeling that could withstand third-party audits. Their existing setup wasn\u2019t structured to document, organize, and reuse that level of detail across the full portfolio in a way verifiers would accept \u2013 making it difficult to scale from individual calculations to verification-ready EPDs at volume.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    \u201cI was completely focused on data processing \u2013 just computer work, computer work. At the end of the day, it keeps running through your head. And at the same time, real estate companies were increasingly asking: \u2018Do you have EPDs for your products?\u2019. That\u2019s when I realized we needed a structured solution like Ecochain to make it scalable.\u201d <\/b>\u2013 Rik Koelma, Sustainability Data Analyst at Van Wijhe Verf<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Rik\u2019s first move was to rebuild everything from scratch \u2013 back to basics: What data do we have today? What are we missing? What software could actually help us?\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

    That reflection led to a clear conclusion. The company needed a product impact data foundation built for both current and future needs. One that could handle detailed raw material modeling, organize data for third-party verification, scale from single-product footprints to portfolio-wide EPD publication, and be robust enough that knowledge wouldn\u2019t sit with just one person.<\/span><\/p>\n

    \"\"<\/p>\n

    The Solution: Building a scalable, verification-ready product footprint foundation with Ecochain<\/h2>\n

    Van Wijhe Verf relied on Ecochain to build a structured LCA foundation that could scale from a handful of product calculations to verified EPDs across the full portfolio.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

    The four key reasons Van Wijhe Verf doubled down on Ecochain as their core LCA platform<\/h3>\n