4TheRecord Podcast: Exploring Digital Product Passports with Carolynn Bernier, CIRPASS, Research Engineer at CEA

[Music] Hello DPP community. Thank you for tuning into the For the Ricket podcast. For the Ricket is a digital product passport consultancy agency that helps institutions and industry players to develop and implement their DPP strategy. Today I'm speaking with Carolyn Bernier. She is a research engineer at the French alternative energies and atomic energy commission. I'm talking with her about the U-funded project, so past two, that she has been appointed to be the lead-off, which consists of 13 pilots with downstream use cases in five product segments, namely textiles, mattresses, tires, electronics and construction. Those projects focus on how DPP can make an impact on sustainability and help the industry beyond being compliant with the mandatory DPP requirements. She also shares examples for new use cases based on voluntary DPP data and how interoperability plays an important role here. I wish you an informative entertainment. Welcome to the podcast digital product passports insights. My name is Susanne Goudolowski and I'm the founder and CEO of For the Ricket a digital product passport consultancy agency. My guest today is one of the most competent women in the area of digital product passports, the one and only Carolyn Bernier. She is research engineer at CEA, which is the French alternative energies and atomic energy commission. And the DPP community knows her as surpass project one and two co-ordinators. I'm delighted to have you on this show. Welcome, Carolyn Bernier. Thanks, Susanne. Thanks for having me. Carolyn, please introduce yourself with your background and your position at CEA. Right. So I'm actually Canadian. I have a French nationality now for a few years. I live in France now and my kids are French and all that. But I did my undergraduate studies in computer engineering at the University of Toronto. And so as I said, computer in electrical engineering in here, I am physically in Grenoble, France, which as you know has a very large microelectronics center. And so my background is in telecommunications integrated circuit design and IOT protocols. So did a lot of that. I don't do that anymore because I don't have time. But I also mean an embedded systems team working on embedded AI, for example. So, so innovation for industry basically. And I started to work on the circular technologies for circular economy in 2020 as a research topic. All upon the DPP subject and started to wonder, how could that work? How could that actually work? And so curious. And so I started building the surface consortium by curiosity, very honestly. Because of course, I'm interested in creating technologies that have a positive impact on the environment. And not only through the work on the digital product passports, we have a lot of activities in our lab on sustainable IT, sustainable embedded systems, environmental impact assessment of AI, things like that. So this is just one of our activities relating technology and sustainability. And so that's how it started. And so that's how somewhat like that's the reason why someone with a computer engineering microelectronics design background ends up working on an IT project. So that's how that happened. Well, we are all glad that this happened, Caroline. You are the coordinator of SOAPAS 2 and you have been of SOAPAS 1. Please give us a short legacy, maybe introduction of SOAPAS 1, what happened there. And you know what the continuation is in SOAPAS 2 and short. And then we can discuss on more details later on. So SOAPAS 1 project was a CSA type project. So a CSA is a coordination and support action, which is a collaborative type of project that the European Commission launches when they need guidance on topics, any topic. So this was a CSA on the digital product passport with the goal to create consensus on a standards based DPP system. And when we started in 2022, basically we only had a draft ESPR to work with. ESPR, the eco design for sustainable products regulation proposal of the European Commission. And so in that proposal went through several iterations, several drafts. So we were like engineers trying to build the specifications for an IT system with the specifications changing all the time. It was quite challenging to follow all this. And also another huge challenge that we ran into was that circular economy is a multi-disciplinary field, hugely interdisciplinary. And so one day I can be talking to blockchain experts and another to textile recyclers. So getting to a common language. What are we talking about? What are the words that we're going to use to describe things and a common understanding of what the DPP is? It was basically the goal of surpass one and trying to map out the issues. It's like a puzzle that you're trying to assemble. And what are the problems and what are the issues and what is clear, what is not clear, and how do we assemble that? So because the DPP is a bunch of technologies that have to work together. And also a bunch of segments, right, a bunch of segments that work together. By segments, do you mean sector as segments, yeah, product segments, sorry, what word would you use? We usually use sector, sector specific, for example. Yeah, but I think that the where the commission, they have this fantastic idea, maybe for once. But anyways, this fantastic idea is that the DPP system is cross sectoral, or cross segment, you say, yeah, and that is just amazing. So across textiles and mattresses, and steel and batteries, product, product items, I always say, product sectors, yeah, exactly, exactly, and that is simply amazing. And I don't think that the commission realized the value of the point they do. Now they do, but not in 2022. They didn't realize it. Now they do. Now they do. But one thing that I'm concerned with always, and that's really what, because I come from a background where our research is innovation for industry. So in the interest of industry, this is not what I do. The fact that the DPP might end up being only a regulatory tool that is a burden to industry without bringing any advantage to industry, that is what concerns me most. Okay. And that is what I endeavor to make sure that never happens. Okay. The DPP must be a useful tool for industry. Otherwise, it will only be a burden. But it has the potential to be an advantage, an advantage, an competitive advantage, but it has to be designed in this way. I fully agree. And I was delighted to read the EU competitive compass. I don't know if you've already looked into this where the DPP explain is explained as one tool of doing exactly that what you say. So I think we can have good hope that this is the direction we're going into. And can you maybe, let's move to surpass a tool, but I don't know if we've been ready with the surpass one. Let's move to surpass two, which is currently running. Give us a bit of an overview of what's happening, what's the timeline, what are the projects. And so it is of course the goal. of that project now. - Right, so Serpas one was all on paper. Everything is, all of our results are conceptual and we made some videos to illustrate our points as well, but it's basically a paper study of what the DBP systems would look like. In Serpas two, we want to go from paper to real world, right? So, and in a large scale, and in a cross segment or cross sector way, okay? We have four, five if you include mattresses sectors addressed in Serpas two, mostly textiles, six pilots including mattresses focusing on textile products, but mattresses are more like furniture. So, they're kind of in between type of product, but the furniture is will likely be regulated soon too. So, it's useful to have this pilot in our group. Then we have five pilots related to electrical and electronic equipment, and this goes from PV panels to second hand IT, to audio equipment, et cetera, so many different product groups, also dishwashers, vacuum cleaners, also other things. Then we have a tire pilot with Michelin around tire retrading, and also we have a construction sector pilot with co-builder, which is very interesting because of the construction product regulation, which also institutes a kind of a digital product passport, whether this will be exactly the same IT system than the ESPR DPP, that's to be seen, but in an ideal world, this would be the case, right? So, I understand that that's also the idea that what is currently developed under Senate ACTC 24 DPP framework and system will be used for any DPP that is regulated in the European Commission. I haven't seen that written down somewhere, but if you're asking the European Commission, that's what you're usually getting as a response. So, there is hope that this is the case. - There's hope, there's hope, there's hope. The construction sector has some particularities in that responsible economic operator, like companies are often short-lived and change all the time. So, it's a kind of an industry that has some particularities. So, we'll see how the CPR, the construction products regulation, how it evolves, if it will be completely aligned with the ESPR, we'll see how that goes. Be interested to see. So, anyways, coming back to our pilots, so each, so there's 13 of them. - So, that's a very impressive number, and diversity of projects, yes. - But this was necessary for me. It was a nest, we don't demonstrate anything, if you don't do it wide scale, and if you don't do it cross-sectorals, you don't demonstrate anything. And also what we do want to demonstrate is that they're interoperable among them. - Okay. - 'Cause a DPP pilot, there's gazillions of DPP pilots out there. - Mm-hmm. - But DPP, interoperable pilots, that demonstrate that they're interoperable, that is new. That's what we want to do, okay. So, each pilot is about, it goes from two to 15 partners. At least, oh, no, there's not two. There's at least four to 15 partners in the pilot. And each is kind of an ecosystem of partners that create DPPs for some specific products and that use the DPP in B2B settings, and not B2C, but B2B settings to achieve circular outcomes. Because this is, so we are being funded by DigiConnect under the digital program, and DigiConnect, really this is what makes them motivated for the DPP, how the DPP could be infrastructure for circular businesses. 'Cause, and this is also some something that, that MV, DigiEnvironment agrees with this, is that the DPP, to have impact, it has to change the way we create value around products. It's not just about information to consumers. - Of course. - It's about how companies can use DPP data to achieve sustainable outcomes. So keep the value longer for further data. - And this is also where all these preparatory stories, coming as studies come in that are actually identifying that impact, right? And then based on that impact, we're deciding on which data should be in the product pass, but the focus is always the impact. - Yes, but that's for the mandatory data. - Yeah. - So what you're talking about is correct, but it's only for the mandatory data. So, insert pass two, all of the pilots are going beyond mandatory. - Okay, interesting. - All of them, okay? Because the DPP cannot be just a regulatory tool to contain mandatory data. It cannot be that. Companies want a tool to share data with their ecosystem partners in an easy way. They want this, okay? So that means that we can use the DPP, the mandatory DPP and add data in it, the data that we actually want to share. That companies actually want to share. - That's an important one. - And are inventing all sorts of DPP-like systems to do it, okay? - There's gazillions of these DPP-like non-interoperable systems to do exactly that. - Okay, yeah. So, but then you have a problem of too much non-interoperable systems. So, this is where what we have to prove is that the DPP can be both a regulatory tool. It has to contain this data. This data must be presented to the actors who have the legal right to see this data, okay? But you can embark additional data that doesn't have to be public. - Yeah, of course. - It's only the partners you want to share the data with, right? And they can access. And they use, they piggyback this data on the DPP. - Can you give us a concrete example of what data that would be that maybe helps companies to create better business models or create better recyclability of their material? Or what are the examples? Like, what's the additional data that the companies want to add? - So, I'll just cite our very first number one pilot, which is the first on the list, okay? - Yeah. - The problem is if I choose a pilot, then I-- - You have to mention everyone. - Yeah, yeah, yeah, no, we don't want that. So maybe just give the example of the data. - Yeah. - Well, so for example, if a company wants to move to a product as a service type of business model, the DPP is a useful tool to enable this. - Yeah. - Okay? But this has nothing whatsoever to do with the regulatory data, because the regulatory data will not include things that enable product as a service, meaning tracking information how many times the product has been repaired, how many times the product has been put in different hands, how many times, what is the wear level of the product, what is the, you know, also like much more detailed information than whatever, than the regulation will ever require. - I see. - Regulation will never require all of this. - So I can determine how often was that product used, what it's still worth, you know, what I should pay for it as a service, and then create more new business models on top of that. - Well, so this information may not actually be used by the person using the product, it might be used by the company, and they use the DPP as a way to track this information, for example. - Okay. - So it doesn't necessarily mean that the data will be used by the user of the product. It might be used by the, by the, my business unit that is responsible for making these sorting decisions. For example, or, - And so that's the downstream of the product, downstream data exchange, but I think you also do projects with data exchange more upstream, right? I'm not sure. - What are you thinking about? - One of your pilots. Are they all focused on the data exchange downstream? - From, I mean, the product is replaced on the market, and then everything that comes after that is downstream for me, everything, well, that was before that is upstream for me. So, where are you doing all the downstream? - All of them are downstream. - All right. - All of them are downstream, which does not mean that we're not interesting, interested in what happens upstream, of course, 'cause that's where the data comes from, right? And this is why interoperability with abstractivity. DPP, such as the UN Transparency DPP, for example, is so important. No, I agree, and this is where due diligence certificates, tracing certificates, are being exchanged, made interoperable technically and also semantically. So that's interesting. I wasn't aware that you're mainly looking at downstream, so that's very interesting. So, can you give us an example of, for example, are you also looking at batteries still and like state of health, information that is mandatory to be exchanged? The way the call was written, we were not authorized to work on batteries. Okay, no, that's fine, that's fine, so everything but batteries. Right, yeah, everything, but not everything. Like I said, we're mostly looking at these four product groups, including plus five, which include mattress as a distinct product group, but there's a lot of overlap in the data model for the mattress textile sections with the textile products, for example. So, sorry, what was your question? No, I was, that's fine. I just wanted to move maybe to the area where I wanted to ask you, are you experimenting with different technologies? I could imagine with 13 pilots, everyone has a different idea of what would make most make more sense. So, it gave us a little bit of insight there, how are you creating this interoperability? How does it work? Well, we're, of course, aspiring to align with the standards that the JTC 24 is currently are currently drafting. So, we don't decide on how these decisions will be made, so we're following this work with a lot of interest, of course, but we're not the ones who make these decisions, however, all of the pilots that came to us had some preliminary work already achieved, meaning that these pilots were already constituted as pilots even before they joined us, our group. And so, I chose the most different types of pilots and technologies possible. Some use blockchain, most don't, some use distributed identifiers. For what do they use blockchain, because you can use it in different ways, right? So, what? I'm not so familiar enough to answer you, but ideally, the DPP systems should be so open to enable all types of technologies to interoperate. So, this is why there's a huge variety in identification systems and data models as varied as possible, because this is the point that we want to make, that we can build a bare bones DPP system there as light as possible, as least complex on which you can build all sorts of things, and use all sorts of technologies, that's the goal, right? A very light, as easy to use system that can be like the web, right? So, the web is a wonderful decentralized database of HTML pages, right? That's what the web is, right? So, now we want the web of DPP product data, that's what we want to create. And so, but on top of the web, there's a huge variety of things that were created, because the web technology is relatively easy to use, right? Absolutely. And so, that's the same idea that we want for the DPP system, easy to use technology on which you can build all sorts of things, which is also important for smaller and medium-sized enterprises, right? Because SMEs can create a website, so now they have to create a product website more or less, and they have to be capable of dealing with that new technology stack. Are you looking specifically also at SMEs in the project, is that a topic to focus on their needs? Yes, yes, we have an entire work package on the how to attend to and be it, how can we support SMEs in the adoption? So, SMEs are very hard to reach, and I'm not talking about here DPP startups, there are many, many DPP startups, that type of SMEs, I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about SMEs such as a repair shop or a small manufacturer of products. Those are very, they're hard to reach, so we need specific effort in the project to find people to interview and to listen to their needs and to design material so that is useful for them. That's a big challenge. SMEs companies as part of your participants of the project, right? You must have around 100 participants also when I calculated your projects in the number of companies participating, so they are also involved. Exactly, exactly, there's more than 75 of them, inside the ecosystem pilots, and so this could be the sorting plant or the, so we selected the pilots after an open call for pilots in the summer of 23, I think, and one of our selection criteria with the number of SMEs involved in the ecosystems. Okay, very good, can you maybe give us the timelines of the project, so when is this going to be finalized, what main results are you expecting from the project? Okay, so we've started in May 24, so we're almost at one year. This first year for the pilots was, so you have to imagine that each of these pilots is led by a DPP service provider that is in direct competition with all the other DPP service providers and the other pilots. So the first part of the project was how to create a team between people who are competing on the same market. I leave you to understand how complex this one. If someone can do it, you can do it. Well, I did it a lot with the help of our pilot leader, who call colleagues from Fujitsu, who are just simply wonderful patients, and I chose Fujitsu because they're Japanese and we must give an international flavor to everything that we're doing in Europe. We must. So I choose partners in US, in Japan, and now on our new platform, I'm inviting partners from Taiwan, from all over the place. So that was the big challenge for the pilots and also to have them open up a little bit on their solutions so that we can identify where the interoperability gaps are according to them. So this is the work that we did for the pilots up till now. You can imagine, because this is all sensitive business information, how delicate this has to be done, how complex this work is and the care that must be brought to bring the level of trust among all these competitors, and this is totally understandable. In parallel to this, so identifying the interoperability gaps that they perceive among their solutions. That was one thing, and then in parallel to this, we've started to work on a new version of the DBB system architecture building on the version that the Serpast 1 project published already in March 24. So this hopefully will be public in a couple of months. In parallel to this, we just recently published our requirements for a DPP system core ontology. So that's now available. We are working on version one of our proposal for a core ontology. It doesn't have to be the only one, it's just a proposal. Which can be reviewed, for example, by JTC24 or by whomever wants to build a core ontology for the DBB system, whether it's JDC, whether it's commission whoever or anybody else. So that's the value of semantic interoperability is that it's not a winner takes all thing. And as long as we stay in a winner takes all mentality, we will never progress. We will not progress quickly. So anyways, just politics aside. So this hopefully will soon be published. And so how does the project, when does the project end? How long does it take? So it's a three year project. So we got rerun until April 27. Okay. So you still have some time. So maybe tell me tell us because we're coming a little bit to the end of our podcast. I tell us a little bit maybe, you know, what are the next steps in the project, the next phase or what are you working on at the moment? Yeah. Yeah. So as I said, we're finalizing version one of our new iteration of the architecture. We're finalizing the first version of our corontology. We are defining the requirements for sector specific ontologies, aligned with the corontology. We're looking a lot into the work by doing done by UNEC to make sure we're semantically interoperable as much as possible. We are designing communication tools for SMEs. We're building cooperations with about 100 other EU funded projects working on DPP. So that's another thing. We are rolling out a platform. It's called circular slash data. org. And we're rolling out this platform as a free, completely free tool to be used by anyone who wants to put light on their DPP related activities. So that might be they have a commercial offer about DPPs or they are working on a pilot. And I want to hear about DPP pilots all over the world. I want to hear this. I want to have a place where we can marvel at our creativity. Maybe the UNDP or the UNEC is a good home for this at least. I know of a couple of pilots that are starting around there now as well. In your personal view, where is the DPP in five years and maybe in 10 years? Five years is very, very short. I mean 2027s men becoming mandatory fees for batteries. Yeah. Yes. So personally, right now the important thing is to make some basic architectural choices to keep the technology as open as possible. For me, that's right now. That's the immediate thing. The emergency right now. Personally, I think it's appropriate to see a very gradual rollout of the DPP with focusing on mandatory DPPs in 27, 28, 29. All of this is, the focus is the mandatory part. But if we just lose sight of the nonmandatory additional things that can be piggybacked on top of this and we only communicate about mandatory DPPs, then we're losing sight of something really fundamentally important. So I think it's the industry jobs probably to do that, to also show the benefits of piggybacking on the DPP. And maybe that's not asked that has to do that, but I guess we have to deliver this. We have to quantify the economic and environmental benefits of our pilots. But we're too small. We're just the projects. I mean, we will not achieve this alone. It's impossible. Yeah. This is why I built these collaborations with 100 other EU funded projects. So you're saying you have to focus in the next five years on the mandatory ones, should not forget the piggybacking other good ideas on top of it. And in 10 years, what's the vision of in 10 years? I think in 10 years. So in terms of applications for the DPP, I think in the short term, five, 10 years, the short term applications is improving the efficiency of already existing circular activities such as repair, or resell, making all these activities that are already there, more efficient, or more profitable. That would be fantastic if the DPP could do that in the short term. Yeah. Imagining entirely new business segments, such as remanufacturing of batteries for repurposing them. That's a fantastic goal, but that's complicated because you have to create an entirely new industry. That won't happen in 10 years. So in 10 years, we want mandatory DPPs across many sectors and getting the DPP technology as cheap as possible. That's what we want. And we want some nice use cases of non-mandatory uses of DPPs, doing things to make business activities profitable with circular activities. Yeah. You want increased profitability of these activities. Yes. Repair, maintenance, maintenance is fantastic use cases. Maintenance, repair, sorting, reselling, that stuff. I'm not talking about recycling. Recycling, the DPP will have an impact on recycling in like 20, 30 years, except maybe shorter term for textiles, maybe, maybe, but that's to be seen. Okay. Thank you, Carolyn, very much for all your insights for your vision and for all the information you shared. Thanks again. Good luck and a great success with your Subpass 2 project and all the other platforms and projects that you're cooperating with or starting off. And thank you so much for being there and helping to make the world a little bit cleaner. Thank you, Carolyn. Thank you. Thank you, Susan. [Music]