SummaryEnvironmentally extended multiregional input-output (EE MRIO) tables have emerged as a key framework to provide a comprehensive description of the global economy and analyze its effects on the environment. Of the available EE MRIO databases, EXIOBASE stands out as a database compatible with the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) with a high sectorial detail matched with multiple social and environmental satellite accounts. In this paper, we present the latest developments realized with EXIOBASE 3-a time series of EE MRIO tables ranging from 1995 to 2011 for 44 countries (28 EU member plus 16 major economies) and five rest of the world regions. EXIOBASE 3 builds upon the previous versions of EXIOBASE by using rectangular supply-use tables (SUTs) in a 163 industry by 200 products classification as the main building blocks. In order to capture structural changes, economic developments, as reported by national statistical agencies, were imposed on the available, disaggregated SUTs from EXIOBASE 2. These initial estimates were further refined by incorporating detailed data on energy, agricultural production, resource extraction, and bilateral trade. EXIOBASE 3 inherits the high level of environmental stressor detail from its precursor, with further improvement in the level of detail for resource extraction. To account for the expansion of the European Union (EU), EXIOBASE 3 was developed with the full EU28 country set (including the new member state Croatia). EXIOBASE 3 provides a unique tool for analyzing the dynamics of environmental pressures of economic activities over time.

Measuring progress towards sustainable development requires appropriate frameworks and databases. The System of Environmental-Economic Accounts (SEEA) is undergoing continuous refinement with these objectives in mind. In SEEA, there is a need for databases to encompass the global dimension of societal metabolism. In this paper, we OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2015, 7 139 focus on the latest effort to construct a global multi-regional input−output database (EXIOBASE) with a focus on environmentally relevant activities. The database and its broader analytical framework allows for the as yet most detailed insight into the production-related impacts and "footprints" of our consumption. We explore the methods used to arrive at the database, and some key relationships extracted from the database.

This paper first reviews previous relevant efforts to bring energy system models and life-cycle assessments together. In section 3, we set out the method we have used, including the details of the EEIO model, the TIMES model, the procedures for linking them, and the scenarios examined. Section 4 then provides results relating to each of the research questions, while section 5 draws key conclusions. The paper is accompanied by a supplementary file that includes considerable further detail on the modelling approach, the data used, and the results. 2 Literature review Bottom-up ESOMs (such as MARKAL [Loulou et al. 2004] and TIMES [Loulou et al. 2004]) and MESSAGE (Messner and Schrattenholzer 2000)) provide a detailed depiction of the energy system, with explicit representation of primary extraction of energy resources, processing and conversion, delivery to consumers, and end-use (DeCarolis et al. 2017). Such models account for some emissions associated with upstream extraction (flaring, for example), and they account for the efficiency losses and energy inputs associated with conversion and processing (e.g. in refineries and power stations), with transmission and distribution (losses in electricity transmission lines, energy use in fuel distribution, etc.), and efficiency losses in end use devices. Many sources of fossil fuel chain indirect emissions are thus already included in the default setup of TIMES (see the supplementary file for further details). ESOMs are "demand-driven" in the sense that the energy service demands across the economy are a key exogenous input into the models. Energy service demands associated with

Consumption-based CO 2 emissions, which are commonly calculated by means of environmentally extended input-output analysis, are gaining wider recognition as a way to complement territorial emission inventories. Although their use has increased significantly in the last years, insufficient attention has been paid to the methodological soundness of the underlying environmental extension. This should follow the internationally agreed accounting rules of the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting, which addresses the activities undertaken by the residents of a country, independent from where these take place. Nonetheless, some footprint calculations use extensions that account for all the activities within the territory, which leads to methodological inconsistencies. Thus, this article introduces the most relevant conceptual differences between these accounting frameworks and shows the magnitude of the gap between them building on the data generated for the EXIOBASE model. It concludes that the differences are high for many countries and their magnitude is increasing over time.

Summary Food is needed to maintain our physical integrity and therefore meets a most basic human need. The food sector got in the focus of environmental policy, because of its environmental implications and its inefficiency in terms of the amount of food lost along the value chain. The European Commission (EC) flagged the food waste issue a few years ago and adopted since then a series of policies that partially address the problem. Among these, the Resource Efficiency Roadmap set the aspirational goal of reducing the resource inputs in the food chain by 20% and halving the disposal of edible food waste by 2020. Focusing on consumer food waste, we tested what a reduction following the Roadmap's food waste target would imply for four environmental categories in EU28 (European Union 28 Member States): greenhouse gas emissions, land use, blue water consumption, and material use. Compared to the 2011 levels, reaching the target would lead to 2% to 7% reductions of the total footprint depending on the environmental category. This equals a 10% to 11% decrease in inputs in the food value chain (i.e., around half of the resource use reductions targeted). The vast majority of potential gains are related to households, rather than the food‐related services. Most likely, the 2020 target will not be met, since there is insufficient action both at Member State and European levels. The Sustainable Development Goals provide a new milestone for reducing edible food waste, but Europe needs to rise up to the challenge of decreasing its per capita food waste generation by 50% by 2030.