A Heavy Reliance on Imports
Australia imports a substantial proportion of its building materials, including steel products, aluminium, glass, ceramics, plastics, and a wide range of manufactured components. In certain construction sectors, imported materials account for over half the embodied carbon footprint of a project. This reliance is driven by limited domestic manufacturing capacity, globalised procurement, and the pursuit of cost efficiencies.
However, this dependency introduces significant challenges. Imported materials often lack the transparency, traceability, and verification standards that are increasingly expected of local products. This undermines carbon accounting efforts and creates uncertainty in life cycle assessments (LCAs) and whole-of-life carbon reporting.
Current Practice: Patchy Data and Conservative Assumptions
At present, carbon planning for imported materials relies heavily on default emissions factors. Where Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) are not available, which is often the case, practitioners are left using proxy data or applying conservative assumptions to mitigate uncertainty.
Some global manufacturers do publish EPDs, but these can be of limited relevance if they are not specific to regional manufacturing processes, energy mixes, or logistics routes. Moreover, local benchmarking and certification schemes often exclude imports due to the lack of verifiable data, skewing comparisons and potentially undermining the credibility of decarbonisation claims.
Towards Better Coordination and Accountability
To address this gap, Australia must refine its own carbon accounting practices while strengthening coordination with international partners. Key opportunities include:
Mandatory Declaration of Origin and EPDs: Requiring clear disclosure of a product’s origin and associated carbon data—either at the point of import or specification—would improve visibility. This could be supported by verified supply chain declarations or third-party documentation.
Harmonisation with International Standards: Aligning with global frameworks such as EN 15804, ISO 21930, or the European Union’s upcoming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) would establish consistency and help ensure imported materials meet equivalent standards to those produced domestically.
Exploring Carbon Border Adjustments: Australia could consider carbon border measures of its own, or engage in global discussions on emissions-based trade adjustments, ensuring imported products carry an accurate reflection of their environmental cost.
Incentivising Low-Carbon Local Alternatives: Supporting the growth of domestic manufacturing with low-emission processes offers a way to reduce dependence on carbon-intensive imports while fostering innovation and resilience within the local supply chain.
Digital Supply Chain Tracking: Technologies such as blockchain, digital product passports, and QR-based traceability systems can enable real-time tracking of embodied carbon and product provenance.
A Turning Point for Carbon-Conscious Design
As governments, clients, and financiers demand more accountability from the construction sector, the pressure is mounting to ensure carbon assessments cover the entire material supply chain, including products manufactured offshore. Without robust and traceable data on imported materials, Australia risks underreporting the true emissions footprint of its built environment.
By recognising the pivotal role imported materials play in project carbon outcomes, and by pursuing both international collaboration and greater transparency, Australia can set a regional example for climate-conscious construction.
