DPP data: essential, recommended, voluntary
Not every field in a Digital Product Passport (DPP) has the same status. Some data is essential, some recommended and some entirely voluntary. This three-tier split helps you understand where to focus effort. This article explains its logic.
Where the three-tier split comes from
So that data requirements are consistent across sectors, the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) developed a methodology for defining them. It proposes sorting fields into three tiers by the relationship between value and effort.
This is a supporting methodology, not standalone law — the final fields for a given product are set by the delegated act. But it gives a common language for discussing what is truly needed and what is worth including in a passport.
Tier 1: essential data
Essential data are the fields a passport must contain for the product to comply with the rules. Without them the passport is incomplete, which can carry consequences in market surveillance.
These are usually high-value fields with a clear regulatory purpose — product identity, responsible-operator data, and key compliance and safety information. Every passport starts here.
Tier 2: recommended data
Recommended (strongly recommended) data are not strictly required, but their value is high enough that the methodology strongly suggests including them. Often this is information useful for repair, recycling or trading partners.
Omitting it does not automatically mean non-compliance, but it lowers the passport's usefulness. Companies that want to use the passport commercially too usually include this layer.
Tier 3: voluntary data
Voluntary data are fields a company may add on its own initiative. They can support marketing communication, build trust or provide value to specific audiences, such as repairers.
This is room to stand out, provided the data is reliable. But bear in mind that more data is not always better — what counts is quality and currency, not sheer volume.
The value-and-effort logic
The core idea of the methodology is balancing the value of information against the effort needed to gather it. A high-value, low-cost field ranks higher in the hierarchy; a costly field of uncertain value ranks lower.
Because of this, the passport does not turn into an unbounded data dump. The regulator aims to require above all what genuinely brings benefit — to consumers, authorities or the circular economy.
What the split means for companies
In practice, the three tiers let you set sensible rollout priorities:
- First secure the complete set of essential data — the basis of compliance.
- Then assess the recommended data for the benefit to your business and partners.
- Add voluntary data deliberately, minding quality rather than quantity.
The scope of fields differs between sectors and follows the delegated act. We describe the staged introduction of detail in ESPR delegated acts.
Classification versus data access
It is worth not confusing two things: classification (essential–recommended–voluntary) says whether a field must appear in the passport. That is separate from who may see it — we cover layered access in Layered DPP data access. You will find a full overview of data types in What data does a DPP need.
What it looks like in practice
Imagine the same product described in a passport. The identifier and responsible-operator data are almost always essential fields. Information on reparability is often recommended — very useful, though not always strictly required. An extra brand story or educational material is typical voluntary data.
This simple example shows that the three tiers are not rigid drawers but reflect the weight and purpose of each piece of information. The same field can have a different status depending on the sector.
Why a field's status differs between sectors
It is important to understand that the classification is not universal. A field that is essential for one product group may be only recommended for another — because the regulatory goal and the value of that information differ.
That is why it is not worth carrying a list of fields straight from one sector to another. The methodology gives a common way of thinking, but the specific assignments come from the delegated act for a given product category.
A common mistake: "more is better"
Companies sometimes assume that the more data in a passport, the better. The JRC methodology suggests otherwise: what counts is the value of information against the effort, not sheer volume.
An excess of poorly maintained voluntary data can even do harm — it lowers readability and undermines trust when it turns out to be outdated. It is better to solidly secure essential data and deliberately choose the recommended and voluntary fields that genuinely add value.
Key takeaways
- The JRC methodology splits passport fields into essential, recommended and voluntary.
- It is a supporting methodology — the final fields are set by the sector's delegated act.
- The split rests on the value of information against the effort to gather it.
- Secure essential data first, then assess recommended, and add voluntary deliberately.
- Classification ("whether") is different from layered access ("who sees it").
See how CyfroPass helps you organise data by its status and build a complete Digital Product Passport without writing code. Visit cyfropass.pl and start with the essential data.