Annex 5.1 - Specificities for associations
What are the specific features of the Bilan Carbone® for an association-type organisation?
The Bilan Carbone® method is expressed according to 3 maturity levels and formulates requirements adapted to the resources and needs of each maturity level.
The Bilan Carbone® method recommends following the Initial Level for an association-type organisation.
The annex below aims to give an overview of the specificities and recommended adaptations for the Bilan Carbone® of an association. The criteria are simply recalled here, with each requirement previously detailed in the method via a dedicated sub-section.
Steering
Hierarchical involvement: criterion A1
ℹ️ Criterion A1: A coordinator is appointed internally. They steer the approach, then are responsible for the construction, implementation and monitoring of the transition plan. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
This criterion applies well to associations, but must take into account the particularities of this type of structure. Associations, often small in size and with limited resources, also have specific governance, involving employees, elected representatives, and volunteers. Thus, to ensure an effective Bilan Carbone® approach, it is recommended to organise a dedicated team within the association, according to its capacity:
Ideally:
An internal Working Group (WG) made up of active volunteers and/or employees of the association. These voluntary stakeholders are integrated according to their level of familiarity with carbon issues.
One or more coordinator(s) within this WG
A reference member of the Board of Directors (BD)
Alternatively:
The association can rely on an outsourced resource trained in the Bilan Carbone®. This could be the association's accountant if they are trained, or a carbon expert consultant.
An internal coordinator within the association
A reference member of the Board of Directors (BD)
This underlines the necessary adaptation to the structural particularities and available resources of an association.
Training of the organisation: criterion B1
ℹ️ Criterion B1: The person or team operationally in charge of the assessment (internal or external) is trained in the Bilan Carbone® method. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
For associations, this criterion is applicable if the designated coordinator (cf. Criterion A1) already has training in the Bilan Carbone® method. If this is not the case, the association can call upon a qualified external resource to carry out this assessment, or train the coordinator internally, who steers the approach.
In the case of internal training, two options are possible:
Ideally:
Full training module: it makes it possible to acquire the skills necessary to carry out a Bilan Carbone® autonomously and completely.
Alternatively:
Simplified module: it allows for more accessible skills development to carry out a self-evaluation or self-diagnosis, called simplified carbon footprint. The module is structured in chapters that must be followed at each step of the approach to ensure continuous progression.
Regardless of the choice, two preliminary modules are recommended:
Upstream awareness module on carbon & climate issues, as a prerequisite.
Introduction module to the implications of the above training. It makes it possible to assess the expectations and level of commitment required for training, relative to the resources available in the association. It can serve as a filter on the motivation and capacity of learners to engage in in-depth or simplified training.
⏳[WIP] The ABC and its training partners are working to offer this set of new training modules, financially supported for association actors, corresponding to the different parts of the Bilan Carbone® approach, and addressing different types of transition actors.
Tool compliance: criterion C1
ℹ️ Criterion C1: The Bilan Carbone® is carried out with the ABC's tools (Bilan Carbone® software or spreadsheet), or, failing that, with a tool compliant with the Bilan Carbone® method. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
⏳[WIP] The ABC and its partners are working to offer access to the Bilan Carbone® software, specific to associations (both in terms of the methodological specificities mentioned in this annex, and in terms of tool use adapted to association actors).
Renewal of the Bilan Carbone®: criterion D1
ℹ️ Criterion D1: Renewal takes place at minimum every 4 years. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
For associations with limited resources, it is important to recall that the philosophy of the Bilan Carbone® recommends prioritising the allocation of these resources to the implementation of concrete actions rather than to too frequent a renewal of the complete analysis. However, monitoring results remains essential; this can be done via a small number of well-chosen indicators (cf. Criterion S1), in order to adjust actions based on results. Certain partial recalculations may be relevant to measure the evolution of the most significant emissions.
ℹ️ Recommended practice for associations: it is advisable to be accompanied by a service provider for the first Bilan Carbone® (in relation to criterion A1). This service provider plays a facilitator role during the approach, allowing the association to familiarise itself with the method while benefiting from operational support. It is then recommended to follow training at the end of the approach aimed at making them autonomous (in relation to criterion B1). The association can then internalise the approach when renewing its Bilan Carbone® (in relation to criterion D1).
Boundary
Operational boundary: criterion E1
ℹ️ Criterion E1: The assessment must take into account all direct emissions and between 80% and 100% of the organisation's indirect emissions. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
For an association, compliance with the boundary defined by criterion E1 is essential, with particular attention paid to indirect emissions. These often constitute the largest share of an association actor's emissions.
The emission category nomenclature remains identical. In addition to this, in order to refine the analysis and facilitate the identification of levers for action, it is advisable to subdivide the boundary into three sub-categories:
Internal Boundary: emission sources generated by the association's own activities, including those of employees.
Volunteer Boundary: emission sources linked to the activities of the association's elected representatives and volunteers.
Beneficiary Boundary: emission sources linked to the beneficiaries of the association's services.
🔎 The emission category nomenclature is suitable for all types of organisations, including associations. It is possible to customise the terminology of categories for better understanding within the association. For example, for the "Travel" category, sub-categories can be adapted as follows:
Home-work travel ≈ Travel of employees and volunteers between their home and the association.
Business travel ≈ Travel of employees and volunteers within the framework of association activities.
Visitor travel ≈ Travel of visitors and beneficiaries.
Identification of emission sources: criterion F1
ℹ️ Criterion F1: The identification of emission sources must be done via a flow mapping. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
In keeping with the operational boundary defined in criterion E1, the emission category nomenclature remains identical. To facilitate the identification of the association's emission sources, a few common examples of association activities are given below:
Energy category: many associations consume energy, for electricity or heating, or other needs in their premises and sites.
Other direct emissions category: some associations own air conditioning or refrigeration equipment, likely to generate refrigerant fluid leaks. Some association activities, particularly agricultural ones (reinsertion farms, community-supported agriculture, shared gardens, agroecology associations, etc.) may generate direct emissions. Industrial activities (solidarity garages, bicycle repair workshops, fablabs, food production sites, composting sites, etc.) may also have process-related emissions (chemical reactions, leaks of special gases).
Inputs: goods and materials category: many associations use material inputs (purchases, donations, loans, provision), whether raw materials or finished products. These may be new, or second-hand (reused, reconditioned, repaired, recycled). Food intended for employees' meals also falls into this category.
Inputs: services category: many associations rely on external services (services, skills sponsorship, etc.). The association's digital uses also fall into this category.
Freight category: some association activities generate freight transport flows, particularly for importing goods and materials inputs. Less commonly, internal transport of goods between several of the association's sites, or delivery to beneficiaries.
Travel category: many association activities involve the movement of people. Notably contributors (employees, elected representatives, volunteers) between their home and the association, or within the framework of their association activities. Many association activities also involve flows of visitor or beneficiary travel (for events, cultural, sports, social, solidarity activities, etc.)
Direct waste category: many association activities generate waste that is collected and treated.
Fixed assets category: many association activities use capitalised goods (buildings, vehicles, IT equipment) by its contributors (employees, elected representatives, volunteers).
Use category: many associations with beneficiaries provide goods (resource centres, donations of food products, medical equipment, etc.) or services (courses, activities, network animation, etc.), which constitutes an emission source linked to use.
End of life category: the few associations that distribute material goods anticipate in this category the end-of-life treatment of these goods.
⏳[WIP] For information, an example diagram of a flow mapping adapted for an association will be inserted here shortly.
Identification of physical and transition risks: criterion G1
ℹ️ Criterion G1: The organisation identifies the various risks linked to climate change (physical risks, transition risks). More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
The association can draw on the annex for a list of potential physical and transition risks that may affect their activities and mission, while identifying opportunities to reduce their vulnerability:
Physical risks: Certain associations, particularly those with infrastructure or equipment, could be exposed to risks linked to climate hazards (floods, heatwaves, storms). It is therefore crucial to anticipate these to ensure continuity of activities and the protection of beneficiaries, volunteers and material resources.
Transition risks: The transition towards a low-carbon model may also present challenges for associations. This includes managing the costs and resources necessary to adapt their practices. However, it may also represent opportunities to strengthen their social and environmental commitment, attract new partners or benefit from conditional financial support.
Within the framework of mobilisation, time for debate and exchange on these risks and the association's vulnerabilities can be organised.
While an exhaustive analysis of the specific risks relating to the association's activities is not required, three reflections are a priority for associations:
Analyse the economic vulnerabilities of the association regarding its dependence on funding. It can for this purpose quantify the proportion that financial donations, subsidies or other funding represent in the association's budget. It then involves qualifying their provenance by typology (local authorities, state, corporate foundations, etc.) and sectorially (at-risk sector, high carbon impact sector, low carbon impact sector, etc.). This will make it possible to consider this indicator alongside the Bilan Carbone® to address these funding issues.
Analyse the vulnerabilities of the association regarding its dependence on fossil fuels. It can for this purpose consider the proportion that fossil fuels represent in its Bilan Carbone®, then draw on a simulation of hydrocarbon availability.
Associations that animate a network of actors (advocacy, animation, etc.) in a given sector may also be interested in the impact of their influence or their dependence on the activities of network members. Transition risks relate to network heads vis-à-vis the associations they support and the messages they convey.
Criterion G1 makes it possible to feed the action plan in response to these risks and opportunities.
Mobilisation
Mobilisation targets: criterion H1
ℹ️ Criterion H1: Mobilisation targets at least the organisation's internal stakeholders, i.e. the project team, employees and management. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
Regarding the project team and management: in accordance with criterion A1, this designates the internal stakeholders of the association who have been involved in the approach: internal working group, voluntary stakeholders, coordinator and reference elected representative.
Regarding internal contributors: in an association context, internal contributors designate not only employees but also the association's volunteers who are interested.
Mobilisation messages: criterion I1
ℹ️ Criterion I1: The following mobilisation phases: awareness and plain-language explanation, accountability, reporting and communication, intervene at least once in the approach. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
It is recommended to adapt messages to the association context, to align with the values, functioning and diversity of profiles involved:
Awareness and plain-language explanation: in addition to awareness messages on carbon & climate issues, it is essential to recall that association actors are often committed to ecological or social justice issues, and that it can be difficult for them to realise that they also have a carbon impact. Awareness must emphasise that reducing GHG emissions does not mean reducing association activity itself — which remains fundamental to society — but rather optimising practices to minimise environmental impact.
Accountability: messages specifying each person's role in the transition to action must be adapted according to the different profiles (elected representatives, volunteers, beneficiaries, employees), and the scope for action of each within the association.
Co-construction (optional for the Initial Level): although this phase is optional, it is often relevant to involve volunteers, employees, and beneficiaries in the co-construction of the transition plan. This pool of stakeholders is generally aligned with the association's values and willing to co-create solutions.
Reporting and communication: This phase remains broadly identical to the standard recommendations, while ensuring that internal communication is well adapted to the association's stakeholders, and prioritising meaningful messages in the association context.
⏳[WIP] The ABC and its partners are working to propose in 2025 guidelines on the quantification of avoided and sequestered emissions, which would notably make it possible to better valorise association actions, alongside induced emissions.
Mobilisation steps: criterion J1
ℹ️ Criterion J1: At least one mobilisation action takes place during the steps of launching the approach, intermediate reporting and synthesis of the approach. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
There is no specific adaptation for an association on the number of mobilisation actions or the steps concerned. Thus, three mobilisation actions are to be carried out during the approach to involve stakeholders in the approach and then in the implementation of actions. Two additional actions are optional: one at the launch of data collection, one in co-construction of the transition plan.
ℹ️ The organisation of mobilisation must articulate criteria H1, I1 and J1 coherently (targets, messages, and steps). The order and format of mobilisation remains flexible. For an association, it is nevertheless frequent and recommended to follow the indicative order below:
Awareness & plain-language explanation of carbon & climate issues: at the launch of the approach, for the project team and the reference elected representative. Details.
Reporting & communication: at the time of presenting the GHG profile, to the project team and the reference elected representative. Details.
Reporting & communication of results, and accountability around actions: in synthesis of the approach, for interested internal contributors. Details.
Accounting
ℹ️ The criteria of the Bilan Carbone® method linked to the accounting step are designed in a generalist manner and apply to all organisations, regardless of their size, sector of activity or profile, therefore including associations.
The Bilan Carbone® method does not aim to specify particular calculations or conventions specific to different sectors or organisation profiles. For practical advice and application keys, the association can draw on the Plan Carbone Général, which notably offers a sectoral approach dedicated to the association sector.
Data collection method: criterion K1
ℹ️ Criterion K1: All methods of collecting activity data are accepted. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
⏳[WIP] There are different types of activity data: real, extrapolated, statistical or approximate. To enable access to extrapolated or statistical data, the ABC and its partners are currently working to facilitate the sharing and pooling of data between association users of the method. This initiative aims to provide associations with access to more representative data from their sector.
Spend-based emission factors: criterion L1
ℹ️ Criterion L1: The share of emissions calculated via emission factors in Spend-based emission factors (specific and non-specific) is reported. The use of non-specific Spend-based emission factors is justified. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
The requirements of criterion L1 apply to associations in the same way as for other organisations, without specific adaptation. The association must be aware of the limitations of Spend-based emission factors.
Uncertainties: criterion M1
ℹ️ Criterion M1: The organisation must qualify and quantify uncertainties for all direct emissions and significant indirect emissions of the Bilan Carbone®. The organisation determines uncertainty by assigning a rating to each relevant activity data and emission factor. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
The requirements of criterion M1 apply to associations in the same way as for other organisations, without specific adaptation.
Emission profile: criterion N1
ℹ️ Criterion N1: The emission profile is presented at minimum according to the Bilan Carbone® nomenclature. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
In connection with criteria E1 and F1, which recommend adapting the operational boundary to the association profile, it is also relevant to present the association's emission profile according to an adapted nomenclature, in addition to the standard Bilan Carbone® nomenclature. Thus, for the presentation of results, it is interesting to distinguish certain categories specific to association functioning, such as emissions linked to volunteers, beneficiaries, and the day-to-day operation of the association. This approach offers an operational view of the contributions of each type of stakeholder to the association's overall emissions.
Transition Plan
Vision and objectives: criterion O1
ℹ️ Criterion O1: The organisation's vision is defined by a medium and long-term objective (time horizon 2030 and 2050), expressed in absolute values, and consistent with the national strategy. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
To build this objective:
As a general rule, it is recommended for associations in France to define an objective consistent with the overall objective of the SNBC, namely:
Reduce GHG emissions by 40% between 1990 and 2030.
Divide GHG emissions by 6 between 1990 and 2050. (consistency with the SNBC objectives)
If the association's activity can be assimilated to a specific SNBC sector (transport, buildings, agriculture, forest - wood, industry, energy production, or waste management), it can draw on the SNBC's sectoral orientations. It can also draw on sectoral standards such as SBT.
For associations outside France, the relevant national objectives are to be used.
The projection of a reduction objective allows the association to grasp the transformations necessary to evolve towards a low-carbon society.
Action plan: criterion P1
ℹ️ Criterion P1: The transition plan contains immediate, priority and data collection improvement actions. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
For a first action plan, it is recommended to plan around ten operational action sheets. This makes it possible to find a balance between realism and efficiency, by concentrating efforts on the actual implementation of actions rather than on a plan that is too vast and risks remaining theoretical.
⏳[WIP] It is relevant to propose and select actions from feedback on actions already implemented by other associations. To this end, the ABC and its partners are currently working to facilitate the sharing and pooling of action ideas between association users of the method. This initiative aims to provide feedback that is adapted and representative of the association sector.
Quantification of actions: criterion Q1
ℹ️ Criterion Q1: An overall emission reduction potential of the transition plan is assessed quantitatively. The impacts of action implementation are assessed qualitatively. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
The quantification of reduction potential compares the emissions of the reference scenario and the scenario where the action is implemented. Several recommendations:
Quantitative estimate: For the overall reduction potential, it is advisable to identify the actions with the greatest emission reduction potential, as these are the actions that will make it possible to have the right order of magnitude of the expected volume of reduction. Furthermore, it is advisable to use an approach by broad categories of actions, by cumulating the expected impacts on key categories of the emission profile (for example: travel, energy, inputs). An approximate but representative method may suffice to effectively guide priorities.
Qualitative assessment: The other qualitative indicators are not negligible, notably the available resources (human, financial and material means). They make it possible to prioritise certain actions when their quantification is more complex (actions with indirect but structuring impacts, or a low but motivating reduction potential, etc.)
Feedback: In the framework of pooled feedback between associations (see Criterion P1), it is useful to draw inspiration from reduction potentials already observed for similar actions implemented by other association structures.
Integration of co-benefits: Associations, often committed to social and environmental issues, can integrate into their assessment the co-benefits of actions (for example: increased awareness of beneficiaries, improvement of working conditions, reduction of costs). This makes it possible to demonstrate added value beyond the sole reduction of emissions.
Low-carbon pathway: criterion R1
ℹ️ Criterion R1: The quantification of reduction potential makes it possible to build a pathway using a bottom-up approach over 3-4 years, i.e. the renewal period of the assessment. It justifies the achievement of a short-term objective (horizon of the next assessment) consistent with the overall objective. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
The requirements of criterion R1 apply to associations in the same way as for other organisations, without specific adaptation. This consists concretely of tracing a pathway over the next 4 years, based on the quantification of emission reductions estimated according to criterion Q1, and the implementation periods of actions.
Monitoring: criterion S1
ℹ️ Criterion S1: Indicators for monitoring and implementing actions are defined. Monitoring of performance indicators (significant emissions) between each renewal of the approach is not required. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
These indicators are concrete tools for associations, useful not only for assessing progress, but also for valorising the actions undertaken and their results, both internally and externally. They can be mobilised to:
Inspire and motivate internal teams (employees, volunteers, BD members).
Strengthen credibility and transparency with external stakeholders (partners, funders, beneficiaries).
Finally, indicators and feedback can enrich the base of shared actions between association users of the method, as mentioned in criterion P1.
It is nevertheless essential to identify in advance the resource persons in charge of monitoring the indicators. These persons, often drawn from the core of actors involved from the beginning of the approach (see criterion A1), may include the internal coordinator, a dedicated employee, or volunteers committed over the long term. To ensure continuity, it is advisable to report periodically to the reference elected representative on the board of directors, particularly in cases of frequent volunteer turnover.
ℹ️ It is essential for an association to commit to concrete actions to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, it should not lose sight of the other impact indicators that associations have on society and the planet. The carbon indicator must be considered alongside these other issues so that associations do not focus exclusively on the carbon footprint, but have an overall view of their positive and negative impacts.
The association can refer to Annex 7 - Opening up to other impact indicators.
[WIP] The ABC and its partners are working to propose guidelines on the quantification of avoided and sequestered emissions, which would notably make it possible to better valorise association actions, alongside induced emissions. Other work will feed discussions on the issues related to planetary boundaries, to ensure a more global and coherent approach to the environmental impact of association actions.
Reporting
Deliverables: criterion T1
ℹ️ Criterion T1: All the deliverables of the Bilan Carbone® approach are presented to the organisation. The evaluation of these deliverables is voluntary. The GHG profile is deposited anonymously on the OCCF. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
The presentation of Bilan Carbone® deliverables must be done internally by the persons involved in the approach (see criterion A1). These deliverables bring together all the information making it possible to document the results, choices and assumptions made. They are archived by the association to ensure their accessibility and longevity.
It is particularly important, in an association context where volunteers may succeed each other frequently, to anticipate the continuity of the approach. This involves a rigorous handover of skills from an additional deliverable: a handover document, which records the choices made throughout the approach (methodological choices, decisions on actions, etc.).
⏳[WIP] This handover document can be structured from a pre-established template (for example a form), enabling homogeneity in the information transmitted. Current reflections on Bilan Carbone® tools are examining the feasibility of automatic extractions of this information, thereby simplifying the management of result monitoring, assessment renewals, and information handovers.
The publication of results (anonymous or not) is useful for contributing to public knowledge in carbon accounting, particularly within the association sector.
⏳[WIP] To this end, in addition to the OCCF, an initiative is currently working to facilitate the sharing and pooling of results between association users of the method. This aims to provide feedback that is adapted and representative of the association sector.
The evaluation of the Bilan Carbone® approach by an independent third party is not necessarily useful or recommended for an association, but it is possible.
Mis à jour