Appendix 5.1 - Specificities for associations
What are the particularities of Bilan Carbone® for a typical association 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 Beginner level for a typical association.
The annex below aims to give an overview of the specificities and recommended adaptations for an association's Bilan Carbone®. The criteria are simply recalled here, each requirement having been previously detailed in the method via a dedicated subsection.
Governance
Hierarchical involvement: criterion A1
ℹ️ Criterion A1: A coordinator is appointed internally. They steer the approach and are then responsible for the development, implementation and monitoring of the transition plan. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
This criterion does apply to associations, but must take into account the particularities of this type of structure. Associations, often small and with limited resources, also have specific governance involving employees, elected officials 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:
A Working Group (WG) internal composed of active volunteers and/or employees of the association. These voluntary stakeholders participate according to their level of acculturation to carbon issues.
One or more coordinators within this WG
A member of the Board of Directors (BD) as a reference
Alternatively:
The association can rely on an outsourced resource trained in the Bilan Carbone®. This may be the association's chartered accountant if trained, or a carbon expert consultant.
An coordinator internal to the association
A member of the Board of Directors (BD) as a reference
This underlines the necessary adaptation to the structural particularities and to the resources available for an association.
Training of the organisation: criterion B1
ℹ️ Criterion B1: The person or team operationally responsible for 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 may call on a qualified external resource to carry out this assessment, or train the coordinator internally, who will steer the approach.
In the case of internal training, two options are possible:
Ideally:
Full training module : it provides the skills necessary to carry out a Bilan Carbone® autonomously and comprehensively.
Alternatively:
Simplified module : it enables a more accessible skills upgrade to carry out a self assessment or self-diagnostic, called simplified carbon footprint. The module is structured in chapters that must be followed at each stage of the approach to ensure continuous progression.
Whatever the choice, two preliminary modules are recommended
Upstream awareness module on carbon & climate issues, as a prerequisite.
Introductory module to the implications of the above trainings. It makes it possible to assess expectations and the level of commitment required for the 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 associative actors, corresponding to the different parts of the Bilan Carbone® approach, and aimed at different types of transition actors.
Tool compliance: criterion C1
ℹ️ Criterion C1: The Bilan Carbone® is carried out with ABC tools (Bilan Carbone® software or spreadsheet), or, failing that, by 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 provide access to the Bilan Carbone® software, specific to associations (both on the methodological specificities mentioned in this annex and on a use of the tool adapted to associative actors).
Renewal of the Bilan Carbone®: criterion D1
ℹ️ Criterion D1: Renewal is carried out at least 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 an overly frequent renewal of the complete analysis. Monitoring of results remains essential however; it can be done via a small number of well-chosen indicators (cf. Criterion S1), in order to adjust actions based on results. Some partial recalculations can be relevant to measure the evolution of the most significant emissions.
ℹ️ Recommended practice for associations: it is advised to be supported by a provider for their first Bilan Carbone® (in relation to criterion A1). This provider acts as a facilitator during the approach, allowing the association to familiarise itself with the method while benefiting from operational support. It is then recommended to attend a training at the end of the process aimed at making the association autonomous (in relation to criterion B1). The association can then internalise the approach when renewing its Bilan Carbone® (in relation to criterion D1).
Scope
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 represent the largest share of emissions for an associative actor.
The emission category nomenclature remains identical. In addition to this, in order to refine the analysis and to facilitate the identification of levers for action, it is recommended to subdivide the boundary into three sub-categories:
Internal Boundary: emission sources generated by activities specific to the association, including those of employees.
Volunteers Boundary: emission sources related to the activities of the association's elected officials and volunteers.
Beneficiaries Boundary: emission sources related 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 personalise the terminology of the categories for better understanding within the association. For example, for the category “People travel”, subcategories can be adapted as follows:
Home-to-work travel ≈ Travel of employees and volunteers between their home and the association.
Business travel ≈ Travel of employees and volunteers as part of associative activities.
Visitor travel ≈ Travel of visitors and beneficiaries.
Identification of emission sources: criterion F1
ℹ️ Criterion F1: The identification of emission sources must be carried out via a mapping of flows. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
In line with the operational boundary defined in criterion E1, the emission category nomenclature remains identical. To facilitate the identification of the association's emission sources, some common examples of associative 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 have air-conditioning or refrigeration equipment that may generate refrigerant fluid leaks. Some associative activities, notably agricultural ones (reintegration farms, AMAP, community gardens, agroecology associations, etc.) can generate direct emissions. Industrial activities (solidarity garages, bike repair workshops, fablabs, food production sites, composting sites, etc.) can also have process-related emissions (chemical reactions, leaks of special gases).
Goods and materials inputs category: many associations use material inputs (purchases, donations, loans, provisions), whether raw materials or finished products. These can be new or second-hand (reused, reconditioned, repaired, recycled). Food intended for staff meals is also included in this category.
Services inputs category: many associations rely on external services (contracts, skill-based sponsorship, etc.). The association's digital uses also fall into this category.
Freight category: some associative activities generate goods transport flows, particularly for the importation of goods and materials inputs. More rarely, internal transport of goods between several association sites, or delivery to beneficiaries
Travel category: many associative activities involve the travel of people. In particular staff (employees, elected officials, volunteers) between their home and the association, or as part of their associative activities. Many associative activities also involve travel flows of visitors or beneficiaries (for events, cultural, sports, social, solidarity activities, etc.)
Direct waste category: many associative activities generate waste that is collected and treated.
Capital assets category: many associative activities use capital goods (buildings, vehicles, IT equipment) by their staff (employees, elected officials, volunteers).
Use category: many associations that have beneficiaries provide goods (reuse centres, donations of food products, medical equipment, etc.), or services (classes, activities, network facilitation, etc.), which constitute a source of emissions related 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 flows 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 different risks related to climate change (physical risks, transition risks). More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
The association can rely in annex on a list of potential physical and transition risks that may affect their activities and mission, while identifying opportunities to reduce their vulnerability:
Physical risks : Some associations, particularly those with infrastructure or equipment, could be exposed to risks related to climatic hazards (flooding, heatwaves, storms). It is therefore crucial to anticipate them to ensure continuity of activities and protection of beneficiaries, volunteers and material resources.
Transition risks : The transition to a low-carbon model can also represent challenges for associations. This includes managing the costs and resources necessary to adapt their practices. However, it can also represent opportunities to strengthen their social and environmental commitment, attract new partners or benefit from conditional financial support.
As part of the Stakeholder engagement, a period of debate and exchange on these risks and the association's vulnerabilities can be organised.
It is therefore not required to analyse exhaustively the specific risks affecting the association's activities; three reflections are however a priority for associations:
Analyse the association's economic vulnerabilities concerning its dependence on funding. For this, it can quantify the share represented by financial donations, grants or other funding in the association's budget. It then needs to qualify their origin by typology (local authorities, state, corporate foundations, …) and by sector (sector at risk, sector with high carbon impact, sector with low carbon impact, etc.). This will make it possible to consider this indicator alongside the Bilan Carbone® to address funding-related issues.
Analyse the association's vulnerabilities concerning its dependence on fossil fuels. For this, it can look at the share represented by fossil fuels in its Bilan Carbone®, then rely on a simulation of hydrocarbon availability.
Associations that lead a network of actors (advocacy, facilitation, etc.) in a given sector can also be interested in the impact of their influence or dependence with respect to the activities of network members. Some transition risks affect network leaders with regard to the associations they support and the messages they convey.
Criterion G1 helps to feed the action plan in response to these risks and opportunities.
Stakeholder engagement
Targets of stakeholder engagement: criterion H1
ℹ️ Criterion H1: The stakeholder engagement targets at least the organisation's internal stakeholders, i.e. the project team, staff and management. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
Concerning 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 the elected reference.
Concerning internal staff: in an associative context, internal staff refers not only to employees but also to the association's interested volunteers.
Stakeholder engagement messages: criterion I1
ℹ️ Criterion I1: The following engagement phases: awareness and popularisation, empowerment, reporting and communication, occur at least once during the approach. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
It is recommended to adapt the messages to the associative context, to align with the values, functioning and diversity of profiles involved:
Awareness and popularisation : beyond awareness messages on carbon & climate issues, it is essential to recall that associative actors are often attached to ecological or social justice issues, and that it can be difficult for them to realise that they also have a carbon impact. Awareness should emphasise that reducing GHG emissions does not mean reducing associative activity itself — which remains fundamental for society — but rather optimising practices to minimise environmental impact.
Empowerment : messages specifying everyone's roles in moving to action must be adapted according to the different profiles (elected officials, volunteers, beneficiaries, employees), and on each person's scope for manoeuvre within the association.
Coconstruction (optional for the Beginner level): although this phase is optional, it is often relevant to involve volunteers, employees and beneficiaries in the coconstruction 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 favouring messages that carry meaning in the associative 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 associative actions, alongside induced emissions.
Stakeholder engagement steps: criterion J1
ℹ️ Criterion J1: At least one engagement action takes place during the launch stages of the approach, during intermediate reporting and during the 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 engagement actions or on the stages concerned. Thus, three engagement actions are to be carried out during the approach to involve stakeholders in the process and then in the implementation of actions. Two additional actions are optional: one at the start of data collection, one in the coconstruction of the transition plan.
ℹ️ The organisation of engagement must articulate criteria H1, I1 and J1 coherently (targets, messages and stages). The order and format of engagement remain flexible. For an association, it is nevertheless common and recommended to follow the following indicative order:
Awareness & popularisation of carbon & climate issues: at the launch of the approach, aimed at the project team and the elected reference. Details.
Reporting & communication: at the restitution of the GHG profile, to the project team and the elected reference Details.
Reporting & communication of results, and empowerment around actions: at the synthesis of the approach, for interested internal staff. Details.
Accounting
ℹ️ The Bilan Carbone® method criteria related to the accounting step are designed in a generalist manner and apply to all organisations, regardless of their size, sector of activity or profile, thus including associations.
The Bilan Carbone® method does not aim to detail the specific calculations or conventions for the various sectors or organisation profiles. To find practical advice and application keys, the association can rely on the General Carbon Plan, which notably proposes a sectoral approach dedicated to the associative 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 : actual, 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 associations using the method. This initiative aims to provide associations with access to data more representative of their sector.
Monetary ratios: criterion L1
ℹ️ Criterion L1: The share of emissions calculated using monetary ratio emission factors (specific and non-specific) is reported. The use of non-specific monetary ratios 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 particular adaptation. The association must be aware of the limits of monetary ratios.
Uncertainties: criterion M1
ℹ️ Criterion M1: The organisation shall qualify and quantify uncertainties for all direct emissions and for the significant indirect emissions of the Bilan Carbone®. The organisation determines the 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 particular adaptation.
Emissions profile: criterion N1
ℹ️ Criterion N1: The emissions profile is presented at least 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 associative profile, it is also relevant to present the association's emissions profile according to an adapted nomenclature, in addition to the standard Bilan Carbone® nomenclature. Thus, for the restitution of results, it is interesting to distinguish certain categories specific to associative functioning, such as emissions related to volunteers, beneficiaries, and the day-to-day functioning 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
Visions 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 value, and in coherence with national strategy. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
To construct 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 is comparable to a specific sector of the SNBC (transport, buildings, agriculture, forest - wood, industry, energy production, or waste management), it can rely on the SNBC's sectoral orientations. It can also rely on sectoral standards such as SBT.
For associations outside France, the relevant national objectives are to be used.
Projecting a reduction objective allows the association to grasp the transformations necessary to move towards a low-carbon society.
Action plan: criterion P1
ℹ️ Criterion P1: The transition plan contains immediate actions, priority actions and process improvement actions. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
For a first action plan, it is recommended to provide around ten action sheets operational. This allows a balance between realism and effectiveness, focusing efforts on the actual implementation of actions rather than on a plan that is too extensive and risks remaining theoretical.
⏳[WIP] It is relevant to propose and select actions from feedback on experiences of 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 associations using the method. This initiative aims to provide feedback adapted and representative of the associative sector.
Quantification of actions: criterion Q1
ℹ️ Criterion Q1: A global emissions reduction potential of the transition plan is quantitatively assessed. The impacts of action implementation are evaluated qualitatively. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
The quantification of the reduction potential compares the emissions of the reference scenario and the scenario where the action is implemented. Several recommendations:
Quantitative estimation: For the overall reduction potential, it is advised to identify the actions with the greatest emissions reduction potential, as these actions will provide the correct order of magnitude of the expected reduction volume. In addition, it is advised to use an approach by major categories of actions, cumulating the expected impacts on key categories of the emissions profile (for example: travel, energy, inputs). An approximate but representative method may be sufficient to effectively guide priorities.
Qualitative evaluation: Other qualitative indicators are not negligible, notably 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 with low reduction potential but mobilising, etc.)
Feedback from experiences: As part of the mutualised feedback between associations (see Criterion P1), it is useful to draw inspiration from the reduction potentials already observed for similar actions implemented by other associative structures.
Integration of co-benefits: Associations, often engaged on social and environmental themes, can integrate the co-benefits of actions into their evaluation (for example: increased awareness of beneficiaries, improved working conditions, cost reduction). This makes it possible to demonstrate added value beyond the sole reduction of emissions.
Low-carbon trajectory: criterion R1
ℹ️ Criterion R1: The quantification of the reduction potential allows construction of an ascending (so-called bottom-up) trajectory over 3-4 years, i.e. the period for renewing the assessment. It justifies achieving a short-term objective (horizon of the next assessment) consistent with the overall objective. More details here.i.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
The requirements of criterion R1 apply to associations in the same way as for other organisations, without particular adaptation. Concretely, this consists in tracing a trajectory over the next 4 years, based on the quantification of estimated emissions reductions according to criterion Q1, and on the implementation periods of the actions.
Monitoring: criterion S1
ℹ️ Criterion S1: Indicators for monitoring and implementation of actions are defined. Monitoring of performance indicators (significant emissions) between each renewal of the approach is not imposed. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
These indicators are concrete tools for associations, useful not only to evaluate progress, but also to highlight actions taken and their results, both internally and externally. They can be used to:
Inspire and motivate internal teams (employees, volunteers, board members).
Strengthen credibility and transparency with external stakeholders (partners, funders, beneficiaries).
Finally, indicators and feedback can enrich the pool of actions shared between associations using the method, as mentioned in criterion P1.
It is nevertheless essential to identify in advance the resource persons responsible for monitoring the indicators. These people, often from the core of actors involved from the start of the approach (see criterion A1), can include the internal coordinator, a dedicated employee, or volunteers committed over the long term. To ensure continuity, it is advisable to refer occasionally to the elected board reference, particularly in case of frequent rotation among volunteers.
ℹ️ It is essential for an association to engage in concrete actions to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, it is important not to lose sight of the other impact indicators that associations have on society and the planet. The carbon indicator should 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 toAnnex 7 - Opening to other impact indicators.
[WIP] The ABC and its partners are working to propose in 2025 guidelines on the quantification of emissions avoided and sequestered emissions, which would notably make it possible to better valorise associative actions, alongside induced emissions. Other work will feed discussions on issues related to planetary boundaries, in order to ensure a more global and coherent approach to the environmental impact of associative actions.
Reporting
Deliverables: criterion T1
ℹ️ Criterion T1: All deliverables of the Bilan Carbone® approach are reported to the organisation. The evaluation of these deliverables is voluntary. The GHG profile is submitted anonymously to theOCCF. More details here.
Specificities and recommended adaptations for an association:
The reporting of the Bilan Carbone® deliverables shall be carried out internally by the people involved in the approach (see criterion A1). These deliverables gather all the information necessary to document the results, choices and assumptions made. They are archived by the association to ensure their accessibility and durability.
It is particularly important, in an associative context where volunteers may succeed one another frequently, to anticipate continuity of the approach. This requires a rigorous handover of skills based on an additional deliverable : a handover document that records the choices made throughout the approach (methodological choices, decisions on actions, etc.).
⏳[WIP] This handover document can be structured using a pre-established template (for example a form), enabling uniformity 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 results monitoring, reassessments of the assessment, and information handovers.
The publication of the results (anonymous or not) is useful to contribute to public knowledge in carbon accounting, notably within the associative sector.
⏳[WIP] For this purpose, in addition to the OCCF, an initiative is currently working to facilitate the sharing and pooling of results among associations using the method. This aims to provide feedback and experiences adapted to and representative of the associative sector.
Theevaluation of the Bilan Carbone® approach by an independent third party is not necessarily useful or recommended for an association, but it is possible.
Last updated