Criterion A.7 - Aggregation of results

From one organization to another, internal operations and working methods can vary greatly. Projects, teams, sites, activities — having GHG data at these scales is more than useful for tracking emissions associated with the internal specificities of an organization. Beyond this "micro" monitoring, it is also essential that this GHG data can be consolidated at a broader scale to assess the overall GHG emissions of an organization. This is why this criterion analyzes the possibility of aggregating results at different scales, similar to what the "multi-site" utility of the Bilan Carbone® method can do.

However, this consolidation of GHG data at different scales may not be of interest in certain business approaches.

Criterion

Mandatory	Criterion A.7 - Results Aggregation
Question	Does the candidate tool allow GHG emissions to be aggregated at the project, team, activity, site, etc. level? Does it also allow these different GHG assessments to be consolidated in order to evaluate the impact of the entire organization (similar to the "multi-site" utility of the Bilan Carbone® method)?
Answer	Yes, the tool aligns with the analytical carbon accounting method and users are made aware of the principle of double-counting risk Yes, the tool allows by default the consolidation of emissions at least at the site level and users are made aware of the principle of double-counting risk Yes, the tool allows by default the consolidation of emissions at least at the site level No, the tool does not allow the consolidation of emissions at the site level
Implementation guidance	Try within the candidate tool to define (if it allows) teams, sites, activities in order to verify whether GHG aggregations at these scales are possible Look for the presence of a tagging system in the tool. Look for a system allowing the tool to implement an analytical carbon accounting approach.