Aller à l’essentiel de l’information
RK
Révisé par
Dr Ross KurinkoLinkedIn
Strategic ESG Advisor · IFRS S1 & S2 / GRI / ESRS expert
GRI Certified Global Trainer · PhD, University of Cambridge · ESG-AI expert
15+ years on FTSE 100 & Fortune Global 500 disclosures
Canary Wharf, London
Support pédagogique LRA · Non publié ni approuvé par Global Reporting Initiative
Gratuit · Membres de la Community
✓ Assistant IA LRA · Supervision humaine
Ouvrir la source officielle →
Explore GRI training (ESRS bundle) →
GRI 102: Climate Change·Disclosure GRI 102-10
Carbon Credits
Guide pratique pour préparer cette information. Utilisez cette fiche pour identifier les données à préparer, vérifier les affirmations et organiser les preuves. Pour les exigences exactes, reportez-vous toujours à la source officielle Global Reporting Initiative.
Statut juridique
GRI 102: Climate Change 2025 is effective for reports or other materials published on or after 1 January 2027, with earlier adoption encouraged.
Passeport publié
Dernière révision le 2026-07-30
Révisé par
Dr Ross KurinkoLinkedIn
Strategic ESG Advisor · IFRS S1 & S2 / GRI / ESRS expert
GRI Certified Global Trainer · PhD, University of Cambridge · ESG-AI expert
15+ years on FTSE 100 & Fortune Global 500 disclosures
Canary Wharf, London
Support pédagogique LRA · Non publié ni approuvé par Global Reporting Initiative
Norme
GRI 102: Climate Change
Disclosure GRI 102-10 · 2025
Dernière révision
2026-07-30
Support pédagogique LRA · Non publié ni approuvé par Global Reporting Initiative
Pour préparer cette information
Objet de l’information
Disclosure 102-10 requires an organization to report carbon credits generated outside its value chain and purchased by the organization. A carbon credit is a transferable or tradable instrument representing one metric ton of CO₂ equivalent of greenhouse gas emission reduction or removal.
The organization must report the total amount of carbon credits cancelled during the reporting period in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent and provide a numerical breakdown between credits from GHG emission-reduction projects and credits from GHG-removal projects. It can additionally report the percentage represented by each project type.
The organization should also report the total amount of carbon credits purchased but not cancelled during the reporting period. Where it purchases removal credits, it should identify whether the underlying projects are nature-based or technological.
For every project whose credits were cancelled, the organization must report the project name and ID, project type, cancellation serial number or range, cancellation date, vintage, host country and issuing registry. Vintage is the year in which the GHG reduction or removal occurred rather than the year in which the credit was purchased or cancelled.
For each cancelled-credit project, the organization must explain how the project adheres to the eight quality criteria: additionality, credible baselines, permanence, leakage avoidance, unique issuance and claiming, regular monitoring, independent validation and verification, and GHG programme governance.
Where a project does not meet one or more quality criteria, the organization should explain why and describe the actions taken or planned to achieve compliance. It should also report whether credits cancelled in earlier periods failed to meet quality criteria during the current reporting period.
The organization should explain how double use, double issuance and double claiming are prevented and report whether the credits are associated with a corresponding adjustment. It should report the crediting and monitoring periods, the validation and verification standards and certifications, and the GHG programme’s rules, auditor-accreditation procedures, stakeholder-consultation procedures and grievance mechanisms.
The organization must report the purpose of each carbon-credit cancellation. Relevant purposes can include compliance with a mandatory or voluntary carbon-crediting programme, beyond-value-chain mitigation or climate contributions, and counterbalancing residual GHG emissions in the context of a net-zero target.
Carbon credits must be excluded from gross GHG emissions and gross GHG emissions-reduction targets. The organization should explain how the use of credits does not impede achievement of its gross reduction targets and describe their role in its climate-change transition plan.
Only GHG-removal credits can be used to counterbalance residual GHG emissions, and only as the final step of the mitigation hierarchy after the organization has reduced at least 90% of its emissions, unless an applicable sectoral pathway provides otherwise. Credits from emission-reduction projects cannot be used to counterbalance residual emissions.
The organization must describe the impacts on people and the environment associated with all carbon-credit projects whose credits were purchased during the reporting period, whether or not the credits were cancelled. It must explain how it continuously monitors and evaluates these impacts.
The organization should have a due-diligence process for selecting projects that maximizes positive impacts and prevents or mitigates negative impacts. It should report the impact-monitoring period and identify impacts related to pollution, corruption, land acquisition, human rights, vulnerable groups, livelihoods, food security, water rights, land rights and the risk of forced eviction.
The organization must report the categories of stakeholders consulted and explain how stakeholder engagement informed project implementation. Where projects affect Indigenous Peoples’ lands, territories or resources, it should explain whether free, prior and informed consent was obtained and how.
The organization must explain how socio-economic benefits are provided to local communities and Indigenous Peoples, including evidence of payments, employment, skills development or training. It must also describe both positive and negative biodiversity impacts and how biodiversity is conserved.
Carbon-credit projects can create trade-offs, such as land-based removal projects reducing land available for food production. The organization must explain how these trade-offs are assessed and should describe the process used to mitigate them.
Information already published by a third party can be incorporated through a clear reference where it covers all relevant quality criteria or impact elements. The organization remains responsible for ensuring that the referenced information is complete, current and applicable to the credits it purchased or cancelled.
Ce support pédagogique LRA aide à préparer l’information. Pour les exigences exactes, reportez-vous toujours à la source officielle Global Reporting Initiative.
Avant de commencer
Avant de commencer
Une courte liste de contrôle avant de préparer cette information — cochez chaque point une fois réglé.
Préparation
Informations clés à préparer
| Champ à préparer | Ce qu’il faut recueillir | Indice de preuve | Responsable |
|---|---|---|---|
| External carbon-credit definition and boundary | Disclosure 102-10 requires an organization to report carbon credits generated outside its value chain and purchased by the organization. A carbon credit is a transferable or tradable instrument representing one metric ton of CO₂ equivalent of greenhouse gas emission reduction or removal. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting external carbon-credit definition and boundary. | GHG Accounting / Sustainability reporting |
| Cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown | The organization must report the total amount of carbon credits cancelled during the reporting period in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent and provide a numerical breakdown between credits from GHG emission-reduction projects and credits from GHG-removal projects. It can additionally report the percentage represented by each project type. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown. | GHG Accounting / Sustainability reporting |
| Purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type | The organization should also report the total amount of carbon credits purchased but not cancelled during the reporting period. Where it purchases removal credits, it should identify whether the underlying projects are nature-based or technological. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type. | Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting |
| Project and cancellation metadata | For every project whose credits were cancelled, the organization must report the project name and ID, project type, cancellation serial number or range, cancellation date, vintage, host country and issuing registry. Vintage is the year in which the GHG reduction or removal occurred rather than the year in which the credit was purchased or cancelled. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project and cancellation metadata. | Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting |
| Eight project quality criteria | For each cancelled-credit project, the organization must explain how the project adheres to the eight quality criteria: additionality, credible baselines, permanence, leakage avoidance, unique issuance and claiming, regular monitoring, independent validation and verification, and GHG programme governance. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting eight project quality criteria. | Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting |
| Quality-criterion failures and corrective actions | Where a project does not meet one or more quality criteria, the organization should explain why and describe the actions taken or planned to achieve compliance. It should also report whether credits cancelled in earlier periods failed to meet quality criteria during the current reporting period. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting quality-criterion failures and corrective actions. | Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting |
| Double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance | The organization should explain how double use, double issuance and double claiming are prevented and report whether the credits are associated with a corresponding adjustment. It should report the crediting and monitoring periods, the validation and verification standards and certifications, and the GHG programme’s rules, auditor-accreditation procedures, stakeholder-consultation procedures and grievance mechanisms. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance. | Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting |
| Purpose of each cancellation | The organization must report the purpose of each carbon-credit cancellation. Relevant purposes can include compliance with a mandatory or voluntary carbon-crediting programme, beyond-value-chain mitigation or climate contributions, and counterbalancing residual GHG emissions in the context of a net-zero target. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting purpose of each cancellation. | Climate / Sustainability reporting |
| Exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets | Carbon credits must be excluded from gross GHG emissions and gross GHG emissions-reduction targets. The organization should explain how the use of credits does not impede achievement of its gross reduction targets and describe their role in its climate-change transition plan. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets. | GHG Accounting / Sustainability reporting |
| Residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy | Only GHG-removal credits can be used to counterbalance residual GHG emissions, and only as the final step of the mitigation hierarchy after the organization has reduced at least 90% of its emissions, unless an applicable sectoral pathway provides otherwise. Credits from emission-reduction projects cannot be used to counterbalance residual emissions. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy. | Climate / Sustainability reporting |
| Impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased | The organization must describe the impacts on people and the environment associated with all carbon-credit projects whose credits were purchased during the reporting period, whether or not the credits were cancelled. It must explain how it continuously monitors and evaluates these impacts. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased. | Operations / Sustainability reporting |
| Project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring | The organization should have a due-diligence process for selecting projects that maximizes positive impacts and prevents or mitigates negative impacts. It should report the impact-monitoring period and identify impacts related to pollution, corruption, land acquisition, human rights, vulnerable groups, livelihoods, food security, water rights, land rights and the risk of forced eviction. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring. | Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting |
| Stakeholder consultation, human rights and FPIC | The organization must report the categories of stakeholders consulted and explain how stakeholder engagement informed project implementation. Where projects affect Indigenous Peoples’ lands, territories or resources, it should explain whether free, prior and informed consent was obtained and how. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting stakeholder consultation, human rights and fpic. | Stakeholder Engagement / Human Rights / Sustainability reporting |
| Socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts | The organization must explain how socio-economic benefits are provided to local communities and Indigenous Peoples, including evidence of payments, employment, skills development or training. It must also describe both positive and negative biodiversity impacts and how biodiversity is conserved. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts. | Stakeholder Engagement / Human Rights / Sustainability reporting |
| Project trade-offs and mitigation | Carbon-credit projects can create trade-offs, such as land-based removal projects reducing land available for food production. The organization must explain how these trade-offs are assessed and should describe the process used to mitigate them. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project trade-offs and mitigation. | Operations / Sustainability reporting |
| Complete and current third-party cross-references | Information already published by a third party can be incorporated through a clear reference where it covers all relevant quality criteria or impact elements. The organization remains responsible for ensuring that the referenced information is complete, current and applicable to the credits it purchased or cancelled. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting complete and current third-party cross-references. | Procurement / Supply Chain / Sustainability reporting |
＋ Afficher les sous-éléments de GRI 102-10 (liste de travail LRA)
Disclosure 102-10 requires an organization to report carbon credits generated outside its value chain and purchased by the organization. A carbon credit is a transferable or tradable instrument representing one metric ton of CO₂ equivalent of greenhouse gas emission reduction or removal.
The organization must report the total amount of carbon credits cancelled during the reporting period in metric tons of CO₂ equivalent and provide a numerical breakdown between credits from GHG emission-reduction projects and credits from GHG-removal projects. It can additionally report the percentage represented by each project type.
The organization should also report the total amount of carbon credits purchased but not cancelled during the reporting period. Where it purchases removal credits, it should identify whether the underlying projects are nature-based or technological.
For every project whose credits were cancelled, the organization must report the project name and ID, project type, cancellation serial number or range, cancellation date, vintage, host country and issuing registry. Vintage is the year in which the GHG reduction or removal occurred rather than the year in which the credit was purchased or cancelled.
For each cancelled-credit project, the organization must explain how the project adheres to the eight quality criteria: additionality, credible baselines, permanence, leakage avoidance, unique issuance and claiming, regular monitoring, independent validation and verification, and GHG programme governance.
Where a project does not meet one or more quality criteria, the organization should explain why and describe the actions taken or planned to achieve compliance. It should also report whether credits cancelled in earlier periods failed to meet quality criteria during the current reporting period.
The organization should explain how double use, double issuance and double claiming are prevented and report whether the credits are associated with a corresponding adjustment. It should report the crediting and monitoring periods, the validation and verification standards and certifications, and the GHG programme’s rules, auditor-accreditation procedures, stakeholder-consultation procedures and grievance mechanisms.
The organization must report the purpose of each carbon-credit cancellation. Relevant purposes can include compliance with a mandatory or voluntary carbon-crediting programme, beyond-value-chain mitigation or climate contributions, and counterbalancing residual GHG emissions in the context of a net-zero target.
Carbon credits must be excluded from gross GHG emissions and gross GHG emissions-reduction targets. The organization should explain how the use of credits does not impede achievement of its gross reduction targets and describe their role in its climate-change transition plan.
Only GHG-removal credits can be used to counterbalance residual GHG emissions, and only as the final step of the mitigation hierarchy after the organization has reduced at least 90% of its emissions, unless an applicable sectoral pathway provides otherwise. Credits from emission-reduction projects cannot be used to counterbalance residual emissions.
The organization must describe the impacts on people and the environment associated with all carbon-credit projects whose credits were purchased during the reporting period, whether or not the credits were cancelled. It must explain how it continuously monitors and evaluates these impacts.
The organization should have a due-diligence process for selecting projects that maximizes positive impacts and prevents or mitigates negative impacts. It should report the impact-monitoring period and identify impacts related to pollution, corruption, land acquisition, human rights, vulnerable groups, livelihoods, food security, water rights, land rights and the risk of forced eviction.
The organization must report the categories of stakeholders consulted and explain how stakeholder engagement informed project implementation. Where projects affect Indigenous Peoples’ lands, territories or resources, it should explain whether free, prior and informed consent was obtained and how.
The organization must explain how socio-economic benefits are provided to local communities and Indigenous Peoples, including evidence of payments, employment, skills development or training. It must also describe both positive and negative biodiversity impacts and how biodiversity is conserved.
Carbon-credit projects can create trade-offs, such as land-based removal projects reducing land available for food production. The organization must explain how these trade-offs are assessed and should describe the process used to mitigate them.
Information already published by a third party can be incorporated through a clear reference where it covers all relevant quality criteria or impact elements. The organization remains responsible for ensuring that the referenced information is complete, current and applicable to the credits it purchased or cancelled.
Comment le préparer
Report carbon credits generated outside the organisation's value chain and purchased by the organisation. Cover every project whose credits were purchased for impact information, whether or not the credits were cancelled.
Collect and reconcile the records for: External carbon-credit definition and boundary; Cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown; Purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type; Project and cancellation metadata; Eight project quality criteria; Quality-criterion failures and corrective actions; Double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance; Purpose of each cancellation; Exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets; Residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy; Impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased; Project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring; Stakeholder consultation, human rights and FPIC; Socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts; Project trade-offs and mitigation; Complete and current third-party cross-references.
Only GHG-removal credits can counterbalance residual emissions and only as the final mitigation-hierarchy step after at least 90% reduction unless an applicable sectoral pathway specifies otherwise.
Draft the response using the defined terms shown in the disclosure focus; do not substitute broader internal labels.
Review the final wording against every requirement and the supporting governance or data records before sign-off.
Demander les données
Request the disclosure evidence
Traduisez l’information en une question métier interne, puis adaptez-la au vocabulaire de votre organisation.
Provide the complete credit transaction and project register; cancelled total and reduction/removal breakdown; purchased-but-not-cancelled total; project, serial, vintage, host-country and registry data; assessment of all eight quality criteria and failures; double-counting and corresponding-adjustment controls; cancellation purpose; inventory and target exclusions; due diligence, impact monitoring, stakeholder, FPIC, socio-economic, biodiversity and trade-off evidence.
Use the organisation's own role and document names, but preserve the defined GRI terms and the scope described above.
Meilleure demande
Provide the complete credit transaction and project register; cancelled total and reduction/removal breakdown; purchased-but-not-cancelled total; project, serial, vintage, host-country and registry data; assessment of all eight quality criteria and failures; double-counting and corresponding-adjustment controls; cancellation purpose; inventory and target exclusions; due diligence, impact monitoring, stakeholder, FPIC, socio-economic, biodiversity and trade-off evidence.
Rédigez votre information
Des notes qui transforment les données en information publiée
Modèles pédagogiques LRA — adaptez-les à votre organisation et vérifiez la source officielle avant validation.
Note méthodologique
Keep carbon credits outside gross Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 inventories and gross reduction targets. Distinguish reduction credits from removal credits, cancellation from purchase and vintage from purchase or cancellation year.
Note de contexte
A third-party reference can be incorporated only when it covers the relevant quality or impact elements completely and currently. The organisation remains responsible for the resulting disclosure.
Centre de téléchargement
Outils et formulaires de préparation
Outils de préparation professionnels pour GRI 102-10 — gratuits avec l’adhésion à LRA Community. Inscrivez-vous une fois (c’est gratuit) et tous les téléchargements se débloquent, avec la Bibliothèque des informations, les modèles et l’assistant IA LRA.
01XLSClasseur préparation et assurancePoints de données, risques, preuves à vérifier, responsable et dossier de preuves.Obtenir gratuitement ↧
02XLSPack de demande de donnéesE-mail de demande, modèle de message, champs de réponse et structure de validation.Obtenir gratuitement ↧
03PDFFiche de bibliothèqueRésumé imprimable d’une page de cette fiche d’information.Obtenir gratuitement ↧
Préparation à l’assurance
Pour chaque affirmation, vérifiez les preuves
| Affirmation | Risque | Preuves à vérifier |
|---|---|---|
| External carbon-credit definition and boundary is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates external carbon-credit definition and boundary. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting external carbon-credit definition and boundary. |
| Cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting cancelled total and reduction-versus-removal breakdown. |
| Purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting purchased but not cancelled credits and removal-project type. |
| Project and cancellation metadata is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates project and cancellation metadata. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project and cancellation metadata. |
| Eight project quality criteria is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates eight project quality criteria. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting eight project quality criteria. |
| Quality-criterion failures and corrective actions is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates quality-criterion failures and corrective actions. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting quality-criterion failures and corrective actions. |
| Double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting double-counting controls, corresponding adjustments and programme governance. |
| Purpose of each cancellation is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates purpose of each cancellation. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting purpose of each cancellation. |
| Exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting exclusion from gross inventories and reduction targets. |
| Residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting residual-emissions counterbalancing and mitigation hierarchy. |
| Impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting impacts from all projects whose credits were purchased. |
| Project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project due diligence and continuous impact monitoring. |
| Stakeholder consultation, human rights and FPIC is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates stakeholder consultation, human rights and fpic. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting stakeholder consultation, human rights and fpic. |
| Socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting socio-economic benefits and biodiversity impacts. |
| Project trade-offs and mitigation is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates project trade-offs and mitigation. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting project trade-offs and mitigation. |
| Complete and current third-party cross-references is reported accurately and completely. | The response omits, misclassifies or overstates complete and current third-party cross-references. | Approved source records, calculation files, reconciliations and review evidence supporting complete and current third-party cross-references. |
Dossier de preuves à préparer
Lacunes fréquentes dans les rapports
Reporting only the cancelled total without a reduction-versus-removal breakdown.
Omitting credits purchased but not cancelled.
Using reduction credits to counterbalance residual emissions.
Treating registry transfer or internal write-off as cancellation.
Calling a project high quality without assessing all eight criteria and any failures.
Assessing impacts only for cancelled credits rather than every purchased project.
Interrogez l’assistant IA de Study Studio sur cette information
Obtenez des réponses concrètes pour votre contexte de reporting. Les deux premières réponses sont gratuites — rejoignez gratuitement LRA Community pour continuer sans limite.
Essayez
Comment préparer GRI 102-10 ?
Quelles données dois-je collecter ?
Quelles erreurs éviter ?
2 réponses gratuites
Références au référentiel
Exigences GRI applicables et informations connexes
Références disponibles du référentiel et informations voisines utiles à la préparation de cette exigence.
GRI
GRI 102-10
au sein de GRI 102 : Climate Change
Connexes et exploration
Transition plan for climate change mitigation → FicheClimate change adaptation plan → FicheJust transition → FicheGHG emissions reduction targets and progress → FicheScope 1 GHG emissions → Fiche
Parcourir toutes les informations →
Plus dans GRI 102 → Parcourir le catalogue complet → Accueil de la Bibliothèque des informations → Rechercher dans toutes les informations →
Aller plus loin · GRI 102-10
Apprenez à préparer cette information de bout en bout
This guide covers one disclosure. The GRI Standards Certified Training — taken as a bundle with an ESRS course — walks the full workflow: datapoints, evidence, drafting and assurance, with exercises on your own data.
Available as Guided Flex, Live Cohort, 1:1 Expert Mentorship or Corporate Programme.
Comment cette bibliothèque est construite
312 rapports publiés indexés
63 171 pages avec citations au niveau de la page
272 fiches disclosure conçues par des praticiens
/fr/knowledge-hub/disclosure-cards/gri-102-10/
Gratuit · LRA Community
Obtenez vos outils GRI 102-10 — gratuitement
Vos outils de préparation sont gratuits pour les membres de LRA Community et les étudiants. Inscrivez-vous une fois (c’est gratuit) et votre téléchargement démarre aussitôt — avec la Bibliothèque des informations, les modèles et l’assistant IA LRA.
✓
C’est fait — votre téléchargement démarre
Votre fichier est en cours de téléchargement. Votre Cabinet Community — avec la Bibliothèque des informations, les modèles et l’assistant IA LRA — est prêt lui aussi.
Ouvrir votre Cabinet →