Biodiversity

BCF’s mission as a cantonal bank is to support economic development in the Canton of Fribourg while preserving the quality of life of its people. In accordance with the observations of the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) and Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), an independent entity created in 2012, artificialisation and fragmentation of soil are the primary cause of biodiversity loss in Switzerland.

The Bank recognises that nature is not just a challenge in terms of conservation but a fundamental economic asset. Ecosystem degradation (water, soil, pollination) represents a material financial risk for certain key sectors in our cantonal economy (agriculture, tourism, construction).

It is within this context and following the double materiality assessment conducted during 2025, that biodiversity became officially recognised as a relevant topic for the Bank. As a regional financial operator, BCF recognises the need to contribute to the reduction, or even reverse, the factors behind biodiversity loss.

Our current priority: quantify to understand

As this topic is relatively new for BCF, the primary challenge lies in the precise quantification of the impact of its activities on ecosystems, and as a result, biodiversity.

To this end, the Bank conducted an initial in-depth analysis of its environmental impacts via twenty distinct categories in 2025. This work was made possible by an innovative environmental impact assessment constructed on the basis of data initially collected for the carbon assessment.

Beyond the carbon footprint: measuring the global impact (UCE/UBP method)

Aware that environmental challenges, particularly biodiversity loss, are not limited to greenhouse gas emissions (CO₂), the Bank has decided to expand the scope of its environmental footprint.

To strictly measure this impact rooted in the reality of our territory, BCF has adopted the Swiss method of eco-points (UBP). This method recommended by the Swiss Confederation (notably via KBOB and the Reffnet network), stands out through its multi-criteria approach.

The principle of “ecological scarcity”

In contrast to a simple carbon footprint assessment, the UBP method evaluates the Bank’s impact via twenty environmental parameters including pollution of the air, water and soil use. Its mechanism is particularly relevant: it translates the raw data operation by comparing it to critical thresholds and environmental goals set by Switzerland.

So, the closer an activity comes to a critical ecological limit that must not be exceeded at the national level (for example, the pollution threshold for fine particles PM10), the higher its “ cost” will be in UBP. This conversion includes a common measurement unit that is unique and readable: the reduction in the UBP total certifies a real decrease in our global pressure on the environment and biodiversity.

Scientific rigour and operational efficiency

The choice of this methodology presents a major operational advantage. The UBP method uses the exact same scope and the same raw data (consumption, purchases, travel) as those gathered for the carbon footprint assessment, with the exception of financed emissions.

By connecting the data of its carbon footprint assessment with the scientifically based impact factors of the global scientific benchmark ecoinvent (of Swiss origin), the Bank is making the most of its data collection. This synergy enables us to move from simple carbon recording to a veritable holistic steering of the environmental impact in an efficient and recognised way.

Results of the global footprint: the four major impacts

The application of the UBP method to the operating data allowed the Bank to map the reality of its environmental footprint beyond a simple carbon prism.

The results of this initial analysis show that the impact of BCF is mainly spread across four large categories:

• The climate impact (49%): effects resulting from greenhouse gas emissions (CO₂, methane, etc.). For the Bank, this impact manifests itself in business terms through physical risks (devaluation of real estate assets in the face of climatic changes) and transition risks (regulatory pressure on client assets connected to fossil fuels). Commuting (48%) and heating (28%) are the main sources of impact on this parameter in BCF’s operational assessment. The mobility plan, mainly comprising the modal shift from individual motorised traffic to gentle mobility and public transport, should enable the reduction of this impact, as well as the replacement of heating systems including the connection of head office with the district heating system.
• Soil use (18%): this category involves the artificialisation of soil (agriculture, urbanisation, infrastructure) which reduces and fragments natural spaces rich in biodiversity. The main upstream impact in the Bank’s activities is the production of printing paper. Downstream (not taken into account in the CEA assessment of operations, linked to Scope 3.15), is an impact intimately linked to the heart of the banking profession: real estate financing, with risks (flood zones, urbanism restrictions) and opportunities (renovation financing) resulting from that.
• The consumption of energy resources (9%): the consumption of energy resources is mainly due to the intensive use of fossil fuels (oil, gas, coal) and, to a lesser extent, renewable energies. The main challenge for the banking sector lies in energy price volatility, which can affect client companies, and in its role as financing entity in the transition to green infrastructure. The impacts of the Bank on the consumption of energy resources are mainly connected to commuting (50%) and heating (31%).
• Air pollution (9%): mainly caused by transport, industry and heating (fine particles, nitrogen oxides). It is bad for human health and ecosystems. As regards BCF’s operations, air pollution is caused mainly by commuting (58%), mainly from fine particles emitted by cars, especially diesel motors.

Awareness and outlook for 2026

These results are a key development and real wake up call for BCF. They confirm in numbers that responsibility for the environment and financial risks are interconnected and multifactorial.

The results of the environmental impact assessment are closely correlated to the sources of GHG emissions (heating and mobility based on combustibles and fossil fuels). This confirms the relevance of the decarbonisation plan designed to reduce the Bank’s emissions. With regard to loans, BCF’s credit policy enables financial flows to be positioned accordingly, notably by excluding the following sectors from new financing: mining industry, fossil energies and palm oil.

Reducing the use of fossil energies will automatically entail other environmental impacts for the environment and biosphere, thus benefiting biodiversity in general. Mitigating climate change is also one of the most efficient levers as it is one of the main causes of the breakdown in biodiversity.

The Bank has chosen to approach these figures pragmatically. It is aware that this initial snapshot of the eco-point impact will require an in-depth analysis of the internal processes and portfolios to be properly managed.

As a result, 2026 will be dedicated to conducting a detailed review of this situation. BCF intends to do the following:

1. Better understand how financing decisions specifically influence soil use and pollution.
2. Define specific and feasible measures to mitigate these priority impacts.
3. Structure internal and external data collection to respond comprehensively to the new requirements of standard GRI 101 (Biodiversity), by obtaining data not currently available.

Scope of analysis (operations vs financing)

It is important to specify that the eco-point analysis to date mainly covers the impacts of direct operations and the upstream supply chain (acquisitions, infrastructure, travel). In accordance with GRI recommendations, the Bank is working to gradually increase this measure for its downstream value chain, i.e. the impact of the credit and investment portfolio.