Certibiocide or Certiphyto: Two Certificates Not to Be Confused

“I already have my Certiphyto, so I’m covered.” That sentence, heard weekly since the Certibiocide “disinfectants” requirement took effect, rests on a confusion — understandable, but expensive.

The two schemes do look alike: individual certificates, obtained through training with authorised providers, valid for five years, governing the professional use of chemical products. Yet neither ever replaces the other. Here is what separates them, and the many cases where you need both.

The differences in one table

	Certibiocide	Certiphyto
Products covered	Biocidal products: disinfectants, rodenticides, insecticides, wood preservation, antifouling	Plant protection products
Authority	French environment ministry	Regional prefect, on assessment by the DRAAF or DAAF (regional agriculture directorates)
Reference text	Order of 9 October 2013 as amended	French rural and maritime fishing code
Split	Three categories: disinfectants, pests, other products	Five categories across three activities, two sectors
Validity	Five years	Five years

The decisive line is the first one. Everything flows from the family of products, and that family is not a matter of appearance or perceived use: it appears in the product’s marketing authorisation.

Biocide or plant protection product: where the line falls

Plant protection products protect plants and plant production. That is the agricultural field, and that of planted areas: herbicides, fungicides, insecticides intended for crops.

Biocidal products cover every other use aimed at controlling harmful or unwanted organisms: disinfecting a surface, eliminating rodents in a building, treating roof timbers, protecting a boat hull.

The example that best illuminates the boundary is the insecticide. An insecticide intended to treat a crop falls under the plant protection regime. An insecticide intended to treat premises — bed bugs, cockroaches — falls under the biocide regime, as PT18. Sometimes the same chemical family, distinct legal regimes, different certificates.

That logic also explains why the Certibiocide splits its scope into three categories: the know-how of rodent control, disinfection and timber treatment have little in common. We set out that split in our article on the Certibiocide categories.

The trades that need both

Some activities sit entirely on one side of the boundary. Many others cross it daily.

Landscaping firms and local authorities. Weed control in a planted area falls under the Certiphyto; disinfecting public toilets or a sports-hall changing room falls under the Certibiocide. The same technical department may employ staff covered by one, the other, or both.

Farms with livestock buildings. Crop treatment falls under the Certiphyto. Disinfection of livestock buildings — veterinary hygiene, PT3 — and rodent control fall under the Certibiocide.

Food processing. Disinfecting surfaces in contact with food falls under PT4, hence the Certibiocide “disinfectants” category. Depending on upstream activities, a Certiphyto may also be required.

Distributors. An agricultural wholesaler listing both plant protection products and professional biocides is covered by both regimes, and by the “distribution” strand of each.

In every one of these cases, the point is not to choose. It is to map the real roles — who decides, who buys, who sells, who applies — then attach each person to the regimes concerned.

Two schemes, two technical bodies of knowledge

This separation is not administrative: the technical issues genuinely differ.

On the disinfection biocides side, the dominant concern is the selection of less susceptible micro-organisms. A review published in 2021 in Molecules by Jones and Joshi, of the University of Plymouth, surveys biocide use in the antimicrobial-resistance era and the risks tied to poorly controlled use (see the study).

On the rodent control side, the issue is unintended effects. A review published in 2024 in Animal Conservation by Keating and colleagues produced a global synthesis of wild carnivore exposure to anticoagulant rodenticides and documents widespread contamination of non-target species (see the study).

On the plant protection products side, finally, the training scheme itself has been evaluated: a study published in 2024 in Archives des Maladies Professionnelles et de l’Environnement by Marcotullio, Werlen, Delanoë and Grimbuhler points to programme density and recommends more horizontal formats centred on real situations (see the study).

Three separate literatures for three families of risk: that is precisely why one certificate cannot stand in for the other.

What they have in common

The common ground is worth noting, because it allows both schemes to be managed with the same reflexes.

Both certificates are individual: they follow their holder, are checked at hiring, and do not transfer with the business. Both are valid for five years and do not renew automatically. Both are obtained through authorised training providers, whose official lists are published by the competent authority — and in both cases that authorisation is separate from Qualiopi certification, which governs the funding of sessions. This point matters directly to training providers: we covered it for the biocide field in our article on Certibiocide authorisation.

The practical consequence: a single tracking register can carry both regimes, with a “scheme” column and a “category” column. It is the simplest way to stop a deadline slipping past unnoticed.

Take action

Take your product list and sort it into two columns, plant protection products on one side, biocides on the other, using labels and marketing authorisations. Then cross-reference with your staff to identify who falls under which regime — and who falls under both. The Certibiocide profile and the Certiphyto profile each set out the categories, the steps and the applicable texts.