For each material climate-related risk the undertaking states whether it is a physical or a transition risk, and beyond IRO-1 explains the main elements of the method by which it judges how exposed and how sensitive its assets and activities, in own operations and the value chain, are across the three horizons to climate hazards and to transition events and trends, screening assets and activities against the identified hazards and events and weighing likelihood, magnitude and duration and asset locations and value chain dependencies. Where scenario analysis is used it discloses the range of scenarios (including whether at least one high-emission scenario was used for physical risks and at least one 1.5 degree scenario with no or limited overshoot for transition risks, and their temperature projections and relevance), the scope of operations covered, the key assumptions (policies, macroeconomics, regional variables, energy mix, technology) and when it was carried out.
This control maps to 2 controls across 2 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 2 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.