Guidance: top management should be answerable for how effective the environmental management system is and ensure its intended outcomes are achieved, providing direction and physical and financial resources and being actively involved. Its commitment should ensure the system is not managed in isolation from core strategy, is considered in strategic decisions, is aligned with business objectives, receives timely and adequate resources and cross-business involvement, provides real value, and continually improves. Value is greatest when environmental performance is considered at the earliest life cycle stage, such as design. Top management should make clear why effective environmental management and conformance matter, support other management roles in applying leadership in their areas, and create a culture in which people at all levels participate. Integration into business processes can include placing intended outcomes in the strategy, policy commitments in governance, responsibilities in job descriptions, environmental indicators in business performance systems and appraisals, environmental performance in external reporting, aspects and risks in enterprise risk management, environmental criteria in design and procurement, and environmental communication in business communication.
This control maps to 34 controls across 26 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 34 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.