Guidance: top management should review the environmental management system at intervals it determines to evaluate its continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness, covering the aspects of the activities, products and services within scope. The review may be held alongside other management activities and be coordinated with planning and budgeting so that environmental priorities and resources are balanced against other business needs. Inputs can include audit and compliance evaluation results, external communications including complaints, environmental performance, achievement of objectives, status of corrective actions, follow-up from previous reviews, changing circumstances (context, activities, products and services, significant aspects and risks from new developments, compliance obligations, interested party views, advances in science and technology, lessons from emergencies), adequacy of resources and recommendations for improvement. Outputs should include decisions on suitability, adequacy and effectiveness, continual improvement opportunities, changes to resources (human, financial and physical), actions where objectives were missed, changes to the policy, objectives and other elements, improved integration with business processes, and implications for strategic direction. Evidence can include agendas, attendee lists, presentations and recorded decisions. Participants typically include environmental staff, unit managers and top management, with other management system representatives for integration.
This control maps to 40 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 40 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.