Source and qualification note
Reviewed 23 September 2026. This practitioner resource is explanatory guidance, not an official publication of ISO, a regulator, an accreditation body or a certification body. Requirements and regulatory applicability should be verified against the authoritative source for the organization’s jurisdiction and scope. BCM.Center does not reproduce paid standards and does not provide certification decisions.
ISO 22301:2019/Amd 1:2024 is titled Climate action changes. In practice, organizations need to consider whether climate change is a relevant issue in their management-system context and recognize that relevant interested parties can have climate-related requirements.
What this means in practice
The amendment does not automatically require every organization to create a separate climate continuity plan or set environmental targets inside BCM. It requires a deliberate relevance assessment. Where climate issues affect sites, utilities, workforce, logistics, suppliers, obligations or recovery solutions, that relevance should flow into appropriate BCMS analysis and decisions.
Decision and evidence map
| Area | Practical question | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Context relevance | Could climate-related physical or transition effects influence BCMS outcomes? | Reasoned context assessment |
| Interested parties | Do regulators, customers, owners or others have relevant climate requirements? | Requirements/stakeholder register |
| Sites/utilities | Could heat, flood, storm, water or power constraints affect primary and alternate locations? | Site and utility continuity analysis |
| Suppliers | Could climate exposure alter critical supply or logistics assumptions? | Critical supplier/location review |
| Strategy | Do recovery options remain geographically and operationally independent? | Strategy review and capability evidence |
| Governance | What changes or accepted risks result from the assessment? | Management review decision and actions |
Practical implementation checklist
- Document why climate change is relevant or not relevant to BCMS outcomes.
- Review relevant interested-party requirements rather than adding generic climate wording.
- Trace identified relevance into site, supplier, BIA or strategy analysis where appropriate.
- Check whether primary and recovery sites share regional climate exposure.
- Review fuel, cooling, water, transport and utility assumptions where they affect continuity.
- Record management decisions and actions created by the assessment.
Worked example
A primary data facility and its recovery location are both in the same heat- and grid-constrained area. The context review determines that extreme heat and power stress are relevant because one event could affect both. The BCM response is to validate generator runtime, fuel supply and cooling capacity and consider a geographically independent recovery option—not simply to insert the words “climate change” into the policy.
Common mistakes
- Assuming the amendment mandates a standalone climate BCP for everyone.
- Declaring climate change irrelevant with no reasoning despite climate-sensitive operations.
- Adding boilerplate context wording that never changes risk, BIA, supplier or strategy decisions.
- Treating climate only as a facilities topic when suppliers and logistics may be affected.
- Confusing continuity requirements with unrelated environmental-management objectives.
Governance, review and improvement
Revisit the relevance decision when sites, suppliers, regulations, customer requirements or physical risk assumptions change. Where the assessment creates a continuity gap, manage it through the same owner, action, strategy and management-review process used for other BCMS context issues.
Authoritative references
BCM.Center paraphrases standards and guidance; use the official publication for authoritative wording and current status.
- ISO 22301:2019 — BCMS requirements
- ISO 22301:2019/Amd 1:2024 — Climate action changes
- ISO 22313:2020 — Guidance on use of ISO 22301
- ISO/CD 22301 — Edition 3 under development
Frequently asked questions
When was Amendment 1:2024 published?
ISO lists ISO 22301:2019/Amd 1:2024 as published in February 2024.
Does it replace ISO 22301:2019?
No. It amends the 2019 standard; ISO 22301:2019 remains the published base requirements standard as of September 2026.
Must every organization say climate change is relevant?
The organization determines relevance based on its context and interested-party requirements.
Does it require a climate business continuity plan?
Not automatically. Relevant climate issues should be reflected in the appropriate BCMS analysis and controls.
Should alternate sites be reviewed?
Yes where climate-related regional exposure could undermine assumptions that the alternate remains available.
Acceptance test: Accountability and decision evidence
Document who owns a critical requirement, who can challenge it, who accepts exceptions and how decisions reach management.
What the evidence does not establish
Check authority and delegated access during an absence or concurrent incident, and expire provisional approvals.
Implementation and verification considerations
A practical review asks whether climate change is a relevant issue within the organization’s context and whether interested parties have related requirements. The amendment should not be interpreted as requiring every organization to create an identical climate continuity project. Instead, examine concrete exposure such as heat stress, flood access, water dependency, coastal assets or supply-chain concentration and determine whether existing risk assessments and continuity strategies need updating. Record the rationale where the issue is not materially relevant.