Framework overlap

Does ISO 27005:2022 cover ISO 14001:2015?

You hold ISO 27005:2022 and have been told to do ISO 14001:2015. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

42% of ISO 14001:2015 you already have

ISO 27005:2022 already covers about 42% of ISO 14001:2015, leaving 21 of 36 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 5 Likely covered 10 New work 21

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in ISO 27005:2022 reaches these. This is the list to scope.

3.2
Terms related to planning
3.3
Terms related to support and operation
3.4
Terms related to performance evaluation and improvement
4.1
Understanding the organization and its context
4.2
Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties
4.3
Determining the scope of the environmental management system
4.4
Environmental management system
5.3
Organizational roles, responsibilities and authorities
6.1.2
Environmental aspects
6.1.3
Compliance obligations
6.2
Environmental objectives and planning to achieve them
6.2.1
Environmental objectives
6.2.2
Planning actions to achieve environmental objectives
7.1
Resources
7.2
Competence
7.3
Awareness
7.5.2
Creating and updating
7.5.3
Control of documented information
8.1
Operational planning and control
8.2
Emergency preparedness and response
9.1
Monitoring, measurement, analysis and evaluation
Show the 15 you already have
10.3
Continual improvement
5.1
Leadership and commitment
7.4
Communication
7.5
Documented information
9.3
Management review
10.2
Nonconformity and corrective action
3.1
Terms related to organization and leadership
5.2
Environmental policy
6.1
Actions to address risks and opportunities
6.1.4
Planning action
7.4.2
Internal communication
7.4.3
External communication
9.1.2
Evaluation of compliance
9.2
Internal audit
9.2.2
Internal audit programme

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in ISO 27005:2022 to that control. Likely covered means no direct mapping exists but both frameworks map to the same control in a third standard. New work means neither. We keep those separate rather than adding them into one friendlier number, because blending them would present a two-hop inference as a verified fact.

Coverage is not symmetric. Run it the other way and you will get a different number; both are correct.

From 332,959 cross-framework control mappings across 723 frameworks, 531 of them verified against their source documents. It does not tell you that you are compliant: a mapped control means the two standards ask for the same thing, not that you have done it.

Try another pair ยท Today's edition