Skip to the disclosure focus
Free · Community members
＋ Show 6 more− Show fewer
＋ Show 5 more− Show fewer
Real published reports
Open report →
Open report →
Open report →
✓ LRA AI Assistant · Human-in-the-loop
Open official source →
Explore the IFRS S1 & S2 course →
IFRS S2: Climate-related Disclosures·Paragraphs 22–a
Climate resilience assessment outputs
Practical guidance for preparing this disclosure. Use this card to identify the information to prepare, verify claims and organise supporting evidence. For exact requirements, always refer to the official IFRS source.
Published passport
Review pending
···
Under review
Editorial review in progress
Prepared from official source material and published report evidence. No named approver is recorded yet, so this page carries no byline.
Use it alongside the official IFRS source while that review is in progress.
Standard
IFRS S2: Climate-related Disclosures
Paragraphs 22–a · 2024
Last reviewed
—
LRA educational guidance · Not issued or endorsed by IFRS
To prepare this disclosure
Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain the results of its climate resilience assessment in a way that shows what was actually tested and what was found. In practice, the report should make clear the main outputs of the assessment, such as the scenarios considered, the time horizons used, the key assumptions made, and the overall conclusions about how resilient the business is to climate-related risks and opportunities.
The practical focus is on whether the assessment covers the organisation’s relevant activities and value chain, rather than only a few selected or flagship sites. Users should be able to see if the analysis reflects the parts of the business that matter most to climate resilience, how broadly it was applied, and where the main vulnerabilities or strengths were identified.
This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official IFRS source.
Before you start
Before you start
A quick mental checklist before you prepare this disclosure — tick each as you settle it.
Preparation
Key information to prepare
| Preparation field | What to capture | Evidence hint | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Asset reuse and closure | Capture whether assets can be moved to another use or taken out of service, and the practical basis for that view. | Asset register, engineering or operations assessments, closure plans, disposal or redeployment options, management papers. | Operations / Asset management |
| Ability to adjust | Capture the organisation’s practical ability to change how it operates when conditions shift, including the main limits and enablers. | Business continuity plans, scenario analysis, operating model reviews, change programme papers, risk assessments. | Strategy / Risk |
| Investment effects | Capture the observed or expected effect of spending on climate-related actions, including how it changes performance or exposure. | Project business cases, post-investment reviews, emissions or risk impact analysis, capex tracking, programme reports. | Finance / Sustainability |
| Funding flexibility | Capture how easily funds can be redirected, raised, or preserved to respond to changing needs and climate-related pressures. | Treasury reports, liquidity forecasts, debt covenants, cash flow plans, funding approvals, capital allocation papers. | Finance / Treasury |
| Resilience view | Capture the final judgement on how well the organisation can withstand and recover from climate-related disruption. | Board or executive papers, risk committee minutes, scenario outputs, resilience assessments, assurance notes. | Risk / Executive management |
| Key unknowns | Capture the main unresolved points that could materially change the assessment, and explain why they matter. | Assumptions log, sensitivity analysis, scenario notes, expert judgement records, risk register. | Risk / Finance |
| Business implications | Capture the practical consequences for the organisation’s direction, priorities, and decisions arising from the assessment. | Strategy papers, board packs, capital plans, transition plans, risk appetite statements, action trackers. | Strategy / Executive management |
＋ Show s2-22-a sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
Check whether assets can be moved to a different use or taken out of service if needed.
Assess how well the business can adjust its operations, plans, or model when conditions change.
Review whether spending on mitigation or adaptation is improving the organisation’s ability to cope with climate-related change.
Consider how easily funds can be reallocated, raised, or preserved to support the response needed.
State the overall judgement on whether the organisation is resilient over the relevant time horizon.
Identify the main areas where uncertainty remains material and could affect the assessment.
Explain what the assessment means for strategy, including any changes that may be needed.
How to prepare it
Set the boundary first: decide which parts of the business, time period and scenario you are assessing, so the disclosure is built on one clear scope.
Define the items you will assess in business terms, covering the organisation’s ability to shift assets or close them down, its ability to adjust, the impact of spending on climate action or adaptation, and how much funding headroom it has.
Gather the support for each point before drafting: internal papers, models, assumptions, approvals and any other records that show how the assessment was reached.
Draft the output in a way that matches the evidence, giving the resilience conclusion together with the main strategic effects and any material unknowns that affect the result.
Record any exclusions, judgement calls or changes in method, so a reviewer can see what was left out, what was revised, and why the final view differs from earlier versions if it does.
Check the finished disclosure back against the official source and the underlying evidence, to confirm the wording, coverage and conclusions still align with the requirement.
Request the data
Request the climate resilience assessment outputs
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What does the latest climate resilience review say about how the business can cope, what it means for strategy and funding, and what uncertainties remain?
Use your organisation’s own language first, then map it to the reporting terms. For example, if you talk about business continuity, capital planning, asset plans, scenario work or investment cases, ask for those artefacts and summaries rather than using framework labels in the request.
Weak request
Please provide the IFRS S2 climate resilience assessment outputs for disclosure ifrs-s2::s2-22-a.
Why it fails: It uses framework language only, gives no clue which internal pack is needed, and does not say what business materials, time period, boundary, or supporting evidence should be returned. That makes it hard for the owner to know what to pull together.
Better request
Please send the latest business resilience review for [period] / [boundary], including the summary of how the business can adjust over time, any effect from climate-related investment, notes on funding flexibility, the main conclusion, key uncertainties, and any strategy implications. Include the source file, version, date, owner, and assumptions, and use your own internal terms if those are the ones you track.
Formal email template
Subject: Request for climate resilience assessment outputs for [reporting period] Hello [name/team], We are preparing the sustainability reporting pack and need the latest materials that explain how the business has assessed its ability to cope with climate-related change. Please share the following for [reporting period] and [reporting boundary]: - the latest assessment or summary of how the business can adjust, redeploy assets, or otherwise respond over time; - any notes on how planned climate-related spend or projects affect that assessment; - any comments on funding headroom, budget flexibility, or other financial room to manoeuvre; - the main conclusion from the review, including any important caveats or open points; - any strategic implications or decisions that follow from the review. Please also include the source file, owner, version, date, and any assumptions used. If you use different internal terms, please send the equivalent materials and we will map them for reporting. Please check the official source before sign-off. Many thanks, [preparer name]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name] — could you send the latest climate resilience pack for [period] / [boundary]? We need the summary of how the business can adapt, any effect from climate-related investment, funding flexibility notes, the main conclusion, key uncertainties, and any strategy implications. Please include the source file, version, date, owner, and assumptions. If you use different internal terms, send the equivalent pack and we’ll map it. Please check the official source before sign-off.
Industry examples
Manufacturing
Context. A plant network has reviewed flood and heat exposure across sites and has a capital plan for equipment upgrades.
Adapted request. Please share the latest site resilience pack for [period] / [boundary], including any notes on whether equipment can be moved, replaced, or reconfigured, how the upgrade programme affects resilience, any budget headroom for further work, the overall conclusion, key uncertainties, and any implications for the plant strategy.
Example response. Returned pack includes a site-by-site summary, capital plan extract, board paper, assumptions log, and a short note stating that two sites can be reconfigured with moderate spend, one site remains constrained, and further investment is needed to reduce uncertainty.
Financial services
Context. A lender has assessed climate impacts on its branch network, data centres, and lending strategy using scenario work.
Adapted request. Please send the latest climate risk and resilience paper for [period] / [boundary], including the summary of how the business can adapt its operations and portfolio, the effect of planned investment on that view, any funding flexibility notes, the overall conclusion, open uncertainties, and any strategic implications for lending or operations.
Example response. Returned pack includes a scenario analysis deck, risk committee paper, capital planning note, and a conclusion that operational resilience is broadly maintained, but portfolio strategy may need adjustment in higher-risk regions, with uncertainty around timing and customer response.
Draft your disclosure
Notes that turn data into a disclosure
LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.
Method note
Explain how the assessment was built, including what was counted, the basis used for judging resilience, and how the organisation defined its ability to adjust assets, operations, and funding.
Context note
Set out what the figures mean for the business by linking the resilience result to operational flexibility, investment choices, financial headroom, and the strategic direction that follows.
Fluctuation statement
Describe any notable change by pointing to shifts in the organisation’s ability to adapt, the effect of response measures, changes in funding flexibility, or new uncertainties that altered the conclusion.
Content index entry
s2-22-a Climate resilience assessment outputs — [location / page] / [notes]Download Centre
Preparation tools & forms
Professional preparation tools for s2-22-a — free with an LRA Community membership. Register once (it's free) and every download unlocks, together with the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI Assistant.
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
| Claim | Risk | Evidence to check |
|---|---|---|
| We based the coverage figure on the operations and activities we actually reviewed, and we kept the boundary consistent with the rest of the climate analysis. | The assurer may question whether the figure was built on a complete and consistent population, or whether parts were left out without a clear reason. | Boundary memo, list of included entities/sites/activities, reconciliation to the reporting population used elsewhere, and sign-off showing the same scope was applied throughout the analysis. |
| We used the same scope decisions across the underlying workpapers, so the disclosed figure reflects the same set of operations and assumptions from start to finish. | Scope drift between drafts, models and the published figure could make the result unreliable or selectively prepared. | Version history, scope-setting paper, model inputs, draft-to-final change log, and evidence of review against the agreed boundary. |
| We checked the source data for the figure against primary records before publication and followed up any gaps or unusual movements. | An assurer may probe whether the data were complete, accurate and free from unexplained adjustments. | Source extracts, reconciliations to ledgers or operational records, exception logs, query resolution notes, and evidence of management review. |
| We kept support for the judgement calls behind the figure, including why certain assets, plans or financing items were treated the way they were. | The main risk is that key judgements were made informally or cannot be evidenced, leaving the figure open to challenge. | Judgement papers, internal approvals, meeting notes, assumptions register, and any external or internal advice relied on. |
| Before release, we ran a final check that the narrative, numbers and time periods matched the working papers and that the explanation was internally consistent. | The assurer may look for inconsistencies between the published wording and the underlying analysis, or for missing context that changes the meaning of the figure. | Final review checklist, cross-check of narrative to model outputs, consistency review across the disclosure pack, and evidence of sign-off by the responsible team. |
Evidence pack to prepare
Common reporting gaps
The information is presented without a date or as-at point.
The scope or boundary of the statement is left undefined.
Key terms are used inconsistently across the report.
Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.
Assertions are made without supporting detail or a source record.
Boilerplate is used that does not actually answer what is asked.
Common gaps
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
Wrong ownerThe request goes to the sustainability team instead of the business lead who holds the operational evidence for the resilience review.
Framework language usedPeople ask for the seven output areas in reporting jargon, so the data owner cannot map them to the organisation’s own planning, finance, and risk terms.
Scope not pinned downThe team never agrees which sites, assets, business lines, or scenarios sit inside the review, so different contributors send mismatched datasets.
Wrong period basisInputs are pulled from the wrong reporting window or planning cycle, which makes the evidence reflect a different point in time from the assessment being documented.
Mixed counting basisSome teams report gross figures while others use net or adjusted figures, so the combined pack cannot be compared on the same basis.
Source labels lostWhen spreadsheets are copied into a pack, the original file names, version notes, and source tags disappear, making it hard to trace where each figure came from.
Separate groups mergedData for different asset classes, regions, or scenario runs is blended together even though it should stay separate for the review.
Evidence trail missingThe pack is assembled without file dates, owners, or approval notes, so no one can show who checked the numbers or when.
No sign-off pathDraft inputs move straight into the disclosure workstream without a recorded review by the people who own the underlying analysis.
Where judgement is often needed
What counts as the group being assessed after a deal closesIf a purchase or sale changes the businesses in scope, use the same cut-off date and explain whether the assessment covers the old group, the revised group, or both, so readers can see what changed.
When local definitions do not line up across countriesWhere the same operational label means different things in different markets, pick one working definition for the assessment, apply it consistently, and explain any country-by-country differences in the output.
How to handle sites or activities sitting on the boundary of scopeFor assets, teams or operations that are partly in and partly out, set a clear inclusion rule, apply it the same way across the portfolio, and disclose any exclusions or partial coverage.
Whether to use modelled outputs or observed resultsIf some conclusions come from estimates rather than direct measurement, say which parts are based on calculations or scenarios, which are drawn from actual evidence, and why that mix was used.
Which date or period anchors the assessmentChoose one reporting date or period for the resilience work, use it consistently across the narrative, and explain any lag between the assessment date and the reporting date.
How to present small numbers after roundingRound in a way that does not distort the overall picture, check that subtotals still reconcile to the total, and note the rounding basis if it could affect interpretation.
How far to aggregate sensitive location or workforce detailIf privacy, security or commercial sensitivity means you cannot show site-level detail, combine the information to the highest practical level and explain the level of aggregation used.
How to treat mixed evidence across the same conclusionWhere one part of the assessment is supported by strong data and another by judgement, separate the two in the write-up so users can see what is evidenced and what is inferred.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Manufacturing
We have stress-tested our current plan against a range of climate-related shocks and, where needed, we can shift or retire equipment without breaching our operating plan; in the most exposed line, 18 of 60 production assets could be repurposed or closed over time, and we expect the remaining 42 to keep serving demand. The review suggests our planned spending on efficiency upgrades and flood protection would cut the estimated downside from £120m to £78m, while our available cash, undrawn facilities and committed capex headroom of £210m give us room to absorb the near-term response. Even so, we still see material unknowns around policy timing and supplier disruption, so our current view is that the business remains resilient under the scenarios assessed, but the shift would likely accelerate portfolio simplification and a move toward lower-emission product lines.
Illustrative only: this example shows how to describe flexibility in assets, the effect of planned resilience spending, funding room, remaining uncertainty, and the strategic direction implied by the assessment.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Retail
Our scenario work indicates we can adjust store formats, logistics routes and some lease commitments if climate pressures intensify; in the highest-risk region, 24 of 80 sites could be reconfigured or exited, leaving 56 to continue trading. The planned investment in cooling, backup power and supplier diversification is expected to reduce the projected annual loss from £45m to £27m, and our liquidity buffer of £95m, plus £40m of unused borrowing capacity, gives us flexibility to fund the response. We still face uncertainty over the pace of extreme-weather change and customer demand shifts, but on balance we judge the group to be resilient within the scenarios considered, with a likely strategic move toward fewer vulnerable locations and a stronger online channel mix.
Illustrative only: this example shows how to explain operational flexibility, the impact of adaptation spending, available funding capacity, residual uncertainty, the resilience view, and the strategic consequences.
Company reports
How companies report S2-22-a in practice
Examples of full and partial reporting practice. These are evidence-led reviews, not exact disclosure templates to copy.
DBS Group Holdings
None · Singapore · 2025
DBS Group Holdings’ Sustainability Report 2025 provides evidence of its capacity to adapt its strategy and business model to climate-related risks and opportunities, as detailed on page 114. The report also discusses the effect of current and planned investments in climate-related mitigation and adaptation, alongside the availability and flexibility of financial resources to respond to climate impacts (p.114). Additionally, the report includes an assessment of the entity’s climate resilience as of the reporting date (p.113) and outlines the strategic implications of climate-related risks and opportunities on its business model and value chain (p.112). However, there is no evidence found regarding asset redeployment or decommissioning ability, nor on significant uncertainties related to climate resilience.
Hang Lung Properties Limited
Real Estate · Hong Kong · 2025
Hang Lung Properties Limited’s Sustainability Report 2025 provides evidence of its capacity to adapt its strategy and business model in response to climate resilience assessments (p.192) and discusses the effect of current and planned investments in climate-related mitigation and adaptation (p.226). The report also addresses significant uncertainties considered in its climate-related scenario analysis (p.226). However, disclosures on financial resource flexibility (p.225), strategic implications including changes to the business model and resource allocation (p.224), resilience conclusions (p.226), and asset redeployment or decommissioning ability are either unclear or not found in the report.
SITC International Holdings Company Limited
Water Transportation · Hong Kong · 2025
SITC International Holdings Company Limited’s 2025 Environmental, Social and Governance Report provides evidence of the company’s capacity to adapt its strategy and business, as detailed on page 195, and includes a resilience conclusion based on scenario analysis and risk assessment on page 122. However, disclosures related to the effect of mitigation adaptation investments (p.197), financial resource flexibility (p.193), significant uncertainties (p.195), and strategic implications (p.195) are unclear, with only related context rather than explicit data provided. There is no evidence found regarding asset redeployment decommissioning ability.
Ask the Study Studio AI Assistant about this disclosure
Get practical answers for your reporting context. Your first two answers are free — join LRA Community for free to continue without a limit.
Try
How do I prepare s2-22-a?
What data do I need to collect?
Where can I see a real-report example?
What mistakes should I avoid?
2 free answers
Check your understanding
Scenarios to work through
A manufacturer has modelled a hotter, drier future and found one plant could be kept running only if some lines are moved to a different site. The team has draft notes on whether equipment can be shifted, but no final decision has been made.
QHow should the team frame the output on whether assets can be moved or retired, and what evidence should sit behind it?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑
Set out the practical view on whether the business can relocate equipment, repurpose it, or close it down if conditions worsen, and support that view with the facts used in the assessment. The write-up should show the basis for the judgement, not just a headline statement.
Why this matters · Explain the organisation’s ability to redeploy or wind down assets using evidence from the resilience assessment.
A utility has tested a scenario with more frequent heatwaves and storm damage. The assessment shows it can cope for now, but only if it changes maintenance timing, supplier arrangements, and operating procedures over the next few years.
QWhat should be said about the organisation’s ability to adjust, and how should the conclusion be presented?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑
Describe the organisation’s capacity to change its operations, plans, and controls in response to climate pressures, and make clear the basis for that judgement. If the assessment shows limits, those limits should be stated alongside the areas where adjustment is feasible.
Why this matters · The output should show how well the business can adapt in practice, including any limits on that flexibility.
A retailer has spent on flood barriers and backup power at two distribution centres. The climate review suggests these projects reduce disruption, but the finance team has not yet linked them to the longer-term resilience view in the report.
QHow should the team explain the effect of those spending decisions in the resilience narrative?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑
Link the spending to the resilience outcome by explaining how the measures change the organisation’s exposure, response, or recovery under the scenarios tested. The explanation should make clear whether the investments strengthen resilience, and by how the assessment supports that view.
Why this matters · Show the practical effect of climate-related spending on the organisation’s resilience position.
A food producer has enough cash for near-term adaptation work, but the assessment shows that a much larger programme would need new borrowing or a slower rollout. The draft report currently says only that funding is available.
QWhat should the disclosure say about financial flexibility, and what else should be included if the assessment found constraints?
Reveal model answer →Hide answer ↑
Explain how easily the organisation can access and reallocate money for climate response measures, including whether it can fund the needed actions from existing resources or would need outside finance. If the assessment found pressure points, those should be described as part of the conclusion.
Why this matters · Describe the organisation’s room to fund climate response actions, not just the cash balance.
Framework references
Relevant IFRS / ISSB requirements and related disclosures
Available framework references and nearby disclosures relevant to preparing this requirement.
IFRS / ISSB
s2-22-a
within IFRS S2: Climate-related Disclosures
Related & explore
Climate-related risks and opportunities → CardIdentification inputs and industry topics → CardObjective →Business model and value chain impact → CardStrategy response and transition plan → Card
Browse all disclosures →
More in IFRS S2 → Browse full catalogue → Disclosure Library home → Search all disclosures →
FAQ
Questions this page answers
For s2-22-a, what data do I need to gather before I start drafting the disclosure?+−
The page says to prepare seven datapoints: asset reuse and closure, ability to adjust, investment effects, funding flexibility, resilience view, key unknowns, and business implications. Use those as the starting checklist before you draft anything.
How do I use the step-by-step 'how to prepare' section for s2-22-a in practice?+−
Use it as a working sequence for moving from raw information to a draft disclosure, rather than as a reference note. The page is designed to help you prepare the disclosure, collect the right data, and turn that into draft output.
Who should own the s2-22-a data collection in my organisation?+−
The page is aimed at sustainability/ESG managers, HR or data owners, and assurance reviewers, so ownership should sit with the people who can source and explain the underlying data. The page does not assign a single owner, so you need to map each datapoint to the right internal contact.
What should I include in the evidence pack for s2-22-a assurance readiness?+−
The page provides an evidence pack with five items to support assurance readiness. Use it alongside the five assurance claims to verify so your pack links the claim, the risk, and the evidence.
What are the five assurance claims I need to check for s2-22-a?+−
The page says there are five assurance claims to verify, each with a claim, risk, and evidence angle. It does not list them in the source text here, so use the page’s assurance section and evidence pack together when you review them.
What are the common reporting mistakes on the s2-22-a page, and how do I avoid them?+−
The page includes a list of common reporting gaps and mistakes to help you spot weak drafting and missing support. Use that list as a pre-submission check against your data, scope, and evidence pack.
How can I turn the s2-22-a page into a draft disclosure quickly?+−
The page includes draft-output support such as visualisation ideas, narrative starters, and a content-index line. That makes it easier to move from prepared data to a first draft without starting from a blank page.
Is there an example disclosure for s2-22-a I can copy as a model?+−
Yes, the page includes synthetic illustrative example disclosures, including a quantitative table. Treat them as examples only and make sure any numbers you use are internally consistent and based on your own data.
Can I use the s2-22-a workbook to organise my data and assurance evidence?+−
Yes, the Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format and a printable Library Card in .pdf format. The workbook is the practical tool for organising preparation and assurance inputs.
How does s2-22-a relate to ESRS E1, and can I reuse the same data?+−
The page says the closest ESRS correspondence is ESRS E1 (Climate Change). You can treat that as a useful cross-framework reference and reuse data where it fits, but the page does not say the requirements are identical.
What should I check before I send the s2-22-a disclosure for assurance?+−
Check that each of the page’s five assurance claims is supported by evidence, that the evidence pack is complete, and that your draft reflects the prepared datapoints. Also review the common reporting gaps so you do not leave out scope, method, or support.
More questions this page can help with
s2-22-a disclosure checklist for sustainability managers2-22-a data collection template for HR or data ownerss2-22-a assurance evidence pack examples2-22-a common mistakes in reportings2-22-a workbook download how to uses2-22-a draft narrative starterss2-22-a synthetic example disclosure tables2-22-a ownership and accountability for datas2-22-a scope and methodology preparations2-22-a from company reports exampless2-22-a ESRS E1 data reuses2-22-a assurance-ready disclosure steps
Go deeper · s2-22-a
Learn to prepare this disclosure end-to-end
This guide covers one requirement. The IFRS S1 & S2 Reporting course walks the full ISSB workflow — governance, strategy, risk management and metrics — with exercises on your own data.
Available as Guided Flex, Live Cohort, 1:1 Expert Mentorship or Corporate Programme.
How this library is built
312 published reports indexed
63,171 pages with page-level citations
272 practitioner-built Disclosure Cards
/en/knowledge-hub/disclosure-cards/s2-22-a/
Free · LRA Community
Get your s2-22-a tools — free
Your preparation tools are free for LRA Community members and students. Register once (it's free) and your download starts right away — plus the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI Assistant.
✓
You're in — your download is starting
Your file is downloading now. Your Community Cabinet — with the Disclosure Library, templates and the LRA AI Assistant — is ready too.
Open your Cabinet →