Sustainability and resilience used to be separate conversations. Today, Climate‑related risk, energy transition and regulatory pressure are forcing organizations to connect how they operate their buildings and assets with how they report risk and performance to stakeholders.
In Europe, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) dramatically expands the number of companies required to disclose detailed environmental, social and governance information, including greenhouse gas emissions across Scopes 1, 2 and 3. At the same time, asset‑management standards such as ISO 55001 are encouraging organizations to manage assets systematically, with explicit links to risk, cost and performance.
Facilities and asset management teams sit at the intersection of these two agendas. This article explains how CSRD and ISO 55001 are reshaping their role and outlines three bridges between regulation and resilience that FM can lead.
CSRD in practice: why facilities matter
CSRD requires in‑scope companies to report on material sustainability impacts, risks and opportunities, using the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). For climate, this means disclosing gross Scope 1, 2 and relevant Scope 3 emissions, as well as transition plans, risk management processes and performance metrics.
Buildings, facilities and physical assets contribute significantly to these disclosures:
- Scope 1: on‑site fuel use for heating and industrial processes, refrigerant leakage from cooling systems.
- Scope 2: purchased electricity, steam, heating and cooling for buildings and operations.
- Scope 3: emissions related to leased assets, upstream and downstream logistics, and sometimes tenant activities in commercial real estate.
If facilities data are incomplete or unreliable, the organization’s sustainability reporting will be too.
ISO 55001: giving structure to asset and facilities data
ISO 55001 specifies requirements for a management system for assets, with emphasis on aligning asset decisions with organizational objectives, risk and performance. It calls for:
- A clear asset management policy and objectives.
- Risk‑based planning and lifecycle strategies.
- Reliable information about assets, their condition and performance.
For facilities, this translates into a more disciplined approach to asset registers, maintenance strategies, condition assessments and performance indicators. It also creates a natural framework for integrating resilience and sustainability considerations into everyday decisions about buildings and equipment.
Bridge 1 – Asset criticality and lifecycle as inputs for risk disclosures
Both CSRD and ISO 55001 require organizations to think explicitly about risks related to physical assets. For CSRD, that includes climate‑related physical risks (such as flooding, heatwaves, storms) and transition risks (such as tightening energy standards for buildings).
Facilities and asset teams can support these disclosures by:
- Classifying assets and sites by criticality, including exposure to climate and operational risks.
- Documenting lifecycle plans that show how risks will be mitigated or phased out.
- Quantifying potential impacts of asset failures on operations, safety and the environment.
This information feeds directly into risk narratives in sustainability reports and strengthens the credibility of resilience claims.
Bridge 2 – Energy and emissions data for CSRD reporting
As noted, buildings and facilities account for a large share of energy use in Europe. Upgrading and operating them efficiently is essential to achieving EU‑level targets for reduced energy consumption and emissions.
Facilities teams are responsible for much of the data needed for accurate CSRD reporting:
- Metered energy consumption by site and energy type.
- Performance of major energy‑using systems (HVAC, lighting, process equipment).
- Emissions‑relevant events, such as refrigerant leaks or changes in fuel use.
A unified asset and energy management platform allows FM to provide these data in a consistent, auditable format, supporting both financial and sustainability reporting teams.
Bridge 3 – Incident and work order history as operational risk evidence
CSRD does not just ask for numbers; it asks for narratives about how sustainability‑related risks are identified, assessed and managed. Facilities and asset teams can demonstrate their contribution by showing how incident and maintenance data become part of risk management.
Examples include:
- Tracking recurring failures in critical equipment and linking them to root‑cause and mitigation actions.
- Showing how asset condition assessments influence investment decisions.
- Documenting improvements in downtime, energy intensity or safety incidents over time.
When this information is captured systematically, it becomes evidence of a mature risk and resilience culture, not just operational noise.
A simple maturity model for CSRD ready facilities
To make the link between CSRD, ISO 55001 and FM tangible, consider a four‑level maturity model for facilities data:
- Level 1 – Fragmented: asset and energy data sit in multiple local systems or spreadsheets. Limited visibility into risk and performance.
- Level 2 – Consolidated: core asset and consumption data are centralised, but risk and sustainability fields are basic. Reporting is possible but labour‑intensive.
- Level 3 – Integrated: asset criticality, lifecycle strategies and energy/emissions metrics are linked and regularly reviewed. Reporting processes are standardised.
- Level 4 – Insight‑driven: FM and asset data feed into scenario analysis, climate risk assessments and strategic planning, influencing investment and portfolio decisions.
The trajectory from Level 1 to Level 4 is as much about governance and culture as it is about technology.
Next steps
Want to connect your facilities data with CSRD and ISO 55001 requirements?
Get in touch with our team to review your current asset and energy data and identify gaps before your next reporting cycle.
Schedule a session – Book here