OSFI published a discussion paper on climate-related risks that can affect the safety and soundness of federally regulated financial institutions (FRFIs) and pension plans (FRPPs). The discussion paper considers how climate-related risks can drive financial, operational, strategic, and reputation risks of federally regulated financial institutions and pension plans. The paper shares the OSFI insights on possible prudential tools for enhancing preparedness and resilience to these risks. This includes a discussion of the respective roles of capital requirements, the supervisory review process, and market discipline in promoting resilience to climate-related risks. OSFI welcomes comments on the discussion paper by April 12, 2021. OSFI also published remarks of the OSFI Superintendent Jeremy Rudin on technology and climate-related risks.
The discussion paper identifies and categorizes climate-related risks and how these risks could impact the safety and soundness of federally regulated financial institutions and pension plans. It also sets out the ways in which federally regulated financial institutions could prepare for, and build resilience to, climate-related risks. The paper also the ongoing work of OSFI on climate-related risks. To promote federally regulated financial institution preparedness and resilience to climate-related risks, OSFI is exploring the role of the following:
- Capital requirements—Exploring whether there are climate-related considerations beyond what is in the existing capital framework that should be considered.
- Supervisory review process—Considering whether climate-related risks should be incorporated more specifically into guidance on risk assessment processes, such as Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process and Own Risk and Solvency Assessment, scenario analysis, and stress testing.
- Market discipline—Reviewing the role climate-related financial disclosures can play in supporting the prudential oversight of climate-related risk management.
The paper highlights that traditional risk management approaches and stress testing tools may not be sufficient for identifying and accounting for a federally regulated financial institution's climate related risk exposures due to the uncertain outlook and long-horizon of climate change. New, advanced, or adapted risk analysis tools—such as sophisticated climate modeling and climate specific scenario analysis—could help to identify and assess material climate-related risks. These tools can also be helpful in setting or evaluating climate-related risk strategy and/or stress testing resilience to economic shocks from climate change. Additionally, financial risk models can play an important role in assessing federally regulated financial institution's material risk exposures. For climate-related risks, financial modeling can present a challenge to federally regulated financial institutions in a number of ways: current assumptions may not capture the impact of climate-related risks on the future direction of the risk exposure; historical loss rates due to climate related risks are not currently available; and climate data available may be insufficient in granularity.
Comment Due Date: April 12, 2021
Keywords: Americas, Canada, Banking, Insurance, Climate Change Risk, ESG, Regulatory Capital, Stress Testing, Disclosures, OSFI
Previous ArticleEC Delegated Regulation on Specialized Lending Exposures Under CRR
EU published Directive 2021/338, which amends the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) II and the Capital Requirements Directives (CRD 4 and 5) to facilitate recovery from the COVID-19 crisis.
The Standing Committee of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) recommended that a systemic risk buffer level of 4.5% for domestic exposures can be considered appropriate for addressing the identified systemic risks to the stability of the financial system in Norway.
In a recent statement, PRA clarified its approach to the application of certain EU regulatory technical standards and EBA guidelines on standardized and internal ratings-based approaches to credit risk, following the end of the Brexit transition.
In a recently published letter addressed to the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors, the FSB Chair Randal K. Quarles has set out the key FSB priorities for 2021.
EU published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, a corrigendum to the revised Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR2 or Regulation 2019/876).
ESAs published a joint supervisory statement on the effective and consistent application and on national supervision of the regulation on sustainability-related disclosures in the financial services sector (SFDR).
EC published a public consultation on the review of crisis management and deposit insurance frameworks in EU.
HKMA announced that enhancements will be made to the Special 100% Loan Guarantee of the SME Financing Guarantee Scheme (SFGS) and the application period will be extended to December 31, 2021.
EBA launched consultations on the regulatory and implementing technical standards on cooperation and information exchange between competent authorities involved in prudential supervision of investment firms.
BoE issued a letter to the CEOs of eight major UK banks that are in scope of the first Resolvability Assessment Framework (RAF) reporting and disclosure cycle.