The NGFS Study Group on Biodiversity and Financial Stability published a Vision paper exploring the case for action in addressing the financial stability concerns arising from biodiversity loss. The report notes that central banks and prudential supervisory authorities are increasingly recognizing the potential for biodiversity loss to threaten macroeconomic stability as well as the stability of the financial systems that they oversee. However, the complexity of the issue, the lack of regulations and policy guidance, and the limited tools to measure, disclose, and manage nature-related financial risks create a range of challenges to overcome.
The paper sets out links between the biodiversity loss and the macroeconomic and financial systems, also considering the impact of the financial sector in exacerbating the degradation of natural systems. It then poses a series of questions regarding whether and how central bankers and supervisors should, in the context of pursuing their mandates, address the issue of biodiversity loss. The paper points out that, given the scale of both the challenge of biodiversity loss and the knowledge gaps around it, a strategic and structured approach by central banks and financial supervisors is needed. The Study Group plans to explore the potential role of central banks and supervisors across a range of functions, including the following:
- Looking at the role of financial authorities in assessing the relationship between biodiversity and financial stability and exploring whether the traditional methods adequate (such as stress testing) are adequate
- Identifying what key biodiversity indicators should central banks and supervisors be monitoring, evaluating and reporting on and what disclosure they should require from regulated entities
- From the micro-prudential perspective, reviewing whether and how biodiversity factors can be included in routine activities to assess the safety and soundness of financial firms and what role might scenario-based tools play in analyzing and stress-testing biodiversity risk exposures
- Investigating the incorporation of biodiversity risks into macro-prudential policy frameworks and instruments
- Reviewing whether and how central banks and supervisors should support the scaling up of innovative financial tools to help support biodiversity and strengthen financial stability
The Study Group would welcome feedback on the initial approach set out in this Vision document and would welcome suggestions or examples of research and analysis that can help to deepen its thinking. Based on this as well as its own research, the Study Group will publish an interim report ahead of COP15 Convention on Biological Diversity in October 2021 and this report will be open for further feedback. The Convention is expected to agree on a post-2020 global biodiversity framework, which aims to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. The study group will publish its final report in February 2022, along the the research agenda for the following years.
Keywords: International, Banking, Climate Change Risk, ESG, COP 15, NGFS, Biodiversity Loss, Financial Stability, Stress Testing, Macro-Prudential Policy, Micro-Prudential Policy, NGFS
Previous ArticleHKMA Requires Banks to Submit Plans for Fintech Adoption
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) published the final policy statement PS21/21 on the leverage ratio framework in the UK. PS21/21, which sets out the final policy of both the Financial Policy Committee (FPC) and PRA
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) proposed to amend Regulation B to implement changes to the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) under Section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act.
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) decided to maintain, at the 2019 levels, the buffer rates for the Other Systemically Important Institutions (O-SII) for another year, with no new rates to be set until December 2023.
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published a progress report on implementation of its high-level recommendations for the regulation, supervision, and oversight of global stablecoin arrangements.
In a letter to the authorized deposit taking institutions, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) announced an increase in the minimum interest rate buffer it expects banks to use when assessing the serviceability of home loan applications.
The Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) are consulting on the preliminary guidance that clarifies that stablecoin arrangements should observe international standards for payment, clearing, and settlement systems.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) have set out their respective work priorities for 2022.
The Malta Financial Services Authority (MFSA) updated the guidelines on supervisory reporting requirements under the reporting framework 3.0, in addition to the reporting module on leverage under the common reporting (COREP) framework.
The European Commission (EC) published the Implementing Decision 2021/1753 on the equivalence of supervisory and regulatory requirements of certain third countries and territories for the purposes of the treatment of exposures, in accordance with the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR (575/2013).
EC published the Implementing Regulation 2021/1751, which lays down implementing technical standards on uniform formats and templates for notification of determination of the impracticability of including contractual recognition of write-down and conversion powers.