Pentti Hakkarainen of ECB spoke, at the Hannes Snellman Financial Law Seminar in Helsinki, about the climate change risks faced by banks and the work that lies ahead for regulators, supervisors, and banks. Banking supervisors must deal with the risks that climate change poses to banks and must raise awareness among banks. He suggested that the climate change risks must be better understood and ways must be found to mitigate them. He also emphasized that banks need to approach climate risks from the angle of risk management and more work needs to be done in this area.
Mr. Hakkarainen classified the climate-related risks into physical and transition risks. Physical risks directly arise from a changing climate while the transition risks arise from the potential shift to a more sustainable economy. These risks are spread unevenly and are complex, chaotic, and non-linear. Transition risks are greater for some sectors and regions than for others. Moreover, the risks span "a very long time horizon" as these changes will happen over decades. However, the risk models used by banks and regulators cover much shorter time frames and this means that there might be blind spots. The 2019 risk map of ECB for the banking sector features, for the first time, climate risk as one of the key risks for the European banking sector. Nonetheless, more needs to be learned about these risks in terms of how to measure and mitigate them. He also discussed the following items on the to-do list of banking supervision:
- First, there is the issue of “green” assets. These are generating some hype and demand is growing fast. However, the definition of green assets is unclear and "a common and precise definition" is needed. EC has made a proposal on defining sustainable assets, which is now being discussed. This proposal just classifies “green” assets though. To get the full picture, “brown” assets will also need to be classified.
- Second, climate risks need to be integrated into the supervisory framework. In this respect, EBA has the legal mandate to propose an approach. This proposal will focus on the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process or SREP—the main tool of supervisors. Supervisors also need to think about how banks should disclose climate risks. Here, approaches differ across countries and need to be harmonized.
- Third, coming back to “green” and “brown” assets, their respective risks need to be better understood. It is risks that determine how supervisors and regulators treat these assets. EBA will work on this over the coming years.
These are just a few of the items on the to-do list. However, given the scope of the challenge and its complexity, no one can solve it alone. Regulators, supervisors, and central banks have joined forces in a Network for Greening the Financial System. This network comprises 42 members worldwide, including the ECB and eight observers. It is encouraging that so many institutions share a common understanding of these problems and have joined forces to come up with solutions. To understand the way banks approach climate risks, ECB recently surveyed a sample of banks. It was found that banks are very much aware of climate change. So far, they have approached the topic from the angle of corporate social responsibility, but they also see the need to approach it from the angle of risk management. In this area too, more work needs to be done.
Related Link: Speech
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, Climate Change Risk, Banking Supervision, SREP, Green Assets, EBA, ESG, ECB
Next ArticleEBA Single Rulebook Q&A: Fourth Update for July 2019
BIS published a paper that provides an overview on the use of big data and machine learning in the central bank community.
APRA finalized the reporting standard ARS 115.0 on capital adequacy with respect to the standardized measurement approach to operational risk for authorized deposit-taking institutions in Australia.
ECB published a guide that outlines the principles and methods for calculating the penalties for regulatory breaches of prudential requirements by banks.
MAS and The Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) jointly issued a paper that sets out good practices for the management of operational and other risks stemming from new work arrangements adopted by financial institutions amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
ACPR announced that a new data collection application, called DLPP (Datalake for Prudential), for collecting banking and insurance prudential data will go into production on April 12, 2021.
BCB announced that the Financial Stability Committee decided to maintain the countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB) for Brazil at 0%, at least until the end of 2021.
EIOPA has launched a European-wide comparative study on non-life underwriting risk in internal models, also kicking-off of the data collection phase.
SRB published an overview of the resolution tools available in the Banking Union and their impact on a bank’s ability to maintain continuity of access to financial market infrastructure services in resolution.
EBA is consulting on the implementing technical standards for Pillar 3 disclosures on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risks, as set out in requirements under Article 449a of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
ESAs Issue Advice on KPIs on Sustainability for Nonfinancial Reporting