Physical Climate Risk for Investment Managers | Deloitte UK has been saved
Despite global efforts to reduce carbon emissions and limit the impacts of climate change, some of these impacts are already being observed and are expected to intensify as global temperatures rise 2 .
Physical climate risks can be quantified in terms of their adverse financial effects on real assets and are defined as either acute risks (e.g. climate events such as floods and hurricanes) or chronic risks (such as rising sea level). Investment management firms holding real assets are particularly exposed because the damage and disruption after extreme weather events can lead to a significant negative impact on asset valuations and viability. An example of this was the California Wildfires in 2018, where several investment firms saw high-value properties and industrial complexes destroyed. Closer to home, the impacts of physical risk on the infrastructure sector are being recognised with the UK National Rail recently doubling their spending on weather resilience measures to adapt to climate risks 3 .
Investment management firms in the UK are now required to disclose their exposures to climate risks, both physical and transition, under the Taskforce on Climate Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). This will be fully incorporated into the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) climate disclosure standards (IFRS S2) from 2024 4 .
However, there may be more work the sector needs to do. The UN Environment Programme Financial Initiative (UNEP FI), in its review of publicly available TCFD reports, stated concerns that physical climate risk may be a “blind spot” for financial institutions who are focussing on the risks associated with transitioning to a net zero economy (transition risks) rather than exposure to physical climate risks 5 . The implications of inadequately identifying exposures to physical climate risk go beyond disclosures. If this shortfall in reporting the risk is an indication of how the sector is assessing and taking into account their physical climate risks, then firms could be underestimating their exposure to unexpected financial consequences in the future.
While it has been highlighted by UNEP FI as a “blind spot” for financial services we observe a growing understanding of the challenges involved in modelling and assessing physical climate risk. In a Dear CEO letter on Climate Related financial risk in October 2022, the Prudential Regulatory Authority recognise that some firms are performing detailed analysis of asset loss by counterparties. That said, they also point to the inconsistency across the industry. There are challenges firms in the investment management sector should focus on overcoming when looking to strengthen their approach and capability assessing and using physical climate risk management. These challenges are as follows:
Forward looking data: Typically, physical climate risk assessments such as flood assessments are based on data from historical events. Whilst a logical starting point, the lack of forward-looking data could systemically underestimate the impact of future flood events in a warmer climate.
Data granularity: Using inadequate location data granularity, prevents capturing an accurate view of physical climate risk at asset level.
Modelling uncertainty: There is a challenge across financial services in understanding and accounting for the uncertainty of future warming projections from climate models and how the impact could crystalise on the balance sheet 6 .
Reliance on Third Parties: Raw climate data requires expertise to extract and process into a format that is useful for investment managers. Due to these modelling complexities, firms tend to rely on third party vendors, which are growing in number. Often these models have opaque methodologies and vary significantly, making outcomes incomparable and selection challenging.
Cross dependencies: Most modelling approaches only capture the direct impact of physical climate risk and do not consider a broader scope outside real assets, such as impairment of critical infrastructure and supply chain disruption.
Breadth of investments: If not properly overcome, these challenges can result in material underestimations of the physical climate risks investment firms are taking.
As firm’s understanding around physical climate risk impacts and modelling continues to evolve, we have set out initial steps which investment managers can take to assess, monitor, and manage their material exposure to physical climate risk:
Overall, physical climate risk management should be embedded into how investment firms manage risks relating to real assets. From overall investment strategy and risk appetite down into the quantitative risk assessment, investment decisions and disclosures. By doing so firms can better manage this emerging and important source of risk.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Understanding the Physical Risks Associated with Climate Change (garp.org)
2. AR6 Synthesis Report: Summary for Policymakers Headline Statements (ipcc.ch)
3. Network Rail doubles spending on adapting to climate risks | Financial Times (ft.com)
Rebecca provides regulatory assurance for Banking and Capital Markets clients in the UK across a variety of topics including climate risk, greenwashing, conduct risk and non-financial risk frameworks. Following a masters at the LSE in Human Rights and two years working as a liquidity risk analyst, Rebecca also focuses on building out Deloitte’s wider ESG offerings across the financial services.
Sarah is a Manager within Deloitte’s Regulatory Assurance team. Her focus is on physical climate risk and challenging financial service firms in meeting regulatory expectations for climate scenario analysis and modelling. Prior to Deloitte she holds five years experience in the (re)insurance catastrophe modelling industry and holds a master’s degree in meteorology and climate change science.
James oversees regulatory assurance work for Banking and Capital Markets clients in the UK across a variety of topics including conduct risk, climate risk, greenwashing, non-financial risk frameworks and assurance methodologies.
Steven is a Partner in our Sustainable Finance team in the UK where he leads on Banking & Capital Markets. Prior to joining Deloitte, Steven worked in Investment Banking for nearly 30 years in a variety of front office leadership roles. He has an extensive understanding and experience of banking and markets product lines, product and transaction governance and approval processes, and the client interface. Steven’s roles in banking have included divisional responsibilities for Sustainable Finance, Chair of the Reputational Risk Committee, SME for evolving Markets & Investment Banking target operating model, and Member of the Climate Executive Steering Group. Immediately prior to joining Deloitte, Steven worked for the Sustainable Markets Initiative, where he was responsible for several initiatives announced and launched at COP26.
Ido is a Director in the Sustainable Finance Team, leading the Investment Management and Wealth offering. He advises asset managers, private equity firms and hedge funds on sustainable finance challenges, including ESG integration, engagement and stewardship, ESG product design, Net Zero commitments, regulation and reporting (including SFDR and TCFD), and impact frameworks. Ido has 20 years of industry experience as a senior investor at J.P Morgan Asset Management. He specialises in ESG investment & research, ESG integration in funds and managing core and index-plus equity funds He has extensive product, stewardship, quantitative investment signal design and risk modelling expertise, combined with a strong track record of client and marketing exposure.