Search results

Purpose: This chapter discusses the need for climate change risk mitigation and why it is not the responsibility of Central Banks to mitigate climate change risk.

Methodology: This chapter uses critical discourse analysis to explain why central banks should not have the responsibility for climate change risk mitigation.

Findings: This chapter argues that the responsibility for managing climate change risk should lie with elected officials, other groups and institutions but not Central Banks. Elected officials, or politicians, should be held responsible to deal with the consequence of climate change events. Also, international organizations and everybody can take responsibility for climate change while the Central Bank can provide assistance – but Central Banks should not lead the climate policy making or mitigation agenda.

Implication: The policy implication is that the responsibility for climate change risk mitigation should be shifted to politicians who are elected officials of the people. Also, international climate change organizations or groups can take responsibility for mitigating the climate change risk of member countries. Finally, citizens in a country or region should have equal responsibility for climate change. Climate information should be provided to every citizen to help them prepare for future climatic conditions.

Originality: This chapter propagates the idea that Central Banks should take a lead role in dealing with the problems of climate change. This chapter is the first chapter to contest a Central Bank-led climate change risk mitigation agenda.

This study aims to investigate the impact of climate risk disclosure by listed companies on the entry of green investors. It seeks to understand how proactive climate risk disclosure can attract green investment and the underlying mechanisms that facilitate this process.

Textual analysis is employed to assess the extent of climate risk disclosure in annual reports. The research constructs indicators for green investor entry and applies regression analysis to examine the relationship between climate risk disclosure and green investment, considering various mediating variables such as positive online news coverage, ESG scores, and corporate reputation.

Green investors are more likely to invest in companies with higher levels of climate risk disclosure. This relationship is robust across different types of firms, with non-state-owned, non-high-tech, large-scale firms, and those in the Eastern region showing a stronger attraction to green investors. Climate risk disclosure promotes green investment through the “signal transmission” mechanism, enhancing corporate reputation and ESG performance.

This paper extends the traditional theory of external incentives for corporate green development to include autonomous incentives through active climate risk disclosure. It provides new insights into the theory of corporate sustainable development and offers practical recommendations for enhancing corporate green development pathways. The study’s comprehensive approach and use of extensive data contribute valuable knowledge to the field of green investment and corporate sustainability.

With the rise of mandating climate-related disclosures (CRD), this paper aims to investigate how energy and agriculture markets are exposed to climate disclosure risk.

Using the multivariable simultaneous quantile regression and data from 1 January 2017 to 29 February 2024, the authors examine daily and monthly responses of energy and agriculture markets to climate disclosure risk, energy risk, market sentiment, geopolitical risk and economic policy risk. The sample covers the global market, Australia, Canada, European Union (EU), Hong Kong, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, the UK and the USA.

The results show that climate disclosure risk creates both positive and negative shocks in the energy and agriculture markets, and the impacts are asymmetric across quantiles in different economies. The higher the climate disclosure risk, the greater impact of crude oil future on the energy sector in North America (Canada and the USA) and Europe (EU and the UK), but no greater effects in Asia Pacific (Australia, New Zealand and Singapore). The agriculture sector can hedge against economic policy and geopolitical risks, but it is highly exposed to climate disclosure and energy risks.

This study timely contributes to the modest literature on the asymmetric effects of climate disclosure risk on the energy and agriculture markets at the global and national levels. The findings offer practical implications for policymakers and investment practitioners in understanding financial effects of mandating CRD to diversify risks depending upon market conditions and policy uncertainty.

The recent meeting of G-20 world leaders, held in New Delhi, in 2023, highlighted that the physical effect of climate change has considerable macro-economic costs at the national and global levels and they have also pledged to accelerate the clean, sustainable and inclusive energy transition along a variety of pathways. Climate change could pose various emerging risks to the firm’s operational and financial activities, specifically for those which are belonging to the energy sector. Thus, this study aims to investigate the impact of climate risks on the financial performance of select energy companies from G-20 countries.

The study considered 48 energy companies from G-20 countries as the sample for the period of 2017 to 2021. To measure the climate change-related physical risks, the study has considered the ND-GAIN climate vulnerability score and the firm’s financial performance has been measured by return on assets, return on equity, return on capital used and price-to-book ratio. To examine the impact of climate risks on the financial performance of the sample companies, the authors have used pooled ordinary least squares (OLS) and fixed/random effect regression analysis and required data diagnosis tests are also performed.

The empirical results suggested that climate risks negatively impacted the financial performance of the sample companies. The market performances of the firms are also being impacted by the physical climate change. The results of panel data regression analysis also confirmed the robustness of the empirical results derived from the pooled OLS analysis suggesting that firms that operated in a less climate-risky country, financially performed better than the firms that operated in a more climate-risky country.

The paper has significant practical implications like it could be helpful for the policymakers, investors, suppliers, researchers and other stakeholders in developing deeper insights about the impact of climate risks on the energy sectors from an international perspective. This study may also help the policymakers in developing policies for the management of climate risk for the energy sector.

This study adds insights to the existing literature in the area of climate risks and firm’s financial performance. Moreover, this may be the first study that attempts to evaluate the impact of climate risks on the financial performance of select energy companies from the G-20’s perspective.

Transitioning to a low-carbon economy requires a positive response by society, including business organizations, towards the green concept and also requires the implementation of long-term green strategies. These requirements could impose various transition risks on the sustainable development of the firms; hence, the present study aims to examine the impact of climate transition risk on a firm’s financial performance and market value creation from the Indian perspective.

We have considered the firm-level environmental risk score (ERS) to evaluate the sensitivity of a firm’s profitability (measured by ROA & ROE) and market value (measured by Tobin’s Q) towards the climate transition risk. The present study used multiple regression analysis to examine the impact of climate transition risk on the firm’s financial performance and market value creation, as evidenced by Nifty 50 companies.

The empirical results suggested that corporate climate transition risks have been positively associated with the firm’s financial performance indicators but negatively impacted the firm’s market value creation in the case of select Indian-listed firms. Hence, our results indicate that with the increase of firm-level climate transition risk, the firm’s financial performance increases but negatively affects the firm’s market value creation. The robustness tests have also confirmed the same results and supported our analysis.

The present paper contributes to the existing literature on climate risks and firms’ performance by providing insights about firms’ sensitivity towards climate transition risk from the Indian perspective.

Climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic are complex and have multifaceted effects on countries in an unpredictable and unprecedented manner. While both COVID-19 and the climate crisis share similarities, they also have some notable differences. Being both systemic in nature with knock-on and cascading effects that propagate due to high connectedness of countries, COVID-19, however, presents imminent and directly visible dangers, while the risks from climate change are gradual, cumulative and often distributed dangers. Climate change has more significant medium and long-term impacts which are likely to worsen over time. There is no vaccine for climate change compared to COVID-19. In addition, those most affected by extreme climatic conditions have usually contributed the least to the root causes of the crisis. This is in fact the case of island economies. The chapter thus investigates into the vulnerability and resilience of 38 Small Islands Developing States (SIDs) to both shocks. Adopting a comprehensive conceptual framework and data on various indices from the literature and global databases, we assess the COVID-19 and climate change vulnerabilities of SIDs on multiple fronts. The results first reveal a higher vulnerability across all dimensions for the Pacific islands compared to the other islands in the sample. There is also evidence of a weak correlation between climate change risk and the COVID-19 pandemic confirming our premise that there are marked differences between these two shocks and their impacts on island communities.

Purpose: This chapter discusses some policy options that central banks may find useful in dealing with climate change risk in the financial sector.

Methodology: This chapter uses discursive analysis to suggest policy options which central banks can use to deal with the risk of climate change in the financial sector.

Findings: Five policy options are proposed in the chapter, which includes: imposing a climate change capital surcharge; impose a fixed-rate risk capital – based on Tier 2 capital; a reduction in lending to industries whose activities destroy the environment and climate; creating a climate bank; and requiring financial institutions to relocate their important assets to areas less prone to climate change events.

Implication: Several policy experiments are needed to identify the best policy option that works best for each country while taking into account the unique financial sector, financial system, and climate change history of each country.

Originality: Central banks play an important role in regulating the financial sector and in managing its inherent risks, yet there are no studies that suggest policy solutions to help central banks and other financial sector regulators deal with the risk that climate change poses to the financial sector. This chapter suggests policy options that central banks can use to deal with the risk that climate change poses to the financial sector.

The impact of climate disasters (e.g., floods, storms, or landslides), which are generally of low intensity and high frequency, should not be overlooked in developing countries. Global experiences related to the damage due to these disasters indicate that such events can be devastating in communities that are vulnerable to hazardous impacts. Cumulative effects of climate disasters are a sign of a potential catastrophe. Moreover, the recent increase in these events poses additional issues that increase the cost of local public administration, including emergency operation and infrastructure recovery. This chapter explains key problems related to climate disasters that are increasing, particularly in the local area of developing countries, and clarifies the need to incorporate climate disaster risk reduction into public development planning and practice. The chapter also provides descriptions of the research location, approaches of the study, and the structure of this book.

In recent years, Costa Rica has experienced increasing economic loss from numerous climate disasters. To meet the challenge of reducing local vulnerabilities, it is necessary to incorporate the potential impacts of current and future climate disaster events into DRM policy, planning, and practice, both at the national and local levels. This chapter evaluates the current status of policy initiative on incorporating the climate disaster risk aspect in DRM planning at the national level in Costa Rica and discusses whether this initiative provides any answers to reduce climate disaster risk. The study applies a “checklist” as a means of evaluation.