Search results

This study aims to address gaps and limitations in the literature regarding firms’ exposure to climate risks. It reviews existing research, proposes new theoretical frameworks and provides directions for future studies.

A bibliometric and systematic approach is used to review the literature on firms’ climate risk exposure. The study examines current theoretical frameworks and suggests additional ones to enhance understanding.

This study contributes to the climate finance literature by offering a comprehensive overview of firms’ climate risk exposure and used theories. It emphasizes the urgent need to tackle climate change and the crucial role of firms in climate risk management. The study supports the advancement of sustainability policies and highlights the importance of understanding firms' climate risk exposure.

This study informs the development of climate risk management strategies within firms and supports the implementation of effective sustainability policies.

Addressing climate risks can contribute to a more sustainable and resilient future for society as a whole.

This study provides a roadmap for future research by identifying gaps and limitations in the literature. It introduces new perspectives and theoretical frameworks, adding original insights to the field of study.

This study aims to investigate how a firm's management team's capacity to efficiently use its resources affects the firm's exposure to climate change. Specifically, the authors investigate the intriguing question – does managerial ability affect a firm's climate change exposure?

The authors use an unbalanced panel dataset of 4,230 US based firms listed on Compustat from 2002–2019 and test the hypothesis by panel regression analysis. To mitigate endogeneity concerns, difference-in-differences and instrumental variable approaches are used.

The baseline analysis shows a negative, statistically significant impact of managerial ability on climate change exposure. The findings hold after controlling for endogeneity using two-stage least squares regression and difference-in-differences tests. The authors find the negative effect is stronger for managers engaged in socially responsible activities, and after climate change issues receiving greater public awareness following the 2006 release of the Stern Review and the 2016 signing of the Paris Accord.

Motivated by the resource-based theory and the natural resource-based view of the firm model, the empirical results support the view that greater managerial ability protects the firm against environmental challenges through efficient use of firm resources. Compared with traditional climate change measures that are plagued by disclosure issues, the use of the Sautner, Van Lent, Vilkov and Zhang's machine learning based dataset utilizing earning conference calls provides stronger, robust findings that will be useful to management and investors in environmental performance assessments.

Motivated by the resource-based theory and the natural resource-based view of the firm model, the empirical results support the view that greater managerial ability protects the firm against environmental challenges through efficient use of firm resources. Compared with traditional climate change measures that are plagued by disclosure issues, the use of the machine learning based dataset utilizing earning conference calls provides stronger, robust findings that will be useful to management and investors in environmental performance assessments.

Exploiting novel measures of climate change exposure and corporate culture generated by a powerful textual analysis of earnings conference calls, this study aims to explore the effect of firm-specific climate change exposure on corporate innovation through the lens of corporate culture.

The authors apply the standard regression analysis as well as a variety of sophisticated techniques, namely, propensity score matching, entropy balancing and an instrumental-variable analysis with multiple alternative instruments.

The authors find that more exposure to climate change risk results in more innovation, as indicated by a significantly stronger culture of innovation. The findings are consistent with the notion that firms more exposed to climate change risk are pressed to be more innovative to adapt to the numerous changes caused by climate change. Finally, the authors also find that the effect of firm-level exposure on innovation is considerably less pronounced during uncertain times.

The authors are among the first studies to take advantage of a novel measure of firm-specific exposure to climate change and investigate how climate change exposure influences an innovative culture. Since climate change is a timely issue, the findings offer important implication to several stakeholders, such as shareholders, executives and investors in general.

This study aims to evaluate the adequacy of climate risk disclosure by providing empirical evidence on whether corporate disclosure meets rising stakeholders’ demand for risk disclosure concerning climate change.

Drawing on a triangulated approach for collecting data from multiple sources in a longitudinal study, we perform a panel regression analysis on a sample of multinational firms between 2007 and 2021. Inspired by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) principles, our innovative and inclusive model of measuring firm-level climate risks underscores the urgent need to redefine materiality from a broader value creation (rather than only financial) perspective, including the impact on sustainable development.

The findings of this study provide evidence of limited corporate climate risk disclosure, indicating that organisations have yet to accept the reality of climate-related risks. An additional finding supports the existence of a nexus between higher corporate environmental disclosure and higher corporate resilience to material financial and environmental risks, rather than pervasive sustainability risk disclosure.

We argue that a mechanical process for climate-related risk disclosure can limit related disclosure variability, risk reporting priority selection, thereby broadening the short-term perspective on financial materiality assessment for disclosure.

This study extends recent literature on the adequacy of corporate risk disclosure, highlighting the importance of disclosing material sustainability risks from the perspectives of different stakeholder groups for long-term success. Corporate management should place climate-related risks at the centre of their disclosure strategies. We argue that reducing the systematic underestimation of climate-related risks and variations in their disclosure practices may require regulations that enhance corporate perceptions and responses to these risks.

This study emphasises the importance of reconceptualising materiality from a multidimensional value creation standpoint, encapsulating financial and sustainable development considerations. This novel model of assessing firm-level climate risk, based on the GRI principles, underscores the necessity of developing a more comprehensive approach to evaluating materiality.

This paper aims to explore current trends in how companies disclose climate-related risks and opportunities in their financial statements. As part of the authors’ analysis, they examine: whether forward-looking assumptions and judgements are typically considered in reporting climate-related risks/opportunities; whether there are differences in the reporting practices of firms in carbon-intensive industries versus non-carbon-intensive industries; and whether negative media reports have an influence on the levels of disclosure a firm makes.

The authors chose content analysis as their methodology and examined the financial statements published by firms listed on the UK’s FTSE 100 between 2016 and 2020. This analysis is framed by Suchman’s three dimensions of legitimacy, being pragmatic, cognitive and moral.

Climate-related disclosures in the notes and financial accounts of these firms did increase over the period. Yet, overall, the level the disclosures was inadequate and the quality was inconsistent. From this, the authors conclude that pragmatic legitimacy is not a particularly strong driving factor in compelling organisations to disclose climate-related information. The firms in carbon-intensive industries do provide greater levels of disclosure, including both qualitative and quantitative (monetary) content, which is consistent with cognitive legitimacy. However, from a moral legitimacy perspective, this study finds that firms did not adapt responsively to negative media coverage as a way of reflecting their accountability to broader public norms and values. Overall, this analysis suggests that regulatory enforcement and a systematic reporting framework with adequate guidance is going to be critical to developing transparent climate-related reporting in future.

This paper contributes to existing studies on climate-related disclosures, which have mainly examined the ‘front-half’ of annual reports. Conversely, this study aims to shed light on these practices in the “back-half” of these reports, exploring the underlying reasons for reporting climate-related risks and opportunities in financial accounts. The authors’ insights into the current disclosure practices make a theoretical contribution to the literature. Practitioners can also draw on these insights to improve how they report on climate-related risks and opportunities in their financial statements.

This paper aims to quantify the (syndicated) loan exposure to elevated environmental risk sectors of the banking system in the USA, EU, China, Japan and Switzerland at US$1.6tn and to highlight its importance, which ranges from 3.8 (USA) to 0.5 per cent (China) in terms of total national banking assets. The paper highlights the relevance of exploring prudential policy responses, including a harmonized taxonomy, statistical and reporting framework that could contribute to internalizing the negative externalities associated with climate risks by both banks and their supervisors. Among the prudential supervisory tools, credit registers facilitate the assessment of environmental risk drivers in “carbon stress tests.” This paper also presents a framework of analysis for the regulatory treatment of climate-related risks.

Similarly to Weyzig et al. (2014), this paper uses financial databases on the banks’ role as book runners for syndicated loans; that is, as the lead arrangers who also provide a large share of the actual lending. Loans are outstanding on December 31, 2014, and the paper assumes linear amortization of loans issued before that date and with maturity after that date. This study includes the largest banks from the above-mentioned countries with financial information available in SNL Financial and EU banks with financial information available in the ECB database on December 31, 2014. By assessing the relative share of the ten largest (or total reporting if less) banks’ exposure to each high environmental risk sector in relation to their total assets, these findings can be extrapolated across sectors in the respective country.

This paper quantifies the loan exposure to elevated environmental risk sectors of the banking system in the USA, EU, China, Japan and Switzerland in US$1.6tn, broadly in line with the findings of Battiston et al. (2017) and Weyzig et al. (2014). This paper also explores prudential policy approaches and tools. In addition to the lack of taxonomy of “brown” vs “green,” the paper identifies the limitations to assess the risks involved in the transition to a low-carbon economy: supervisory reports that do not make full use of the existing international statistical framework (e.g. EU COREP and FINREP); lack of harmonized reporting requirements of environmental risks; lack of credit registers as tools to perform carbon stress-testing; and supervisors’ governance framework that do not internalize environmental risks (e.g. proposed revision of the Basel Core Principles of Banking Supervision). As per the stress-testing, the paper presents two examples. The paper presents a framework of analysis for the regulatory treatment of climate-related risks. The author identifies two critical elements of such framework if prudential regulation of environmental risks is to be considered: the consideration or not of climate risk as credit risk and the impact of environmental risks over probabilities of default over the entire business cycle.

No internationally accepted “official” taxonomy of high environmental risk sectors exists. This paper uses Moody’s (2015a) classification of sectors according to their environmental risk exposure. This paper’s exposures do not reflect the real risk exposure of these institutions and the banking industry as a whole because, as explained in Page 6, these values are without regard to bilateral loans and guarantees and securitizations of loans; in the case of loans to power generation companies, renewable sources are not excluding and, similarly, for the production of electric vehicles, loans are not excluded. Furthermore, this paper does not assess banks’ exposures to sovereigns subject to high environmental risks and bonds and equity issued by corporations operating in high environmental risk sectors.

Contribution to the present policy debate on how to regulate banks’ exposure to high environmental risk and how to manage the transition to a low-carbon economy.

This paper can increase awareness of the banking sector transition risks to a low-carbon economy.

This paper quantifies banks direct exposures to high environmental risk sectors using an ample definition of sectors exposed to environmental risk. The author suggests policy actions to assess the environmental risks. The author defines a regulatory framework for banks to internalize the negative externalities of environmental risks.

This paper aims to investigate the effect of firms’ sustainability practices on firm performance and valuation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Using a sample of Australian listed firms from 2011 to 2021, the authors perform textual analysis on sustainability practices from annual reports and sustainability report disclosures and include this variable in various regression models that assess firm valuation. The authors also use propensity score matching and Heckman two-stage regression methodology to address endogeneity concerns.

The authors find that firms disclosing sustainability practices exhibit higher market valuations relative to other firms. Specifically, loss-making firms exhibit higher market valuation during the COVID-19 crisis relative to prior period. The authors also observe a negative association between sustainability practices and firm performance proxied by return on assets. The findings suggest that engagement in sustainable practices helps loss-making firms remain resilient during the pandemic. In addition, the authors find that the positive relation between sustainability practices and firm value is stronger among firms with a higher level of annual report readability.

Considering the conflicting evidence in the literature on the economic benefits of sustainability practices, this study takes advantage of the heterogeneity in corporate practices and provides empirical evidence that a firm’s sustainability practices can build economic resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis. The authors believe the findings of the study is timely in informing the regulators and standard-setters on changes in reporting required to increase sustainability in the business practices.

To comply with the adopted Paris Agreement, global finance flows must be measured against climate scenarios consistent with possible pathways towards limiting global warming to 2°C or less. For this, there must be proven and accepted accounting principles for assessing financial plans of climate relevant actors against climate models. As there are a variety of data sources describing the financial plans of relevant actors, these principles must accommodate a variety of reported information, while still yielding relevant metrics to different stakeholders. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

A set of accounting principles tested by governments, financial supervisory bodies and both institutional investors and mangers, covering global-listed equity and corporate bond investment is described.

The application illustrates that a common set of accounting principles can act across both asset classes and provide relevant metrics to multiple stakeholders.

The principles require data of varying quality and are ultimately unverified. Thus, the definitive quality of the output metrics is uncertain and is yet to be characterized. The principles are yet to be applied to the credit market as the information is seldom publicly available, but it too plays an important role in the required market transition and therefore must be incorporated into these guiding principles of analysis.

The principles allow for standardised assessment of financial flows of equity and corporate debt with global climate scenarios.

It illustrates the acceptance of a common set of accounting principles that is relevant across different actors and asset classes and summarizes the principles underlying the first climate finance scenario analyses.

Commodity price volatility and small variations in climate conditions may have an important impact on the creditworthiness of any agricultural project. The evolution of such risk factors is vital for the credit risk analysis of a rural bank. The purpose of this paper is to determine the importance of price volatility and climate factors within a default risk model.

The authors estimate a generalized linear model (GLM) based on a structural default risk model. With the estimated factor loadings, the authors simulate the loss distribution of the portfolio and perform stress test to determine the impact of the relevant risk factors on economic capital.

The results indicate that both the price volatility and climate factors are statistically significant; however, their economic significance is smaller compare to other factors that the authors control for: macroeconomic conditions for the agricultural sector and intermediate input prices.

The analysis of non-systemic risk factors such as price volatility and climate conditions requires statistical methods focussed on measuring causal effects at higher quantiles, not just at the conditional mean, this is, however, a current limitation of GLMs.

The authors provide a design of a portfolio credit risk model, that is more suited to the special characteristics of a rural bank, than commercial credit risk models.

The paper incorporates agricultural-specific risk factors in a default risk model and a portfolio credit risk model.

Framed within global policy debates over the need for private financial flows to align with the capital requirements of the Paris Agreement, this paper examines UK asset managers in their approaches to disclosing and managing climate risk. This paper identifies and evaluates climate risk management practices among this under-researched investor group in their capacity to address fundamental behavioural obstacles to low-carbon investment.

This paper takes an inductive approach to document analysis, applying content and thematic analysis to the annual disclosures of the 28 largest UK asset managers (by assets under management), including the investment management arms of insurance and pension companies.

The main takeaway from this research is that today’s climate risk management strategies hold potential to effectively address traditionally climate risk-averse investor behaviour and investment processes in the UK asset management context. However, this research finds that the use of environmental, social and governance (ESG) investment strategies to mitigate climate risks is a “grey area” in which climate risk management practices are undefined within broad sustainability and responsible investment agendas. In doing so, this paper invites further research into the extent to which climate risks are considered in ESG investment.

This paper contributes to research in sustainable finance and behavioural finance, by identifying the latest climate risk management techniques used among UK-headquartered asset managers and uniquely evaluating these in their capacity to address barriers to low-carbon investment arising from organisational behaviours and processes.