Publications

The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has committed to presenting a European Climate Adaptation Plan in 2026. The European Commission has previously emphasised public budgets as the main source of coverage for climate-related disasters. But if both the EU’s and member states’ budgets are strained by competing investment priorities and high debt levels in some cases, what are the complementary avenues for financing adaptation in the EU? How can private financial actors, such as banks, insurance companies or asset management firms, support adaptation efforts, not only to ensure resilience (i.e. recovery) from climate disasters, but also to prevent impacts before they arrive?

In the face of geopolitical shifts, not least those driven by the second Trump administration, the EU needs to secure its own green industrial base and foster new alliances. The European Commission’ proposal for a Clean Industrial Deal, central to its new competitiveness agenda, needs to spell out how Europe will create the enabling conditions […]

While several North American banks exit the voluntary NZBA (Net Zero Banking Alliance), European banks must bolster their climate risk frameworks. The European Banking Authority’s (EBA) recently published guidelines on ESG risk management offer a beacon of hope amidst the turmoil that currently surrounds the EU’s sustainable finance regulations. These guidelines are encouraging in both substance and form, reflecting prudential supervisors’ commitment to aligning the banking sector with the bloc’s climate and sustainability goals.

The implementation of the new banking package (or Capital Requirements Directive package) that adopts the final parts of the international Basel 3 financial regulation is underway in the European Union. The European Banking Authority (EBA) along with the other European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) is mandated to develop technical standards that provide the framework to help financial institutions comply with the new regulatory rules. Key among these standards is the novel guidance on ESG risks which is expected to be finalised by the EBA in the coming months. This is an opportune moment to address weaknesses in banks’ risk management practices, particularly regarding the underestimation of stranded asset risks, a missing angle in current policy debates.  

Following the European elections on June 9, the EU is adapting to a new, more conservative, political reality. Yet despite changing political tides, a new EU leadership will still need to find a credible answer to how the continent is to reach climate neutrality by 2050. To understand how to get there, we need a clear understanding of the progress already made. This is where the European Climate Neutrality Observatory (ECNO) comes in.

The European Union is continuing its efforts to ensure that the banking system takes climate change into account. Banks will have to draw up a "transition plan", according to the European Banking Authority’s (EBA) guidelines that are out for consultation until April.  One could hope that the banking authorities would seize this opportunity to encourage banks to better finance the transition, since their voluntary commitments are not sufficient. But the EBA does not make it a clear objective.

After nearly 4 years of negotiations, the European Union has just reached an agreement to reform the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD) for banks. The inclusion of climate change is a major step forward: banks will have to draw up prudential transition plans, supervised by the European Central Bank. These plans will complement the European regulatory architecture that is being put in place for large companies, with the Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Due Diligences Directive (CSDD). Are these banking transition plans a sufficient breakthrough to finally commit banks to climate neutrality? The answer to this question will depend on the implementation of EU legislation.

There is a broad consensus that private finance has an important role to play in financing the climate transition, given the scale of needs and the constraints on public finances. Beyond investments in climate alone, all financial activities must be reoriented to be compatible with the transition. This shift cannot take place on a voluntary basis at the scale and speed required. The inactivity of financial players, the weight of past financing, and the demands of shareholder profitability limit the effectiveness of voluntary international initiatives to which private financial players commit themselves.

Elections of the European Parliament are coming up in June 2024 and will be followed by the renewal of the Commission. Hence, there are only a few months left to finalize the implementation of the renewed sustainable finance strategy adopted in 2021. This strategy aims, among other things, to increase the contribution of the financial sector to sustainability. It seems too early to already draw conclusions on how the Commission delivered on its objectives as some key legislative and supervisory processes are still under way. This newsletter focusses on some of these ongoing processes that receive quite some attention in the public debate

Negotiations are under way on the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, commonly known as the "CSDDD". Regarding climate, an obligation of climate transition plan for companies is discussed. But let’s keep careful on this point. Europe is in the process of developing climate transition plan requirements in two other directives on corporate sustainability reporting (CSRD) and on prudential requirements for banks (CRD). We must therefore ensure that the discussions result in a final version of the CSDDD that is consistent with these other texts and at the same time complementary.

The proposal for mandatory climate transition plans for banks is slowly making its way through the regulatory debate. Proposed by the European Commission and confirmed by the EU Council, this proposal has now also been taken up by the European Parliament. This obligation could be a game-changer for financial risk management and the alignment of financial flows with the transition to a low-carbon economy. It could lead banks to limit their activities in climate-damaging activities, adjust their business models, review their strategies as well as their governance and risk management procedures.

The legislators in Europe are discussing the introduction of mandatory climate transition plans for banks. After the European Commission and the Council, the European parliament has adopted its position. Now trilogue negotiations between the three will begin. While all three seem to agree on the idea itself, differences remain in how these plans are defined. Anuschka Hilke, Director of the Finance program from the Institute for Climate Economics (I4CE), explains in this blog which parameters will be decisive for framing the ambition of this legislative proposal.

One year ago the creation of the Glasgow Finance Alliance for Net Zero - GFANZ – was announced. The expectations were as big as the numbers: a coalition gathering 500 financial actors representing 130 trillion dollars. Private financial actors were finally stepping in and mobilizing. But one year later, the coalition raises many doubts. On one side it faces criticism from NGOs, and on the other some US actors are considering leaving the coalition under the pressure of members of Republicans Party.  

The end of the year is always a busy period for the climate finance world, with international events multiplying to take stock of the latest achievements in the implementation of the Paris agreement and to identify the next – more ambitious – steps to be taken by the international community. Though the climax of these events is undoubtedly the COP (starting in two weeks in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt), with the New York Climate Week, and the World Bank and IMF’s international meetings behind us, and the Finance in Common summit coming to an end, we start sensing that some topics are already drawing a lot of attention.

The Basel Committee is finally taking up climate issues! Founded in 1974, this forum which brings together the financial supervisors of the G20 countries and which provides the main guidelines for guaranteeing financial stability has been absent from climate issues since Donald Trump's mandate. It recently published a first consultative document on the principles of climate risk management and supervision. Julie Evain presents the recommendations addressed by I4CE to the Basel Committee.

The government has recently modified the environmental, social and governance disclosure obligations for French investors via the publication of an implementing decree which specifies regulator expectations. Romain Hubert of the Institute for Climate Economics explains why this decree was to be expected and necessary for climate reporting.

Some of the heat waves and wildfires that were experienced in Europe and in the world in the summer of 2019 are symptoms of a climate that is already changing. These events may cause losses for banks and other financial institutions, which will therefore have to integrate climate change into their decisions. Regulators are also pushing in this direction.

The public institutions that regulate and supervise private finance will talk a lot about climate change in the coming months. The European taxonomy that allows economic actors to identify activities that are favorable to ecological transition or the "climate stress tests" of the Banque de France and ACPR are just some of the issues they will have to deal with and that we invite you to follow. I4CE has synthesized for you the "climate calendar" of financial regulation in a graphics.

To accelerate and deepen this work, the new European Commission will adopt a renewed Sustainable Finance Strategy.  As the public consultation to define the future directions of this strategy draws to a close, Julie Evain from I4CE points out three challenges to be met in order to integrate climate issues into the financial sector.

The pandemic caused by Covid 19 has triggered a major economic crisis. The emergency treatment of this crisis relied heavily on massive recourse to fiscal and monetary instruments already widely used during the 2008 crisis. But financial regulation was also mobilized to ease or alleviate prudential constraints in order to preserve bank financing for economic players, especially those most affected by the crisis. This illustrates the different facets of the use of financial regulation: primarily intended to ensure the efficient functioning of financial markets and financial stability, it can also be used with economic policy objectives.