Climate change, with its physical and transitional challenges, is now at the forefront of global issues. Financial institutions, specifically banks, are navigating the evolving terrain of climate models and their implications. This post delves into the types of climate models, their implications for financial institutions, and the challenges that banks face in the quest for robust climate risk management.
The Climate Model Spectrum
There are a myriad of climate models that cater to different aspects of climate-related risks. Some of the prominent ones include:
- Physical and Transitional Risk Models: These models forecast the direct physical threats from climate change, such as severe weather events, and the transitional risks arising from the shift to a low-carbon economy.
- Hazard Models: Concentrating on specific threats like floods, storms, or heatwaves, these models assess the potential damages from individual climate-related hazards.
- Credit-Impact-Assessment Models: These assess the repercussions of climate change on borrowers’ creditworthiness and asset valuations.
- Emission Assessment Models: These determine emission baselines and targets, aiding organizations in setting and monitoring their carbon footprints.
Source: McKinsey Risk Dynamics
Challenges for Banks in the Climate Arena
Navigating this new climate model landscape creates significant hurdles. Three pivotal challenges are:
- Vendor Climate Model Management: As financial institutions increasingly rely on third-party models for climate risk analytics, managing, and understanding these models become critical.
- Climate-Specific Model Validation: Traditional validation methods might not suffice due to the novel nature of these models and a lack of historical data.
- Talent Acquisition: The increasing demand for expertise in the climate modeling domain has led to a talent war, especially with sector-specific methodologies becoming essential.
Additionally, regulatory pressure on banks to manage climate risk comprehensively is on the rise. This is especially true for US banks, which lag behind their European counterparts in integrating climate models under Model Risk Management (MRM) oversight.
Navigating Model Validation Challenges
The intricate nature of climate models often recalls the early challenges faced by Model Risk Management teams during the US Federal Reserve’s Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR). Key validation challenges include:
- Ensuring Model Completeness: It’s vital to ensure that climate models are holistic and don’t overlook essential risk drivers.
- Vendor Model Alignment: Many vendor models might not align with a bank’s definition of a model, leading to potential inconsistencies and misunderstandings.
- Transparency and Documentation: Climate model vendors, especially newer entrants, may lack comprehensive documentation that caters to MRM requirements.
- Data Sources and Long-Term Forecasting: With climate models often predicting impacts over long horizons, assessing and validating the model outputs becomes even more challenging.
A Glimpse into the Future
With climate change progressing in real-time, banks must be agile in adapting to the ever-evolving landscape of climate models. Leading institutions are responding with strategies that can shape successful validations. The objective for most will be to align these insights with their business priorities and the fluctuating impacts of climate change on the financial sector.
It’s clear that the industry is on the cusp of a transformative era where climate models will play a pivotal role. As the climate model landscape continues to evolve, those financial institutions that stay ahead of the curve, continuously adapting and innovating, will be best positioned for future resilience and success.
For an in-depth understanding, refer to the recent MRM survey by McKinsey Risk Dynamics.
