“Sustainable Finance and Climate Protection” (SFCP) is the name of the BMBF’s accompanying project for the funding measure “Climate Protection and Finance” (KlimFi). In a dialog process, the fields of science, politics and finance are networked around the topic of climate protection and finance and findings from science are communicated to politics and finance. The VfU is responsible for the transfer of central results into practice in the financial sector and to other relevant stakeholder groups.
The Science Meets Stakeholder format aims to support the interface between research and financial industry practice and provides a platform for scientists to exchange ideas with stakeholders. Goals, questions, needs and ideas are to be shared. Thus, valuable feedback on the relevance and enhancement of the research work can be provided by the stakeholders.
In this issue, a subproject of the project “Scenario Analysis as a Tool for Investors, Companies and Regulators on the Way to Climate Neutrality” (SATISFY) is discussed.
Scenario analysis is an important tool to identify and understand the potential impacts of climate risks. In the financial sector, it is therefore also an important component of risk management.
The SATISFY subproject will investigate how banks integrate climate-related information into their risk management and what role climate scenario analysis plays in this process. Based on interviews and archive data, the status quo will be surveyed and gaps will be identified.
This event is primarily aimed at banks, especially experts in risk management. The subproject is in its initial phase. The webinar will collect feedback from practitioners on the project idea and structure to ensure practical relevance.
In particular, the researchers are looking forward to an exchange on the following questions:
What role do climate risks play in lending and pricing today? How is this likely to (need to) change in the coming years?
At what points in risk management do climate-related data already play a role? Where are they still missing and should they be given greater consideration in the lending process in the future?
What analyses are used today to assess climate risks? How are these currently being further developed? Where are there methodological gaps?
What are the implications of the ECB climate stress test for participating banks? How will the ECB’s feedback on microprudential climate risk management be implemented?
