Pfaffenhofen Ilm as one of the city which was injured by the water flood in 2024

Impact of climate risk on banks and expected credit losses

Related topics

What banks can do to adequately consider the impacts of climate risk in their financial statements.

In brief

  • Both physical and transition climate risks are reshaping banks' credit risk, yet approaches to expected credit loses (ECL) vary across banks and regions. 
  • Natural disaster costs have increased dramatically over the past few years and many banks are actively assessing the impacts of climate risk.
  • To stay resilient, banks must enhance data, models, scenario analysis and disclosures to fully reflect the impact of climate risk in ECL.

Climate risk is no longer a distant concern - it’s here, and it’s transforming the economic and financial landscape. While many banks have started to incorporate climate-related risks into their credit risk models and ECL calculations, the depth, consistency and transparency of these assessments varies widely across institutions and regions.

Broadly speaking, climate risk falls into two main categories:

  • Transition risk: With the shift to a low-carbon economy, there are risks due to regulatory changes, evolving market demands, technological advances, shifts in investor and stakeholder expectations, and their impact on the creditworthiness of borrowers.
  • Physical risk: As a result of the direct impact of climate change on physical assets or collateral, which can be acute (e.g., wildfires, heatwaves, droughts, floods, and storms) or chronic (e.g., rising sea levels and long-term shifts in climate patterns).

In 2024, US$417 billion direct economic costs from natural disasters globally; 63% of which were uninsured.1

Climate risk has materialised with intensifying storms, droughts and wildfires, and by contributing to rising sea levels and flash floods. In the past year, catastrophic wildfires in countries such as the US, Canada, Brazil and Chile, along with severe floods in Spain, India and Pakistan, have left their mark. Meanwhile, the United Nations Environment Programme’s 2024 Emissions Gap Report2 warns that, under current policies, global temperatures could still rise by as much as 3.1°C by the end of the century, far exceeding the Paris Agreement goal of keeping warming below 2°C.

Recognising these risks, many banks have announced the ambition to reduce their carbon footprint both for their own operations as well as entities they finance, with some committing to stop financing certain sectors.

 

How banks are factoring in climate risks in ECL

Recently issued 2024 annual reports for a selection of large UK and European banks indicate that, while both transition and physical climate risks were generally considered in their ECL assessments, whether through macroeconomic variables, scenario analysis or overlay adjustments, most banks reported that these risks had no material impact on their impairment charges.

 

In the UK, only a minority of banks had an ECL provision for climate risk, focusing primarily on transition risks, although amounts were marginal in proportion to the overall ECL. In Europe, some banks applied management overlays, not only for transition risks, but also for physical risks in addition to model-driven outcomes. Even in this case, amounts were generally small, with some exceptions.

 

To date, some banks in the UK and Europe have disclosed a specific amount in their ECL estimates, while others indicated that the climate risk was included in the estimate of ECL without any quantification, as illustrated in these extracts from 2024 annual reports. 

 

The picture that emerges from these banks’ annual reports raises questions about how the approach taken by banks will continue to evolve when considering the impact of both transition and physical climate risks and opportunities in the ECL assessment and in the connectivity disclosures. Moreover, it raises the question whether there is any difference between UK and European banks in this assessment and, if so, whether this is driven by unique circumstances, including market and geographical conditions.

 

There is also a question on how banks can enhance their disclosures on how they assess and account for climate risks.



The complexity and interconnectedness of both transition and physical climate risks to other existing risks make it challenging for banks to fully embed climate risk in their risk assessment and mitigation. This challenge will vary across banks based on factors such as size, geographical presence, portfolio complexity, and industry concentration.



Action plan for 2025 and beyond

To address the evolving challenges above, banks will need to prioritise the following key areas:

  • Data collection and analysis: Collect data on natural disasters and analyse how climate change has intensified these events, exploring their impact in terms of business disruptions, financial losses, physical damage, decreases in collateral value and the challenges of recovery.
  • Risk management processes: Build climate risk assessments into customer acceptance and monitoring reviews, considering their climate transition plans and impact on the bank’s stated decarbonisation ambitions.
  • Modelling parameters and adjustments: Evaluate and, if necessary, adjust ECL model parameters to account for climate-related risk factors. This includes modifying the probability of default (PD) and loss given default (LGD) estimates to reflect short, medium, and long-term transition and physical climate risks, ensuring that ECL models accurately capture evolving risks (e.g., changes in the credit risk profile of the existing loan book and changes in the banks’ lending strategy in light of climate change criteria) and their financial implications. Inevitably, this will require collecting emerging and relevant data based on recent developments. It also requires considering first, second and third-order effects on loans.
  • Scenario analysis: Incorporating climate-related risks in macroeconomic factors and considering multiple economic scenarios (baseline, downside, and upside) is crucial for a comprehensive and forward-looking assessment. This will help banks understand a range of potential impacts on credit risk and impairment charges. However, banks need to consider potential overlap and the risk of double-counting when incorporating climate-related risks into macroeconomic factors, multiple economic scenarios, and overlay adjustments. For example, recent historical data and growth forecasts may already account for the impact of adverse climate developments.
  • Geographic and sector considerations: For banks with a global presence, assessing climate risk at the country level or even more granularly, at the sector or industry level is essential. For local institutions, considering location-specific climate risks will influence key ECL parameters, including PD and LGD. Climate change introduces a new driver of risk and correlation of losses.
  • Disclosures and transparency: Banks must address the challenges associated with ECL and climate risk disclosures. This includes factoring climate risks and opportunities into the business plan, overcoming obstacles such as data availability and quality, strengthening governance and processes for determining overlays, integrating climate risk into credit risk assessments, and improving connectivity of the disclosures with the front half of the annual report. If banks do not address these challenges, meaningful comparisons of climate risk disclosures across banks may be hindered, undermining their reliability for investors and stakeholders.

Appendix: Comparing UK and European banks’ approaches to climate risk in ECL assessments



The question is not whether climate change will impact banks’ ECL, but whether they are fully prepared for it.



Summary

With the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events and the upcoming sustainability reporting including IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 standards requiring disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities, it is now a priority for banks to evolve their risk management frameworks, particularly with respect to ECL provisions. By incorporating both transition and physical climate risks into their business plans and climate risk assessments, banks can better anticipate and manage the financial impacts of the climate crisis. This proactive approach will ultimately strengthen their resilience and contribute to the stability of sustainable financial systems.


Related articles

Financial reporting amid increasing tariffs and market volatility

This article highlights some of the financial reporting implications of the challenges of evolving tariffs and market volatility. Learn more

What to focus on in financial reporting this year-end

As companies prepare for the forthcoming reporting season, find out what key themes executives and boards need to focus on this year-end. Learn more

How IFRS reporting is impacted by global volatility and vulnerability

IFRS requires companies to reflect the effects of economic developments in the accounting and to disclose relevant information in the financial statements.

    About this article