Rising Temperatures, Melting Ratings
By Dr. Patrycja Klusak, Dr. Matthew Agarwala, Matt Burke, Dr. Moritz Kraemer, Dr. Kamiar Mohaddes 23 April, 2021
Dr Klusak, Dr Agarwala, Burke, Dr Kraemer & Dr Mohaddes share how they created the world's first climate smart sovereign credit rating
This article was first published by The Bennett Institute for Public Policy, University of Cambridge on Mar 2021. You can see the article here.
Climate change is “the biggest market failure the world has seen” (Stern 2008), with wide-ranging implications for stability – financial, economic, political, social, and environmental. As the economic consequences of climate change continue to grow, financial markets and business leaders face increasing pressure to factor climate risks into decision making.
Climate change is “the biggest market failure the world has seen”
Climate change will hit markets from all directions. In boardrooms and at AGMs, what were once token whispers of eco-marketing have become serious discussions of extreme weather events, reputational risks, activist movements (shareholder and consumer), regulatory and transition risks, asset stranding, and environmental litigation.
In response, investors and regulators are calling for climate risk disclosures and a clear demonstration that portfolios and business models are consistent with the Paris Climate Agreement. Central bankers, finance ministers, the International Monetary Fund and United Nations are in on the action (see PBOC’s former Chief Economist on The Future of Finance).
Such enthusiasm for ‘greening the financial system’ is welcome, but a fundamental challenge remains: financial decision makers lack the necessary information. It is not enough to know that climate change is bad. Markets need credible, digestible information on how climate change translates into material risks. Instead, an explosion of ESG (environmental, societal, and governance) ratings and voluntary, ad hoc, unregulated climate disclosures has created a confusing world of unfamiliar, incomparable, and conflicting metrics.
‘Greening the financial system’ is welcome, but the lack of scientific foundations in risk disclosures remains a fundamental challenge…
A chief concern is the lack of scientific foundations in risk disclosures (see Fiedler et al., 2021). Climate models operate at global scales, projecting impacts over decades. Financial models do not. How should a high-frequency trading algorithm (operating in nanoseconds) adjust to the possibility that climate may reduce global output in 2100? How should corporate disclosures address issues beyond their control, such as the carbon intensity of the national electricity grid, or the direction of government flood strategies?
…No corporate risk assessment is complete without considering the effect of climate on sovereign bonds
Most disclosures present companies as if they are independent of their physical (geographical) and macroeconomic surroundings. But climate change does not just affect firms individually, it affects countries and economies systemically. No corporate climate risk assessment is complete without also considering the effect of climate on sovereign bonds. Without scientific credibility, economic evidence, and decision-ready metrics, the field of green finance is open to charges of greenwash.
This is what motivated us to bridge the gap between climate science and real-world financial indicators (Klusak et al., 2021). We focused on a familiar metric: the sovereign credit rating. By linking climate science with economic models and real-world best practice in sovereign ratings, we simulate the effect of climate change on sovereign credit ratings for 108 countries under three different warming scenarios (see Figure 1).
We simulated the effect of climate change on sovereign credit ratings for 108 countries
We were guided by a single overarching principle: to remain as close as possible to climate science, economics, and real-world practice in the field of sovereign credit ratings. We are the first to simulate the effect of climate on future sovereign ratings under multiple warming scenarios. We also provide initial estimates of the effects of climate-induced sovereign downgrades on the cost of public and corporate debt around the world.
Sovereign ratings are reported using a 20-notch scale, where AAA is ‘prime high grade’ and anything below BBB- is considered ‘speculative’ (or informally, ‘junk’). We convert this into a numerical scale and use a machine learning model to predict creditworthiness, training it on ratings issued by S&P (one of the largest credit ratings agencies) from 2015-2020. Next, we combine climate economic models and S&P’s own natural disaster risk assessments to develop a set of climate-adjusted data. We use these to simulate the effect of climate change on sovereign ratings. Finally, we calculate the additional cost of corporate and sovereign debt due to climate-induced sovereign downgrades (Figure 1, purple).
Sovereign ratings are already used in a range of financial decision-making contexts…
…downgrades will increase the cost of public & corporate debt
We focus on sovereign ratings because they are already used in a range of financial decision-making contexts (e.g. under Basel II rules, ratings directly affect the capital requirements of banks and insurance companies). They cover over US$ 66 trillion in sovereign debt, acting as ‘gatekeepers’ to global financial markets. Sovereign downgrades increase the cost of both public and corporate debt, influencing overall economic performance and significantly affecting fiscal sustainability.
We document three key empirical findings.
Study found 63 sovereigns will suffer downgrades by 2030…
…Chile, China, Slovakia, Malaysia, Mexico, India, Peru & Canada most affected
First, in contrast to much of the climate-economics literature, we find material impacts of climate change as early as 2030. In one realistic scenario, we find that 63 sovereigns suffer climate-induced downgrades of approximately 1.02 notches by 2030, rising to 80 sovereigns facing an average downgrade of 2.48 notches by 2100.
Figure 2 depicts the magnitude and geographical distribution of sovereign ratings changes, showing that the most affected nations include Chile, China, Slovakia, Malaysia, Mexico, India, Peru and Canada. More importantly, our results show that virtually all countries, whether rich or poor, hot or cold, will suffer downgrades if the current trajectory of carbon emissions is maintained.
Second, our data strongly suggests that stringent climate policy consistent with the Paris Climate Agreement will result in minimal impacts of climate on ratings – with an average downgrade of just 0.65 notches by 2100.
Additional cost to sovereign debt is between USD137-205bn under RCP8.5
Third, we calculate the additional costs to sovereign debt – best interpreted as increases in annual interest payments due to climate-induced sovereign downgrades – in our sample to be between US$ 22–33 billion under a low emissions scenario known as RCP2.6, rising to US$ 137–205 billion under RCP 8.5. These translate to additional annual costs of servicing corporate debt ranging from US$ 7.2–12.6 billion to US$ 35.8–62.6 billion in each case.
There are caveats. There are no scientifically credible quantitative estimates of how climate change will impact social and political factors, so these are excluded from our model (Oswald and Stern, 2019). Thus, our findings should be considered as conservative. Moreover, our results should be understood as scenario-based simulations rather than predictions. We do not comment on the relative probabilities of any given warming scenario playing out in practice.
Existing climate science and economics are capable of supporting credible, decision-ready green finance indicators
The key take-home message is that existing climate science and economics are capable of supporting credible, decision-ready green finance indicators. Governments issue ever-longer dated bonds, of which life insurance companies and pension funds are eager buyers, thus enabling them to match their own long-term liabilities.
Therefore, investors should consider the long-term creditworthiness of sovereign issuers. Currently, there is no reliable yardstick for assessing sovereign creditworthiness beyond the current decade and this research fills this gap. Based on the methodology applied here future research could focus on developing ultra-long ratings not only for sovereigns but also for other issuers including corporates.
- The CWR Survival Guides to Avoiding Atlantis – Sea levels can be 3m by 2100, putting urban real estate equivalent to 22 Singapores underwater in just 20 APAC capitals & cities. With US$5.7trn of annual GDP at stake, get on top of the new risk landscape to survive
- Sovereigns At Risk: Lots Of Capital In Vulnerable Spots – Clustered nature of rising coastal threats plus lax govt action put APAC sovereigns at risk. CWR’s analysis of GDP, trade, markets & bank loans reveal intense concentration of risks. As no-sense strategies pervade, see who’s in CWR’s watchlist
- Wipeout – 8 Reasons Why Stress Testing For Chronic Risks Will Strand Assets – Systemic shocks from water risks are inevitable unless action is taken to reduce emissions. CWR’s Dharisha Mirando & Debra Tan share 8 things you need to know about stress testing your portfolio
- It Happened – Central Banks And Water Risks – Half a dozen new reports by the NGFS means that CWR has achieved a key milestone in embedding water risks in finance. Debra Tan and Dharisha Mirando expand on these game-changing moves by the central banks. The credit evolution has started
- Capital Threats Remain Post COVID – There is no vaccine for climate & water risks, yet some in the financial sector are still burying their heads. CWR’s Dharisho Mirando reminds us how our capital is at risk & steps we can take to reduce them while going green
More on Latest
- Can TSMC & Taiwan Manage Water To Save Global Electronics? – Taiwan’s water & climate risks plus lacklustre government actions mean the electronics sector faces significant clustered risk, warns CWR’s Dharisha Mirando
- Bottom Trawling Fishing Releases More Emissions Than Global Aviation – Green Queen’s Sally Ho shares key takeaways from a first of its kind study on the climate impacts from bottom trawling fishing & how to tackle the climate implications plus build food security
- Business of Fashion’s Inaugural Sustainability Index: The Sustainability Gap – BoF’s Sarah Kent who led the inaugural sustainability index talks to us on the why, how & what’s next. Plus, see how the largest 15 global fashion companies scored
- Our Water Footprint: Labeling The Litres Less Known – Many are still blind to the impacts on water from our consumption. CWR intern, Alexandra Murray-Tacon, finds out what 5 young Hong Kongers know about their water footprint
- Getting Old & Feeling Unloved: Water Needs A Multi-Billion Dollar Makeover – Ageing water infrastructure presents a new set of problems that will eventually lead to a breakdown in our water systems. It’s time for a multi-billion dollar makeover says CWR’s Tan
Read more from Dr. Patrycja Klusak →
Read more from Dr. Matthew Agarwala →
Read more from Matt Burke →
Read more from Dr. Moritz Kraemer →
Read more from Dr. Kamiar Mohaddes →