THE BIG SMOKE THE GLOBAL EMISSIONS OF THE UK FINANCIAL SECTOR - WWF
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
THE BIG SMOKE THE GLOBAL EMISSIONS OF THE UK FINANCIAL SECTOR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
2. INTRODUCTION 6
3. APPROACH AND SCOPE 7
3.1. APPROACH 7
3.2. SCOPE 8
3.2.1. Emissions 8
3.2.2. Financial Institutions in the UK Finance Sector 9
3.2.3. Banks 9
3.2.4. Asset managers 10
3.2.5. Additional comments on entity selection 10
4. KEY FINDINGS 11
4.1. THE UK FINANCIAL SECTOR – A HIGH-CARBON SECTOR 11
4.2. LIKELY AN UNDERESTIMATE OF FINANCED EMISSIONS 11
4.3. LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AND COMPARABLE DATA 12
5. THE ROLE OF REGULATION TO ALIGN FINANCING WITH THE PARIS GOALS 13
5.1. BEYOND DISCLOSURE TO STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT 14
5.2. VOLUNTARY EFFORTS ARE NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR GOVERNMENT ACTION 15
6. RECOMMENDATIONS 17
7. CARBON ACCOUNTING METHODOLOGY 18
7.1.1. GHG Protocol and PCAF guidance 18
7.1.1.1. Banks 18
7.1.1.2. Asset managers 19
8. LIMITATIONS AND BARRIERS 21
8.1. Limitations from data availability 21
8.2. Publicly available data 21
8.3. Boundary of the assessment 21
8.4. Pillar 3 categorisation 21
8.5. Methodological limitations 21
ANNEX 1 22
LIST OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS IN SCOPE 22
ANNEX 2 23
PCAF DATA QUALITY SCORE FOR DEBT AND EQUITY 23
2
ACRONYMS AND
ABBREVIATIONS
AUM Assets under management
CDP Carbon Disclosure Project
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
FCA Financial Conduct Authority
FI Financial institution
GHG greenhouse gas
GICS Global Industry Classification Standard
G-SII Global Systemically Important Insurers
M&A Mergers and acquisitions
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
O-SII Other systemically important institutions
PCAF Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials
PRA Prudential Regulatory Authority
TCFD Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures
WACI Weighted Average Carbon Intensity
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report is being published by WWF UK and Greenpeace UK. They commissioned South Pole,
a climate solutions and project developer to design and conduct the indicative quantitative
analysis in this report. South Pole is referred to in this report as ‘the Research Provider’. Rouse
Research & Consulting was commissioned to write this report with contributions from Jon
Dennis, Charlie Kronick, Raymond Dhirani, Anthony Field, Karen Ellis, Becky Jarvis and South
Pole. WWF UK and Greenpeace UK wish to acknowledge the support of The Sunrise Project.
The estimates of financed emissions in this analysis produced using publicly available
information should not be seen as conclusive or final, nor do they cover the full range of
activities by the selected institutions. The figures presented in this report should be seen as
indicative estimates only.
The opinions expressed in this report are based on the documents referenced in the endnotes.
We encourage readers to read those documents. The information in this report, or on which
this report is based, has been obtained from sources that the authors believe to be reliable
and accurate. However, no representation or warranty, express or implied, is made as to the
accuracy or completeness of any information obtained from third parties.
Design by: Paul Wright. Cover: ©Imageplotter News and Sports/Alamy Live News
Dated: May 2021
3
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The finance sector will play a vital role The analysis was based on a sample Canada’s domestic emissions (763 million
in determining whether the world will of selected FIs to give an indicative tonnes CO2e).5
successfully transition towards a low-carbon, representation of the UK financial sector,
sustainable economy. As an important focusing on banks and asset managers The results demonstrate that the UK’s
stakeholder to the world’s economic actors, (see Annex 1). The fifteen banks were financed emissions are extensive, likely
the finance industry can exert enormous selected based on the Bank of England’s representing one of the UK’s most significant
influence by aligning investment and domestically significant systemic institution contributions to climate change. Yet, the
lending activities with the goals of the Paris list from 2019, that evaluated banks based indicative figures generated by this analysis
Agreement and engaging their clients and on core determining criteria (e.g. size, should not be seen as conclusive or final and
investee companies to do the same. While connectedness, economic importance). The are likely a significant underestimate of the
the UK financial sector’s national importance1 asset managers are the ten which have the total UK financed emissions.
and its international reach2 is championed by largest assets under management (AUM),
the government and regulators, its ongoing are headquartered in the UK and made PCAF’s methodology does not currently
role in financing the climate and nature public disclosures enabling analysis. It is include the emissions associated with
emergency is not a matter of corresponding the first time we are aware of that such a insurance underwriting, the securities
regulatory focus. holistic analysis has been completed based underwriting and advisory services of
on data publicly disclosed by FIs using this banks, or those in asset management
To date, neither the government nor approach. assets classes other than fixed income and
relevant regulators have taken adequate equity. This meant that while the asset
action to address the global emissions Our results show estimated carbon managers included in this analysis together
financed and enabled by UK private financial emissions associated with the FIs analysed manage 86% of total UK AUM, only 39%
institutions (FIs) and to ensure that they amounted to 805 million tonnes CO2e was included in the indicative calculation.
align their activities with the country’s (Banks: 415 million tonnes CO2e Insurers were excluded due to the lack of
climate ambitions and the goals of the Paris Asset Managers: 390 million tonnes CO2e), public disclosure and external methodology
Agreement. based on year-end disclosures from 2019. to calculate their carbon emissions. Given
This is almost 1.8 times the UK’s domestically the London market for (re) insurance is the
This report provides an indicative, up-to- produced emissions. If the FIs in this study largest globally by some margin,6 the carbon
date assessment of the size of the global were a country, they would have the 9th emissions enabled by insurance underwriting
carbon footprint that is financed by some of largest emissions in the world– larger than are anticipated to be substantial.
the largest and most systemically important Germany’s (776 million tonnes CO2e) and
entities in the UK’s financial sector, in other
words, the UK’s ‘financed emissions’.a The
analysis was undertaken using the market 1.8x UK’S
DOMESTICALLY AN
CIAL INST
9
leading carbon accounting methodology UK
th
PRODUCED
IN
ITU
from the Partnership for Carbon Accounting FINANCIAL
UK F
TIONS
INSTITUTIONS
Financials (PCAF)3 which is underpinned by EMISSIONS
=
LARGES
the greenhouse gas (GHG) protocol.4 This EMISSIO T
IN THE W NS
approach calculates the indirect (Scope 805 ORLD
3) emissions of the reporting FI, currently MILLION
covering the borrowers’ and investees’ total TONNES CO2e
(absolute) Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions
(e.g. operations and offices) across a range of
economic sectors.
a Financed emissions are the greenhouse gas emissions associated with a financial institutions’ loans and investments in a reporting year.
b While some of the borrowers’ and investee companies’ Scope 3 emissions may be included within another companies’ direct emissions, it is not possible to determine this with
certainty given the international nature of UK FIs’ loans and investments. Even if this determination could be made, certain borrower and investee company Scope 3 emissions
would not be included in the Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions of other companies - most notably regarding the consumption of fossil fuels.
4
PCAF’s methodology also does not MANDATORY CLIMATE RISK DISCLOSURE MUST BE
yet enable the incorporation of Scope
3 emissions of any underlying loan or
ACCOMPANIED BY MANDATORY TRANSITION PLANS TO
investment in part due to substantial ALIGN FINANCING ACTIVITIES WITH THE GOALS OF THE
variation in the comparability, coverage and
reliability of data. The exclusion of Scope 3
PARIS AGREEMENT INCLUDING THE AIM OF LIMITING
likely results in the overall indicative figure for GLOBAL TEMPERATURE INCREASE TO 1.5°C ABOVE
this assessment being an underestimate and
will result in a significant underestimate of
PRE-INDUSTRIAL LEVELS.
the financed emissions in individual industrial
sectors. This is particularly the case for
those industries where Scope 3 dominates
overall carbon footprint,b for example, that aligns with the Paris Goals. Regulators with low or no temperature overshoot
according to MSCI the Scope 3 emissions of can then set out “a clear framework for and not reliant on carbon dioxide
the integrated oil and gas industry are more what alignment with Paris means in practice removal and to be reported on an
than six times the level of its Scope 1 and 2 for FIs, and set out the consequences for annual basis.
emissions.7 failing to meet the requirements”.8 In doing
so they can ensure that commitments • The UK government should use its G7
The exclusions of key financing activities to Paris Goals are sufficiently ambitious and COP 26 Presidencies to encourage
and Scope 3 from even the leading carbon and robust while providing an essential other countries to adopt this approach,
accounting methodologies present FIs, evaluation and enforcement mechanism. by spearheading leadership towards
regulators and governments with a They can also address gaps in data availability the alignment of private finance
misleadingly positive assessment of their and accelerate the development of key sector with Paris Goals and creating
financed emissions and climate impact. methodologies, supporting FIs through international venues and mechanisms
Unless such gaps are closed when assessing the implementation process to meet their to take this commitment forward.
financed emissions, the true extent of FIs current high-level commitments. COP26
exposure to carbon, and corresponding provides a unique opportunity for the UK to • The UK government should support
climate risk, will continue to be misjudged accelerate the adoption of financial practices the harmonisation and consistent
and underestimated. that actively support the paradigm shift implementation of an industrial
towards net zero and Paris alignment and classification across all reporting under
These findings show that the government begin to tackle globally financed emissions. Pillar 3 of the Basel Framework to
and regulators must not assume that a Prior to the summit, we recommend that increase transparency, comparability
combination of voluntary high level ‘net- the UK government commit to the following and granularity of disclosed data.
zero’ pledges and increasing disclosure measures:
of climate risk by FIs will drive capital • The Treasury should report to
allocation at the scale and pace required • Legislation to require all UK regulated parliament each year on whether
to meet the climate emergency, without FIs to adopt and implement a transition financed carbon emissions for the
further regulatory intervention. Mandatory plan that aligns with the 1.5°C goal of UK regulated FIs has increased or
climate risk disclosure must be accompanied the Paris Agreement, the provisions of decreased and whether this poses
by mandatory transition plans to align which should be guided by regulation, any systemic financial risks for the UK
financing activities with the goals of the that is both flexible to evolving best financial system.
Paris Agreement including the aim of limiting practices for assessing alignment and
global temperature increase to 1.5°C above in line with latest science. In line with its updated mandate on
pre-industrial levels (the Paris Goals). climate change, we also recommend that
• The development of specific the Bank of England:
While disclosure is an important first step, requirements9 to be included within
elevating it to the status of regulatory those transition plans and their • Ensure that climate-related risks and
‘silver bullet’ is a flawed approach to climate supervision should be undertaken impacts are integrated into asset
change mitigation. It limits the consideration by the relevant regulatory and purchase schemes and the collateral
of climate change to the risks posed to the supervisory bodies. framework; and
finance sector while ignoring the significant
negative climate impacts enabled and • The transition plan would apply • Adjust the macroprudential regulatory
financed by the industry. Fundamentally, it to all financing activities (lending, framework so that climate-related
mistakes corporate climate risk management underwriting, investing, advisory risks and impacts are more accurately
with alignment with climate outcomes, and services, and insurance underwriting). reflected in capital liquidity rules.
overlooks larger macroeconomic systemic
risks created by climate change against • The transition plan would include
which investors cannot ultimately hedge. interim emissions reductions targets
that are in line with 1.5°C pathways
Government has a clear role in setting a
legislative requirement that all regulated UK
FIs adopt and implement a transition plan
5
2. INTRODUCTION
The finance sector will play a vital role
in determining whether the world will
successfully transition towards a low-carbon,
sustainable economy, through its financing
practices, as a major investor in companies
worldwide, and as an insurance underwriter.
Spurred by the work of the Task Force
on Climate-related Financial Disclosures
(TCFD)10 and the Network of Central
Banks and Supervisors for Greening the
Financial System,11 there has been increasing
recognition in recent years of the risks posed
by climate change to the financial sector -
both credit risk from transition, physical, and
legal climate risks and broader risks to overall
financial stability.
However, this analysis and the resulting
climate risk management by FIs has been
divorced from an assessment and mitigation
©Greenpeace
of the negative climate impacts caused by
them. Accordingly, the financial system, and
the wider economy it serves, now edges
closer to the possibility of a failed transition
and the resulting systemic financial impacts it remains challenging to get full visibility on the exposure of the finance sector, based
through breakdowns of planetary systems on lending and investing related carbon on the data key actors have made publicly
and overshooting global temperature goals emissions from the outside looking into FIs. available, to promote action on climate by
such as limiting global temperature increase This is due to a number of reasons, including the UK government and FIs in the lead up to
to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels (the data limitations and lack of calculation COP26.
Paris Goals). methodologies. In this report, an indicative
analysis has been completed based on the While the UK government has further raised
As a result, there are increasing expectations latest comparable information, close to four ambition with its recent target to reduce
on FIs to move beyond climate-related risk years after the launch of TCFD. emissions by 78% in 2035 and taken a
management and disclosure and to align leadership role on public finance, to date,
activities more strategically with global The main aim of the research project is neither the UK government nor relevant
commitments such as the Paris Goals and to provide an indicative and up-to-date regulators have taken adequate action to
nature protection. assessment of the size of the global carbon ensure UK FIs align their activities with the
footprint that is financed through the UK’s goals of the Paris Agreement on climate
External stakeholders, such as customers financial sector, based solely on publicly change and the UK’s own net zero target.
and civil society groups, are increasingly available data. Although evaluated on an The UK, as the host of COP26 in 2021 and
interested in the carbon emissions associated indicative basis, this analysis aims to provide through its international and sizable financial
with the financial sector’s lending and a better understanding of the carbon sector, is central to accelerating alignment
investments. FIs’ self-disclosure of carbon emissions financed by the UK financial sector, of the global finance system with the Paris
emissions are improving, particularly since via an analysis of large and systemically Agreement.
the launch of the TCFD in 2017. However, important institutions. We hope to shed light
6
3. APPROACH AND SCOPE
3.1. APPROACH time of writing not all FIs had published to calculate financed emissions of banks
Carbon accounting is the process of their more up-to-date annual reports. A or asset managers due to the scope of the
consistently measuring, tracking and high-level sample check was completed assessment, which does not focus only
reporting GHGs generated, avoided or to compare to more recent publications to on carbon intensive sectors but expands
removed by an entity over time. The Global ensure substantial changes (i.e., +/- 25% across several asset classes, industries
GHG Accounting and Reporting Standard by sector classification) had not taken place and geographies. As a result, the level of
(the “Standard”) devised by the Partnership throughout 2020. granularity of the calculations and values can
for Carbon Accounting Financials (PCAF) differ substantially from previous efforts as it
is the most established of the carbon It is worth noting that the approach taken is more holistic in nature covering all sectors
accounting methodologies. To estimate by this analysis will differ from prior efforts as opposed to just fossil fuels.
emissions from lending and investment
activities by the selected entities, the
Research Provider followed and applied
the methodological principles of the GHG
Protocol’s Category 15: Investments12
and the application guidelines provided
by the PCAF.13
Financial data was sourced from public
disclosures such as annual reports, regulatory
disclosures, and includes data such as
portfolio positions, loan transactions and
the balance sheet. The Research Provider
assessed the level of disclosure of ten of the
largest asset managers in order to identify
disclosure related to listed equity or fixed
income. All ten of the asset managers were
found to disclose either their positions for
a number of equity and fixed income funds,
or disclosed emissions data for a portion of
their AUM as part of their annual disclosure
to the Montreal Pledge, CDP, or TCFD. The
calculated emissions for disclosed funds were
used as proxies for the remaining value of
AUM in equity and fixed income, enabling
an indication of total absolute emissions
financed by the asset manager.
Reported emissions data was sourced
from company disclosures in sustainability
reports, as well as disclosure to mechanisms
such as CDP14 and TCFD. The assessment
covers financing to 23 sub-industries, from
energy to IT and industrials. Full details of the
methodology and its limitations are set out in
Sections 7 and 8.
©Marten van Dijl/Greenpeace
The analysis was completed using the
year-end disclosures from 2019, as at the
7
3.2. SCOPE These are categorised into two scopes: The work conducted does not incorporate
3.2.1. Emissions Scope 3 emissions of any loan or investment
In order to assess the UK finance sector’s • Scope 2: Indirect GHG emissions from because to date, as noted by the Standard,
emissions, the Research Provider had to consumption of purchased electricity, there is substantial variation in the
first determine which FIs and which of the heat or steam. comparability, coverage, transparency and
emissions within the industry’s complex reliability of Scope 3 data per sector and data
chain of operations would be included in this • Scope 3: Other indirect emissions, such source. It is worth noting that the Standard
analysis. as the extraction and production of outlines a phased-in approach to Scope 3
purchased materials and fuels, outsourced reporting, requiring the energy and mining
As defined by the GHG protocol, direct activities and investments. sectors to report Scope 3 emissions from
GHG emissions are those stemming from 2021 as a starting point, with all sectors
sources owned or controlled by the reporting For the purpose of this work and as defined reporting from 2026 onwards as per the
company. These emissions are categorised as in the Standard, “financed emissions” are approach defined by the EU Technical Expert
Scope 1 emissions. the GHG emissions financed by the loans Group. However, this assessment uses data
and investments of FIs. Furthermore, as per and public disclosures from 2019, where
Indirect GHG emissions are emissions that the Standard, the assessment covers the no scope 3 reporting was required for any
are a consequence of the activities of the borrowers’ and investees’ absolute Scope 1 industrial sector.
reporting entity, but which occur at sources and Scope 2 emissions across all sectors.
owned or controlled by another company.
Figure 1: Overview of GHG Protocol scopes and emissions across the value chain
CO2 N20
HFCs PFCs NF3
SF6 CH4
Scope2 Scope3 Scope1 Scope3
Indirect Indirect Direct Indirect
investments
purchased
electricty leased assets
company
steam, heating facilities
& cooling franchises
for own use
employee
commuting
company leased assets
vehicles
business travel end-of-life
treatment of
sold products
waste generated
in operations use of
sold products
transportation
and distribution processing of
sold products
purchased goods capital fuel and energy transportation
and services goods related activities and distribution
8
3.2.2. Financial Institutions in to be substantial.15 Despite the resulting 3.2.3. Banks
the UK Finance Sector underestimate of financed emissions (due The selection of UK-incorporated banks and
The UK is one of the world’s leading financial in part by methodological limitations, UK entities of internationally headquartered
centres. The UK finance sector comprises a see section 5.2), we believe the analysis banks is based on the list of institutions
number of sub-sectors including banking, provides an insightful assessment of the identified as Other Systemically Important
insurance & reinsurance, fund management, emissions financed by the selected lending Institutions (O-SII) by the Prudential
commodities trading and Fintech. Likewise, and investing activity demonstrating the Regulatory Authority – Bank of England. The
it comprises multiple actors of varying exposure of and contribution by UK FIs to core set of criteria behind the underlying
sizes from multinational conglomerates to climate change. scoring were as follows16:
independent advisors. For the purposes
of this indicative analysis, the Research Where an entity may fall under more than a) size;
Provider identified the main types of FIs in one FI type the Research Provider assessed b) importance for the economy e.g.
the UK, based on importance and size, which data availability to avoid duplication. For the capturing substitutability/financial
represent a significant selection of the UK purposes of the estimation, all of the global institution infrastructure;
finance sector as a whole. emissions (that are in scope under Section c) complexity — including the additional
3.2.1) associated with a UK headquartered complexities from cross-border activity;
Three types of FI were included in the initial FI have been included in the scope of the d) interconnectedness of the institution or
definition of ‘the UK’s financial sector’: calculation. This is the same approach used (sub-)group with the financial system.
banks, asset managers and insurers. Due by the financial supervisors. For example,
to the lack of public disclosure and external the Prudential Regulatory Authority in the
methodology to calculate the carbon UK supervises the bank HSBC Holdings plc
emissions related to insurers, following across its group globally. In the case of a
a detailed investigation, this type of FI subsidiary of a non-UK headquartered group,
has not been included in the indicative such as the UK based entity of Credit Suisse
estimate. Given the London Market for (re) International, the global emissions of the
insurance is the largest globally by some regulated UK subsidiary were calculated for
margin, the carbon emissions enabled by the scope of this report. Again, this is the
insurance underwriting are anticipated same approach as regulatory supervisors.
9
3.2.4. Asset managers INSURANCE
The selection of asset managers,c which
encompass entities incorporated in the UK Three types of FI were included in the initial definition of ‘the UK’s financial sector’; banks,
and subsidiaries with UK presence, is based asset managers and insurers. According to an 2019 ABI report, the UK insurance market
on their size of operations and market is the fourth largest in the world, and the largest in Europe.19 PCAF does not provide
capitalisation on the London Stock Exchange. guidance to assess emissions associated with insurance premiums underwritten. Due to
To ensure a representative coverage, the the lack of public disclosure and external methodology to calculate the carbon emissions
Research Provider compared our list of related to insurers, following a detailed investigation this type of FI has not been included
asset managers with a report from the City in the estimate. However, the carbon emissions associated with insurance underwriting
of London Corporation report.17 It stated would be anticipated to be extensive. The London Market Group reported that in 2018 the
AUM from the UK was USD 6.9tn in 2018.18 combined London insurance market accounted for 55% of global energy sector insurance
Over the prior five years these figures have premiums.20 Insurance companies are in a unique position to accelerate the transition to
not changed by more than 5%. There are a 100% renewable energy future. As risk managers they play a silent but essential role in
many potential comparative numbers – this deciding which types of project can be built and operated in a modern society. Without
was selected as it has been used recently their insurance, almost no new coal mines, oil pipelines and power plants can be built, and
by the industry itself. However, the value most existing projects will have to be phased out.21 Excluding such financial activities from
of equity and fixed income AUM assessed the calculation of ‘financed emissions’ leads to an underestimate of the contribution of key
in this work represents 39% of the total UK financial actors such as insurance companies to the climate emergency.
AUM. Data and methodological limitations
for other asset classes within existing carbon
accounting methodologies reduced the
coverage of the assessment. Following a review and extensive research managed by the UK entities. As a result,
relating to the country of domicile for global these asset managers were not included
3.2.5. Additional comments asset managers including Blackrock, State in the assessment, given that accounting
on entity selection Street and Vanguard, the Research Provider for their global emissions would incorrectly
Pension schemes were excluded, as there was unable to identify information related attribute emissions to the UK financial sector,
could be double counting with asset to the UK entities of these asset managers, which cannot be verified.
managers. nor data on the positions held by the funds
© Geoffrey Robinson / Alamy Stock Photo
c It is worth noting that, unlike banks and insurers, a list of systemically important institutions is not available for asset managers which limits our
understanding of the significance of the selected asset managers in the UK finance sector.
104. KEY FINDINGS
4.1. THE UK FINANCIAL 1.8x UK’S
SECTOR – A HIGH-CARBON DOMESTICALLY AN
CIAL INST
9
UK
SECTOR th
PRODUCED
IN
ITU
FINANCIAL
UK F
TIONS
INSTITUTIONS
Our results show estimated carbon emissions EMISSIONS
=
LARGES
associated with the FIs analysed amounted EMISSIO T
IN THE W NS
to 805 million tonnes CO2e (Banks: 415 805 ORLD
million tonnes CO2e Asset Managers: 390 MILLION
million tonnes CO2e), based on year-end TONNES CO2e
disclosures from 2019. If the FIs in this study
were a country, they would have the 9th
largest emissions in the world – larger than
Germany’s (776 million tonnes CO2e) and
Canada’s domestic emissions (763 million
tonnes CO2e).22 by which banks support high-carbon underestimate arising in the case of
industries. The Rainforest Action Network calculating financed emissions for individual
Although not like-for-like, for a sense of found that 65% of the 2020 fossil fuel industries.d This is particularly the case for
scale it’s worth noting that this estimate of financing they identified was provided sectors such as energy, mining, utilities,
the UK’s financed emissions based on the through such services.24 Similarly, the construction, materials and transportation,
sample in this study is almost 1.8 times the emissions associated with key asset classes where not accounting for the indirect
entire UK’s net emissions account for 2019 for asset managers, such as cash, currency emissions substantially underestimates the
of 455 million tonnes (CO2e).23 and derivatives, cannot be captured under emissions profile of the activities owned
available methodologies. In the context and operated by loanees and investees that
4.2. LIKELY AN of this analysis, this restricts us to an are active in these sectors might result
UNDERESTIMATE OF assessment of only 39% of the total of UK in missing the majority of emissions. For
FINANCED EMISSIONS AUM. Taken together these exclusions create example, according to MSCI the Scope
The analysis was carried out as much as a substantial limitation as key activities for 3 emissions of the integrated oil and gas
possible in alignment with the guidelines banks, asset managers, and insurers could industry (measured by the constituents
set by PCAF, the most established of the not be assessed. of the MSCI ACWI Index) are more than
carbon accounting methodologies. Although six times the level of its Scope 1 and 2
PCAF has provided a global standard with Furthermore, as noted the Standard covers emissions.25
options to account for financed emissions, only the emissions associated with absolute
the Standard still has gaps for both banks and Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions across all Exclusion of key financing activities and
insurers. sectors. Therefore, analysis being carried out scope 3 from even the leading carbon
by the finance sector does not incorporate accounting methodologies present
Existing carbon accounting methodologies Scope 3 emissions of any loan or investment. FIs, regulators and government with a
note that capital providers and owners As noted by the Standard, there is substantial misleadingly positive assessment of their
generate financed emissions, but exclude variation in the comparability, coverage, financed emissions and climate impact.
emissions associated with service providers. transparency and reliability of Scope 3 data Until such gaps are closed when assessing
Guidance on accounting for service per sector and data source. financed emissions the true extent of FIs’
provision, such as insurance and securities exposure to and contribution to climate risk
underwriting and M&A advisory, is not The exclusion of Scope 3 likely results in the will be misjudged and underestimated.
provided. This is important as underwriting overall indicative figure for this assessment
of securities is increasingly the mechanism being underestimated and a significant
d While some of the borrowers’ and investee companies’ Scope 3 emissions may be included within another companies’ direct emissions, it is not possible to determine this with
certainty given the international nature of UK FIs’ loans and investments. Even if this determination could be made, certain borrower and investee company Scope 3 emissions would
not be included in the Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions of other companies - most notably regarding the consumption of fossil fuels.
114.3. LACK OF Another example is the aggregation by some Feedback received from banks during this
TRANSPARENCY AND banks of credit exposure for ‘Agriculture, research, focused on the lack of clarity
COMPARABLE DATA fishing and transport’. These inherently surrounding granularity of the data used,
Reports issued under the Pillar 3 of the different activities would generally require industrial classification, and attribution.
Basel Consolidated Framework26 were three separate emission factors per type However, the high-level nature of the data
heavily used for the analysis, specifically of agriculture and transport, for example. disclosed by banks makes precise comparable
industry classification tables. Pillar 3 was In addition, the share of credit exposure for emissions estimates highly challenging. This
further developed by regulators after each of the three activities is not disclosed, lack of comparability and granularity within
the financial crisis of 2007-9, to enable requiring assumptions on how to distribute Pillar 3 reporting is a significant risk as these
greater transparency by banks. However, these accordingly. disclosures are currently being relied upon
the manner in which industry classification as the driving force for capital reallocation in
and aggregation was conducted varied per This issue did not arise to the same extent line with Paris Goals.
institution which created barriers to the with asset managers where there is a
analysis (detailed in Section 8). For example, more standardised system of industrial A harmonised industrial classification and
three banks reported and categorised classification. consistent implementation should be
transport in three different formats: introduced across all reporting under Pillar 3
“Transport, utilities and storage”; “Transport, Furthermore several industrial activities of the Basel Framework to overcome these
distribution and hotels;” and “Transport are capable of being grouped under the challenges.
and storage”. As can be evidenced, uninformative categorisation ‘Other’,
transportation activities are categorised which for some banks could encompass
alongside other activities. In the case of JP numerous activities, including mortgages
Morgan, for instance, two carbon intensive and exposure to carbon-intensive activities.
sectors such as transport and utilities are The Research Provider conducted extensive
grouped together with storage, with no research to identify solutions to enhance the
further granularity provided, leaving the transparency of this ‘Other’ category further,
reader to assume the share of each activity with limited success. This form of grouping
as a proportion of the total loan exposure for accounted for approx. 20% of total credit
this category. A similar case was evidenced exposure.
for several other categories.
©Marten van Dijl/Greenpeace
125. THE ROLE OF REGULATION
TO ALIGN FINANCING WITH
THE PARIS GOALS
The finance sector drives the nature of global
economic activity via its capital allocation
decisions. As an influential stakeholder,
the finance industry can exert enormous
influence not just by aligning their own
activities with the Paris Goals but by pressing
their clients and investee companies to do
likewise.
The analysis provided in this study
demonstrates that the UK finance sector
should be considered a ‘high-carbon sector’
–in particular given that its carbon emissions
outweigh that of UK economy. While the UK
financial sector’s national importance27 and
its international reach28 is championed by the
government and regulators, its ongoing role
in financing and profiting from the climate
and nature emergency is not a matter of
corresponding regulatory priority.
The current focus of assessing the risk to
the finance sector from climate change must
be accompanied by an assessment of and
plan to address the industry’s significant
contribution to climate change. The
limitations within even the leading carbon Against this context, there is a clear role for just as the finance flowing from the City of
accounting methodologies highlight the regulators, in supporting the finance sector London fuels the global economy, so too
risk of focusing solely on measurement in overcoming barriers and accelerating can UK regulation drive global emissions
and disclosure frameworks rather than on its alignment with the goals of the Paris reductions. Governments should support
rapidly realigning core financing activities Agreement and the UK’s own net zero the financial sector in the implementation of
with a 1.5°C outcome. The government and ambitions. Further regulation of FIs will likely its obligations by introducing such additional
regulators must not assume a combination have a transformative cascading impact policy measures as are necessary to ensure
of voluntary high-level ‘net-zero by 2050’ onto other sectors and companies across FIs’ efforts are not undermined by lack of
pledges by FIs and disclosure of climate risk the world as FIs step up their demands on data provision or other actions by other
by companies will sufficiently drive capital clients and investee companies. In that way, companies.
allocation in line with the Paris Goals absent
any further regulatory requirements. This is
evidenced by research showing that since the THE CURRENT FOCUS OF ASSESSING THE RISK TO THE FINANCE
signing of the Paris Agreement, the world’s
largest 60 banks have provided USD$3.8trn
SECTOR FROM CLIMATE CHANGE MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY
to the fossil fuel industry.29 Leading FIs also AN ASSESSMENT OF AND PLAN TO ADDRESS THE INDUSTRY’S
continue to be linked to financing activities
contributing to deforestation endangering
SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TO CLIMATE CHANGE.
the world’s carbon sinks.30
135.1. BEYOND DISCLOSURE
TO STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
In March 2021, the UK government
announced a consultation on a proposal to
require large private and listed companies
to disclose climate risks as soon as 2022
which would make the UK the first G20
country to mandate implementation of the
TCFD. The government, in the consultation
paper, recognises the opportunity for the
UK leadership as both G7 and COP 26
president in 2021 “for collective action to
address the most pressing challenge of our
time, and to encourage countries across the
globe to match our ambition.”31 It appears
that the UK government currently limits its
ambition for collective action in the financial
regulatory space to encouraging other
countries to follow suit on mandatory TCFD
implementation.
While disclosure through frameworks like
TCFD is an important first step, it should
not be mistaken for actions whose aim is
the alignment of activities with climate
outcomes such as the 1.5°C temperature
goal. Climate risk management may reduce
©Bernd Lauter/Greenpeace
a company’s or FI’s risks arising from the
transition to a low carbon economy but does
not necessarily result in actions that reduce
emissions in line with the science.32 Nor does
the biggest financial risk from climate change
arise from losses on individual companies or
even industrial sectors but rather from the
macroeconomic systemic risks against which
one cannot hedge.33 owners, and perverse incentives are As the timeframe for effective climate action
repeatedly diagnosed but with no regulatory shortens with significant global emissions
Rooted firmly in the ideas of market treatment prescribed.35 As has been pointed cuts needed this decade, it is unacceptable
efficiency and that ‘what‘s measured is out by academics, “While TCFD can influence to treat mandatory risk disclosure as the
managed’, the TCFD framework requires the nature of the information disclosed, it has primary regulatory intervention to drive
companies to report on the risks and no direct influence over the degree to which, corporate action on climate.
opportunities it faces from climate risk and how appropriately, such information
and explain how its governance structures is used. The ability and incentive of users As Dr Ben Caldecott has noted, “instead
and strategic planning seek to identify and to interpret and apply climate-related of incidentally contributing to alignment
manage them. The focus on disclosure is disclosures, and the mechanisms available with climate outcomes we need specific
driven by the theory that if comparable to them for doings so, are influenced by a ways of dealing with and contributing to
and detailed information is available across much broader set of societal and economic the challenge of alignment.”38 The Advisory
the economy, the market will appropriately challenges than those encompassed within Group on Finance to the Committee on
price the climate risks and opportunities and the direct influence of the TCFD.”36 Climate Change has argued similarly that
corporate and investment capital will flow “the UK must go beyond managing climate
accordingly. Evidence to date suggests that investors risk and focus on net-zero as a key goal”.39
are not integrating existing voluntary TCFD Mandatory climate risk disclosure must be
While disclosure of material risks including disclosures into their decision-making. accompanied by mandatory transition plans
climate risks is important for the proper According to an HSBC survey of 2000 that align with the Paris Goals. Information
functioning of the financial markets, a lack of investors, just 10 per cent considered can serve as a means of assessing the
information is not the sole or even primary the disclosures as a relevant source of viability and merit of the presented strategy.
cause of the market’s continued failure to information. Daniel Klier, the then global head But disclosure of climate risk should not be
address climate change - identified over a of sustainable finance at HSBC, put it bluntly conflated – and cannot be confused - with
decade ago as the greatest market failure when he said: “We disclosed that 21 per cent adopting a new strategy that aligns with a
in history.34 Problems of short-termism, of our balance sheet is subject to climate risk, climate outcome.
regulatory capture, misinterpretations of but we don’t get investor queries on that, I
fiduciary duty, a failure to act as universal could count them on a single hand.”37
145.2. VOLUNTARY EFFORTS Relying on voluntary efforts by UK FIs is not carbon sectors not themselves aligned with
ARE NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR sufficient given the urgency of the issue and the Paris Goals.40
GOVERNMENT ACTION the inadequacy of the commitments made
Since 2020, there has been a mass – to date. Many of these net zero ambitions The trajectory on climate risk disclosure
though not universal – movement from amount to ‘aims’ to be achieved decades provides a warning to those intending to
financial firms announcing “net-zero by from now rather than targets for near term rely solely on voluntary efforts. The TCFD
2050 or sooner” ambitions and high-level emissions reductions; focus on reducing recommendations were published in 2017
commitments to align financing practices intensity rather than absolute emissions; after a two year consultation process.
with the Paris Agreement, while financial deem acceptable emissions reduction Four years later, the UK aims to become
sector actors and coalitions have unveiled trajectories with questionable levels of the first major economy to mandate its
a plethora of recommendations, tools, and carbon dioxide removal; use energy demand adoption. In announcing this intention, the UK
initiatives for a range of purposes and actors projections and scenarios which result in government acknowledged that regulation
in the finance sector. Sometimes overlapping net-zero in 2070 rather than 2050; and lack is now necessary because voluntary
and occasionally competing, the continuing transparency about the demands being made levels of disclosure overall were low with
appearance of new coalitions and pledges of portfolio companies and clients on climate companies avoiding some of the TCFD
leads to a wide array of acronyms but change. At the same time, institutions recommendations, and because “an increase
without corresponding progress in absolute announcing net-zero ambitions continue to in the quality and quantity of TCD disclosures
emissions reductions. provide high levels of financing to high- is needed.”41
Table 1: A selection of the existing initiatives associated with financed emissions42
Focus Initiatives Financial Sector
• Collective Commitment to Climate Action
(subset of Principles for Responsible Banking)
High level commitment to act Banks
• Climate Action in financial institutions
• Net Zero Banking Alliance
• Net Zero Asset Owners Alliance
High level commitment to act • Investor Agenda Investors
• Net Zero Investment Framework
Measuring Emissions • PCAF’s Methodology Banks and investors
• Paris Agreement Capital Transition
Assessment (PACTA)
• Poseidon Principles
Scenario Analysis • Center for Climate Aligned Finance Banks and investors
• TCFD Implied Temperature Rise Associated
with Investments Working Group
• Transition Pathway Initiative
Target Setting Science Based Targets for Financial Institutions Banks and Investors
CISL Banking Environment Initiative
Enabling Action Climate Safe Lending Network Banks and Investors
Climate Action 100+
TCFD
Reporting Banks and Investors
CDP Financial services sector Questionnaire
15This decade represents the most critical Goals. Even the most lauded voluntary • Setting minimum expectations for FI’s
time period for deep absolute emissions efforts are coalitions of the willing from that are aligned with best available
cuts across the economy. According to which leading FIs can choose to exclude science rather than the willingness of the
IPCC 1.5°C pathways with limited or no themselves. Government has an clear role least ambitious signatory to a voluntary
temperature overshoot, global emissions in setting a legislative requirement that all effort;
need to decline by about 45% from 2010 regulated UK FIs must adopt and implement
levels by 2030. Given this scientific reality a transition plan that aligns with the Paris • Encouraging the international adoption of
and the inevitability that voluntary efforts Goals. This avoids any inconsistencies in national best practice standards; and
will fall short of the required level of action, how individual regulators may interpret their
we simply do not have another four years mandate on climate change. • Implementing an evaluation and
to waste on inadequate and inconsistent enforcement process which would
voluntary efforts. Regulators can then set out “a clear provide much needed credibility and
framework for what alignment with Paris accountability into ‘net-zero’ pledges.
There is growing consensus that FIs should means in practice for FIs, and set out
be required to make strategic adjustments the consequences for failing to meet the FIs should welcome rather than resist such
to drive climate action. The Advisory Group requirements”.45 Regulators could help legislative and regulatory intervention. It
on Finance for the UK’s Climate Change address the gaps with existing voluntary would level the playing field as well as help
Committee recommended that net-zero efforts by: them operationalise the high-level ambitions
targets and plans be mandatory for FIs, they have expressed to shareholders and
alongside the 6th carbon budget.43 A • Defining and standardising best practice whose implementation will be complex. A
recent report from Policy Exchange called removing the growing risk of similar but survey of 50 sustainable finance experts
for supervised firms to be required to different voluntary initiatives setting found broad consensus on the potential
create transition plans aligned with key varying standards each labelled ‘best impact of regulators filling this role.46
environmental targets such as those in practice’;
the Paris Agreement and with eradicating
activities such as deforestation.44 • Supporting and accelerating the
development of objective fit-for-purpose
The government and the relevant regulators methodologies and overcome known data
– the FCA and the PRA – each have a role gaps;
to play in driving FI alignment with the Paris
©Paul Langrock/Greenpeace
166. RECOMMENDATIONS
In March 2021, the Chancellor of the • Legislation to require all UK regulated the alignment of private finance
Exchequer confirmed that each of the key FIs to adopt and implement a transition sector with Paris Goals and creating
regulatory bodies– the FCA and the PRA plan that aligns with the 1.5°C goal of international venues and mechanisms
- “should have regard to the government’s the Paris Agreement, the provisions of to take this commitment forward.
commitment to achieve a net-zero economy which should be guided by regulation,
by 2050 under the Climate Change Act that is both flexible to evolving best • The UK government should support
2008 (Order 2019) when considering how practices for assessing alignment and the harmonisation and consistent
to advance its objectives and discharge in line with latest science. implementation of an industrial
its functions.”47 This clarification supports classification across all reporting under
civil society calls for the Bank of England • The development of specific Pillar 3 of the Basel Framework to
to fully use its powers, including on capital requirements48 to be included within increase transparency, comparability
requirements, to drive FIs towards alignment those transition plans and their and granularity of disclosed data.
with the Paris Goals. supervision should be undertaken
by the relevant regulatory and • The Treasury should report to
However, the regulators’ reluctance to supervisory bodies. parliament each year on whether
mandate climate risk disclosures which was financed carbon emissions for the
also arguably within their existing remit and • The transition plan would UK regulated FIs has increased or
instead rely on the government to introduce apply to all financing activities decreased and whether this poses
legislation suggests that HM Treasury will (lending, underwriting, investing, any systemic financial risks for the UK
likewise need to introduce legislation to advisory services, and insurance financial system.
require that FIs align their activities with the underwriting).
Paris Goals. In line with its updated mandate on climate
• The transition plan would include change, we also recommend that the Bank of
COP26 provides a unique opportunity interim emissions reductions England:
for the UK to accelerate the adoption of targets that are in line with
financial practices that actively support 1.5°C pathways with low or no • Ensure that climate-related risks and
the paradigm shift towards net zero and temperature overshoot and not impacts are integrated into asset
Paris Alignment and begin to tackle globally reliant on carbon dioxide removal purchase schemes and the collateral
financed emissions. Prior to the summit, we and to be reported on an annual framework; and
recommend that the UK government commit basis.
to the following measures: • Adjust the macroprudential regulatory
• The UK government should use its G7 framework so that climate-related
and COP 26 Presidencies to encourage risks and impacts are more accurately
other countries to adopt this approach, reflected in capital liquidity rules.
by spearheading leadership towards
177. CARBON ACCOUNTING
METHODOLOGY
This section gives a further explanation of Table 2: PCAF’s data score quality for equity and loans52
the methodological process undertaken by
the research provider (beyond the steps Data Options to estimate the
When to use each option
outlined in Section 3), across the selected Quality financed emissions
entities that featured in the analysis.
Outstanding amount in the company is known.
Emission factors for the sector per unit of
7.1.1. GHG Protocol and Score 5
Option 3: Economic activity-
revenue (e.g., tCO2e per EUR/USD of revenue
PCAF guidance based emissions
earned in a sector) and asset turnover ratios for
To estimate emissions from lending and
the sector are known.
investment activities by the selected entities,
the Research Provider followed and applied Unaudited emissions are collected from the
the methodological principles of the GHG borrower or investee company directly or
Option 1: Reported
Protocol’s Category 15: Investments49 and Score 1 indirectly via verified third-party providers (e.g.,
emissions
the application guidelines provided by the CDP) and then allocated to the reporting FI using
Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials the attribution factor.
(PCAF).50
There are three options specified by PCAF to score assigned by PCAF (1 being the highest, and mortgages. In particular, the assessment
measure financed emissions, namely: 5 being the lowest), is illustrated in Table 2. covers 23 sub-industries, from energy
to IT and industrials. It is worth noting
• Option 1: reported emissions Financial data was sourced from public that although information from banks’
disclosures such as annual reports, regulatory disclosure enables an estimate, the lack of
• Option 2: physical activity-based disclosures, and includes data such as a harmonised industrial classification and
emissions portfolio positions, loan transactions and categorisation across institutional Pillar 3
the balance sheet. Reported emissions data reporting, as well as granular disclosure of
• Option 3: economic activity-based was sourced from company disclosures in geographic exposure, only allows for the
emissions sustainability reports, as well as disclosure to estimates to be carried out through the
mechanisms such as CDP51 and TCFD. use of economic activity-based emissions
Reported emissions and physical activity- (Option 3 as per the Standard). Banks are
based methods require reported emissions or 7.1.1.1. Banks required to report their material risks in
primary physical activity data (e.g., electricity Banks act both as asset owners (e.g., Pillar 3 while meeting the regulations core
consumption) disclosed by each borrower lending) and service providers (e.g., principles; clarity, comprehensiveness,
or investee, or third-party data providers. underwriting, M&A). For this assessment, meaningfulness/usefulness, consistency
Economic activity-based emissions on the banks’ credit exposure represents the over time and comparability. Pillar 3 sector
other hand, are estimations derived from the basis for the calculations carried out, classifications tend to be less comparable
use of region or sector-specific emissions given banks’ ownership of the emissions across institutions when compared with the
data, combined with key financial data for resulting from the activities financed. global standard industry codes typically used
each investee, for example, credit exposure Although credit represents only one part by Asset Managers for debt and equity.
or AUM. of a bank’s activities (e.g., lending), there is
an acceptable degree of visibility related to In addition, as per PCAF’s data quality score
Given that the analysis is based solely on each bank’s lending activities per industry guidelines, the approach enabled by the
publicly available data, it has employed and geography. Accordingly, only credit publicly available data is a Score 5, the lowest
options 1 and 3, based on data availability. exposure is included within this analysis. The data quality score possible for an estimation.
The underlying data considerations for each asset classes covered in this assessment
option, as well as the underlying data quality include business loans to several industries
18The implications of the method and a data report itself. This analysis is completed on a different industry name and constituted
score 5 are predominantly that the resulting a regulatory accounting basis by the FIs. a large share of the counterparty exposure
emissions estimates encompass a degree of The initial steps in the assessment carried disclosed in the credit risk disclosure tables
error that is notable, and the estimates can out by the Research Provider included a in Pillar 3 (CRB tables). These were found
therefore only be seen as indicative. This still mapping exercise where the classification within the following classifications per bank:
provides a sound basis for estimated carbon of activities outlined by banks in the CRB-D ‘Personal’ for HSBC, ‘Other’ for Barclays and
emissions while accepting the analysis is not tables in Pillar 3 reports were mapped to ‘Retail’ for Santander. Further, the underlying
precise in nature. The calculation approach the Global Industry Classification Standard geographies of the counterparty values were
taken is the same across all institutions and (GICS) – an industry taxonomy. This identified from the explanations mentioned
provides a comparable top-down analysis. enabled the Research Provider to map these within the Pillar 3 report. The emission
Deeper analysis based on transactions activities to the Exiobase datasets providing factors which were calculated using the
would need to be completed by the FIs GHG emission factor per sector, as well as above-mentioned approach for mortgages
themselves to be fully accurate – this is not calculate the asset turnover per industry. The in specific geographies were then applied to
possible from the outside, usually due to attribution of overall emissions was based these mortgage values, corresponding to the
client confidentiality. To date, not all FIs in on the outstanding aggregate investment industry where the counterparty values were
the UK have published their financed carbon or lending provided to an industry, and the largely concentrated.
emissions. use of an asset turnover ratio specific to the
country and industry. This approach was 7.1.1.2. Asset managers
As there is a lack of public data from the implemented for all asset classes except The portfolio-level exposure of the ten
institutions themselves, methodological mortgages, following the formula below largest asset managers in terms of value of
assumptions have been used for this (extracted from PCAF’s methodologies assets under management (AUM) is assessed
indicative analysis. The key data points used https://carbonaccountingfinancials.com/): based on the data quality that is publicly
for the calculation were the following: available from each institution. Each asset
manager’s portfolio encompasses a diverse
• Attribution data: portfolio of asset classes, geographies
where c = borrower or investee company and positions. Given the methodological
• Outstanding investment in the industry and s = sector. guidelines provided in the Standard to date,
the assessment focuses on equity and
• Asset turnover ratio per sector For mortgages, which represents the largest corporate fixed income investments.
asset class in the assessment of the 15
• Emissions data: institutions, a separate approach was used The Research Provider assessed the level
based on PCAF’s recommendations, which of disclosure of ten of the largest asset
• GHG emissions per sector (sourced from was based on the geographic distribution managers in order to identify disclosure
Exiobase53) of each bank’s mortgage exposure. The related to equity or fixed income. All ten
calculation was based on national statistical of the asset managers were found to
• Turnover per sector (calculated using data to estimate average dwelling type area disclose either their positions for a number
the asset turnover and outstanding and energy consumption. Emissions were of equity and fixed income funds, or
investment per sector) estimated using emission factors specific to disclosed emissions data for a portion of
the geography and energy source (e.g., grid their AUM as part of their annual disclosure
As outlined by the Standard, and based on emission factors). The key data points used to the Montreal Pledge, CDP, or TCFD. The
data availability from Pillar 3 disclosures, for the calculation were the following, based following approach was used to estimate
the Research Provider employed the use on the formula below (extracted from PCAF financed emissions based on the available
of official statistical data from Exiobase, https://carbonaccountingfinancials.com/): data:
providing region and industry-specific
emission factors expressed per economic • Outstanding amount • For asset managers that publicly disclose
activity (e.g., kg of CO2/USD of revenue) to their holdings and positions for a number
estimate the exposure of each bank’s lending • Estimated building energy consumption of their funds, an accurate carbon
activity on a global scale. For example, for per m2 accounting of Scope 1 and 2 emissions
energy the composition of the grid would for investees was carried out as per PCAF
be included in the country emission factor. • Estimated area financed in m2 based on guidelines for equity and/or fixed income
Asset turnover ratios were employed, as average dwelling type portfolios, with the calculation accuracy
per PCAF’s guidelines, to estimate turnover ranging between a data quality score of 1
per industry and geography, and enable the • Standard emission factors specific to the and 3.
attribution of emissions per institution i.e., energy source
financed emissions. • Once the emissions from the available
funds under equity and fixed income
For this assessment, the Research Provider strategies were calculated and attributed
collected geographical and industry credit where b = building, c = energy source to the asset manager, an average carbon
exposure data reported by banks in so intensity (tCO2e / million invested) for
called CRB (i.e. credit risk exposure) tables It was also found that some banks (HSBC equity and fixed income was calculated
respectively in their Pillar 3 reports for Holdings Plc, Barclays Plc, and Santander based on the intensity of each underlying
2019. The letters after CRB significant UK Group Holdings Plc) potentially classified fund.
the sequence of the table in the Pillar 3 their credit exposure for mortgages under
19You can also read
