Posted on

Swiss Re: Total losses from disaster events rise to USD158 billion in 2016

  • Total economic losses from natural catastrophes and man-made disasters are estimated to be USD 158 billion in 2016
  • Insured losses from disaster events were around USD 49 billion
  • Approximately 10 000 people lost their lives in disaster events in 2016
  • Earthquakes, hail and thunderstorms, and Hurricane Matthew resulted in the largest insurance losses in 2016

Total economic losses from natural and man-made disasters in 2016 were at least USD 158 billion. This is significantly higher than the USD 94 billion losses in 2015 and was caused by large natural catastrophes, such as earthquakes and floods, according to preliminary sigma estimates. Insured losses were also higher in 2016 at around USD 49 billion, compared to USD 37 billion in the previous year. However, the gap between total losses and insured losses in 2016 shows that many events took place in areas where insurance coverage was low. Losses resulting from man-made disasters fell to USD 7 billion from USD 9 billion in 2015. Globally, there were approximately 10 000 victims in disaster events in 2016.
Natural catastrophes accounted for USD 150 billion of the total economic losses in 2016. Insured losses from natural catastrophe events were USD 42 billion in 2016, up from USD 28 billion in 2015, but slightly below the annual average of the previous 10 years (USD 46 billion). Man-made disasters triggered an additional USD 7 billion in insurance claims in 2016.
Earthquake losses reveal schisms in insurance coverage needs
There were a number of major earthquakes across the world in 2016, for example in Taiwan, Japan, Ecuador, Italy and New Zealand. Among the largest was the 7.0-magnitude quake that struck the Kumamoto prefecture in Japan on 16 April 2016, part of a series of strong shocks and aftershocks in the region. The quakes resulted in extensive structural damage, fires and collapsed buildings, and claimed 137 lives. The total economic cost was at least USD 20 billion, of which USD 5.0 billion was insured. The Kumamoto quakes were the costliest disaster event globally of the year.
Later in the year, central Italy was struck by an earthquake in August destroying some small towns and killing 299 people. There were other strong quakes in October which added to the destruction, but no loss of life. Government sources estimate that the overall reconstruction cost for the August earthquake alone will be as high as USD 5 billion. Insured losses for that event, however, are only a fraction of the total, estimated at USD 70 million,1  mainly from commercial assets.
“Society is underinsured against earthquake risk,” Swiss Re Chief Economist Kurt Karl says. “And the protection gap is a global concern. For example, Italy is the 8th largest economy in the world, yet only 1% of homes in Italy are insured against earthquake risk. Most of the reconstruction cost burden of this year’s quakes there will fall on households and society at large.”

Hurricane Matthew and severe storms in the US generate high losses
In October, Hurricane Matthew caused devastation across the east Caribbean and southeastern US. Economic losses were USD 8 billion, with insured losses estimated to be in excess of USD 4 billion. Hurricane Matthew was the strongest of the season and also the deadliest natural catastrophe of the year globally, claiming up to 733 lives, most of those lost in Haiti.
There were a number of severe weather events in the US in 2016, including a series of severe hail and thunder storms. The costliest was a hailstorm that struck Texas in April, resulting in economic losses of USD 3.5 billion and insured losses of USD 3 billion, as large hailstones inflicted heavy damage to property. “In this case, because households and businesses were insured, they were much better protected against the financial losses resulting from the storms,” Kurt Karl continues.
Widespread flooding in the US, Europe and Asia
Several large-scale flood events hit the US in 2016. The biggest was in August when heavy rains caused widespread flooding in Louisiana and Mississippi. The economic losses from this event totaled USD 10 billion, while private insured losses were at least USD 1 billion.2
Europe and Asia also experienced heavy flooding. In Europe in late May and early June, two slow-moving low-pressure systems caused thunderstorms, flash floods and river flooding, with France and Germany hit the most. The storms and floods led to total losses of USD 3.9 billion, and insured losses of USD 2.9 billion. In Asia, heavy rains throughout the year led to severe floods in China and other countries. According to public sources, total economic losses from flooding along the Yangtze River were at least USD 16 billion.
Wildfires spark biggest-ever loss for Canada’s insurance industry
Wildfires in Canada were another cause of large insurance losses in 2016.  The cause of the wildfires is still under investigation, and could be the result of human activity.3  Due to dry conditions and strong winds, once triggered, fires spread rapidly through the forests of Alberta. The town of Fort McMurray was evacuated, and many homes there were completely destroyed. Economic losses were USD 3.9 billion. The area is the heart of Canada’s oil sands production with a high concentration of insured economic assets. As such, the insured losses were around USD 2.8 billion. This is one of the costliest wildfire events in insurance industry history, and it is the biggest loss the Canadian insurance sector has ever experienced.

Loss estimates in this release can still be subject to revision.

Notes to editors

Accessing data by sigma:
The data from the study can be accessed and visualised at www.sigma-explorer.com. This mobile enabled web-application allows users to create charts, share them via social media and export them as standard graphic files.
Swiss Re
The Swiss Re Group is a leading wholesale provider of reinsurance, insurance and other insurance-based forms of risk transfer. Dealing direct and working through brokers, its global client base consists of insurance companies, mid-to-large-sized corporations and public sector clients. From standard products to tailor-made coverage across all lines of business, Swiss Re deploys its capital strength, expertise and innovation power to enable the risk-taking upon which enterprise and progress in society depend. Founded in Zurich, Switzerland, in 1863, Swiss Re serves clients through a network of around 70 offices globally and is rated “AA-” by Standard & Poor’s, “Aa3” by Moody’s and “A+” by A.M. Best. Registered shares in the Swiss Re Group holding company, Swiss Re Ltd, are listed in accordance with the International Reporting Standard on the SIX Swiss Exchange and trade under the symbol SREN. For more information about Swiss Re Group, please visit: www.swissre.com or follow us on Twitter @SwissRe.
___________________________________
1 Perils AG
2 The private insured loss estimate does not include the losses covered by the National Flood Insurance Program.
3 In this release, the wildfires in Canada are counted as natural catastrophe losses.

Posted on

Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)

TCFD Recommendations Report: Executive Summary
Financial Markets and Transparency
One of the essential functions of financial markets is to price risk to support informed, efficient capital-allocation decisions. Accurate and timely disclosure of current and past operating and financial results is fundamental to this function, but it is increasingly important to also understand the governance and risk management context in which financial results are achieved. The financial crisis of 2007-2008 was an important reminder of the repercussions that weak corporate governance and risk management practices can have on asset values. This has resulted in increased demand for transparency from organizations on their governance structures, strategies, and risk management practices. Without the right information, investors and others may incorrectly price or value assets, leading to a misallocation of capital.
Financial Implications of Climate Change
One of the most significant, and perhaps most misunderstood, risks that organizations face today relates to climate change. While it is widely recognized that continued emission of greenhouse gases will cause further warming of the planet and this warming could lead to damaging economic and social consequences, the exact timing and severity of physical effects are difficult to estimate. The large-scale and long-term nature of the problem makes it uniquely challenging, especially in the context of economic decision making. Accordingly, many organizations incorrectly perceive the implications of climate change to be long term and, therefore, not necessarily relevant to decisions made today.
The potential impacts of climate change on organizations, however, are not only physical and do not manifest only in the long term. To stem the disastrous effects of climate change within this century, nearly 200 countries agreed in December 2015 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and accelerate the transition to a lower-carbon economy. The reduction in greenhouse gas emissions implies movement away from fossil fuel energy and related physical assets. This coupled with rapidly declining costs and increased deployment of clean and energy-efficient technologies could have significant, near-term financial implications for organizations dependent on extracting, producing, and using coal, oil, and natural gas. While such organizations may face significant climate-related risks, they are not alone. In fact, climate-related risks and the expected transition to a lower-carbon economy affect most economic sectors and industries. While changes associated with a transition to a lower-carbon economy present significant risks, they also create significant opportunities for a broad range of organizations focused on climate change mitigation and adaptation solutions.
Because this transition to a lower-carbon economy requires significant and, in some cases, disruptive changes across economic sectors and industries in the near term, financial policymakers are interested in the implications for the global financial system, especially in terms of avoiding severe financial shocks and sudden losses in asset values. Potential shocks and losses in value include the economic impact of precipitous changes in energy use and the revaluation of carbon-intensive assets—real and financial assets whose value depends on the extraction or use of fossil fuels. Given such concerns, and the potential impact on financial intermediaries and investors, the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors asked the Financial Stability Board to review how the financial sector can take account of climate-related issues. As part of its review, the Financial Stability Board identified the need for better information to support informed investment, lending, and insurance underwriting decisions to improve understanding and analysis of climate-related risks and opportunities, and over time, to help promote a smooth rather than an abrupt transition to a lower-carbon economy.
Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures
To help identify the information needed by investors, lenders, and insurance underwriters to appropriately assess and price climate-related risks and opportunities, the Financial Stability Board established an industry-led task force: the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (Task Force). The Task Force was asked to develop voluntary, consistent climate-related financial disclosures that would be useful to investors, lenders, and insurance underwriters in understanding material risks.
The 32-member Task Force is global; its members come from various organizations, including large banks, insurance companies, asset managers, pension funds, large non-financial companies, accounting and consulting firms, and credit rating agencies. In its work, the Task Force drew on member expertise, stakeholder engagement, and existing climate-related disclosure regimes to develop a singular, accessible framework for climate-related financial disclosure.
The Task Force developed four widely adoptable recommendations on climate-related financial disclosures that are applicable to organizations across sectors and jurisdictions (Figure 1). Importantly, the Task Force’s recommendations apply to financial-sector organizations, including banks, insurance companies, asset managers, and asset owners. Large asset owners and asset managers sit at the top of the investment chain and, therefore, have an important role to play in influencing the organizations in which they invest to provide better climate-related financial disclosures.
Disclosure in Mainstream Financial Filings
The Task Force recommends that preparers of climate-related financial disclosures provide such disclosures in their mainstream (i.e., public) financial filings. In most G20 jurisdictions, companies with public debt or equity have a legal obligation to disclose material risks in their financial filings—including material climate-related risks. The Task Force believes climate-related risks are material risks for many organizations, and this framework should be useful to organizations in complying more effectively with existing disclosure obligations. In addition, disclosure in mainstream financial filings should foster shareholder engagement and broader use of climate-related financial disclosures, thus promoting an informed understanding of climate-related risks and opportunities by investors and others.
The Task Force also believes that publication of climate-related financial information in mainstream financial filings will help ensure that appropriate controls govern the production and disclosure of the required information. More specifically, the Task Force expects the governance processes for these disclosures would be similar to those used for existing public financial disclosures and would likely involve review by the chief financial officer and audit committee, as appropriate.
Core Elements of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures
The Task Force structured its recommendations around four thematic areas that represent core elements of how organizations operate: governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets (Figure 2). The four overarching recommendations are supported by recommended disclosures that build out the framework with information that will help investors and others understand how reporting organizations think about and assess climate-related risks and opportunities. In addition, there is guidance to support all organizations in developing climate-related financial disclosures consistent with the recommendations and recommended disclosures. The guidance assists preparers by providing context and suggestions for implementing the recommended disclosures. For the financial sector and certain non-financial sectors, supplemental guidance was developed to highlight important sector-specific considerations and provide a fuller picture of potential climate-related financial impacts in those sectors.
Scenario Analysis
One of the Task Force’s key recommended disclosures is related to the disclosure of potential impacts of climate-related risks and opportunities on an organization’s businesses, strategies, and financial planning under different potential future states (scenarios), including a 2°Celsius scenario. Disclosure of how organizations analyze different climate-related scenarios and the considerations associated with the individual scenarios is a key step to better understanding the potential financial implications of climate change on an organization. Over time, the Task Force would expect to see more quantitative analyses in disclosures, including the underlying assumptions associated with the climate-related scenarios used.
Conclusion
Recognizing that climate-related financial reporting is still at an early stage, the Task Force’s recommendations provide a foundation to improve investors’ and others’ ability to appropriately assess and price climate-related risk and opportunities. The Task Force’s recommendations aim to be ambitious, but also practical for near-term adoption. The Task Force expects to advance the quality of mainstream financial disclosures related to the potential effects of climate change on organizations today and in the future and to increase investor engagement with boards and senior management on climate-related issues.
Improving the quality of climate-related financial disclosures begins with organizations’ willingness to adopt the Task Force’s recommendations. Organizations already reporting climate-related information under other frameworks may be able to disclose under this framework immediately and are strongly encouraged to do so. Those organizations in early stages of evaluating the impact of climate change on their businesses and strategies can begin by disclosing climate-related issues as they relate to governance, strategy, and risk management practices. The Task Force recognizes the challenges associated with measuring the impact of climate change on an organization or an asset, but believes by moving climate-related issues into mainstream financial filings, practices and techniques will evolve more rapidly. Improved practices and techniques, including data analytics, should further improve the quality of climate-related financial disclosures and, ultimately, support more appropriate pricing of risks and allocation of capital in the global economy.
Annex & Technical Supplement
The Annex to the Recommendations report on “Implementing the Recommendations of the TCFD” can be found here. The Technical Supplement that outlines the use of scenario analysis can be found here.
Posted on

Potential Secretary of State Nominee Rex Tillerson Has an SEC Problem

ExxonMobil has been under SEC investigation since August, by David Dayen, December 12, 2016
Most of the commentary over Donald Trump’s presumed secretary-of-state nominee Rex Tillerson concerns the Exxon Mobil CEO’s closeness to Russia, and Senate Republican discomfort with that relationship. But Trump and Tillerson share something else that hasn’t gotten as much attention—a penchant to rip off their business partners.
In ExxonMobil’s case, I’m talking about shareholders. Tillerson’s company has been under formal investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission since August for failing to accurately value its proven oil reserves.Those reserves are critical to investors for assessing the future viability of the company. Without the certainty that the company can keep crude oil flowing decades into the future, ExxonMobil stock would plummet. Rewriting the disclosures to investors with lower valuations would cost the company billions of dollars. And actually the entire oil and gas industry would be affected by a new standard rather than the current ad hoc system.
The investigation is a kind of companion piece to the “Exxon Knew” campaign, which charges that the world’s largest publicly traded oil company was aware of the catastrophic effects of climate change nearly 40 years ago, but lied to shareholders about these risks to its business model. Attorneys general in over a dozen states have opened investigations into these matters.
But the SEC probe goes further. The agency requested documents from PricewaterhouseCoopers, ExxonMobil’s auditor, looking at how the company accounts for future costs from global climate regulations. If it becomes more costly to initiate drilling because of the so-called “price of carbon,” or regulations that mandate reductions to greenhouse gas emissions, Exxon might have to shelve the projects, taking a hit to future profitability. Even if the United States dumps the Paris climate accord (something a Secretary of State Tillerson may be in position to influence), Exxon does business worldwide, including with countries who would be likely to stay in the pact and work to cut emissions. Public companies must account in their financial disclosures for knowable risks to investors, and climate regulations would certainly fit the bill for an oil giant.
The SEC also wants to know why ExxonMobil does not write down the value of its reserves when oil prices drop. The crash began two years ago; a barrel of oil fetched $115 in June 2014, but under $28 by February. Even with the recent announcement of OPEC production cuts, the price has barely crested $50. But ExxonMobil never factored that loss into its calculations of future reserves; by contrast, Chevron has written down $50 billion. Exxon said in October it could “de-book” about 20 percent of its reserves if prices remain low, but it hasn’t done it yet.
Exxon claims that it doesn’t overstate its reserves (which at the end of 2015 totaled 24.8 billion oil-equivalent barrels) and book those values conservatively. “Our financial reporting meets all legal and accounting requirements,” said spokesman Alan Jeffers in September. But if the company was found to be touting phantom future profits, it would surely be committing securities fraud against investors.
The problem is that getting smoking-gun information about often-byzantine oil and gas accounting will prove difficult. And that’s made more difficult if the CEO of ExxonMobil holds a major cabinet position.
The man who wants to appoint him, Trump, will also have the opportunity to remake the SEC. Since his election, seven top officials have announced their resignations, from chair Mary Jo White to Enforcement Division chief Andrew Ceresney to the leader of the section with primary responsibility over reviewing corporate filings, Division of Corporation Finance head Keith Higgins.
This turnover isn’t necessarily a bad thing—the SEC’s record over Obama’s second term has been so weak that liberals have repeatedly demanded mass firings. But Trump will get to appoint three new SEC commissioners (two seats on the five-member panel were already vacant before White’s resignation announcement), and that new executive team will hire the top leadership. So the president-elect could make sure that ExxonMobil has little to fear from the SEC, whether or not Tillerson makes it to Foggy Bottom.
I’d assume that deceiving investors is a résumé-builder for a Trump administration post, and I wouldn’t expect this issue to be a major factor in Tillerson’s confirmation process. But it’s notable nonetheless, especially if it’s true that climate risk has not been properly priced on Wall Street. Trump over the weekend called the free market the dumb market, and here’s a way it’s made dumb, through accounting deception that promises endless fossil-fuel burning without any threat to sustainability.
Source: The Nation

Posted on

Microsoft announces largest wind energy purchase to date

Nov. 14, 2016 — On Monday, Microsoft Corp. announced its largest purchase of wind energy to date with the signing of two agreements. Combined, these agreements represent 237 megawatts of wind energy, which brings Microsoft’s total investment in wind energy projects in the U.S. to more than 500 megawatts.
“Microsoft is committed to building a responsible cloud, and these agreements represent progress toward our goal of improving the energy mix at our datacenters,” said Brad Smith, president and chief legal officer at Microsoft. “Our commitment extends beyond greening our own operations because these projects help create a greener, more reliable grid in the communities in which we operate.”
Microsoft has contracted with Allianz Risk Transfer (ART) to fix its long-term energy costs and purchase the environmental attributes connected with the new, 178-megawatt Bloom Wind project in Kansas. The project is the first to use a novel structure developed by ART and designed to offset high upfront costs associated with the creation of large-scale wind projects. Microsoft is the first buyer to participate in this structure, which has the potential to bring clean energy projects online at a faster pace.
“It is important for investors in renewable energy projects to secure long-term, stable revenues, and our structure does just that,” said Karsten Berlage, managing director of ART. “We are thrilled to be partnering with Microsoft on this groundbreaking project.”
In addition, Microsoft has contracted with Black Hills Corp. subsidiary Black Hills Energy, under a long-term agreement, to purchase 59 megawatts of renewable energy certificates from the Happy Jack and Silver Sage wind projects, which are adjacent to Microsoft’s Cheyenne, Wyoming, datacenter. The combined output of the Bloom and Happy Jack/Silver Sage projects will produce enough energy on an annual basis to cover the annual energy used at the datacenter.
“Our longstanding partnership with Microsoft productively led to this landmark collaboration. This collaboration provided them the opportunity to utilize significantly more renewable energy while still ensuring the reliability they’ve come to expect through our energy infrastructure and generation resources,” said David R. Emery, chairman and CEO of Black Hills Corp. “We are proud to be a strong supporter and partner in their mission to power their datacenters with increased renewable energy resources, and look forward to our continued collaboration in the years ahead.”
Microsoft and Black Hills Energy also worked together to create a new tariff, available to all eligible customers, that allows the utility to tap the local datacenter’s backup generators, thereby eliminating the need for Black Hills Energy to construct a new power plant. The tariff received approval from the Wyoming Public Service Commission in July.
“We are constantly looking for new ways to approach energy challenges and avenues of engagement with our utility partners,” said Christian Belady, general manager of cloud infrastructure strategy and architecture at Microsoft. “The team worked closely with ART to come up with a completely new model to enable faster adoption of renewables. Likewise, the tight engagement with Black Hills created the opportunity for Microsoft’s datacenter to become an asset for the local grid, maintaining reliability and reducing costs for ratepayers. This kind of deep collaboration with utilities has great potential to accelerate the pace of clean energy, benefitting all customers — not just Microsoft.”
These are Microsoft’s third and fourth wind energy agreements, joining the 175-megawatt Pilot Hill wind project in Illinois and 110-megawatt Keechi wind project in Texas. In March, Microsoft also signed an agreement with the Commonwealth of Virginia and Dominion Energy Inc. to bring 20 megawatts of solar energy onto the grid in Virginia. These projects are in addition to the renewable and carbon-free energy Microsoft purchases from the grid mix in the markets in which it operates.
More information about this announcement is in the Microsoft on the Issues blog post by Microsoft President and Chief Legal Officer Brad Smith.
About Allianz Risk Transfer
Allianz Risk Transfer (ART) is the center of competence for alternative risk transfer business within the Allianz Group offering tailor-made insurance, reinsurance and other non-traditional risk management solutions to industrial and financial clients worldwide. Founded in June 1997, the company is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty SE. ART operates through affiliated companies with offices in Amsterdam, Bermuda, Dubai, Liechtenstein, London, New York and Zurich. Its client base spans across all industry sectors and its solutions are most effective for clients facing unusual or complex risks, where traditional (re)insurance or financial products are inadequate. As of today, ART AG is rated AA- by Standard & Poor’s and A+ by A.M. Best. www.art.allianz.com
About Black Hills Corp.
Black Hills Corp. (NYSE: BKH) is a customer-focused, growth-oriented utility company with a tradition of improving life with energy and a vision to be the energy partner of choice. Based in Rapid City, South Dakota, the company serves 1.2 million natural gas and electric utility customers in eight states: Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota and Wyoming. The company also generates wholesale electricity and produces natural gas, oil and coal. More information is available at www.blackhillscorp.com.
About Microsoft
Microsoft (Nasdaq “MSFT” @microsoft) is the leading platform and productivity company for the mobile-first, cloud-first world, and its mission is to empower every person and every organization on the planet to achieve more. 
Note to editors: For more information, news and perspectives from Microsoft, please visit the Microsoft News Center at http://news.microsoft.com. Web links, telephone numbers and titles were correct at time of publication, but may have changed. For additional assistance, journalists and analysts may contact Microsoft’s Rapid Response Team or other appropriate contacts listed at http://news.microsoft.com/microsoft-public-relations-contacts.

Posted on

New York Pension Fund Joins Multi-billion-dollar International Investors to Reduce Carbon Footprint

In the latest demonstration of institutional asset owners’ commitment to climate action, New York State Common Retirement Fund (CRF), the third largest public pension fund in the US with $184.5 billion in assets, has joined the Portfolio Decarbonization Coalition (PDC).
The CRF is the first major US pension fund to join the Coalition’s 28 members, who between them control over $3 trillion in assets and have pledged to gradually decarbonize a total of $600 billion by designing investment portfolios with a smaller climate change impact.
One year ago, New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli, trustee of the CRF, announced plans at the Paris climate talks to position the Fund for a low carbon future. In partnership with Goldman Sachs, the CRF developed a low emission index, which steers assets away from large carbon emitters and increases investments in carbon-efficient companies.
“Climate change is one of the greatest risks to our pension fund’s portfolio,” DiNapoli said. “We’re reviewing and adjusting our investments to reduce that risk and take advantage of the growing opportunities of a lower carbon future. Investors are playing a key role in fostering a cleaner global economy. The PDC gives us the opportunity not only to highlight our own activities in this regard, but also to share insights and challenges with counterparts around the world.”
“Investments with more carbon translate to higher risk, not just from potential carbon fees or pricing, but also from shifts in technology that can leave high carbon assets stranded,” said Erik Solheim, Head of UN Environment. UN Environment’s Finance Initiative is a co-founder of the PDC.
“The success of the Portfolio Decarbonization Coalition is a clear signal to both governments and companies that climate change, and the corporate response to it, is critical to shareholder value and investor interests going forward,” said Solheim.
CRF’s action comes at a time of intense efforts by the financial community to prevent market shocks from the widespread mispricing of climate change risks.
Last month, the G20’s Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures co-chaired by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Bank of England Governor Mark Carney recommended full and standardized disclosure by companies and investors of financial risks and opportunities from climate change.
Other investor members of the PDC include major European funds such as France’s ERAFP ($26.9 billion) and FRR ($38.5 billion), the Dutch giant ABP ($481.1 billion) and the world’s largest insurance company, Germany’s Allianz Group.
“We are seeing significant international collaboration among leading asset owners to push on climate issues,” said Lance Pierce, President of CDP North America, the international not-for-profit organization holding the world’s largest collection of self-disclosed corporate environmental data and one of the Portfolio Decarbonization Coalition organizers.
Pierce added, “Climate change is requiring transformational changes in the economy in order to safeguard assets and supply chains, and presents a significant economic growth opportunity. The US renewable energy sector employed 769,000 people and the solar industry grew 12 times faster than overall job creation in 2015. Investors are realizing they can reduce carbon, reduce risk and generate steady financial returns as well as jobs.”
About New York State Common Retirement Fund’s sustainability investing
DiNapoli has positioned the Fund in the vanguard of institutional investors who seek out and promote sustainable investing that takes environmental, social and corporate governance considerations into account as part of their long-term strategy. The Fund is committed to the belief that well-managed businesses, which focus on the long-term health of the company and work to avoid environmental damage or harm to the communities in which they operate, are more likely to produce sound returns. A growing body of academic research confirms this and investment firms that integrate sustainability in their decisions have performed well for the Fund.
About CDP
CDP, formerly Carbon Disclosure Project, is an international, not-for-profit organization providing the largest global system for companies and cities to disclose and manage vital information concerning climate change, water and forest risk commodities information. Backed by 830 institutional investors with assets of US$100 trillion, CDP puts these insights at the heart of strategic business, investment and policy decisions. More than 5,800 companies disclosed environmental information through CDP in 2016. Please follow us @CDP to find out more.
About the Portfolio Decarbonization Coalition
The Portfolio Decarbonization Coalition was co-founded by CDP, the UN Environment Finance Initiative, The Fourth Swedish National Pension Fund (AP4) with assets of $34 billion, and Amundi, Europe’s largest asset manager with more than $1.07 trillion in assets. In the 15-month lead-up to the December 2015 Paris climate talks the Coalition received $600 billion in commitments from investors of capital positioned towards a low-carbon economy, six times more than its $100 billion goal. For more information, please visit: www.unepfi.org/pdc
About UNEP FI
The UNEP Finance Initiative (UNEP FI) is a unique partnership between UNEP and a global network of over 200 banks, insurers and investors from 51 countries.
Created in the wake of the 1992 Earth Summit UNEP FI’s mission is to mainstream the integration of sustainability across the finance sector. It provides a neutral space to convene stakeholders and acts as a platform at the intersection between finance, science and policy. Please visit www.unepfi.org, for more information.
Source: CDP

Posted on

BlackRock – Adapting portfolios to climate change

Investors can no longer ignore climate change. Some may question the science, but all are faced with a swelling tide of climate-related regulations and technological disruption. We show how to mitigate climate risks, exploit opportunities or have a positive impact.

Key highlights

  • We detail how climate change presents risks and opportunities through four channels: 1) physical: more frequent and severe weather events; 2) technological: advances in batteries, electric vehicles or energy efficiency; 3) regulatory: subsidies, taxes and energy efficiency rules, and; 4) social: changing consumer and corporate preferences.
  • The longer an asset owner’s time horizon, the more climate-related risks compound. Yet even short-term investors can be affected by regulatory and policy developments, technological disruption or an extreme weather event.
  • We show how all asset owners can — and should — take advantage of a growing array of climate-related investment tools and strategies to manage risk, search for excess returns or improve their market exposure.
  • We detail what many see as the most cost-effective way for governments to meet emissions-reduction targets: policy frameworks that result in realistic carbon pricing. These would incentivise companies to innovate and help investors quantify climate factors. We see them as a scenario investors should prepare for.

 
Warming paths
Scenarios for global temperatures, 2010-2100

Warming paths: Climate change and global markets
The speed of the energy transition is key to assessing climate risks and opportunities. Most countries have submitted plans to reduce carbon emissions in so-called intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs). The aim is to limit global warming to less than two degrees Celsius (2°C) above pre-industrial levels – the threshold where many scientists see irreversible damage and extreme weather effects kicking in.
Yet the INDCs are just a first step, as the chart above shows. No action at all or current policies would lock in much more severe warming. Slow action would mitigate regulatory risk in the short run, but raise the possibility of extreme weather events. These events, in turn, could prompt more drastic policy actions down the road. The bolder the policy action taken today, by contrast, the greater the ‘transition risk’ for industries and assets due to fast technological and other changes.
DOWNLOAD FULL REPORT
Spurce: BlackRock Investment Institute
Posted on

Small Business key to tackling climate change

The Government’s Committee on Climate Change has backed FSB calls for a more resilient business community to tackle the risks posed by climate change to the UK economy.
The Adaptation Sub-Committee of the Committee on Climate Change has today published a key report which reaffirms the real and growing risk of climate change to small businesses, and warns the risk of flooding must be addressed urgently.
The findings of ‘UK Climate Change Risk Assessment Evidence Report,’ also draws heavily from Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) research showing two thirds of small businesses have been negatively affected by severe weather in recent years.
Mike Cherry, FSB National Chairman, said: “This report recognises the great risk posed by flooding and extreme weather on small businesses. It also confirms the problems we have consistently identified with access to affordable small business flood insurance.
“Severe weather is expected to increase the severity and frequency of flooding, leaving vulnerable regions at real risk of greater damage and disruption. The economic fallout extends beyond those businesses who actually receive flood water through their doors. It disrupts supply chains, distribution channels and impacts whole communities.
“Small businesses need to be empowered to improve their own resilience. That should be supported by bringing flood insurance premiums down to an affordable level. Flood risks must also be tackled and defences improved so that businesses have the confidence to remain at the heart of their local communities.”
FSB research suggests up to 75,000 smaller businesses at risk of flooding could currently struggle to find affordable flood insurance. Small businesses are not covered by the new Flood Re agreement and so FSB is working closely with Government and industry to explore how best to increase resilience and reduce insurance costs for businesses in high-risk areas.
Only 25 per cent of microbusinesses have a resilience plan in place that specifically includes severe weather. Today’s report recognises Government has a role to play in supporting businesses to improve their resilience through policies, regulation and awareness raising measures.
The UK Climate Change Risk Assessment Evidence Report analyses risks and opportunities to the UK from climate change and will inform the UK’s second ever Climate Change Risk Assessment due out in early 2017. FSB will continue to work with Ministers, officials and the insurance industry to explore and agree solutions to small business resilience and the lack of available flood insurance.

Notes to editor


1) Committee on Climate Change Adaption Sub Committee, ‘Climate Change Risk Assessment 2017 Evidence Report’, 12 July 2016, https://www.theccc.org.uk/uk-climate-change-risk-assessment-2017,
2) Federation of Small Businesses, ‘Severe Weather: A more resilient small business community’, July 2015
About FSB
As experts in business, FSB offers members a wide range of vital business services, including advice, financial expertise, support and a powerful voice in Government. Its aim is to help smaller businesses achieve their ambitions. More information is available at www.fsb.org.uk. You can follow us on twitter @fsb_policy.

Posted on

New FSB report reveals huge opportunity to double the number of small business exporters

New FSB report reveals huge opportunity to double the number of small business exporters

  • Potential for small firms to make greater contribution to exports market
  • Finding customers remains the biggest challenge to small firms wanting to export
  • Established export markets – including Europe and North America – remain dominant but emerging markets are making headway

The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) has today (Monday) published a comprehensive report exploring the way small businesses interact with the global export market. “Destination Export: The small business export landscape” highlights key characteristics and drivers of small firms that currently export and, crucially, the potential exporters of the future. The focus on potential exporters offers insights into what more could be done to move the dial on growing the number of small firms selling overseas.
The proportion of small businesses exporting, one in five, (21%) has remained static for many years. One of the key findings of this report is that the number of small businesses currently exporting is matched by those that would consider exporting (21%). This points to the huge potential to double the number of small business exporters. In order to tap into this potential, the Government, the private sector, the finance industry and business associations including FSB, must now focus on providing effective targeted and tailored support.
The most common challenge facing small firms in exporting is finding customers, followed by marketing their product to overseas customers. For those currently exporting the most common challenge remains foreign exchange rates. While for potential exporters, there is a pervasive knowledge gap to overcome – one in five small firms that would consider exporting do not know where to go for support. This report also found there are issues around confidence in trading overseas and an assumption by some small firms that exporting is not for them. Yet there are clear benefits with the average annual turnover of an exporter (£935,921) more than double that of a non-exporter (£390,028).
Martin McTague, FSB National Policy Director, said: “Small businesses that export are more likely to survive, grow and innovate. But in addition to more traditional barriers such as language and foreign exchange, businesses are having to deal with a rapidly changing export landscape and the advantages and challenges brought about by e-commerce. Any support must be designed with this in mind and should be able to cater to a wide range of export needs, both for those currently exporting and for those considering doing so.”
“The Government clearly understands the need to promote exporting given the decision in late 2015 to refocus UKTI’s role and make exports a priority across government departments. Small businesses are well placed to make a significant contribution to the Government target to increase the value of exports to £1 trillion and support 100,000 new exporters by 2020. But the fact remains, many small businesses aren’t aware of the support available or how to access it. This report provides some critical insight into the kind of support small firms need at different points along their export journey and provides key recommendations on how close the gap between demand and delivery.”
This exports report has been researched and written against the backdrop of campaigning around the EU referendum. Given the UK’s decision to leave the EU, ‘Destination Export’ could not be published at a more uncertain time. Maintaining a stable and secure trading environment for small businesses must now be the priority.
Martin McTague continued: “FSB has clearly and consistently called for clarity on what the UK’s exit from the EU means for business, with particular emphasis on access to the single market and the free movement of people and trade. The majority of FSB members export to the single market with provides access to 500 million potential consumers, more than 26 million businesses and is worth around £9 trillion.”
The EU is by far the dominant export destination for small businesses with 93 per cent of exporters selling to countries within that trading bloc. But our report does point to signs that newer entrants to the export market are attracted to a more diverse range of destinations, especially emerging markets in Asia and the Middle East. Those offering support must seize this opportunity boost this trend and diversify the export market further by helping to provide market knowledge and practical information on logistics, delivery and translation services.
Current Government-backed support, particularly UKTI services, have made some headway with exporters. Our survey showed that of those who accessed export support, over a third (37%) used support provided by Government. But this report recommends one key way for UKTI to help maximise the chances of exporters getting approached by customers overseas. It’s Exporting is Great website allows UK businesses to search for export opportunities but there is potential to create an online platform allowing businesses to show their wares to overseas markets and increase their visibility.
The report, ‘Destination Export: The small business export landscape’ will be officially launched on Monday 18 July 2016 at an evening reception in the prestigious Admiralty House at the Heart of Whitehall. Attendees will be hearing from Lord Price CVO, Minister of State for Trade and Investment.
Ends
 

Posted on

New report provides authoritative scientific assessment of climate change risks to UK

Climate change is happening now. Globally, 14 of the 15 hottest years on record have occurred since 2000.
The impacts of climate change are already being felt in the UK, and urgent action is required to address climate-related risks, the CCC’s Adaptation Sub-Committee (ASC) says today.
The ASC’s new independent report to Government, ‘UK Climate Change Risk Assessment Evidence Report’ sets out the most urgent risks and opportunities arising for the UK from climate change.
The report is the result of more than three years of work involving hundreds of leading scientists and experts from the public and private sectors and civil society. The risk assessment has been peer reviewed by UK and international specialists.
Changes to the UK climate are likely to include periods of too much or too little water, increasing average and extreme temperatures, and sea level rise. The report concludes that the most urgent risks for the UK resulting from these changes are:

  • Flooding and coastal change risks to communities, businesses and infrastructure.
  • Risks to health, wellbeing and productivity from high temperatures
  • Risk of shortages in the public water supply, and water for agriculture, energy generation and industry, with impacts on freshwater ecology.
  • Risks to natural capital, including terrestrial, coastal, marine and freshwater ecosystems, soils and biodiversity.
  • Risks to domestic and international food production and trade.
  • Risks of new and emerging pests and diseases, and invasive non-native species, affecting people, plants and animals.

The opportunities for the UK from climate change include:

  • UK agriculture and forestry may be able to increase production with warmer weather and longer growing seasons, if constraints such as water availability and soil fertility are managed.
  • There may be economic opportunities for UK businesses from an increase in global demand for adaptation-related goods and services, such as engineering and insurance.

The impact of the recent vote to leave the European Union does not change the overall conclusions of the risk assessment. However, some individual risks may change if EU-derived policies and legislation are withdrawn and not replaced by equivalent or better UK measures. The Adaptation Sub-Committee will assess the implications of the EU referendum in its next statutory report to Parliament on the UK National Adaptation Programme, due to be published in June 2017.
Lord Krebs, Chairman of the Adaptation Sub-Committee of the Committee on Climate Change, said: “The impacts of climate change are becoming ever clearer, both in the United Kingdom and around the world. We must take action now to prepare for the further, inevitable changes we can expect. Our independent assessment today, supported by the work of hundreds of scientists and other experts, identifies the most urgent climate change risks and opportunities which need to be addressed. Delaying or failing to take appropriate steps will increase the costs and risks for all UK nations arising from the changing climate.”
 
 
Notes to editors

  • The Climate Change Act requires the UK Government to compile every five years its assessment of the risks and opportunities arising for the UK from climate change, known as the Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA). The ASC’s Evidence Report published today will inform the Government’s second Climate Change Risk Assessment due to be presented to Parliament in January 2017. The first CCRA was presented to Parliament by Government in 2012.
  • The Climate Change Act places a duty on the Adaptation Sub-Committee to provide independent advice six months in advance of the Government’s Climate Change Risk Assessment report to Parliament being due. The Evidence Report, consisting of eight individual chapters looking at key areas of risk and opportunity, constitutes the ASC’s advice on the Government’s second CCRA. Each chapter has been written by expert lead authors supported by co-authors with particular specialties. The individual chapters are the product of their expert authors.  A Synthesis Report has also been produced by the ASC to highlight the key messages of the Evidence Report.
  • The Synthesis Report ‘UK Climate Change Risk Assessment: priorities for the next five years’, together with the chapters of the full Evidence Report, and associated materials is available here.

 
Download the report here >>

Posted on

Yorkshire: Report on economic impact of 2015 floods

The unprecedented floods of Boxing Day 2015 had a serious impact on the borough of
Calderdale, and the Upper Calder Valley was particularly badly hit.
Small and medium sizedbusinesses (SMEs), which make up the majority of the local businesses in the economy, were worst affected. Understanding the situation of SMEs is important, as they represent key drivers in achieving the growth and development needed for economic recovery.
This report presents an economic impact assessment of the flooding on SMEs. This study will support the evidence that the Calderdale Flood Commission collates to make recommendations to Government, the Council, the Environment Agency, the community and businesses, about the effects of recent flooding and lessons for possible future flooding. This report will assist policy makers and local stakeholders to take effective action based on what the community of SMEs needs to recover and continue to provide jobs, products and servicefor local communities.
Background
The Calder Valley has a long history of flooding, but the regularity and scale of
flooding appears to have increased since 2000. In 2012, a month’s worth of rain fell in
less than 24 hours, affecting numerous businesses and households.
On Boxing Day 2015 even higher levels of water were recorded, which deluged a
much wider range of properties from Todmorden to Brighouse along the River Calder.
Over 2,800 houses and 1600 business premises were affected by the flooding
Calderdale Council’s Business & Skills team has been administering the package of
Flood Recovery grants for businesses, and has processed almost 900 applications.
The sector most severely affected by the December 2015 flooding is retail, especially
in Hebden Bridge, Mytholmroyd/Luddendenfoot and Todmorden.
As of 31 March 2016, around 83% of flood affected businesses were back in
operation across Calderdale, but the picture is not consistent. Just 61% of Hebden
Bridge businesses are open.
Initial scoping by Upper Calder Valley Renaissance (UCVR)
Immediately after the flooding, the ‘UCVR Business Flood Recovery Team’ was
formed to assess the initial extent of the impact. They conducted a basic online
survey.
150 businesses in total responded to this initial survey, including those located in
Sowerby Bridge and Luddenden/Luddendenfoot.
The data obtained by the survey was useful to Calderdale Council to assist in their bid
for emergency funding from central government. It also helped identify businesses in
need of support, as well as contact details of affected businesses.
Economic impact assessment
The University of Leeds, in conjunction with the Council’s Business team and UCVR,
conducted an economic impact assessment of the floods on SMEs.
The data was collected via an online questionnaire administered to businesses in the
borough of Calderdale.
The majority of the respondents are business owners (~80%) and around six in every
ten firms have less than 5 employees.
Half of the sampled businesses have been operating for less than 10 years and
approximately 60% rent their premises.
Almost three quarters of the sampled businesses were in operation at the time of the
2012 floods.
The estimated value of the overall costs to the business during the 2012 floods was
£26,000, and half of the businesses reported having losses for £5,000 or less.
The greater intensity of the 2015 floods, compared to those of 2012, translated into
higher costs. The 2015 flooding was 1.3 times more damaging to businesses, while
the total losses suffered by SMEs almost doubled.
Hebden Bridge reported the largest number of cases. However, Mytholmroyd suffered
the highest losses per SME.
The total amount of losses reported by the surveyed businesses is almost £47 million,
which represents around 12% of their annual turnover. Excluding a small amount of
enterprises that reported total losses above £500,000, the average loss per firm was
around £47,000.
The total reported losses (£47 million) account for 5.4% of the business sector GVA in
Calderdale and Kirklees.
The amount of losses were almost twice as high for businesses with less than 4
employees than for businesses with more than 20 employees.
On average, businesses with less than 4 employees have recovered 45% of their
sales, in comparison to 66% by larger businesses.
The surveyed firms are considering laying off a total of 124 employees in the next 3
months, which would represent a loss of around £2.3 million or 1.8% of their annual
wage bill.
The total amount of lost sales amounted to nearly £7 million at the time the survey
was conducted. The sector worst hit worst is Retail and Wholesale, followed by
Manufacturing.
When taking into account direct and indirect losses, the total economic impact to the
Calderdale and Kirklees regional economy amounts to a total of approximately £170
million. This figure represents 1.1% of the total output of the region (Office of National
Statistics – ONS). For every £1 reported in direct losses, another £0.6 on average was
lost indirectly throughout the regional economy.
Three out of five businesses have recovered 50% of their normal sales. On average it
has taken almost twice the time for firms to recover their monthly average sales,
compared to the 2012 floods.
Three out of five of the surveyed businesses have at least one type of insurance.
Nevertheless, around 14% had an insurance excess that was so high it has not been
worth submitting a claim.
70% of the surveyed forms mentioned they have received grant aid from local or
central government, followed by business rebate (43%) and advice from Council or
business support organisations (42%).
Almost half of surveyed businesses do not set aside time for planning for flooding,
and less than a quarter monitor free flood warning systems.