Let’s Get Physical: Comparing Metrics of Physical Climate Risk

Linda I. Hain, Julian F. Kölbel, Markus Leippold
{"title":"Let’s Get Physical: Comparing Metrics of Physical Climate Risk","authors":"Linda I. Hain, Julian F. Kölbel, Markus Leippold","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3829831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Investors and regulators require reliable estimates of physical climate risks for decision-making. While assessing these risks is challenging, several commercial data providers and academics have started to develop firm-level physical risk scores. We compare six physical risk scores. We find a substantial divergence between these scores, also among those based on similar methodologies. We show how this divergence could cause problems when testing whether financial markets are pricing physical risks. Hence, financial markets may not adequately account for the physical risk exposure of corporations using available risk scores. Finally, we identify key sources of uncertainty for further investigation.","PeriodicalId":260048,"journal":{"name":"Capital Markets: Market Efficiency eJournal","volume":"171 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Capital Markets: Market Efficiency eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3829831","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Abstract Investors and regulators require reliable estimates of physical climate risks for decision-making. While assessing these risks is challenging, several commercial data providers and academics have started to develop firm-level physical risk scores. We compare six physical risk scores. We find a substantial divergence between these scores, also among those based on similar methodologies. We show how this divergence could cause problems when testing whether financial markets are pricing physical risks. Hence, financial markets may not adequately account for the physical risk exposure of corporations using available risk scores. Finally, we identify key sources of uncertainty for further investigation.
让我们得到物理:比较物理气候风险指标
投资者和监管机构需要可靠的物理气候风险评估来进行决策。虽然评估这些风险具有挑战性,但一些商业数据提供商和学者已经开始开发公司层面的物理风险评分。我们比较了六个身体风险评分。我们发现这些分数之间有很大的差异,在那些基于类似方法的分数中也是如此。我们展示了在测试金融市场是否对实物风险定价时,这种差异是如何造成问题的。因此,金融市场可能无法充分利用现有的风险评分来解释公司的实际风险敞口。最后,我们确定了进一步调查的不确定性的主要来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信