Whose risk counts? Climate risk frames in global green finance governance complex

IF 4.6 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Hyeyoon Park , Jakob Skovgaard
{"title":"Whose risk counts? Climate risk frames in global green finance governance complex","authors":"Hyeyoon Park ,&nbsp;Jakob Skovgaard","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2025.100288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In recent decades, global green finance governance institutions (GGFGIs) have developed diverse frames for understanding climate-related risks. Understanding these risk frames is crucial because they lead to distinctive “de-risking” policies, empowering different types of actors. This paper examines how GGFGIs produce different climate risk frames, and what the prevailing climate risk frame is and whose risk it addresses. We investigate these questions by analyzing the current global green finance governance complex applying a constructivist approach emphasizing contestation over normative issues and a Critical Political Economy perspective. Our mapping based on 74 GGFGIs shows exercise that a risk framing focusing on climate impact on business actors became prevalent over other types of climate risks imposed on people and nature. Our finding shows the dominant influence of the Task Force on the Climate-Related Financial Disclosure created by G20's Financial Stability Board. This development reflects broader trends of climate capitalism.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 100288"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earth System Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589811625000540","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent decades, global green finance governance institutions (GGFGIs) have developed diverse frames for understanding climate-related risks. Understanding these risk frames is crucial because they lead to distinctive “de-risking” policies, empowering different types of actors. This paper examines how GGFGIs produce different climate risk frames, and what the prevailing climate risk frame is and whose risk it addresses. We investigate these questions by analyzing the current global green finance governance complex applying a constructivist approach emphasizing contestation over normative issues and a Critical Political Economy perspective. Our mapping based on 74 GGFGIs shows exercise that a risk framing focusing on climate impact on business actors became prevalent over other types of climate risks imposed on people and nature. Our finding shows the dominant influence of the Task Force on the Climate-Related Financial Disclosure created by G20's Financial Stability Board. This development reflects broader trends of climate capitalism.
谁的风险更重要?全球绿色金融治理综合体中的气候风险框架
近几十年来,全球绿色金融治理机构(GGFGIs)开发了多种框架来理解气候相关风险。了解这些风险框架至关重要,因为它们会导致独特的“去风险”政策,赋予不同类型的参与者权力。本文探讨了GGFGIs如何产生不同的气候风险框架,以及什么是主要的气候风险框架以及它所处理的风险。我们通过分析当前全球绿色金融治理复合体来研究这些问题,运用建构主义的方法强调规范问题的争论和批判政治经济学的观点。我们基于74个ggfgi绘制的地图显示,侧重于气候对商业行为者影响的风险框架比强加给人类和自然的其他类型的气候风险更为普遍。我们的研究结果表明,由G20金融稳定委员会创建的气候相关财务披露工作组发挥了主导作用。这一发展反映了气候资本主义的更广泛趋势。
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
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
14.30%
发文量
31
审稿时长
35 weeks
×
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