银行对贷款中的物理和过渡风险的反应：一个来自系统文献综述的诊断框架

IF 13.3 1区管理学 Q1 BUSINESS

Business Strategy and The Environment Pub Date : 2025-09-05 DOI:10.1002/bse.70176

Tabea Brüggemann, Rainer Lueg

{"title":"银行对贷款中的物理和过渡风险的反应：一个来自系统文献综述的诊断框架","authors":"Tabea Brüggemann, Rainer Lueg","doi":"10.1002/bse.70176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Banks face mounting pressure to integrate climate risks into lending, yet responses remain incoherent. This systematic literature review of 9034 studies synthesizes 68 peer‐reviewed articles and develops a behavioral typology of five bank responses: recovery, containment, repricing, reallocation, and relational transformation. Responses vary by risk type, visibility, and salience. Acute, unexpected physical risks (nine studies) trigger recovery lending, while expected (five) or chronic risks (12) lead to containment or repricing. Transition risks (42) are more consistently priced when indicators are quantifiable and policy‐aligned; softer ESG signals elicit conditional responses. Asymmetries arise: recovery and containment occur only for physical risks, while strategic reallocation remains rare. Carbon‐intensive firms are penalized, while green firms benefit only when performance is credible and verifiable. We propose a diagnostic framework to evaluate climate risk management in lending, providing a novel tool to assess climate risk integration in bank lending and inform regulatory design and sustainability‐oriented strategy.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bank Responses to Physical and Transition Risks in Lending: A Diagnostic Framework From a Systematic Literature Review\",\"authors\":\"Tabea Brüggemann, Rainer Lueg\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bse.70176\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Banks face mounting pressure to integrate climate risks into lending, yet responses remain incoherent. This systematic literature review of 9034 studies synthesizes 68 peer‐reviewed articles and develops a behavioral typology of five bank responses: recovery, containment, repricing, reallocation, and relational transformation. Responses vary by risk type, visibility, and salience. Acute, unexpected physical risks (nine studies) trigger recovery lending, while expected (five) or chronic risks (12) lead to containment or repricing. Transition risks (42) are more consistently priced when indicators are quantifiable and policy‐aligned; softer ESG signals elicit conditional responses. Asymmetries arise: recovery and containment occur only for physical risks, while strategic reallocation remains rare. Carbon‐intensive firms are penalized, while green firms benefit only when performance is credible and verifiable. We propose a diagnostic framework to evaluate climate risk management in lending, providing a novel tool to assess climate risk integration in bank lending and inform regulatory design and sustainability‐oriented strategy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9518,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Business Strategy and The Environment\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Business Strategy and The Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70176\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Strategy and The Environment","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.70176","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

银行面临将气候风险纳入贷款的压力越来越大，但应对措施仍然不连贯。本文对9034项研究进行了系统的文献综述，综合了68篇同行评议的文章，并建立了五种银行应对措施的行为类型学：恢复、遏制、重新定价、重新分配和关系转变。响应因风险类型、可见性和显著性而异。急性的、意外的物理风险（9项研究）触发恢复性贷款，而预期的（5项）或慢性风险（12项）导致遏制或重新定价。当指标可量化且与政策一致时，转型风险（42）的定价更为一致；较弱的ESG信号引发条件反应。出现了不对称：恢复和遏制只针对物理风险，而战略重新分配仍然很少。碳密集型企业受到惩罚，而绿色企业只有在业绩可信和可验证的情况下才会受益。我们提出了一个评估贷款中的气候风险管理的诊断框架，为评估银行贷款中的气候风险整合提供了一个新的工具，并为监管设计和可持续发展战略提供了信息。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Bank Responses to Physical and Transition Risks in Lending: A Diagnostic Framework From a Systematic Literature Review

Banks face mounting pressure to integrate climate risks into lending, yet responses remain incoherent. This systematic literature review of 9034 studies synthesizes 68 peer‐reviewed articles and develops a behavioral typology of five bank responses: recovery, containment, repricing, reallocation, and relational transformation. Responses vary by risk type, visibility, and salience. Acute, unexpected physical risks (nine studies) trigger recovery lending, while expected (five) or chronic risks (12) lead to containment or repricing. Transition risks (42) are more consistently priced when indicators are quantifiable and policy‐aligned; softer ESG signals elicit conditional responses. Asymmetries arise: recovery and containment occur only for physical risks, while strategic reallocation remains rare. Carbon‐intensive firms are penalized, while green firms benefit only when performance is credible and verifiable. We propose a diagnostic framework to evaluate climate risk management in lending, providing a novel tool to assess climate risk integration in bank lending and inform regulatory design and sustainability‐oriented strategy.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Business Strategy and The Environment Multiple-

CiteScore

22.50

自引率

19.40%

发文量

336

期刊介绍： Business Strategy and the Environment (BSE) is a leading academic journal focused on business strategies for improving the natural environment. It publishes peer-reviewed research on various topics such as systems and standards, environmental performance, disclosure, eco-innovation, corporate environmental management tools, organizations and management, supply chains, circular economy, governance, green finance, industry sectors, and responses to climate change and other contemporary environmental issues. The journal aims to provide original contributions that enhance the understanding of sustainability in business. Its target audience includes academics, practitioners, business managers, and consultants. However, BSE does not accept papers on corporate social responsibility (CSR), as this topic is covered by its sibling journal Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. The journal is indexed in several databases and collections such as ABI/INFORM Collection, Agricultural & Environmental Science Database, BIOBASE, Emerald Management Reviews, GeoArchive, Environment Index, GEOBASE, INSPEC, Technology Collection, and Web of Science.