Véronique Mariotti: The best way to perform a high-quality financial quantification is to onboard the company’s financial team at the beginning of the climate scenario assessment. Sometimes it is not possible, in which case you can gather financial information from other internal stakeholders like insurance and risk departments that have a global overview of the company. Then, depending on the risks, you might need to get current costs from a global facility manager or a particularly exposed operational unit. Economic indicators will of course vary from one risk to the other.
Vincent Ducros: Not all of the risks are material; for the transition risks and opportunities that are, we used business assumptions (share of specific clients and assumed impact for example) to assess the anticipated impact on turnover. Given that there is always some level of uncertainty, these impacts are considered to be orders of magnitude rather than exact figures. Hence, disclosure of impact quantification must be properly assessed.
For physical risks, we have assessed high-level impact in terms of interrupted business days, which we can translate into financial costs. For heat waves, we based our estimations on existing cooling costs and calculated the potential future impact.
Vincent Ducros: We were faced with two main challenges – the first was the assessment of the financial impact, which we addressed by using all of the data currently available to make educated guesses that allowed us to construct our model. Secondly, we found that we had limited data available related to flooding risk. To address this challenge, we worked with EcoAct’s experts to develop a bespoke hydraulic model in order to better understand and anticipate this potential risk.
Véronique Mariotti: For time horizons, you can align on the IPCC time horizons (2021-2040, 2041-2060, 2081-2100) and choose the horizon that makes the most sense for your company’s strategy (for example, for infrastructure construction, the time horizon is longer than for manufacturing). For scenarios, I would recommend following at least a 2°C or 1.5°C scenario to assess transition risks and opportunities, and a 4°C scenario to assess physical risks.
Véronique Mariotti: Risk exposure has less to do with your sector as it does with where you stand within the value chain of a given sector. EcoAct worked with an energy producer whose facilities were directly exposed to heat waves, while at the same time working with an energy engineering company that was not directly impacted by any climate hazards. All economic actors across all sectors will likely be impacted in different ways, depending on their business model, the resources they depend upon, and their geographic location(s). As an example, textile and agro-industry are very exposed in terms of their resources (agricultural commodities or carbon intensive packaging), while the transport sector could be positively impacted by carbon taxes if the transportation mode is low carbon, or negatively impacted if the transportation mode is carbon intensive.
Vincent Ducros: My advice for any organisation starting a climate risk assessment is the following:
Choose EcoAct for industry-leading expertise in climate strategy and sustainability solutions. We’re here to guide your business through every step towards achieving your sustainability goals while supporting your operational success and market reputation.