Niet beschikbaar in het Nederlands
Aurora Abbondanza
- 19 November 2025
- MACROPRUDENTIAL BULLETIN - ARTICLE - No. 32Details
- Abstract
- As authorities across the euro area work towards including climate risks into regular stress-testing frameworks, this article offers a starting point for assessing bank resilience to climate risks that materialise under a short-term horizon. This is relevant since acute physical risks and abrupt policy changes can also materialise at short notice and affect the balance sheet of financial institutions. The analysis uses an adverse macroeconomic backdrop that combines the EBA’s adverse scenario with the Network for Greening the Financial System’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NGFS NDCs) scenarios. It extends the EU-wide 2025 stress test results by incorporating both transition and acute physical climate risks into the credit risk assessment for non-financial corporations by means of top-down models. Transition risks driven by green investments to reduce emissions amplify credit losses and reduce banks’ CET1 capital, particularly in high energy-intensive sectors. Similarly, acute physical risks such as extreme flood events reduce CET1 capital through direct damage, local disruptions and macroeconomic spillovers. While the magnitude of impacts varies across banks, the analysis shows that both types of climate risk can have a moderate but consequential effect on capital ratios. Notably, the banks most exposed to climate-related losses may differ from those identified as the most vulnerable in the broader EU-wide assessment. These findings underscore the importance of incorporating both types of climate risk into regular financial stability assessments.
- JEL Code
- G20 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→General
G28 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Government Policy and Regulation
- 1 October 2025
- WORKING PAPER SERIES - No. 3128Details
- Abstract
- This paper presents the first causal evidence on how banks adjust their voluntary capital buffers (the capital headroom above the required level) in response to changes in capital requirements. Using granular euro area data and exploiting the threshold-based assignment of Other Systemically Important Institution (O-SII) buffers within a regression discontinuity design, we study the liability side of banks’ balance sheets, complementing the asset-focused literature on lending and risk-taking. This allows us to assess whether capital regulation is effective in enhancing bank resilience, arguably its main objective. We find that banks offset about half of higher capital requirements by cutting their voluntary buffers rather than raising new equity. The offsetting effect is more pronounced among banks with weaker balance sheets, particularly those with higher levels of non-performing loans. These results indicate that regulation aimed at strengthening resilience may be only partially effective, as banks use existing voluntary buffers when subject to higher requirements.
- JEL Code
- E44 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Money and Interest Rates→Financial Markets and the Macroeconomy
E51 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit→Money Supply, Credit, Money Multipliers
E58 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit→Central Banks and Their Policies
G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, Depository Institutions, Micro Finance Institutions, Mortgages
G28 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Government Policy and Regulation