This article originally was published on世界资源研究所。
创纪录的野火和飓风2020年，可能不会因为复杂危机定义的一年中最严重的灾难而脱颖而出。但是，这些自然灾害是漫长的物理气候危害的清单，变得越来越频繁和强烈。在全球范围内，自然灾害造成2100亿美元在2020年的损失中，仅在美国，就有950亿美元。
科学证据告诉我们，随着全球温度升高，对人类生活，基础设施，经济活动和金融稳定的损害，这些趋势只会恶化，尤其是如果风险继续低估的情况下。到2100年，气候变化可能使全球经济损失数百种万亿of dollars.
The problem is that they may lack the right supporting resources to do so.
WRI分析了来自六个领先提供商的企业的可用物理气候风险报告指南，例如与气候相关的财务披露工作组（TCFD）和可持续会计标准委员会。我们发现该指南并不涵盖所有物理气候危害。任何指导文件中都没有涵盖五种危害，例如海洋酸化和沙尘暴，而其他危害（例如滑坡和极端降水）的覆盖率较低。
该指南也不是指量化物理气候风险的全面指标。这表明缺乏识别和评估身体气候风险的共同理解和方法。显然，需要进一步的工作来帮助桥梁科学和私营部门在气候影响问题上。
物理风险评估指南缺少什么？
While the field of physical climate risk assessment is still nascent, there are various resources to help companies and financial organizations account for these risks alongside existing risk-management processes. These include analytics services from commercial climate data providers, as well as guidance from voluntary sustainability disclosure initiatives. The ultimate purpose of the disclosure initiatives is to facilitate standard disclosure and greater transparency. To that end, they also provide guidance for measuring and assessing sustainability issues.
We reviewed physical climate risk assessment guidance from six leading disclosure initiatives: CDP; the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB); the EU Non-financial Reporting Directive (NFRD); the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI); the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB); and the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD).
我们研究了指导文件与最新气候科学的一致性如何，以及它们是否提供了可靠的方法来为评估提供信息。我们的分析，我们在新的working paper, reveals several important gaps:
Ambiguous depiction of building blocks for physical risk assessment:政府间气候变化小组（IPCC）的最新气候科学告诉我们，物理气候风险取决于给定的危险气候事件或趋势发生的可能性，结合了企业或金融组织的暴露水平和危害的脆弱性。这三个因素 - 发生危害的可能性，暴露水平和脆弱性 - 是身体风险评估的基础。但是，公司披露指南并不总是清楚地区分风险或危害等关键术语，或提供与IPCC气候风险功能相似的明确，基于科学的框架，用于评估身体气候风险。这可能会使公司和金融组织没有清楚地了解确定风险的关键因素之间的关系。
5个危害被完全排除：Absent from the six initiatives' guidance documents are any references to dust storms, ocean acidification, ice melt/permafrost melt, tornadoes or hail. Companies and financial organizations that rely on the initiatives' guidance to inform their physical climate risk assessments may limit their analysis only to hazards referenced by the initiatives. In that case, they would have a blind spot to potentially costly hazards. For example, hailstorms already cause billions in damages to homes, vehicles and businesses; in April 2020, widespread damage from a series of hailstorms across the U.S. Midwest cost29亿美元。同时，海洋酸化使一些最有利可图的商业渔业处于直接风险，可能会通过$100 billion到2100。
4强调危险：其他危害仅包括在某些指导文件中。只有两项举措参考极端降水，而只有一项举措包括极端海平面（风暴潮），极风和滑坡。这些风险也可能是物质的。例如，在2011年，巴西严重滑坡的重建，造成647人的费用为估计12亿美元。
量化风险的有限方法：目前，市场缺乏评估物理气候危害如何影响公司及其财务绩效的标准方法或指标。因此，毫不奇怪的是，该计划的指导没有参考一组全面的指标来评估每种危害的公司风险的关键决定因素。如果这样做的话，它们将包括指标或详细方法来量化IPCC风险函数中的每个因素：物理术语中的潜在危害（例如，摄氏摄氏度[温度]，每秒米[风]米，毫米[降水]）；实体的暴露和危害的脆弱性；危险的潜在影响；和/或完全风险指标。对于大多数危害，我们没有找到用于评估这些因素的完整特定指标。例如，在指导文件中，仅针对五种危害（洪水，海平面变化，持续温度升高，水应力和降水模式变化）提出指标。该指南文件不包括其他13个气候变化危害中的任何一个危害指标，并且大多数危害都缺乏评估暴露和脆弱性的指标。尽管开发这些资源可能超出了大多数披露计划的任务，但事实仍然是这些资源并不广泛可用。
为了成为气候弹性的真正推动者，企业的风险管理策略需要不仅仅是维持业务态度。
什么可以帮助私营部门更有效地做出反应？
Three key actions could strengthen businesses' ability to identify and assess physical climate risks:
Better scientific knowledge:If the private sector is to effectively manage climate risks, it needs to keep pace with the leading climate science. Currently, few resources are dedicated to tailoring findings from climate science for the private sector. The private sector needs this information in a practical format, with thorough, open-source translations of findings from theIPCC和其他人以他们的语言呈现。
Better data:风险评估仅与基础数据一样好。许多公司和金融组织根本没有足够的高质量，开源，实用的数据来适应与之相关的物理气候危害。（WRI很快将启动一个策划数据的仪表板和有关物理气候危害的可视化措施，并伴随着对气候科学的解释和潜在的财务影响。）其他工作可能包括将科学数据转化为定量危险指数，或者将气候模型变成降低的气候模型，从使公司和金融组织能够评估不同地理位置的潜在风险的决议。
更好的方法：A widely accepted, open-source, science-based framework for physical climate risk assessment — one that's co-created with private sector actors — could provide common ground for analysis. It should include a standard taxonomy for physical climate hazards and corresponding guiding principles and methods to quantify hazards, exposure and vulnerability. This would parallel the standard frameworks, accounting methods and calculation tools developed by the温室气体协议用于测量和管理温室气体排放。这些广泛使用的标准是减少排放策略的组成部分基于科学的目标倡议。A similar approach for physical climate risks would serve as a valuable starting point toward more robust, standardized assessments of these risks and their impacts.
More than profits at stake
While financial and economic impacts of climate change often make headlines, the real story of climate change is the human impact. Climate change puts our most basic and essential human needs at stake — from securing food, water and housing, to preserving traditional ways of life. These challenges often fall first and hardest on vulnerable frontline communities who often face structural barriers to effective adaptation.
建立更多有韧性的社会和经济高效地管理身体气候风险的任务很大程度上将落在政府身上。但是私营部门也必须发挥作用。为了成为气候弹性的真正推动者，企业的风险管理策略需要不仅仅是维持业务态度。策略必须考虑如何明确促进和with local communities。
制定符合这些目标的策略需要对物理气候危害的潜在风险有更深入的了解。围绕这个问题提高知识和能力符合股东和利益相关者的最大利益。
