Source: European Central Bank
Interview with Frank Elderson, conducted by NVDE
20 February 2025
TIME has named you one of the 100 most influential climate leaders in business. Why are you so motivated to integrate climate and nature-related risks into exercising the mandate of central banks and supervisors?
Climate, nature and the economy are deeply interconnected and interdependent. The twin climate and nature crises are sources of financial risk. For central banks and supervisors, addressing these issues is therefore neither an option nor a political choice – it is an obligation that falls squarely within our mandate. If central bankers and supervisors want to effectively pursue their tasks of maintaining price stability and keeping the banking sector safe, they need to be mindful of the environment in which they operate. This means considering the impact of the climate and nature crises on inflation and banks’ safety and soundness.
Is the energy transition in Europe progressing too slowly? If so, why?
Europe has made significant progress in its energy transition, but if it wants to reach the agreed target, it needs to remain determined and avoid undermining what has been achieved so far. The facts are that current policies put Europe on a 3.1°C warming trajectory over the course of the century, which is too far from the 1.5°C target.[1] The economic risks associated with delayed action are stark: a late, abrupt transition away from fossil fuels would weaken the economy and increase losses for the financial system, making the path to net zero far more costly.[2] In fact, the United Nations has warned that climate mitigation must increase sixfold globally to stay on track for the Paris Agreement.[3] These figures underscore the urgent need for Europe not to relent in its transition efforts if it wants to avoid severe economic and environmental consequences.
In a previous study, you demonstrated that most European companies and banks face significant financial risks when natural ecosystems collapse due to climate change and biodiversity loss. What are examples of these financial risks? What is the most important recommendation in the report?
The interdependencies between banks, businesses and nature lead to financial risks. Damage to ecosystems through nature degradation and biodiversity loss poses a significant threat to the economic viability of companies and, by extension, to the financial stability of banks that grant them loans. The study you mention showed that, in the euro area, 72% of non-financial corporations rely heavily on at least one ecosystem service, while 75% of corporate bank loans – approximately €3.24 trillion – are tied to these ecosystem-dependent borrowers.[4] Key ecosystem services such as surface and ground water, together with mass stabilisation[5] and erosion control, are particularly critical, exposing banks to credit risks through affected firms.
One of the most important lessons from the report is the recognition that biodiversity loss is both an economic and financial risk. A second lesson is that climate and biodiversity are, to a large extent, two sides of the same coin, and they cannot be addressed in isolation. Lastly, the report shows that we are still missing the data needed to better take into account the risks stemming from nature loss. To address this, we need to improve the way we collect and organise information about nature.
What is the impact of climate change on inflation?
The economic impacts of climate change and extreme weather events are impossible to ignore. Following 2023’s record-breaking temperatures, 2024 became the warmest year on record globally, reaching 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.[6] Europe, the fastest-warming continent, saw temperatures soar to 2.9°C above pre-industrial levels in 2024. The physical impacts of climate change – such as more frequent and severe weather events like floods, droughts, and city and forest fires – disrupt supply chains, reduce agricultural yields and drive up food prices. For example, an interdisciplinary study by ECB economists and climate scientists showed that the 2022 heatwave in Europe added 0.8 percentage points to euro area food price inflation.[7]
The green transition will also bring about structural economic changes, which could influence inflation. Although the overall impact of the green transition remains very uncertain and may vary over time, we need to account for it to effectively deliver on our mandate. This is why we are increasingly incorporating green transition policies, such as climate-related fiscal policies or assumptions on carbon pricing under the EU Emissions Trading System 2, into our macroeconomic analyses.[8]
To what extent do oil and gas reserves, as stranded assets – losing their value due to the necessity of staying within the 1.5°C climate goal – pose an economic risk?
Generally, stranded assets pose greater economic and financial risks to the extent that industries and banks are not prepared. As the economy moves towards meeting climate goals, industries need to adjust how they operate. And since most companies in the EU with high-emitting production facilities rely on bank financing, this also has a significant impact on banks’ balance sheets. Last year, we released a study on the banking sector’s alignment with EU climate objectives, where we found that 90% of analysed banks faced elevated transition risks due to substantial misalignment with the Paris Agreement.[9] The biggest risk stems from exposures to companies in the energy sector that are lagging behind in phasing out high-carbon production processes and are slow to scale up renewable energy production.[10]
To what extent does the ECB incorporate climate-related risks into its monetary policy?
The ECB has taken significant steps to integrate climate-related risks into its monetary policy framework. It has reduced the carbon footprint of the Eurosystem’s corporate bond holdings and expanded annual climate disclosures to cover over 99% of assets held for monetary policy purposes. We’re also making progress in embedding climate considerations in our modelling and forecasting. Through exercises such as climate stress tests, we’ve deepened our understanding of the impact of the green transition and the physical impacts of the climate crisis. To improve data availability, which is key if we want to keep incorporating climate and nature risks, the ECB has developed climate-related statistical indicators.
How does the ECB ensure that the financial sector properly manages the risks associated with climate change?
Five years on from the publication of the ECB Guide on C&E risks in 2020, banks have made significant progress in managing climate-related and environmental (C&E) risk. Initially, fewer than 25% of banks had worked on climate-related risk management, and in 2021 a self-assessment conducted by the banks revealed that 90% of their practices fell short of our expectations.
Following thorough assessments in 2022, we came to the conclusion that the glass was filling up, but that it wasn’t yet half full. Based on what the banks themselves considered reasonable when we first started discussing C&E risk management with them, we set interim deadlines resulting in three milestones: by March 2023 banks were expected to draw up adequate materiality assessments; by December 2023 they needed to integrate C&E risks into their governance, strategy and risk management; and by the end of 2024 they were expected to comply with the full scope of ECB expectations on C&E risk.
Encouragingly, most banks met the targets set by the 2023 deadlines, and frameworks for climate and nature-related risks are now broadly in place. However, a few banks are still lagging behind and could face potential penalties. For the third and final deadline, which just passed at the end of 2024, we are proceeding with our compliance assessments in the same way as for the two previous deadlines.
What specific sustainability measure will you personally advocate for within the ECB in 2025?
In 2025 we will closely monitor progress and, where necessary, use all the tools at our disposal to ensure the banking sector is resilient in the face of the unfolding climate and nature crises. As part of the ECB’s multi-year agenda for banking supervision, we will make sure that the banks we supervise directly – whose assets total over €26 trillion – fully account for climate and nature-related risks in their strategies and risk management. Ensuring banks comply with the new regulatory requirement to develop transition plans to prepare for the risks and potential changes in their business models associated with the green transition is particularly high on the agenda.
What are your thoughts on Mario Draghi’s report, particularly his call for further financial and economic integration within the EU through, for example, establishing a capital markets union? This plan aims to create a single integrated capital market in the EU, allowing investments and savings to flow more freely across borders.
From an ECB perspective, we have always been supportive of a deeper capital markets union (CMU). The renewed political momentum we have seen recently in furthering CMU – or a savings and investment union – has come at a crucial time. In fact, the bulk of the additional financing needed for the green transition has to come from the private sector.[11]
The European Commission estimates that the EU needs an extra €477 billion (equivalent to 3.4% of GDP in 2023) of green investment per year by 2030. This number increases to €620 billion when considering the EU’s broader environmental ambitions. While banks are expected to make an important contribution, expanding and integrating capital markets is essential for directing the flow of funds towards green innovation. The public sector also has a key role to play in mobilising private green investment by crowding in private investment through, for example, lowering borrowers’ financing costs or de-risking green investment activities.
Sustainable energy technologies and electricity infrastructure have higher investment costs than fossil fuel technologies. As a result, high interest rates slow the energy transition, despite its potential to help combat inflation. Recent high inflation was partly driven by high fossil energy prices. Could a lower interest rate for investments in sustainable energy accelerate the shift away from fossil fuels?
The ECB’s primary objective is to maintain price stability, and this will always remain the cornerstone of our actions. But we also have a secondary objective, which requires us to support the general economic policies in the EU, including contributing to a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment.[12] Within this mandate, accounting for the effects of climate and nature-related events is part and parcel of our tasks. Importantly, any direct incentives and tools must align with our monetary policy stance. In the specific case you mention, further challenges – such as data coverage and quality, defining appropriate green targeting criteria and establishing robust verification processes – still exist. Some of these issues require agreement on a European level, where we are dependent on legislation.
Having said that, the ECB’s euro area bank lending survey tells us that European banks are already offering more favourable lending conditions to green firms or firms in transition.[13] In addition, governments can support green projects in a more targeted and effective way by offering more favourable lending through for instance public development banks. Despite this, the ECB still actively monitors regulatory developments.
Are you optimistic about the energy transition in Europe?
I am generally an optimistic person. In this case, the progress made speaks for itself: the share of renewables in the EU’s final energy use more than doubled between 2005 and 2023.[14] And last year, nearly half of the EU’s electricity was powered by renewables.[15] Much-needed investment in climate change mitigation has also grown, increasing by 42% between 2005 and 2022.[16]
We know progress is possible, but we now need to go further and faster. Our research shows that a quicker transition will lower costs – being ready can offer a competitive advantage. Consumer preferences are already changing and these will support the transition. In that respect, we welcome the European Commission’s focus on both decarbonisation and competitiveness.
Last but not least, through my involvement with the Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS), which I co-founded and of which I was the first Chair, I’ve also witnessed first-hand the impact a committed group of central banks and supervisors working towards a common goal can have. The NGFS has grown from its original eight members to 143 members today. This “coalition of the committed” is prepared to help future-proof the economy and the banking sector. Regardless of the political winds that are blowing, the reality of the climate and nature crises doesn’t change. And as most Europeans know, it is a reality we must face head on.
How sustainably do you live and travel?
We have a fully electric car, and as a proud Dutchman, I love to ride my bike.
