气候变化对企业有何风险？

    能源，材料，工业和公用事业公司具有最高的直接碳排放强度。因此，碳排放计划施加给这些企业的监管风险也是最大的。

    但是，由于建筑物的生命周期和长期投资的性质，房地产和金融服务行业亦面临气候风险。事实上，所有行业都或多或少地受到气候和碳风险的影响。

    针对碳风险所做的传统财务分析往往会忽略“影子负债”——它是整个价值链面临的间接风险有可能产生的碳价格负债所导致的。

    我们很难分析这种影子负债，因为相关数据非常零散，估值方法也不尽相同。世界各地不一致的披露要求同样无助于这种分析。

    美国证券交易委员会(SEC)要求企业在提交年度报告时披露实质性的气候变化风险。今年4月份，欧洲议会批准一项新规则，要求大型上市公司在它们提交给投资者的报告中发布环境和社会数据。但仅凭这些措施，还远远不足以形成一个全面且可协调，针对公司面临的全部碳和气候风险的披露机制。

    与此同时，投资者并没有无动于衷。他们自己已经开始分析间接的碳价格风险及其对企业投资回报率和信贷质量的影响。

    服务于投资者的独立分析师也正在从事这类分析。比如，标准普尔公司正在估算盈利能力，资产及负债估值和现金流遭受的直接和间接影响，以评估碳价格风险对公司信誉的影响。像碳信息披露项目(Carbon Disclosure Project)这类国际组织正在调查公司面临的环境风险，并给予它们相应的评分。

    一些大公司正在作出回应。埃克森美孚(Exxon Mobil)最近成为第一家详尽发布其搁浅资产（即如果调控收紧，该公司就不能开采的资产储量）气候风险信息的石油和天然气生产商。但大多数企业尚未接受气候和碳风险对企业绩效和价值的影响将日益加大这个事实。

    企业领导者应该认识到，气候风险和碳负债是切实存在的，而且注定会继续增大。如果他们不能有效地评估和管理这些短期和长期负债，公司信誉或将遭受重创，融资成本就将上升。

    资本市场的参与者通常只关注短期图景。但环境变化是一个不容忽视的长期问题。随着时间的推移，环境变化在决定财务风险和回报方面的作用将越来越大。

    本文作者Neeraj Sahai是标准普尔评级服务公司总裁。（财富中文网）

    译者：叶寒

    Energy, materials, industrial and utility companies have the highest direct carbon intensity and therefore the largest regulatory exposure to emissions compliance schemes.

    But the property and financial services sectors are also exposed to climate risk due to the life cycle of buildings and the nature of their long-term investments. All sectors, in fact, are affected in varying degrees, to climate and carbon risks.

    Conventional financial analysis of carbon risk overlooks the “shadow liability” caused by potential carbon price liabilities from indirect exposures across the value chain.

    This shadow liability is hard to analyze, as data is patchy and valuation methods vary. Inconsistent disclosure requirements around the world do not help either.

    In the U.S., the SEC requires firms that file annual reports to communicate material climate change risks. In April, the European Parliament approved new rules that will require large listed firms to publish environment and social data in their reporting to investors. But this falls far short of a comprehensive and coordinated disclosure regime for companies’ overall exposure to carbon and climate risk.

    Investors, meanwhile, are not standing still. They are starting to conduct their own analysis of indirect carbon price risk and its impact on corporate investment returns and credit quality.

    Independent analysts who serve them are doing the same. S&P, for instance, is seeking to assess the effects of carbon price risk on a company’s creditworthiness by considering the direct and indirect impact of profitability, asset and liability valuation, and cash flow. Organizations like the international Carbon Disclosure Project are surveying companies about their environmental exposures and scoring them accordingly.

    Some large companies are responding. Exxon Mobil recently became the first oil and gas producer to publish details of its climate risk exposure from stranded assets (reserves that it could not exploit if regulation is tightened). But most businesses are yet to accept that climate and carbon risks are ever more material to corporate performance and value.

    Business leaders should acknowledge that climate risk and carbon liabilities are here to stay and, in all probability, set to grow. If they cannot demonstrate effective assessment and management of these short-term and long-term liabilities, their creditworthiness may suffer and their financing costs will rise.

    Capital markets participants traditionally have short term horizons. But environmental change is a long-term issue that they cannot ignore. Over time, it will play an increasing role in determining both financial risk and return.

    Neeraj Sahai is president of Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services.