Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Financial Stability of Insurance Companies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recent losses and damages due to climate change have destabilized the insurance industry. As global warming is one of the most critical aspects of climate change, it is essential to investigate to what extent greenhouse gas emissions affect the financial stability of insurers. Insurers typically do not emit substantial greenhouse gases directly, while their underwriting and investment activities play a substantial role in enabling companies that do. This article uses panel data regressions to analyze companies in all insurance segments and in all geographic regions of the world from 2004 to 2023. The main finding is that insurers that increase their greenhouse gas emissions become financially unstable. This result is consistent in all three scopes (scope 1, scope 2, and scope 3) of emissions. Furthermore, the findings reveal that this impact is related to reserves and reinsurance. Specifically, reserves increase with greenhouse gas emissions, while premiums ceded to reinsurers decline. Thus, high-emissions insurers retain a significant share of carbon risk and eventually become financially weak. The results encourage several policy recommendations, highlighting the need for instruments that improve the assessment and disclosure of insurers’ carbon footprints. This is crucial to achieving environmental targets and improving the stability of both the insurance market and the economic system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".