Understanding the Systemic Implications of Climate Transition Risk: Applying a Framework Using Canadian Financial System Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our study aims to gain insight on financial stability and climate transition risk. We develop a methodological framework that captures the direct effects of a stressful climate transition shock as well as the indirect—or systemic—implications of these direct effects. We apply this framework using data from the Canadian financial system. To capture the direct effects, we leverage the climate transition scenarios and financial risk assessment methods developed for the Bank of Canada and the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions climate scenario analysis pilot project. We examine the direct effects—in the form of credit, market and liquidity risks—of the climate transition shock on financial system entities within the scope of our study. Specifically, we look at the public and private assets and derivatives portfolios of deposit-taking institutions, life insurance companies, pension funds and investment funds. To assess the indirect effects from the potential spread of the climate transition shock across an interconnected financial system, we extend an agent-based model to explore shock transmission channels such as cross-holding positions, business similarities, common exposures and fire sales. This model considers behavioural assumptions and rules, allowing us to understand the interconnectedness of the financial system. This work strengthens our understanding of how distinct entities within the financial system could be impacted by and respond to climate transition risks and opportunities, and of the potential channels through which those risks and opportunities may spread. More generally, this work contributes to building standardized systemic risk assessment and monitoring tools.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".