Response to discussion Paper on management and supervision of ESG risks for credit institutions and investment firms (EBA/DP/2020/03)
Go back
Covid-19 as unexpected social factor has had a significant influence on the way we deal with consequences primarily in our own internal environment. This period has brought us constant changes and challenges, as one of them being the telecommuting and ensuring continuity of work. However, these changes made us develop more efficient and more technologically advanced ways to continue the workflow, as well as made us consider the health of our employees and clients more seriously than ever.. Therefore, it would be true to say that this period of Covid-19 has made us address ESG factors differently and adapt to the current situation in the world.
We do apply our own indexes when evaluating investment options for portfolio management. However, we use a pool index. The index consists of two reference indexes and one of our own. What makes it confusing, especially to clients, is that completely different factors are taken into account within these indexes; therefore, they cannot be compared on equal terms. In addition, the fact that many companies are disclosing as little information as possible of the ESG factors is the other half of the problem. In addition, standard measures and methodologies are often not applicable to smaller companies that leads to insufficient information.
1. Please provide details of other relevant frameworks for ESG factors you use.
Even though Baltic International Bank is not one of the signatories of the United Nations’ Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI)’s Principles for Responsible Banking, the bank has included these principles into its strategy and has followed them since 2016. The Bank uses some methodologies to evaluate the compliance with the ESG principles of its counterparties, but it does not use any distinct methodology to identify or evaluate specifically ESG risks.2. Please provide your views on the proposed definition of ESG factors and ESG risks.
A more descriptive definitions of terms ‘ESG factors’ and ‘ESG risks’ are used in internal documents of the bank, however, the main ideas used in the documents are correlating with the definitions proposed in the Discussion paper in question. Therefore, the Bank is prepared to adopt and incorporate the proposed definitions in the relevant internal documents.3. Do you agree that, for the purpose of assessing their inclusion in institutions’ and supervisors’ practices from a prudential perspective, ESG risks should be approached primarily from the angle of the negative impacts of ESG factors on institutions’ counterparties? Please explain why.
Yes, the Bank maintains its opinion that it would be beneficial to approach ESG risks primarily from the angle of negative impacts. Mainly, such approach makes the institutions be more cautious about possible negative influence on the financial performance or solvency of their projects, themselves or counterparties. In that way the negative risks can be identified and evaluated sooner, giving a chance to prepare to minimize the negative impacts or choosing not to close the deal with such entities at all.4. Please provide your views on the proposed definitions of transition risks and physical risks included in section 4.3.
Definitions accurately capture the main concepts and without excessive example lists explain the main characteristics of the risks.5. Please provide you views on the proposed definition of social risks and governance risks. As an institution, to which extent is the on-going COVID-19 crisis having an impact on your approach to ESG factors and ESG risks?
The proposed definitions maintain the main concept of “exposure of financial institutions to counterparties that may experience financial difficulties due to negative impacts of ESG factors”.Covid-19 as unexpected social factor has had a significant influence on the way we deal with consequences primarily in our own internal environment. This period has brought us constant changes and challenges, as one of them being the telecommuting and ensuring continuity of work. However, these changes made us develop more efficient and more technologically advanced ways to continue the workflow, as well as made us consider the health of our employees and clients more seriously than ever.. Therefore, it would be true to say that this period of Covid-19 has made us address ESG factors differently and adapt to the current situation in the world.
6. Do you agree with the description of liability transmission channels/liability risks, including the consideration that liability risks may also arise from social and governance factors? If not, please explain why.
Yes, we do agree with the description of liability risks and it is true that such risks may arise from social and governance risks. The example provided is clear and understandable; however, it is clear that financial institutions may be exposed to liability risks because of a direct misjudgement or faulty governance policies of counterparties, especially, in credit-debit relationship.7. Do the specificities of investment firms compared to credit institutions justify the elaboration of different definitions, or are the proposed definitions included in chapter 4 also applicable to them (in particular the perspective of counterparties)? Please elaborate on the potential specificities of investment firms in relation to ESG risks and on how these specificities, if any, could be reflected in this paper.
Bank believes that the definitions provided in chapter 4 are applicable for credit institutions just as well as for investment firms. The definitions capture the main ideas not the specific conditions of whether the definition is applicable to investment institutions or credit institutions only. Moreover, many financial institutions still have mixed products including crediting, investments and managing private or public clients’ portfolios. Therefore, we believe the short and concise definitions with the elaborate explanations are applicable for financial institutions in general.8. Please provide your views on the relevance and use of qualitative and quantitative indicators related to the identification of ESG risks.
As a Bank that has incorporated general ESG approach to business practices since 2016 we are concerned that there are still uncertainty about the use of indicators. Surely, such quantitative measurements as an amount of greenhouse gas emissions or water consumption, and even amounts of produced waste may be applied as indicators, but they are irrelevant if every financial institution evaluates ESG factors differently. Even if environmental indicators may be measured, there is still uncertainty about what indicators do we measure governance or social factors?We do apply our own indexes when evaluating investment options for portfolio management. However, we use a pool index. The index consists of two reference indexes and one of our own. What makes it confusing, especially to clients, is that completely different factors are taken into account within these indexes; therefore, they cannot be compared on equal terms. In addition, the fact that many companies are disclosing as little information as possible of the ESG factors is the other half of the problem. In addition, standard measures and methodologies are often not applicable to smaller companies that leads to insufficient information.