This paper illustrates the potential impacts of climate change on financial markets, focusing on their long-term significance. It uses a top-down modelling tool developed by Ortec Finance in partnership with Cambridge Econometrics that combines climate science with macro-economic and financial effects to examine the possible impacts of three plausible (not extreme) climate pathways. The paper first considers the impact on gross domestic product (GDP), finding that GDP is lower in all three pathways, with the most severe reduction in the Failed Transition Pathway where the Paris Agreement climate targets are not met. The model then translates these GDP impacts into financial market effects. In the Failed Transition Pathway, cumulative global equity returns are approximately 50% lower over the period 2020–2060 than in the climate-uninformed base case. For the other two pathways where the Paris Agreement targets are met, the corresponding figures are 15% and 25% lower returns than in the base case. Results are provided for other asset classes too. These demonstrate that climate change represents a significant market risk, with implications for financial planning, modelling and regulation.

This paper demonstrates how climate scenario analysis can be used for forward-looking assessment of the risks and opportunities for financial institutions, using a case study for a UK defined benefit pension scheme. It uses a top-down modelling tool developed by Ortec Finance in partnership with Cambridge Econometrics to explore the possible impacts of three plausible (not extreme) climate pathways of the scheme’s assets and liabilities. It finds that the funding risks are greater under all three climate pathways than under the climate-uninformed base scenario. In the absence of changes to the investment strategy or recovery plan, the time taken to reach full funding is increased by three to nine years. Given that most models currently used by actuaries do not make explicit adjustments for climate change, these modelled results suggest it is quite likely that pension schemes are systematically underestimating the funding risks they face.