speeches · June 21, 2021
Regional President Speech
Mary C. Daly · President
FINAL
Climate Risk and the Fed: Preparing for an Uncertain Certainty
Mary C. Daly, President and Chief Executive Officer
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
Peterson Institute for International Economics1
June 22, 2021
11:00 AM EDT
Remarks as prepared for delivery.
Economies are, in many ways, perpetually evolving; adapting to new
conditions and moving from one steady state to another. As these transitions
occur, the path forward is often hazy. We can see the world shifting around us,
but we’re not completely sure where we’ll end up. All we know for certain is
that change is on the horizon.
Society has faced many of these uncertain certainties: industrialization,
globalization, the digital revolution. It’s increasingly clear that climate change
is another one. While the severity and scope remain unclear, the consensus is
that a changing climate poses a significant risk to the global economy and
2
financial system. And we know from experience that ignoring these risks or
failing to prepare for them will make the transformation more turbulent and
the destination less hospitable.
As monetary policymakers, our job is to navigate this uncertainty. We
need to anticipate the changes before us and understand their implications.
1
I am grateful to Stephie Fried and Fernanda Nechio of the Federal Reserve Bank of San
Francisco for assistance in preparing this text.
2
See, for example, USGCRP (2018), Auffhammer (2018), Hsiang and Kopp (2018), Hsiang et
al. (2017), Brunetti et al. (2021), Rudebusch (2021). See also Brainard (2021) for related
1
discussion.
FINAL
Today, I will talk about how the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and
the Federal Reserve more broadly think about climate risk and its
implications for the economy.
But before I go any further, it’s a good time to remind you that the views
I will express today are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of anyone
else within the Federal Reserve System.
Preparing for Uncertainty
Now,at this point, most people understand that their future, and the
futures of their children and grandchildren, will be affected by climate
3
change. Indeed, in a 2019 Pew Research survey, 62 percent of Americans said
4
that climate change is having at least some effect on their local communities.
But the future is a far-off place. And as humans, it can be tempting to
discount or simply ignore it. Unfortunately, that makes the path to change
more treacherous. The better we understand the challenges and opportunities
of climate change, the better we’ll be able to manage them.
For many people, that future is already here. Drought and wildfires in
California and the Pacific Northwest, ice storms in Texas, floods in the
Midwest, and hurricanes in the South have already cost lives, destroyed
3
Defined as the current and projected trend toward higher average temperatures and the
environmental shifts that result, such as melting ice caps, rising sea levels, more frequent
severe storms, and changes in the pattern and predictability of rainfall (IPCC 2020, USGCRP
2018).
4
2
Funk and Hefferon (2019).
FINAL
5
property, and displaced communities, sometimes permanently. Assessing
climate risk means understanding the likely frequency and severity of these
kinds of physical disruptions.
But physical risks are only part of the story. A complete picture has to
recognize the preparations—precautionary or proactive—that individuals,
businesses, and governments are making to manage the expected risks. These
are especially uncertain since they depend on the awareness and reactions of
individuals, communities, and societies.
Early data tell us that adjustments are already under way. As the
frequency of climate-related events has increased, insurers and financial
institutions have taken notice. They’re much less likely to shake off storms,
fires, and floods as occasional or “freak” occurrences. Instead, they’re
recognizing them as indicative of a recurrent pattern that demands higher
compensation or different treatment.
The economic impact is tangible. It’s already harder and more expensive
to insure real estate in risk-prone areas like Florida, Louisiana, Texas, and
6
California. Individuals and businesses in those areas are increasingly on the
hook for property damage. This limits their ability to get loans or attract
investors, curtails production, and affects decisions about the location of
current and future operations. It also leaves property owners and the banks
that hold their mortgages with stranded assets: real estate investments that
can no longer deliver their projected rate of return.
5
For research on extreme events and their economic effects, see Aylward and Oliveira
(2020), Bakkensen and Barrage (2020), Gallagher (2014), Tran and Wilson (2020),
Deryugina (2017), and Fried (2021).
6
3
See, for example, Flavelle (2019), Grimaldi et al. (2020), Sheehan (2020).
FINAL
These dynamics aren’t limited to businesses and households in areas
prone to destructive weather events. We’re seeing them in parts of the
country facing less conspicuous climate effects, like prolonged extreme
temperatures and unpredictable rainfall. The outcomes may seem less acute
than fires or hurricanes, but they affect business operations in equally crucial
ways—for example, by influencing which crops can be grown or how may
months of the year people can work outside. These kinds of shifts are already
7
being factored into businesses’ and insurers’ assessments of risk.
All of this highlights an important reality. The risks from climate change
aren’t an isolated problem relevant only to a few sectors or parts of the
country. Large swaths of the nation and a wide range of industries are
8
vulnerable to disruption.
Of course, nowhere are these risks more acute than in the sectors of the
economy that produce and use carbon-based energy. The global and
increasingly domestic momentum to “go green” is prompting consumers and
businesses to decarbonize and shift to more environmentally neutral forms of
9
energy. These changes can lead to mispriced assets or misallocated capital,
especially for entities operating globally. We’re already seeing corporations
take notice. A growing number of them are including climate risk assessments
in their daily business planning and financial disclosures. In many cases, this
7
Brunetti et al. (2021).
8
These industries include the agricultural and resource sectors, leisure activities, various
manufacturing industries, and the financial institutions that support their operation.
(USGCRP 2018).
9
4
Fried, Novan, and Peterman (2021).
FINAL
is happening in the absence of regulatory requirements or government
10
mandates.
Many sectors are feeling the strain, including energy, automobiles, and
construction. Firms in these carbon-heavy sectors could see declines in asset
11
prices, income, and profitability. Understandably, communities and
businesses that rely on these industries are worried; they’re thinking about
falling production, stranded assets, and, ultimately, stranded people.
Their fears aren’t unfounded. We don’t have to go back very far in our
history to see the devastating impact economic shifts can have on whole
segments of society. Think back to the 1980s wave of globalization. The view
of most economists, including me, was that freer trade would be an
unqualified win for the aggregate economy, raising output, driving growth,
12
lowering inflation, and ultimately delivering higher GDP per capita. And
13
globalization has led to many good things—just not across the board.
Industries that had once been at the heart of the U.S. economy became
less profitable and less viable. Workers displaced from downsized and closing
businesses found it hard to transition to alternative employment with similar
pay. Some remained idle for the rest of their working lives. While new jobs
and industries emerged, they often went to other people, in other places, far
from the communities hardest hit by globalization. Thirty years later, many of
10
See the work by the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures
(https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/) and CDP (https://www.cdp.net/en/climate).
11
Rudebusch (2021), Brunetti et al. (2021).
12
Alston, Kearl, and Vaughan (1992).
13
See, for example, Broda and Weinstein (2006), Ebenstein et al. (2014), Caliendo and
5
Parro (2015), and Hummels, Munch, and Xiang (2018).
FINAL
these communities still bear the scars, having never fully recovered from the
14
effects of the transition.
Climate change could bring similar economic upheaval, boosting
innovation, output, and jobs in green sectors, while reducing them in carbon-
intensive ones. While the evolution of these patterns is uncertain, it is clear
that where we end up will be different than where we’ve been. And the lesson
from past experience is that how we manage these shifts will shape not just
the climate, but also the trajectory of the economy and the individuals,
families, and communities that make it up.
Climate Risk and the Fed
So, what does all of this mean for the Fed? Well, like all other risks to the
economy, it’s incumbent on the Federal Reserve to understand the likely path
of climate change and the transitions that could be part of this evolution. At
this juncture, when both the path of change and the eventual new equilibrium
are so uncertain, our role is to listen, study, and adjust to whatever comes our
way.
And we’ve already needed to do this. Over the past several years, severe
weather and wildfires have frequently distorted headline employment and
growth numbers, making it more challenging to decipher the true state of the
economy. This has prompted us and others throughout the Federal Reserve
System to look at weather as a regular explanatory factor in economic
14
Regarding persistent trade impacts on U.S. employment, see, for example, Autor, Dorn,
6
and Hanson (2013) and Autor et al. (2014).
FINAL
performance—a necessary response to the increased frequency and impact of
15
climate events.
But the Fed and all central banks also need to be forward looking,
responding to the risks we see today, while anticipating those that have yet to
unfold. This need has prompted many central banks to formally consider
16
climate risk in the regulation and supervision of financial institutions. The
Federal Reserve is thinking about these risks, too. Earlier this year, we created
a new Supervision Climate Committee to ensure the resilience of financial
17
firms under our supervision.
Of course, there are also risks to the economy that we don’t yet fully
understand—the known but unknown risks. One of those is the response of
businesses and households to living in a more unpredictable world. As
uncertainty rises, so does the desire for precautionary savings that can be
used to offset or hedge against possible future losses. While such behavior is a
prudent response to greater risk, a change in saving behavior of a large
number of individuals, both here and abroad, would contribute to a lower
18
neutral rate of interest, or r-star.
15
Wilson (2019), Boldin and Wright (2015). This is different than simple seasonal
adjustment, which assumes the local and national patterns of weather are broadly similar
from year to year.
16
For example, this month the Bank of England launched an “experimental” climate risk
stress test of major U.K. banks and insurers (Bank of England 2021). The European Central
Bank includes climate risk in its supervisory guidance to financial institutions (European
Central Bank 2020).
17
The FedSeuraple rRveisseiornv ea nBdo Raredg uisl aatlisoon e Rsetapbolristhing a Financial Stability Climate FCionmanmciitatle e to
iSdtaenbtiliiftyy, Rasespeosrst, and address climate-related risks to financial stability. The Federal
Reserve’s (Board of Governors 2020a) and
18 (Board of Governors 202 0b) discuss these issues from microprudential and
macroprudential perspectives, respectively. See Brainard (2021) for additional discussion.
7
Dietrich, Muller, and Schoenle (2021).
FINAL
A similar downward force on r-star may arise from a reduction in labor
productivity, as rising temperatures impede outdoor work or skill demand
outstrips skill supply, limiting growth. This would only add to the structural
factors currently depressing the neutral rate of interest and further curtail the
19
Fed’s ability to cut rates to combat economic downturns. Of course, there
could also be offsetting pressure on r-star from increased investments to
move to a more sustainable economy. In other words, there’s a lot of
uncertainty.
Another known but unknown risk is how much and how rapidly the
structure of the economy will change. If the journey occurs abruptly, the
transition could put considerable pressure on both employment and prices.
For example, an abrupt shift from older, less green technologies to greener
ones could leave workers in declining sectors unprepared, lacking the skills to
smoothly transition. We could also see prices jump in emerging sectors and
fall in declining ones, as supply responds to changes in demand. Without
advance preparation to help industries transform and the workforce adapt,
the transition costs could be large and long-lasting. As monetary
policymakers, we will need to watch these developments closely and prepare
for any and all scenarios.
So how do we do this? How do we watch for developments and assess
risks when so many have yet to fully develop? At the San Francisco Fed we
have taken a very direct approach. We are working intentionally and
deliberately with our communities, other public institutions, and the private
th
sector to catalog the risks and how they are playing out in the 12 District, the
19
For examinations of the structural factors depressing r-star see Carvalho, Ferrero, and
Nechio (2016), Holston, Laubach, and Williams (2017), Jordà and Taylor (2019).
8
FINAL
nation, and across the globe. These data collection efforts are multifaceted and
include formal surveys, listening sessions, and targeted meetings with CEOs to
better understand how climate risk affects decision making and resiliency
planning.
We are also convening the best academic thinking on these topics,
hosting conferences and sponsoring a virtual seminar series on climate
20
economics that features a range of research on the issues we are facing.
Finally, consistent with our history, we have assembled a team to study how
these issues are likely to impact the Federal Reserve’s mandates in the future.
This team allows us to leverage our strength as students of the economy to
21
prepare for the challenges and uncertainties that lie ahead.
The Transition We Choose
Future occurrences, especially when uncertain, are easy to push off. But
doing so leaves a mark.
I saw this myself. As a teenager growing up in Missouri, I witnessed
factory after factory move away, or simply shutter. Each one of them left
people behind. Some of those people—too many to count—never recovered. I
20
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/events/2019/november/economics-of-
climate-change/, https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/events/virtual-seminar-on-
climate-economics/, and http://www.impactlab.org/news-insights/economic-risks-of-
climate-change-implications-for-financial-regulators/. In addition, the San Francisco Fed’s
Community Development group will be hosting a climate conference on July 21
(https://www.frbsfevents.org/event/2c68afa2-7d0f-465c-b386-8770185ff28f/summary).
21
Our new Sustainable Growth group continues the San Francisco Fed’s long tradition of
doing focused research on issues that affect the economy. For example, previous groups
have focused on the IT revolution, emerging Pacific Basin economies, and quantitative
9
assessment of financial vulnerability.
FINAL
saw the same thing in Syracuse, where I got my PhD. Carrier air conditioning
closed, and the community struggled. Drive anywhere in America and you can
see vestiges of a similar story.
Now, it’s tempting to blame globalization. And so many do. But the real
miss was a lack of acknowledgement. Acknowledgement that, while the
economy would be better off in the end, the end is a long way off and the
transition would not benefit everyone equally. In fact, there could be collateral
damage.
So, what do we learn from this? The key lesson is that transitions
matter. And how they play out is our choice. On the cusp of an economic
transformation that will likely be even more far-reaching, we have an
opportunity to do things differently.
Our future is uncertain: no one really knows the severity and scale of
climate change, where and who will be most affected, or the nature, extent,
and duration of our response to the risks. But one thing is certain—the
economic ground is shifting. And we have a window of opportunity to
prepare; to choose the degree of hardship we will endure.
Economic transitions are inevitable, but the degree of pain they inflict is
not. In the end, preparation gives us agency. It is our duty to use it.
Thank you.
10
FINAL
References
American Economic Review
Alston, Richard M., J.R. Kearl, and Michael B. Vaughan. 1992. “Is There a Consensus Among
Economists in the 1990s?” 82(2), pp. 203–209.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2117401
Journal of Economic Perspectives
Auffhammer, Maximilian. 2018. “Quantifying Economic Damages from Climate
Change.” 32(4, Fall), pp. 33–52.
American Economic
AutoRre, vDieawvid H., David Dorn, and Go rdon H. Hanson. 2013. “The China Syndrome: Local
Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States.”
103(6), pp. 2,121–2,168.
Quarterly Journal of Economics
Autor, David, David Dorn, Gordon Hanson, and Jae Song. 2014. “Trade Adjustment: Worker
Level Evidence.” 129(4), pp. 1,799–1,860.
FRBSF Economic Letter
Aylward, James, and Luiz E. Oliveira. 2020. “Rising Wildfire Risk for the 12th District
Economy.” 2020-19 (July 13). https://www.frbsf.org/economic-
research/publications/economic-letter/2020/july/rising-wildfire-risk-for-12th-
district-economy/
Bakkensen, Laura, and Lint Barrage. 2020. “Climate Shocks, Cyclones, and Economic
Growth: Bridging the Micro-Macro Gap.” National Bureau of Economic Research
Working Paper 24893 (February).
Bank of England. 2021. “Stress Testing.” https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/stress-testing
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. 2020a. “Supervision and Regulation
Report.” November. https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2020-november-
supervision-and-regulation-report.htm
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. 2020b. “Financial Stability Report.”
November. https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2020-november-financial-
stability-report-purpose.htm
Brookings Papers on Economic Activity
Boldin, Michael, and Jonathan H. Wright. 2015. “Weather Adjusting Economic Data.”
, Fall. https://www.brookings.edu/bpea-
articles/weather-adjusting-economic-data/
Brainard, Lael. 2021. “Financial Stability Implications of Climate Change.” Speech at the
“Transform Tomorrow Today” Ceres 2021 Conference, Boston, MA (via webcast),
March 23.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/brainard20210323a.htm
Quarterly Journal of Economics
Broda, Christian, and David E. Weinstein. 2006. “Globalization and the Gains from Variety.”
121(2, May), pp. 541–585.
11
FINAL
Brunetti, Celso, Benjamin Dennis, Dylan Gates, Diana Hancock, David Ignell, ElizabFeEthD KS .
KNiosteers, Gurubala Kotta, Anna Kovner, Richard J. Rosen, and Nicholas K. Tabor. 2021.
"Climate Change and Financial Stability." Federal Reserve Board of Governors
, March 19. https://doi.org/10.17016/2380-7172.2893
Review of Economic Studies
Caliendo, Lorenzo, and Fernando Parro. 2015. “Estimates of the Trade and Welfare Effects
of NAFTA.” 82(1, January), pp. 1–44.
European Economic Review
Carvalho, Carlos, Andrea Ferrero, and Fernanda Nechio. 2016. “Demographics and Real
Interest Rates: Inspecting the Mechanism.” 88, pp. 208–226.
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy
Deryugina, Tatyana. 2017. “The Fiscal Cost of Hurricanes: Disaster Aid Versus Social
Insurance.” , 9(3), pp. 168–198.
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.20140296
Dietrich, Alexander M., Gernot J. Muller, and Raphael S. Schoenle. 2021. “The Expectations
Channel of Climate Change: Implications for Monetary Policy.” Brandeis University
Working Paper, March.
https://peeps.unet.brandeis.edu/~schoenle/research/The_Expectations_Channel_of_Cl
imate_Change.pdf
Ebenstein, Avraham, Ann HarrisonR,e Mvieawrg aorf eEtc MoncoMmililcasn a, nadn dS tSahtiasntincosn Phillips. 2014.
“Estimating the Impact of Trade and Offshoring on American Workers Using the
Current Population SurveysG.”u ide on Climate-Related and Environ9m6e(n4t)a, lp Rpi.s 5ks81–595.
European Central Bank. 2020. .
November.
https://www.bankingsupervision.europa.eu/ecb/pub/pdf/ssm.202011finalguideoncli
mate-relatedandenvironmentalrisks~58213f6564.en.pdf
New York Times,
Flavelle, Christopher. 2019. “As Wildfires Get Worse, Insurers Pull Back from Riskiest
Areas.” August 20.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/20/climate/fire-insurance-renewal.html
Fried, Stephie. 2021. “Seawalls and Stilts: A Quantitative Macro Study of Climate
Adaptation.” Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Working Paper 2021-07.
https://doi.org/10.24148/wp2021-07
FRBSF Economic Letter
Fried, Stephie, Kevin Novan, and William B. Peterman. 2021. “The Economy’s Response to
Potential Climate Policy.” 2021-16 (June 21).
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-
letter/2021/june/economy-response-to-potential-climate-policy
12
FINAL
Funk, Cary, and Meg Hefferon. 2019. “U.S. Public Views on Climate and Energy.” Report,
Pew Research Center, November 25.
https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2019/11/25/u-s-public-views-on-climate-and-
energy/
American Economic Journal: Applied
GallEagchoenro, mJuicsstin. 2014. “Learning about an Infrequent Event: Evidence from Flood
Insurance Take-Up in the United States.”
6(3), pp. 206–233.
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/app.6.3.206
Grimaldi, AntoOnuior, IKnisai gJhatvsa,nmardian, Dickon Pinner, Hamid Samandari, and Kurt Strovink.
2020. “Climate Change and P&C Insurance: The Threat and Opportunity.” McKinsey &
Company, November 19.
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/financial-services/our-insights/climate-
change-and-p-and-c-insurance-the-threat-and-opportunity
Journal of International
HolsEtcoonn, oKmatihcrsyn, Thomas Laubach, and John C. Willia ms. 2017. “Measuring the Natural
Rate of Interest: International Trends and Determinants.”
108 (supplement 1, May), pp. S59–S75.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2017.01.004
Journal of Economic Perspectives
Hsiang, Solomon, and Robert E. Kopp. 2018. “An Economist’s Guide to Climate Change
Science.” 32(4, Fall), pp. 3–32.
Hsiang, Solomon, Robert Kopp, Amir Jina, James Rising, Michael Delgado, Shashank Mohan,
D. J. RasmussenS, cRieonbceert Muir-Wood, Paul Wilson, Michael Oppenheimer, Kate Larsen,
and Trevor Houser. 2017. “Estimating Economic Damage from Climate Change in the
United States.” 356 (June 30), pp. 1,362–1,369.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6345/1362
Journal of Economic Literature
Hummels, David, Jakob R. Munch, and Chong Xiang. 2018. “Offshoring and Labor Markets.”
56(3), pSpp. e9c8ia1l– R1e,0p2o8r.t on Climate Change and Land
IPCC. 2020. “Summary for Policymakers.” .
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva, Switzerland.
https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/chapter/summary-for-policymakers/
Jordà, Òscar, and Alan M. Taylor. 2019. “Riders on the Storm.” Federal Reserve Bank of San
Francisco Working Paper 2019-20. https://doi.org/10.24148/wp2019-F2R0B SF Economic
Letter
Rudebusch, Glenn D. 2021. “Climate Change Is a Source of Financial Risk.”
2021-03 (February 8). https://www.frbsf.org/economic-
research/publications/economic-letter/2021/february/climate-change-is-source-of-
financial-risk/
13
FINAL
Reinsurance News,
Sheehan, Matt. 2020. “RenRe Could Pull Back in Florida If Rates Stay Low, Says
CEO.” February 7. https://www.reinsurancene.ws/renre-could-pull-
back-in-florida-if-rates-stay-low-says-ceo/
Tran, Brigitte Roth, and Daniel J. Wilson. 2020. “The Local Economic Impact of Natural
Disasters.” Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Working Paper 2020-34.
https://doi.org/10.24148/wp2020-34 Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the
United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment
USGCRP (U.S. Global Change Research Program). 2018.
, Volume II. U.S. Global Change
Research Program, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.7930/NCA4.2018
American Economic Review: Insights
Wilson, Daniel J. 2019. “Clearing the Fog: The Predictive Power of Weather for Employment
Reports and their Asset Price Responses.” 1(3), pp.
373–388.
14
Cite this document
APA
Mary C. Daly (2021, June 21). Regional President Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_20210622_mary_c_daly
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_regional_speeche_20210622_mary_c_daly,
author = {Mary C. Daly},
title = {Regional President Speech},
year = {2021},
month = {Jun},
howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_20210622_mary_c_daly},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}