Environmental Risk Index for financial services firms
Authors: Prorokowski Lukasz 
Published: February 2016

Purpose
– This paper aims to provide an index benchmarking financial services firms against their environmental performance. The paper also introduces a new definition of the environmental risk that fits the current business and regulatory landscape of financial services firms. The Environmental Risk Index (ERI) helps financial services firms review their corporate social responsibility (CSR)/environmental and social governance (ESG) frameworks and address any shortcomings. With this in mind, every financial institution should understand that the Index is not primarily about the ranking, but about the highlighted areas that require significant investment to improve the overall management and understanding of environmental risk. This paper points to the link between being “green” and financial performance. As it transpires, addressing environmental risk serves not only the planet but also banks themselves by bringing in new business, reducing costs and avoiding reputational damage.

Design/methodology/approach
– The ERI relies on 44 variables grouped into ten thematic vectors that relate to different aspects of environmental risk management. Data for calculating the ERI are obtained by reviewing CSR and Sustainability Reports produced annually by financial services firms. Reports encompassing 2013 have been analysed to ensure objectivity and comparability of the results. A universal approach to all organisations has been taken in the numerical calculation of this index. The variables have been constructed such that they fit a wide range of institutions, from G-SIB banks and international asset managers through to smaller, domestic firms. As it transpires, the efforts to become “greener” are similar for financial institutions regardless of their market capitalisation or international reach.

Findings
– As far as the general ranking for the ERI is concerned, the range between the first and the last bank equals 524 points. With the maximum of 1,000 points that could be achieved in the ranking, the average score is 633 points and over 50 per cent of the banks have scored above the average. As it transpires, European banks outperform institutions from other regions with the average ERI score of 700. Banks repressing the Middle East region lag behind in their environmental performance. Interestingly, ERI scores and revenue figures are almost uncorrelated for large banks. This proves that any bank, despite its global presence and revenue, can develop similar environmental risk initiatives. The empirical analysis of the index results and revenue figures suggest that the revenue is related to the environmental performance. In other words, it is profitable to become “greener”. For every point in the ERI score gained, the revenue should increase slightly by a factor of 0.02.

Practical/implications
– This paper cuts through the environmental jargon, extensive literature review on environmental issues, socio-political issues and scientific study to deliver a clear picture of what needs to be done in the area of the environmental risk for financial services firms to reduce costs, increase business, improve reputation, address certain regulatory initiatives, strengthen the environmental and social governance and become more environmentally responsible.

Originality/value
– This paper, in a pioneering attempt, has presented the ERI encompassing financial services firms. At this point, the paper serves as a benchmarking tool for financial institutions willing to compare their “green” status. Looking at environmental risk has become an important part of the journey towards carefully managing business processes to generate a positive image. The importance of environmental risk is further underscored by investors, shareholders and regulators taking an increasing interest in banks’ activities. With this in mind, financial services firms need to scrutinise their operations with a particular focus on the quality of management in terms of people, environment and processes.