in line with our supervisory expectations. given the difficulties to assess the exposure to and the impact of climate - related risk we have not assigned to this exercise quantitative objectives, beyond providing participants and us with a first bottom up assessment of their exposure, based on common assumptions, assessment which appears to be moderate by 2050. in particular, we didn ’ t set as an objective to assess the extent to which the current regulatory framework is sufficient and well suited to absorb climate - related risks, and whether additional supervisory capital requirements would be legitimate. models, metrics and methodologies developed so far are still in their infancy and the data too sparse to allow drawing firm conclusions about the loss absorption capacity of current capital levels. nonetheless, we already see at the acpr these exercises as prudential tools, as they have proved helpful to us at incentivizing financial institutions to give the proper level 1 / 3 bis central bankers'speeches of priority and resources to the monitoring and management of climate - related risks. the publication in november 2020 of the ssm guide on climate and environmental - related risk was driven by the same logic and the preparation underway of an ssm stress test should provide an additional step at european level towards more supervisory scrutiny in the process of fully integrating these risks into the day - to - day risk management of banks. 2 - there are also a few lessons that can be drawn from our experience from a methodological standpoint, as the use of such scenario analysis by supervisors is likely to be repeated and is likely to spread among supervisors. i would like to highlight two of them. first, tremendous progresses have been made in the domain of climate risk scenarios under the aegis of the network of central banks and supervisors for the greening of the financial sector, the ngfss. thanks to this “ coalition of the willing ”, gathering today more than 90 central banks and supervisors across the world, high level scenarios were published in july last year, updated a couple of weeks ago by a set of 6 scenarios. this set of global reference scenarios provide a good basis for financial authorities. of course, the ngfs should continue to develop and refine those scenarios. however, there will remain the need to tailor those scenarios to the circumstances of each jurisdiction, for instance specifics of their climate policies, or more precise meteorological data at the national level. in addition, st may legitimately differ along other methodological dimensions. a case in point is the use or not of a dynamic balance sheet assumption

though the international standards - setters have made considerable progress in terms of harmonisation. let me take the example of banking resolution : one of the ( many ) remaining challenges is to make sure that the adopted resolution strategies will be recognised and applied cross - border. under the aegis of the fsb, several initiatives have been taken ( e. g. isda protocol for financial contracts ) but this is not the end of the story and many further discussions will be necessary to remove all the obstacles to implementing, inter alia, a single point of entry resolution of a gsib. in the eu we have now a common legal resolution regime and even a common resolution authority for the banking union but resolution measures continue to be implemented at the national level because insolvency regimes within europe are not unified. being optimistic, i would say that these difficulties are not an impediment to resolution, because the most important thing is to be mindful of such a difficulty and to deal with it. each of us constitute a vital link for building the proper international regulatory framework the presence of so many different institutions at this conference demonstrates the need and interest to talk and work together because we share a lot of similar concerns and goals concerning depositor protection and financial stability. we are united by a common goal : to strongly mitigate contagion and make liquidation operationally possible. depositors must perceive the dis as a well - funded and reliable partner able to satisfy their claims in a timely manner. but continuous efforts are required. i know for instance in france the permanent working relationship between the acpr, the fgdr and the treasury to make the french dis ever more effective with regard to these goals. i am wholeheartedly convinced that working together, especially at the international level, is a key factor of success. bis central bankers ’ speeches