institutions although, in practice, expectations for recovery times may differ depending on the scenario, some critical functions, including the safeguarding and transferring of funds and financial assets, are so vital to the domestic and global financial system that they arguably should continue with minimal, if any, disruption, even in the most severe regional disaster. obviously, all institutions need to plan to continue serving customers in a major disruption, and supervisory standards have required them to do so for many years. however, it is increasingly evident that the operational resilience of the largest institutions in key markets should reflect their systemic impact across the financial sector. expectations should be highest for institutions whose activity can significantly affect others, such as major clearing and settlement entities and institutions that act as financial " utilities " in some of their functions. our conversations with financial institutions and disaster - recovery experts indicate that some institutions are not just revamping emergency response and contingency plans to address vulnerabilities experienced during 9 / 11 ; they are considering some fairly significant changes in their operations. for example, the traditional business - resumption model calls for having a backup for an active operating site, but maintaining an effective one is difficult. during 9 / 11, some firms found that their backup sites were not always accessible or that their backup systems did not have the up - to - date hardware and software versions in use at the active site. some firms had only so - called " warm or cold " backup sites that required installation of hardware or software, which was not possible under the circumstances. financial utilities, counterparties, and customers reported some difficulties in establishing communications because backup information had not been shared or was not current. moreover, assumptions that key personnel could be relocated proved wrong. a variation of that business - resumption model includes shifting operations to the backup site on a regular basis. doing so avoids the systems issues of the traditional model, but it still requires the movement of personnel. some institutions are moving toward a split - operations model in which two or more active sites provide backup for one another, and one site can absorb some or all of the critical work of the other for an extended time. instituting this model may be easiest for institutions that have nationwide or global operations. the strategy offers the potential for an almost immediate resumption of business and addresses all the key vulnerabilities of the traditional model. at the same time, the split - operations model can involve significant costs in that it requires maintaining excess capacity at each site and

is that the efficient allocation of climate - friendly capital is hindered by insufficient availability of granular, reliable, internationally comparable information. sustainable financial investments rely on ( i ) company disclosure practices that are neither harmonised nor easily auditable, and ( ii ) scoring systems that are heterogeneous across different financial providers, largely subjective and sometimes opaque. as a consequence, the risk of confusing information and misleading claims ( ‘ greenwashing ’ ) is not immaterial. another important issue for financial authorities is the need for adequate consideration of environmental risk in financial institutions ’ risk management, in supervisory rules and practices, and in economic modelling. many central banks and supervisory authorities, including the bank of italy, are making efforts to improve their actions, also benefiting from the exchange of experiences at international level. the g20 sustainable finance working group has undertaken several important initiatives. in its 2021 report, it set practical recommendations in three priority areas : ( i ) strengthening the comparability and interoperability of approaches ; ( ii ) improving reporting and disclosure ; and ( iii ) enhancing the role of international financial institutions in supporting the goals of the paris agreement and of the united nations agenda 2030. as a key legacy of the italian presidency, the group developed the first g20 multi - year roadmap on sustainable finance to guide future works at international level. this year, the indonesian presidency are promoting new analyses on sustainable finance, building on the work plan detailed in that roadmap. further initiatives under our presidency included requesting the imf and other international 3 / 5 bis central bankers'speeches organisations to consider climate - related data needs in preparing a new data gap initiative, and the financial stability board to report on disclosure challenges and data gaps on climate - related financial risks. the fsb was also requested to develop its own roadmap to tackle climaterelated risks for financial stability, to provide a coordination mechanism for standard setting bodies and international organisations to improve firm - level disclosures, data availability, methods and scenarios for vulnerability analyses, and regulatory and supervisory practices and tools. let me just add that, while enhancing sustainable finance is very important, fighting climate change is first and foremost a job for general public policy. as i mentioned earlier, within the g20 framework we were and are committed to promoting fruitful cooperation on actionable policy proposals. a key focus should be the design of a global carbon pricing system, including setting up carbon tax plans and removing fossil fuel subsidies. in these first months