ColumnistsPREMIUM

MICHAEL AVERY: Raising bank capital buffers could worsen climate change risk

Higher capital requirements may reduce banks’ lending capacity, potentially stifling growth

Michael Avery

Michael Avery

Columnist

We need to find a happy medium between the need to ensure business in its entirety (big and small) fully embraces the various sustainability frameworks, and the ease of doing so. Picture: REUTERS/PETER ANDREWS
We need to find a happy medium between the need to ensure business in its entirety (big and small) fully embraces the various sustainability frameworks, and the ease of doing so. Picture: REUTERS/PETER ANDREWS

In the wake of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s recent signing of the Climate Change Act, SA is experiencing a familiar resurgence of climate change denialism. It’s a familiar pattern: every time progress is made it seems to trigger a backlash intent on pulling us back. Yet this moment demands we confront these myths with clarity and evidence. 

Let’s start with a fact everyone can agree on: the earth’s climate has always experienced natural variability. Think ice ages and interglacial warm periods; this is ancient history. But what we’re witnessing now is unprecedented. Since the late 19th century the global average temperature has risen by about 1.2°C. Such a rapid change over mere decades rather than millennia points to a different culprit. 

You don’t need a PhD to see the changes around us. Last Sunday, then Monday, marked the hottest days humans have measured, according to the European climate service. For the past 13 months the earth has been setting heat records. The worldwide temperature average over the last year is has risen by more than 1.5°C over pre-industrial levels, appearing to breach the global warming limit. When that barrier was established in 2015 it was intended to apply for 20 or 30 years, not just 12 months. 

Our fingerprints are unmistakable. Carbon isotopes — nature’s own markers — reveal that the surge in carbon dioxide comes from burning fossil fuels. The unique chemical signature from our cars, factories and power plants is clear. Climate models corroborate this. When accounting for natural phenomena such as volcanic activity and solar radiation, the models fail to explain the observed warming. Add human activities and the models align perfectly with reality. 

Temperatures are rising. Glaciers and polar ice caps are melting at alarming rates. Oceans are warming and acidifying, devastating marine life. Extreme weather events — storms, droughts, floods — are more frequent and severe. Just ask the insurers. These aren’t isolated incidents; they’re part of a disturbing pattern. 

Misinformation — whether unintentional or deliberate — undermines effective climate policy. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warns that misleading information can derail our efforts. The Global Risks Report 2024 ranks misinformation as the biggest short-term risk and extreme weather events as the top long-term risk. It’s a one-two punch that obscures truth and delays action when we need it most. 

Climate denialism, the old foe, rejects the overwhelming scientific consensus that human activities drive global warming. This isn’t a new battle. Late in the 20th century, as evidence mounted, denialists sowed doubt, often with backing from fossil fuel interests. Today, denial has evolved into a more insidious form: climate delayism. This “new denial” doesn’t outright reject climate change but downplays its urgency, arguing for slow, incremental changes that essentially delay necessary actions until it’s too late. 

The presidential climate commission (PCC) highlighted in a report published last week that there is a yawning gap between our ambitions and actions. According to the research, the country’s total renewable capacity was 10.4GW in 2022, up 1GW each year since 2015. To achieve net zero by 2050, renewable capacity will need to increase by between 190GW and 390GW, or 6GW-14GW a year. The report fingers often incoherent policies, weak governance structures and insufficient financing. This isn’t bureaucratic jargon — it’s about real, necessary changes. 

And public perception matters. A PCC and Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) survey shows broad support for climate action. More than half of South Africans believe transitioning to renewable energy could end load-shedding, and more than 40% think it could reduce electricity costs and boost the economy. The will exists; we must harness it. 

First, we need coherent governance and aligned energy policies. Second, financial investments in climate initiatives must ramp up. Third, key sectors (water, agriculture, energy, and transport) require focused action. 

SA stands at a crossroad. With the Climate Change Act and PCC recommendations we have a unique opportunity to base policies on sound science and take decisive action. By acknowledging the facts and moving with purpose we can mitigate risks and secure a sustainable future. 

However, we must tread carefully. A Reserve Bank report, also published last week, warns that local banks face up to R1-trillion in transition risk. The banking sector’s R2.8-trillion corporate credit loan book, 35% of which ties to industries at risk of falling behind in the low-carbon economy shift, underscores the economic complexity. 

The Bank’s paper suggests increasing capital buffers to address climate-related systemic risks. I’m concerned the trade-offs haven’t been fully explored here because of the calamitous unintended consequences. Higher capital requirements might reduce banks’ lending capacity, tightening credit conditions and potentially stifling economic growth. In a country already grappling with low growth, world-leading youth unemployment and potential social instability, these outcomes spell disaster. 

Banks may become more selective, potentially excluding vital but riskier sectors from accessing funds, slowing down investment and consumer spending. Small and medium-sized enterprises might face greater difficulties in accessing credit, hindering growth and innovation. Such measures, if not carefully calibrated, might push lending into the less-regulated shadow banking sector, creating new financial stability risks. 

Policymakers must adopt a balanced approach. Gradual capital requirement implementation, targeted sector support and flexible policy adjustments are crucial. Integrating climate policies with economic strategies can ensure a just transition that safeguards both the environment and livelihoods. 

The moment demands bold action and careful consideration. This is not arguing for delayism but by aligning climate initiatives with economic realities, SA can ensure the medicine applied isn’t worse than the disease.  

• Avery, a financial journalist and broadcaster, produces BDTV’s ‘Business Watch’. Contact him at Badger@businesslive.co.za.

Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Comment icon