ENVFIBA气候风险分析模型：框架、模型细节和指南（英）

The ENV-FIBA Model forClimate Risk Analysis Framework, Model Details, and Guide Marco Gross, Jinhyuk Yoo, Hugo Rojas-Romagosa, ZulmaBarrail, Salim Dehmej, Hannah Sheldon WP/25/230 IMF Working Papersdescribe research inprogress by the author(s) and are published toelicit comments and to encourage debate.The views expressed in IMF Working Papers are IMF Working Paper Monetary and Capital Markets Department The ENV-FIBA Model for Climate Risk Analysis: Prepared by Marco Gross, Jinhyuk Yoo, Hugo Rojas-Romagosa, Zulma Barrail, Salim Dehmej, Hannah Authorized for distribution by Hiroko Oura IMF Working Papersdescribe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicitcomments and to encourage debate.The views expressed in IMF Working Papers are those of the ABSTRACT:We present the ENV-FIBA macro-micro model framework that can be used to analyze the climate-macro-financial consequences of climate scenarios and related policy counterfactuals. The model consists of amulti-country Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) core and a connected micro simulation module for aneconomy’s individualnonfinancial firms and banks. The climate-macro-financial scenario simulations areanchored in future temperature and emission pathways, alongside policy assumptions regarding carbon taxation,fiscal revenue recycling and reinvestment, optional carbon border adjustment mechanisms, and others. We RECOMMENDED CITATION:Gross, M., Yoo, Y., Rojas-Romagosa, H., Barrail, Z., Dehmej, S., and Sheldon,H.2025. “The ENV-FIBA Model for Climate Risk Analysis—Framework, Model Details, and Guide.” IMF WORKING PAPERS The ENV-FIBA Model for Climate Framework, Model Details, and Guide Prepared byMarco Gross, Jinhyuk Yoo, Hugo Rojas-Romagosa, ZulmaBarrail, Salim Dehmej, and Hannah Sheldon Contents Contents...............................................................................................................................................................2 3.1Context...............................................................................................................................................123.2Climate Risk Scenarios......................................................................................................................143.3Results................................................................................................................................................18 4.Conclusions.........................................................................................................................................25 Annex I. Model Inputs and Calibration............................................................................................................27 1.Introduction The increasing urgency of addressing climate change necessitates comprehensive model analyses tounderstand and mitigate bothclimatephysical and transition risks. Physical riskmaterialization,throughtherisingfrequency and severity ofweather eventsas a result of structural climate changeposeathreatto We develop a micro-macro simulation-based climate-economic model—calledtheENV-FIBAmodel—that is meant to helpanalyzetheimplications ofsuch physicalclimaterisksandto designtransitionpolicies to counter them. “ENV” denotes the involvement of theIMF’smulti-countrydynamiccomputablegeneral equilibrium(CGE)modelwithexplicit linksbetween economic dynamics andgreenhouse gas(GHS)emissions(Chateau et al. 2024). “FIBA” abbreviates firms and banks, to refer to thefirm-bankmicro simulationlayer of the model. The model’s inputs include temperature and emission targets (pathways) coupled with The model relates to three clusters of climate-economic modelswith financial elements in the literature. These include (1) network-based methodologies (e.g.,Battiston et al. 2017,Stolbova et al. 2018,Roncoroni et al. 2021), (2)stock-flow consistent models (e.g.,Dafermos et al. 2017/18,Bovari et al. 2018,Monasterolo and Raberto 2018,Dunz et al. 2021), and (3) macro-financial model suiteswith embeddedbankstress test methodologies (Vermeulen et al. 2018/21,Allen et al. 2020,Alogoskoufis et al. 2021,Emambakhshet al. 2023,Laliotis and Lamichhane 2023,Lee et al 2024). Our model falls into the third category.For ageneral overview of micro-macro model approacheswith a transition risk focus seeAdrian et al. (2022).Inaddition to these relatively new model developments,there is a sizeable and well-establishedpreceding Weformulatethreerecommendations that wethinkwould beinstrumentalforenhancingthe value of (1)Physical and transition risk effectsshould be modeledin an integrated manner. Physical andtransition risk cannot be separated. Transition risk would not exist without physical climate risk. Transitionpolicies imply costs and benefits. Their benefit is to mitigate physical risk and thereby avert the otherwisedetrimental humanitarian and economic impact of physical risk materialization. The economic cost stems (2)Dynamic bank balance shee