At the Banque de France, we published a study called “A “Silent Spring” for the Financial System?”,xix which explored the dependencies and impacts of the French financial system on biodiversity.xx Importantly, the study was interdisciplinary and involved several researchers and experts from various institutions.xxi As I will discuss later, I believe that this interdisciplinary approach is essential to address the challenges of the Anthropocene. These different studies enable us to understand that nature-related financial risks can be split between physical and transition risks, much like climate-related financial risks. Physical risks stem from the dependency of economic activities on ecosystem services and their vulnerability in the case of disruption. For instance, the loss of pollination could affect agricultural output and lead to food shortages or higher consumer prices, while new pandemics could disrupt entire value chains. Transition risks result from the negative impacts of some economic activities on biodiversity, which makes them vulnerable to transition policies. For instance, it is hoped that the COP15 that will take place in December in Montreal will lead to an international agreement to protect 30% of land and sea areas by 2030. Regional and national policies are also expected: the EU Green Deal contains several goals related to biodiversity, such as the need to increase organic farming practices from 9% to 25% cultivated areas. All these policies could have profound implications for different sectors (agriculture, industry, real estate, and so on), and it is important to assess the potential impacts for financial institutions and the financial system as a whole.
Let me also mention that in 2019, a group of 15,000 scientists (yes, 15,000) issued a “warning to humanity”xiii, reminding that runaway consumption by a growing population in a world of limited resources and limited capacity to absorb pollutions is now posing an existential threat. 2. What does the Anthropocene mean for central banks? Even in such a dire situation, one may still be tempted to ask: why should macroeconomists, let alone central bankers, care about it? The short response is: because they belong to mankind. Another one, is that there cannot be macroeconomic, price or financial stability on a dead planet. But let me be a bit more specific. You probably already know that central banks and supervisors created a network in 2017 to “contribute to the development of environment and climate risk management in the financial sector”. The NGFS (Network for Greening the Financial System), created by 8 members, now counts with 121 members in addition to 19 observers, and the Banque de France proudly hosts its secretariat.xiv In March, the NGFS acknowledged that biodiversity loss and nature loss are also a source of macroeconomic and financial instability.xv This statement followed some groundbreaking work conducted by researchers from NGFS members along with the INSPIRE research networkxvi, as well as other research conducted by researchers at a few central banks including the Dutch 4  Page 5 sur 12 central bankxvii (DNB), the Banque de France, as well as the central banks of Malaysia and Brazil jointly with the World Bankxviii.