Except otherwise indicated, all data on this page are sourced from the Climate Change and Emerging Markets after COVID-19 report, October 2020.
Climate change and emerging markets after Covid-19
The world stands to lose nearly half of its potential economic output by the end of the century. That’s the shortfall we face if we fail to make further progress on climate change.
But this is only an average. Emerging markets are at risk of faring even worse given their particular vulnerabilities to rising sea levels, drought and slumps in agricultural output.
It’s a bleak picture. But there are also reasons for hope.
The scientific consensus on climate change is becoming widely accepted, and governments, individuals and businesses have started to act. With the benefit of some clear thinking and careful planning, much more can be done. Particularly across the emerging world.
Everywhere, human ingenuity, technological advances and the understanding that comes from experience and education are all positive forces that will drive efforts to mitigate climate change and to help us adapt to its effects.
This paper by Professor Cameron Hepburn and his team at the University of Oxford Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment offers a deep and broad analysis of the risks and opportunities emerging economies – and the world more generally – face from climate change. Their insights are based on the latest economic and climate modelling techniques.
It is research we at Pictet Asset Management are proud to have sponsored. The dynamics this report describes will play a critical role for investors over the coming decades. The pace at which governments act will determine how capital should best be allocated, be it regionally or across asset classes.
Our responsibility as managers of our clients’ assets is to understand the forces that shape our world, not just during the coming quarter or two, but sometimes over lifetimes – indeed, this frames our pioneering thematic approach. It also underpins our commitment to investing in emerging markets, which, notwithstanding short-term fluctuations, represent the greatest potential for long-term economic growth. Just think of the enormous strides these countries have made over recent decades.
Such are the foundations on which Pictet has grown during the past two centuries. But as talented as our own analysts, economists and investment managers are, we recognise there is always more to learn. For nearly a millennium, Oxford’s academic community has created a well of knowledge that has profoundly influenced the course of humanity. Our own history suggests that we have also had some success in taking the long-term view.
Which is why we have forged this partnership with Oxford’s Smith School. Thanks to their vast expertise in both environmental economics and emerging economies,
Professor Hepburn and his team have produced insights here that aren’t available anywhere else.
And, extraordinarily, they’ve done so through the lens of one of the most traumatic global developments in modern memory.
Compounding the challenge of how to negotiate the long-term peril presented by climate change is a more immediate crisis – the Covid-19 pandemic that has ravaged communities around the world. As this paper makes clear, the vast fiscal and monetary packages governments continue to put in place to support their economies over the near term can also considerably help efforts to limit global warming over decades to come if invested wisely.
Thankfully, the worst-case outcome, that of failing to do anything more to prevent global warming than we already have, is unlikely. Governments, businesses and individuals have recognised the need for action and have put steps in place.
Rather, the issue is: how much do we do? We can’t take for granted that all the effort will come from the developed world. Emerging countries are at risk of suffering disproportionately from the effects of global warming. And I think they are rising to the challenge – not least because taking measures is an investment that will often reap considerable rewards, and not just over the very long term.
In some areas, emerging economies are even well placed to take a lead. China already accounts for the lion’s share of photovoltaic cell manufacturing, is at the forefront of research and development and is one of the biggest adopters of the technology. Renewables combined with decentralised energy systems could help other emerging economies escape the need for massive investment in large networks. And as renewables become ever more cost effective, many of these countries could end up with cheaper energy than their developed rivals.
Some of the measures governments introduce, such as redirecting fossil fuel subsidies towards renewable energy sources, will be temporarily unpopular because they run counter to embedded interests. But the economic justification is clear. As the cost of power generated by renewables falls, fossil fuels will become ever less attractive. Great swathes of infrastructure devoted to fossil fuel production and use will be mothballed.
Ultimately, the work done by Professor Hepburn and his team leaves us hopeful. The challenges posed by climate change are huge. But they’re not insurmountable. And the emerging world has both its role to play and rewards to reap.
Climate change will cause enormous damage to economies, especially in the emerging world. People in China could be 25 per cent poorer by the end of the century than if there were no further climate change if we do nothing more to slow the rise in global temperature. For Brazil and India the shortfall is likely to exceed 60 per cent, according to modelling by a team of environmental economists at Oxford University’s Smith School in a new report sponsored by Pictet Asset Management.
Globally, that deficit could reach some USD500 trillion – as a worst case, nearly half of the world’s potential economic output would be lost by the end of the century compared to potential in the absence of further global warming. But this impact won’t be spread evenly. Some of the world’s biggest emerging economies are at greatest risk, particularly if they leave the heavy lifting on slowing climate change to the developed world and do little themselves. Vulnerable to rising sea levels, drought and severe weather events, these countries need to take action to limit climate change.
Fortunately, they increasingly recognise that the effort will be worthwhile. Worldwide, people are aware of the challenges presented by climate change, understanding that it leads to a loss of biodiversity, more flooding, arid farmland, forest fires and the like. And so governments are being forced into action. Thankfully this now makes the worst case a relatively unlikely one.
But merely sticking to current policies doesn’t do enough either. The loss in potential GDP per capita would be smaller, but not by much. At best the loss in potential GDP per capita might be reduced to 32 per cent from 46 per cent. And that’s without factoring in impossible-to-predict cascading effects where small incremental changes lead to a suddenly catastrophic outcome.
But were countries to act collectively, they could make up a significant chunk of that foregone output. That means action by developed and developing countries.
The Oxford team’s “current policies” scenario is that global warming would be some 2.8 degrees Centigrade above pre-industrial levels if efforts were limited to the richest countries, with 1 degree of that warming having already occurred. Should that temperature increase be cut to 1.6 degrees under an ambitious programme that included emerging economies, potential losses could shrink to a quarter or less.
And right now, there is a unique opportunity for countries, rich and poor, to make radical progress towards limiting the likelihood of catastrophic climate change. The Covid-19 pandemic has been a huge global shock. Public health measures, such as lockdowns, have inflicted huge financial costs. Governments were quick to respond and have committed vast sums to economic recovery. In many cases it makes financial sense for this expenditure to be directed towards measures that mitigate climate change.
China and India are jostling for greater geopolitical influence, within the emerging world and beyond. Their ambitions are manifold. For instance, China aims to lead the world in AI technology, India to take China’s manufacturing mantle. But over the long run, they won’t achieve their aims through armed conflict on some high Himalayan glacier.
Rather, they’ll only do so by working towards the same goal of limiting global warming – and, along the way, will ensure the survival of the glacier they both claim.
A major, concerted effort at limiting how much global temperatures rise over the coming decades will pay significant dividends not just in China and India but for emerging economies generally. Were developed and emerging countries to work together in limiting global warming, they could roughly halve the loss in output they face by the end of the century compared to if there were no further climate change.
Emerging economies are much more vulnerable to rising global temperatures than their advanced counterparts. For instance, major cities around the world face annual losses of between USD300 billion and USD1 trillion in output from climate change-related sea level rises, according to modelling by Oxford University’s Smith School, in a report sponsored by Pictet Asset Management. China alone has 15 cities that risk losing as much as 4.7 per cent in GDP per capita per year from rising sea levels.
But this is not where China’s worries about global warming end. Temperatures in the country have been rising faster than the global average. Current projections are for a 13 per cent fall in the country’s crop yields by 2050 compared with 2000.
Meanwhile, India stands to be one of the biggest losers from global warming, risking more than a 60 per cent shortfall in GDP per capita by the end of the century relative to if temperatures stayed the same. A hotter climate threatens the country’s productivity levels. Knock-on effects to education will prove a drag on the accumulation of human capital and thus economic development. Agricultural output will also decline.
Of major emerging market economies, only Russia is likely to benefit from rising global temperatures – at least, on the face of it. A melting Arctic would free more of Russia’s coastline, opening the region to trade and the exploitation of the region’s wealth of natural resources. But there’s a caveat. This doesn’t factor in the impact climate change would have on other countries’ demand for Russian goods. Subdued GDP elsewhere would very likely hurt Russian exports.
The Covid-19 pandemic has ravaged economies worldwide. Weak infrastructure and healthcare systems, dependence on commodities and tourism for income, and high debt loads have left emerging markets suffering disproportionately.
But looking beyond the short-term, prospects for these countries are hopeful. Vast fiscal and monetary stimulus have poured into the global financial system as governments everywhere look to mitigate the pandemic’s impact on their economies. A considerable proportion has been earmarked for infrastructure. Crucially, governments will be in a position to restructure their economies in ways that not only boost their productivity but are also environmentally friendly – to build back better. Indeed, in many cases the greener course of action is also the most economically sensible for emerging markets, according to a report by Oxford University’s Smith School sponsored by Pictet Asset Management.
Even before Covid-19, the green investment potential of emerging economies was huge. It’s estimated that the Paris Agreement has paved the way for some USD23 trillion in climate smart opportunities in emerging markets by 2030, according to the World Bank.
So far, their performance has been mixed. Yet, there is political momentum, driven by a groundswell of popular support, for green recovery from Covid-19, in a way there wasn’t following past pushes like the 1997 Kyoto agreement. Government efforts are reinforced by and reflect a groundswell of environmental activism by both individuals, companies and communities.
Not that it necessarily needs new money. For instance, public subsidies for coal, oil and gas production and consumption amounted to roughly USD500 billion worldwide in 2019, compared to USD100 billion for renewables.
In many cases, this support is provided by governments of less developed economies in an effort to develop oil and gas fields or to keep their populaces happy with cheap energy. But just reversing those subsidies would make huge strides towards climate change mitigation. And would save tens of billions of dollars from becoming stranded assets.
Between USD5 trillion and USD17 trillion of assets are already at risk if governments decide to pursue a high ambition strategy of limiting warming to 1.6˚C. That’s the value of infrastructure and other assets that would have to be mothballed to achieve the lowest rate of warming in Oxford’s scenarios. Further investment into fossil assets only pushes the value of stranded assets higher.
The green economy already makes up some 6 per cent of the global stock market, according to FTSE Russell. For it to expand further, investments will need to flow beyond the power sector, which currently receives most low-carbon funding, to agriculture, transport and forestry among others.
The significant structural changes economies need to undergo to mitigate climate change will absorb large amounts of funding over a long period, but financing is also needed for the many smaller, cost-effective measures that can be taken to adapt to the rise in global temperatures. For instance, early warning systems for storms and heat waves are estimated to save in assets and lives ten times what they cost. In all, adaptation currently represents just 0.1 per cent of private climate finance flows.
There’s an inevitability about the shift towards greener investment. The economics are moving in that direction. The finance will follow. Governments and private investors are likely to heed the early signals and allocate capital accordingly.
In the thick of the global pandemic, it might be forgivable to lose sight of an even graver global threat: climate change. But there’s a clear inter-play between the two, as a new exclusive report commissioned by Pictet Asset Management from Professor Cameron Hepburn’s team at Oxford University’s Smith School highlights.
In the video below, Professor Hepburn explains why we’re all responsible for solutions to this potentially existential problem, whether we live in the developed or developing world.
Cameron Hepburn is Professor of Environmental Economics at the University of Oxford, and Director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment. He also serves as the Director of the Economics of Sustainability Programme, based at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School.
Cameron has published widely on energy, resources and environmental challenges across disciplines including engineering, biology, philosophy, economics, public policy and law, drawing on degrees in law and engineering (Melbourne University) and masters and doctorate in economics (Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar). He has co-founded three successful businesses and has provided advice on energy and environmental policy to government ministers (e.g. China, India, UK and Australia) and international institutions (e.g. OECD, UN).
His co-authors on this paper are researchers at Oxford University, Francois Cohen, Matthew Ives, Sugandha Srivastav, Moritz Schwarz, Yangsiyu Lu, Penny Mealy, Paulo Bento, Maffei De Souza and Luke Jackson.
Click here for more information on the work of Professor Cameron Hepburn
The Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment was established in 2008 through the generosity of Sir Martin and Lady Elise Smith, and their family, based on their belief that to address climate change and environmental sustainability, it is essential to bring business into the conversation.
The Smith School seeks to apply relevant research with enterprise to shape business practices, government policy and stakeholder engagement. The Smith School is focused on teaching, research, and engaging enterprise and works with social enterprises, corporations, and governments alike. Its goal is to offer innovative solutions to the challenges facing humanity and the modern firm over the coming decades.
Its focus is on environmental economics and policy as well as enterprise management, financial markets and investment. It is housed in the University of Oxford’s School of Geography and the Environment, which is the top ranked department in the QS World University subject rankings. The Smith School works closely with Oxford's wealth of academics, with 1,000 researchers from the social sciences. Its staff also hold cross-appointments at the University of Oxford's Saïd Business School, the Oxford Martin School, and the Institute of New Economic Thinking.
The University of Oxford is one of the world’s leading academic research institutions, consistently at or near the top of global university rankings.
Find out more about the Oxford Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment by clicking here.
This marketing material is issued by Pictet Asset Management (Europe) S.A.. It is neither directed to, nor intended for distribution or use by, any person or entity who is a citizen or resident of, or domiciled or located in, any locality, state, country or jurisdiction where such distribution, publication, availability or use would be contrary to law or regulation. The latest version of the fund‘s prospectus, Pre-Contractual Template (PCT) when applicable, Key Investor Information Document (KIID), annual and semi-annual reports must be read before investing. They are available free of charge in English on www.assetmanagement.pictet or in paper copy at Pictet Asset Management (Europe) S.A., 15 avenue J.F. Kennedy, L-1855 Luxembourg, or at the office of the fund local agent, distributor or centralizing agent if any. The KIID is also available in the local language of each country where the compartment is registered. The prospectus, the PCT when applicable, and the annual and semi-annual reports may also be available in other languages, please refer to the website for other available languages. Only the latest version of these documents may be relied upon as the basis for investment decisions.
The summary of investor rights (in English and in the different languages of our website) is available here and at www.assetmanagement.pictet under the heading "Resources", at the bottom of the page.
The list of countries where the fund is registered can be obtained at all times from Pictet Asset Management (Europe) S.A., which may decide to terminate the arrangements made for the marketing of the fund or compartments of the fund in any given country.
The information and data presented in this document are not to be considered as an offer or solicitation to buy, sell or subscribe to any securities or financial instruments or services.
Information, opinions and estimates contained in this document reflect a judgment at the original date of publication and are subject to change without notice. Pictet Asset Management (Europe) S.A. has not taken any steps to ensure that the securities referred to in this document are suitable for any particular investor and this document is not to be relied upon in substitution for the exercise of independent judgment. Tax treatment depends on the individual circumstances of each investor and may be subject to change in the future. Before making any investment decision, investors are recommended to ascertain if this investment is suitable for them in light of their financial knowledge and experience, investment goals and financial situation, or to obtain specific advice from an industry professional.
The value and income of any of the securities or financial instruments mentioned in this document may fall as well as rise and, as a consequence, investors may receive back less than originally invested.
The investment guidelines are internal guidelines which are subject to change at any time and without any notice within the limits of the fund's prospectus.
The mentioned financial instruments are provided for illustrative purposes only and shall not be considered as a direct offering, investment recommendation or investment advice. Reference to a specific security is not a recommendation to buy or sell that security. Effective allocations are subject to change and may have changed since the date of the marketing material.
Past performance is not a guarantee or a reliable indicator of future performance. Performance data does not include the commissions and fees charged at the time of subscribing for or redeeming shares.
Any index data referenced herein remains the property of the Data Vendor. Data Vendor Disclaimers are available on assetmanagement.pictet in the “Resources” section of the footer.
This document is a marketing communication issued by Pictet Asset Management and is not in scope for any MiFID II/MiFIR requirements specifically related to investment research. This material does not contain sufficient information to support an investment decision and it should not be relied upon by you in evaluating the merits of investing in any products or services offered or distributed by Pictet Asset Management.
Pictet AM has not acquired any rights or license to reproduce the trademarks, logos or images set out in this document except that it holds the rights to use any entity of the Pictet group trademarks. For illustrative purposes only.