Thank you.
Broadly, I think this just comes down to a big question of information not being standardized in a way that participants in capital markets can really use it such that you would see those risks starting to get priced into decision-making.
Right now, we do not have a good, full grasp of the physical risks of climate change or the physical costs of climate change. As a result, those are not getting priced into decisions. We still see housing developments, for example, being developed in areas that are at extreme risk of flooding, sea level rise or wildfires, so our adaptation team at the institute is doing work in this area to study that in more detail.
The same goes for transition risks. We don't have a standardized definition of what is “green” or “transition”. As a result, there are lots of different interpretations, and that creates ambiguity. The lack of standardized, credible information causes many investors to underinvest in the energy transition and to over-invest in things like oil and gas, which carry a higher transition risk.