IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bracjl/v30y2025ip-_28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

International practices in climate transition plan reporting: lost in translation?

Author

Listed:
  • Bankar, A.
  • Campbell, S.
  • Gandotra, S.
  • Gayen, M.
  • Klumpes, Paul
  • Matteucci, D.
  • Meyer, N.
  • Mok, K.
  • Walshe, B.J.
  • Worsley, S.

Abstract

Disclosing transition plans to meet future net zero climate targets requires organisations to fundamentally move beyond traditional historical-oriented stewardship reporting towards forward-looking accountability to meet their obligations to their future shareholders and stakeholders. However, despite a range of varying requirements concerning disclosure of climate-related targets to meet the Paris Agreement, confusion remains over the appropriate form, content and standard of transition plan disclosure that are required to implement these targets. The former UK based Transition Plan Taskforce set out globally leading requirements for transition plan reporting in 2023, however the extent to which these recommendations have since been implemented has not yet been comprehensively analysed. This paper summarises the key differences between UK, European and International guidelines for transition plans and then discusses the results of an analysis of variations in transition plan reporting practices by a sample of globally large financial and industrial organisations. It is predicted that a combination of both firm-level climate risk and country-level institutional factors are associated with the propensity to produce public transition plans. The empirical results are largely supportive of these predictions. Firms with greater levels of engagement with climate risk (as proxied by the CDP score), and UK and-or EU based firms, are more likely to produce climate transition plans. The empirical results are corroborated by qualitative analysis, which compares examples of good practice transition plan reporting by a sub-sample of firms within each industry sector. It is concluded that the resulting lack of clarity by regulatory authorities, and diversity in transition plan reporting practices by globally large financial and industrial firms, may potentially result in confusion and a lack of informed decision-making by their stakeholders and policymakers concerning climate-related resilience and risk mitigation actions.

Suggested Citation

  • Bankar, A. & Campbell, S. & Gandotra, S. & Gayen, M. & Klumpes, Paul & Matteucci, D. & Meyer, N. & Mok, K. & Walshe, B.J. & Worsley, S., 2025. "International practices in climate transition plan reporting: lost in translation?," British Actuarial Journal, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30, pages 1-1, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:bracjl:v:30:y:2025:i::p:-_28
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1357321725100238/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:bracjl:v:30:y:2025:i::p:-_28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/baj .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.