Drone view of contaminated, toxic water stream in Geamana, Romania

Strengthening Nature Risk Management in Swiss Finance


Gain market insights on managing nature-related financial risks while overcoming implementation challenges of the new FINMA Circular 2026/1.


In brief

  • How prepared is your institution to meet FINMA’s requirements on nature-related financial risks, like the materiality assessment via scenario analysis?
  • How does FINMA 2026/1 align with international regulatory trends in risk management and what are the synergies with international frameworks like the TCFD/TNFD?
  • What challenges are Swiss financial institutions facing in integrating nature-related financial risks, and what steps can be taken to close the management gap?

With the release of Circular 2026/1 on 17 December 2024, the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) signals that financial institutions in Switzerland must elevate their approach to managing climate and other nature-related financial risks (henceforth “nature-related financial risks”). Unlike previous sustainability and climate disclosure regulations, this circular introduces binding expectations focusing on risk management.

 

Overview and key requirements

The circular applies to Swiss banks and insurance companies, with a phased implementation: Category 1 and 2 institutions must comply with climate-related financial risk requirements by January 2026, while Category 3 to 5 institutions must follow by January 2027. Full integration of the circular is required across all categories by January 2028.1

 

Among its main provisions, FINMA compliance calls for established governance structures with clearly defined roles and responsibilities for nature-related financial risks, along with adequate levels of expertise. In addition, institutions must identify and assess the financial materiality of such risks using at least qualitative scenario-based analyses across different relevant time horizons, with Category 3 institutions conducting quantitative assessments for portfolios with elevated risk exposure. Material risks should be integrated into existing risk categories, such as credit, market and insurance risks, using appropriate indicators and limits, aligned with the institution’s risk tolerance for nature-related financial risks. This integration must be supported by updates to control processes, internal monitoring, and reporting. Moreover, Category 1 and 2 institutions must incorporate material nature-related financial risks into their stress testing frameworks to evaluate financial resilience under adverse environmental scenarios. Finally, specific provisions exist for banks and insurances, ensuring risk-specific mitigation and resilience measures across all relevant risk categories.

 

International regulatory alignment in managing nature-related financial risks

FINMA Circular 2026/1 aligns broadly with emerging international regulatory trends in the treatment of nature-related financial risks, particularly in its emphasis on integrating such risks into existing risk management frameworks. While its scope is limited to environmental factors – focusing on climate and other nature-related risks such as biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation – it reflects a shift observed across jurisdictions toward forward-looking, risk-based supervision.

 

For example, the new EBA guidelines on managing ESG risks and the new PRA consultation paper on managing climate-related risks both adopt a similar focus on the integration of such risks into existing risk categories, while scenario analysis is required under all three regimes (including FINMA regulation) with proportionality in method and scope.

 

For the implementation of the supervisory expectations, FINMA suggests that institutions leverage existing work and international frameworks such as ISSB, TCFD, and TNFD, all sharing a common architecture centered on governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets – elements broadly mirrored in the FINMA Circular. Although FINMA allows for flexibility in the way institutions integrate nature-related financial risks, its reference to third-party standards creates synergies between domestic supervisory compliance and international reporting obligations, thereby facilitating interoperability with global reporting frameworks.

Majority of CROs consider nature risks as material
Of EMEIA insurance CROs (54% of global) plan transformation projects on sustainability/climate risk management; 63% of global banking CROs expect climate risk to materialize through credit risk. Sources: 2025 EY/IIF surveys (2)

Swiss market readiness and implementation gaps

Swiss financial institutions are at varying stages of readiness when it comes to addressing nature-related financial risks, as outlined in FINMA Circular 2026/1.

Category 1-2 institutions are generally more advanced in their management of nature-related financial risks, particularly climate-related, largely due to their existing obligations under regulatory frameworks such as the revised FINMA disclosure Circulars 2016/1 (for banks) and 2016/2 (for insurers). In contrast, most Category 3-5 banks and insurance companies remain at an early stage of implementation.

Based on our Swiss market intelligence, institutions of Categories 3-5 have completed gap analyses to assess alignment with the circular’s climate-focused expectations for 2027 and are exploring synergies with the Swiss Climate Ordinance, while the integration in risk management processes and the coverage of other nature-related risks remains largely unaddressed. While this reflects a growing awareness of nature-related financial risks and the potential for regulatory synergies, it underscores the challenge of moving from regulatory reporting to actionable risk management.

Extreme events are the top concern
Extreme weather events remain the top concern in the 10-year risk outlook for the second year in a row; Source: WEF, Global risk report 2025

Key challenges in effective risk integration

We observe several barriers that continue to hinder effective integration of nature-related financial risks:

Insured losses increase exponentially
Is the observed average real annual growth of insured losses globally over the last 30 years. Source: Swiss Re Institute, Sigma 1/2025: Natural catastrophes: insured losses on trend to USD 145 billion in 2025

Closing the nature-related risk management gap

With Circular 2026/1, FINMA aligns with international trends and marks a fundamental shift from a disclosure-based approach toward the active management of nature-related financial risks. Institutions must now move beyond reporting to fully embed these risks into governance, risk identification and assessment, and core risk management frameworks – yet many still lack the foundational capabilities to do so.

Closing this gap will require financial institutes to undertake key actions with immediate steps including:

a) Build internal expertise among key stakeholders and define roles and responsibilities;
b) Collect decision-useful data and build robust methodologies to regularly identify and assess nature-related financial risks across relevant time horizons and scenarios;
c) Define risk tolerance for these risks via quantitative indicators (KRI’s);
d) Integrate material nature-related risks to institution’s risk and control taxonomy, and in line with its strategy and tolerance for such risks;
e) Establish steering mechanisms to manage material risks, with escalation protocols and integration in internal monitoring and reporting.

These enablers – and practical steps to operationalize them – will be explored in the next article of this series.

Abbreviations:

EBA: European Banking Authority

PRA: Prudential Regulation Authority

ISSB: International Sustainability Standards Board

TCFD: Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures

TNFD: Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures

Summary

FINMA’s Circular 2026/1 marks a shift from sustainability disclosure to active management of nature-related financial risks by Swiss banks and insurers. Phased from 2026 to 2028, it mandates integration of material climate and other nature-related risks into governance, risk assessment, controlling and monitoring. With elements of proportionality, scenario analysis and stress-testing are required, with depth and complexity being dictated by institution category and risk materiality. Aligned with international standards and regulations, the circular emphasizes solid materiality assessment and robust forward-looking integration in risk management. Key implementation challenges include data gaps, lack of standardization and risk tolerance thresholds, and immature controls.

Acknowledgement

Many thanks to Dr. Christos Karydas, Dina Saber and Paula Tacke for their valuable contribution to this article.


Related articles


    About this article


    Request for proposal (RFP) - exclusively for Switzerland

    |

    Submit your request now!