Socruithe eagraíochtúla agus rialachais

I gcás inarb ábhartha, ba cheart comhordú uile-chórais a shaothrú freisin chun a áirithiú go gcuirfear rioscaí níos leithne don chobhsaíocht airgeadais agus éifeachtaí seach-iarmharta a d’fhéadfadh a bheith ann ar fud na n ‑ earnálacha san áireamh i dtástálacha struis CSR.

Comhtháthú sa phróiseas maoirseachta

Ba cheart torthaí tástála struis CSR a chomhtháthú, a mhéid is féidir, sa phróiseas maoirseachta níos leithne. De réir mar a fhorbraíonn gné mhodheolaíochta agus infhaighteacht sonraí le himeacht ama, ba cheart d’údaráis inniúla na torthaí a úsáid chun bon n eolais a chur faoi mheasúnuithe riosca, athbhreithnithe ar leordhóthanacht caipitil, agus/nó plé straitéiseach le heintitis airgeadais.

Ba cheart na torthaí a bheith ina dtreoir freisin do bhearta leantacha maoirseachta agus do mholtaí beartais i gcás ina sainaithnítear gur dócha go mbeidh rioscaí CSR ina mbagairtí ábhartha ar an gcobhsaíocht airgeadais. Nochtadh poiblí faisnéise

Ba cheart foilsiú na dtorthaí a bheith i gcomhréir leis an rialáil earnála agus leis an gcleachtas maoirseachta ábhartha. Agus rogha déanta torthaí a fhoilsiú, ba cheart do na húdaráis inniúla na tairbhí comparáideacha a bhaineann le torthaí aonair nó comhiomlána a fhoilsiú a mheas. Ba cheart leibhéal an nochta a chalabrú bunaithe ar iontaofacht na modheolaíochta agus ar cháilíocht na sonraí. Ba cheart d’údaráis inniúla a mheas go gcuireann trédhearcacht feabhas ar smacht an mhargaidh, ar mhuinín na bpáirtithe leasmhara agus ar chuntasacht. Ba cheart dóibh a áirithiú freisin go ndéanfar faisnéis a léirmhíniú i gceart agus nach mbeidh saobhadh neamhbheartaithe ar an margadh mar thoradh uirthi. D’fhéadfadh méadú teacht ar an nochtadh de réir mar a éiríonn na torthaí níos láidre.

Athbhreithniú rialta agus éabhlóid na tástála struis CSR

I bhfianaise chineál athraitheach na rioscaí CSR agus na modheolaíochtaí tástála struis, ba cheart do na húdaráis inniúla athbhreithniú agus beachtú rialta a dhéanamh ar a gcreataí tástála struis. Ba cheart ceachtanna a foghlaimíodh ó chleachtaí roimhe seo a ionchorprú sna cinn seo a leanas, agus ba cheart dea-chleachtais atá ag teacht chun cinn, ceanglais rialála nua, agus dul chun cinn i sonraí CSR agus i dteicnící samhaltaithe a léiriú sna nuashonruithe.

Beidh feidhm ag na treoirlínte comhpháirteacha seo ón 1 Eanáir 2027

A rigorous quality assurance process should be implemented to verify the accuracy, consistency, and reliability of stress test results. Competent authorities should establish review mechanisms (e.g. benchmarking or peer reviews) to assess data quality, methodology robustness, and, where appropriate, scenario adequacy. Where necessary, expert judgment should complement quantitative findings to mitigate model limitations.

Effective dialogue with financial entities

Competent authorities should maintain effective and structured dialogue with financial entities throughout the stress testing process. This includes providing clear guidance on expectations, facilitating engagement at key stages, and ensuring that financial entities have the opportunity to clarify methodological aspects. Regular interaction will enhance the credibility of the exercise and improve financial entities’ ability to incorporate ESG risk considerations into their own risk management frameworks.

Cross-border and system-wide coordination

Where relevant and possible, competent authorities should coordinate across jurisdictions to allow a harmonised approach to ESG stress testing for cross-border financial groups. This includes collaboration with other supervisory authorities to align methodologies, share best practices, and avoid regulatory fragmentation.

When relevant, system-wide coordination should also be pursued to ensure that ESG stress tests account for broader financial stability risks and potential spillover effects across sectors.

Integration into the supervisory process

ESG stress test results should be, to the extent possible, integrated into the broader supervisory process. As methodological aspect and availability of data develop over time, competent

14 authorities should use the findings to inform risk assessments, capital adequacy reviews, and/or strategic discussions with financial entities.

The results should also guide supervisory follow-up measures and policy recommendations where ESG risks are identified as likely to pose material threats to financial stability.

Public disclosure of information

Publication of results should be in line with relevant sectoral regulation and supervisory practice. When choosing to publish results, competent authorities should weigh up the comparative benefits of publishing individual or aggregate results. The level of disclosure should be calibrated based on the reliability of the methodology and the quality of the data. Competent authorities should consider that transparency enhances market discipline, stakeholder confidence, and accountability. They should also ensure that information is interpreted correctly and does not lead to unintended market distortions. Disclosure can increase as results become more robust.

Regular review and evolution of ESG stress testing

Given the evolving nature of ESG risks and stress testing methodologies, competent authorities should regularly review and refine their stress testing frameworks. Lessons learned from previous exercises should be incorporated into the following ones, and updates should reflect emerging best practices, new regulatory requirements, and advancements in ESG data and modelling techniques.