Arranġamenti organizzazzjonali u ta’ governanza

Meta rilevanti, għandha tiġi segwita wkoll koordinazzjoni mas - sistema kollha biex jiġi żgurat li t-testijiet tal-istress ESG iqisu r- riskji usa’ ta’ stabbiltà finanzjarja u l -effetti konsegwenzjali potenzjali fis-setturi kollha.

Integrazzjoni fil- proċess superviżorju

Ir- riżultati tat -test tal- istress ESG għandhom, sa fejn ikun possibbli, jiġu integrati fil - proċess superviżorju usa’. Hekk kif l - aspett metodoloġiku u d -disponibbiltà tad- data jiżviluppaw maż - żmien, l - awtoritajiet kompetenti għandhom jużaw is -sejbiet biex jinfurmaw il-valutazzjonijiet tar-riskju, ir- rieżamijiet tal -adegwatezza kapitali, u/jew id- diskussjonijiet strateġiċi mal -entitajiet finanzjarji.

Ir- riżultati għandhom jiggwidaw ukoll il - miżuri ta’ segwitu superviżorji u r -rakkomandazzjonijiet ta’ politika fejn ir - riskji ESG huma identifikati bħala li x’aktarx joħolqu theddid materjali għall -istabbiltà finanzjarja.

Divulgazzjoni pubblika tal-informazzjoni

Il-pubblikazzjoni tar- riżultati għandha tkun konformi mar -regolamentazzjoni settorjali u l-prattika superviżorja rilevanti. Meta jagħżlu li jippubblikaw ir - riżultati, l -awtoritajiet kompetenti għandhom jiżnu l - benefiċċji komparattivi tal - pubblikazzjoni ta’ riżultati individwali jew aggregati. Il- livell ta’ divulgazzjoni għandu jiġi kkalibrat abbażi tal -affidabbiltà tal- metodoloġija u l -kwalità tad- data . L- awtoritajiet kompetenti għandhom iqisu li t -trasparenza ttejjeb id-dixxiplina tas-suq, il- fiduċja tal -p artijiet ikkonċernati, u r - responsabbiltà. Għandhom jiżguraw ukoll li l -informazzjoni tiġi interpretata b’mod korrett u ma twassalx għal distorsjonijiet mhux intenzjonati fis -suq. Id- divulgazzjoni tista’ tiżdied hekk kif ir - riżultati jsiru aktar robusti.

Rieżami regolari u evoluzzjoni tal -ittestjar tal-istress ESG

Minħabba n -natura li qed tevolvi tar-riskji ESG u tal- metodoloġiji tal -ittestjar tal-istress, l- awtoritajiet kompetenti għandhom jirrieżaminaw u jirfinaw regolarment l - oqfsa tagħhom tal-ittestjar tal-istress. It- tagħlimiet meħuda minn eżerċizzji preċedenti għandhom jiġu inkorporati f’dawk li ġejjin, u l - aġġornamenti għandhom jirriflettu l - aħjar prattiki emerġenti, ir - rekwiżiti regolatorji ġodda, u l -avvanzi fid- data ESG u fit-tekniki tal-immudellar.

Dawn il- Linji Gwida Konġunti japplikaw mill -1 ta’ Jannar 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.