請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/50442
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 童慶斌(Ching-pin Tung) | |
dc.contributor.author | I-Wen Liu | en |
dc.contributor.author | 劉憶玟 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T12:40:55Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2026-01-01 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2021-03-04 | |
dc.date.issued | 2021 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2021-02-05 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 1. Adams, A., Cox, A. L. (2008). Questionnaires, in-depth interviews and focus groups. 2. Airport Council International. (2020). Airport Carbon Accreditation. Retrieved from:https://www.aci-asiapac.aero/advocacy/environment/airport-carbon-accreditation 3. Airport Council International. (2020). Green Airports Recognition. Retrieved from: https://www.aci-asiapac.aero/advocacy/environment/green-airports-recognition 4. AMF. (2020). Climate Reporting in the Financial Sector: Study of the Reporting Practices of 10 French Companies Using the TCFD Framework. 5. Anderson, N. (2019). FRS Standards and Climate-Related Disclosures. 6. Auckland Airport. (2019). Sustainability Report 2019 7. Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainably: A longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic management journal, 26(3), 197-218. 8. Bauer, N., Calvin, K., Emmerling, J., Fricko, O., Fujimori, S., Hilaire, J., ... de Boer, H. S. (2017). Shared socio-economic pathways of the energy sector–quantifying the narratives. Global Environmental Change, 42, 316-330. 9. BCI. (2018). The BCI Good Practice Guidelines (GPG) 10. Board, T. R., National Academies of Sciences, E., Medicine. (2015). Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 11. Bowen, H. R., Johnson, F. E. (1953). Social responsibility of the businessman. Harper. 12. Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership (CISL). (2019). Transition risk framework: Managing the impacts of the low carbon transition on infrastructure investments UK: the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership. 13. Carbon Disclosure Project. (2020). CDP Climate Change 2020 Questionnaire. Retrieved from: https://www.cdp.net/en/guidance 14. CDP, CDSB, GRI, IIRC, SASB. (2020). Statement of Intent to Work Together Towards Comprehensive Corporate Reporting. 15. CDSB SASB. (2019). TCFD Implementation Guide 16. CDSB. (2012). Climate Change Reporting Framework 17. CDSB. (2019). CDSB Framework for reporting environmental climate change information. 18. COSO WBCSD. (2018). Applying Enterprise Risk Management to Environmental, Social and Governance-related Risks. 19. COSO. (2004). Enterprise Risk Management-Integrated Framework. 20. COSO. (2017). Enterprise Risk Management—Integrating with Strategy and Performance. 21. Dietz, S., Bowen, A., Dixon, C., Gradwell, P. (2016). ‘Climate value at risk’of global financial assets. Nature Climate Change, 6(7), 676-679. 22. Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science, 60(11), 2835-2857. 23. Economics of Climate Adaptation Working Group. (2009). Shaping climate-resilient development: A framework for decision-making. Washington, DC, Global Environment Facility, European Commission, McKinsey Company, The Rockefeller Foundation, Standard Chartered Bank, and Swiss Re. 24. Economist Intelligence Unit. (2020). Resilience to climate change?. 25. Elkington, J. (1997). The triple bottom Line. Environmental management: Readings and cases, 2. 26. EU Technical Expert Group (TEG) on Sustainable Finance. (2020). Technical annex to the TEG final report on the EU taxonomy 27. EU Technical Expert Group (TEG) on Sustainable Finance. (2020). TEG final report on the EU taxonomy 28. European Commission. (2014). Directive 2014/95/EU of the European parliament and of the council-of 22 October 2014-amending Directive 2013/34. EU as regards disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large undertakings and groups. 29. European Commission. (2017). Guidelines on non-financial reporting (methodology for reporting non-financial information), Official Journal of the European Union (2017/C 215/01). Retrieved from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52017XC0705%2801%29. 30. European Commission. (2019). Guidelines on non-financial reporting: Supplement on reporting climate-related information. Official Journal of the European Union (2019/C 209/01). Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52019XC0620%2801%29. 31. Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge university press. 32. Global Reporting Initiative. (2020). GRI Standards. Retrieved from: https://www.globalreporting.org/standards 33. Global Sustainable Investment Alliance, GSIA. (2019). Sustainable Investor Poll on TCFD Implementation 34. Green, R. K. (2007). Airports and economic development. Real estate economics, 35(1), 91-112. 35. Griffin, P., Heede, C. R. (2017). The carbon majors database. CDP carbon majors report 2017, 14. 36. Heathrow airport. (2011). Climate Change Adaptation Reporting Power Report 37. ICAO. (2018). Climate Adaptation Synthesis. 38. ICMM. (2019). Adapting a changing climate: Building resilience in the mining and metals industry. 39. IPCC. (2007). Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. 40. IPCC. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC 41. IPCC. (2018). Special Report, Global Warming of 1.5° C (SR15). 42. ISO. (2018). Risk Management-Guidelines (Standard No. ISO 31000: 2018). Washington, DC: International Organization for Standardization Retrieved from https://www. iso. org/obp/ui# iso: std: iso, 31000. 43. ISO. (2020). ISO 14091:2020 (pre-WD). 44. Kim, D., Lee, J. (2016). Development of a web-based tool for climate change risk assessment in the business sector. Sustainability, 8(10), 1013. 45. Linnanen, L., Panapanaan, V. (2002). Roadmapping CSR in Finnish companies. Helsinki University of Technology, 2, 27-28. 46. Lokuwaduge, C. S. D. S., Heenetigala, K. (2017). Integrating environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure for a sustainable development: An Australian study. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(4), 438-450. 47. Minichiello, Victor. (1995). In-depth interviewing : principles, techniques, analysis. Melbourne : Longman 48. Montiel, I. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability: Separate pasts, common futures. Organization Environment, 21(3), 245-269. 49. NCCARF. (2017). The adaptation process - Coastal Climate Adaptation Decision Support (C-CADS). Retrieved from: https://coastadapt.com.au/coastal-climate-adaptation-decision-support-c-cads 50. O'Neill, B. C., Tebaldi, C., Van Vuuren, D. P., Eyring, V., Friedlingstein, P., Hurtt, G., ... Meehl, G. A. (2016). The scenario model intercomparison project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6. 51. SASB. (2018). SASB Standards Application Guidance 52. SASB. (2018). The SASB Materiality Map. Retrieved from: https://www.sasb.org/standards-overview/materiality-map/ 53. Science Based Targets Initiative. (2018). Companies Taking Action. Retrieved from: https://sciencebasedtargets.org/companies-taking-action/ 54. Science Based Targets Initiative. (2018). Set a target. Retrieved from: https://sciencebasedtargets.org/set-a-target 55. Sydney Airport. (2019). Sustainability Report 2019. 56. TCFD. (2017). Final report: recommendations of the task force on climate-related financial disclosures. Financial Stability Board Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, available at: www. fsb-tcfd. org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FINAL-TCFD-Report-062817. pdf (accessed 15 January 2018). 57. TCFD. (2020). 2020 Status Report. 58. TCFD. (2020). Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure. 59. TCFD. (2020). Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies. 60. Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance. (2019). Report on Climate-related Disclosures. 61. Tonmoy, F. N., Rissik, D., Palutikof, J. P. (2019). A three-tier risk assessment process for climate change adaptation at a local scale. Climatic Change, 153(4), 539-557. 62. Tung, C. P., Tsao, J. H., Tien, Y. C., Lin, C. Y., Jhong, B. C. (2019). Development of a novel climate adaptation algorithm for climate risk assessment. Water, 11(3), 497. 63. UKCIP. (2011).UK Adaptation Wizard. 64. UNCTAD. (2018). Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Framework for Caribbean Coastal Transport Infrastructure 65. Van der Lugt, C. T., P. P. van de Wijs, D. Petrovics. (2020). Carrots Sticks 2020 - Sustainability reporting policy: Global trends in disclosure as the ESG agenda goes mainstream. Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the University of Stellenbosch Business School (USB) 66. Van Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion. Journal of business ethics, 44(2-3), 95-105. 67. WBCSD. (2019). Business Climate Resilience: Thriving Through the Transformation 68. Willows, R., Reynard, N., Meadowcroft, I., Connell, R. (2003). Climate adaptation: Risk, uncertainty and decision-making. UKCIP Technical Report. UK Climate Impacts Programme. 69. World Economic Forum. (2020). The Global Risks Report 2020. 70. Sean Gilbert、黃正忠 (2010)。ESG揭露與企業永續報告書的發展。證券櫃檯,(147), 38-42。 71. 吳安妮 (2003)。以策略為焦點 促效益之提昇 平衡計分卡之精髓, 範疇及整合 (上)。會計研究月刊,(211),45-54。 72. 李宜樺、鄭可俐 (2020)。加速永續金融的利器-永續會計準則 (SASB)。會計研究月刊, (411),94-99。 73. 林嘉佑 (2016)。因應氣候變遷之供水系統調適能力建構與監測修正調適路徑之研究。臺灣大學生物環境系統工程學研究所博士論文。 74. 金融監督管理委員會 (2020)。綠色金融行動方案2.0。 75. 金融監督管理委員會 (2020)。公司治理3.0-永續發展藍圖。 76. 科技部 (2017)。科技部災害管理資訊研發應用平台。檢自: http://dmip.tw/Lthree/2017/riskapp/report/1_3.aspx?counted=1 77. 科技部國家災害防救科技中心 (2020)。氣候變遷災害風險調適平台。檢自: https://dra.ncdr.nat.gov.tw/Frontend/Disaster/RiskIndex?Category=Flooding 78. 桃園國際機場公司 (2018)。桃園國際機場航空站空側手冊。安全管理系統手冊。 79. 桃園國際機場公司 (2019)。2019年CSR報告書。 80. 氣候相關財務揭露工作小組(TCFD) (2019)。氣候相關財務揭露建議結論報告中文版。 檢自: https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/publications/ 81. 氣候變遷調適科技整合研究計畫(TaiCCAT) (2015)。氣候變遷調適行動計畫建構指引。 82. 國家發展委員會 (2020)。風險管理及危機處理作業手冊。 83. 曹榮軒 (2019)。氣候調適演算法之發展與應用。臺灣大學生物環境系統工程學研究所學位論文。 84. 陳沛芫 (2017)。韌性社區氣候風險評估暨調適決策之方法發展。臺灣大學生物環境系統工程學研究所學位論文。 85. 黃正忠 (2015)。CSR 的真面目─ESG. 證券櫃檯買賣中心電子報,(178)。 86. 黃翰榆 (2017)。深度減碳下的沙盤推演-全球情境分析。深度減碳,邁向永續社會─邁向深度低碳社會:社會行為與制度轉型的行動研究計畫,中央研究院社會學研究所。檢自:http://ddpp.ntu.edu.tw/publish-and-video/newsletter/328-newsletter.html 87. 監察院 (2016)。調查報告 (字號:105交調0027)。檢自:https://www.cy.gov.tw/CyBsBoxContent.aspx?n=133 s=5008 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/50442 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 隨著氣候變遷對企業的營運衝擊程度逐漸提升,企業內外部利害關係人對於氣候相關議題的資訊揭露日益重視。而「氣候相關財務揭露建議書」(Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, TCFD)成為企業面對氣候變遷風險評估之顯學。然而企業在面對氣候相關議題時,仍面臨氣候情境與相關資料及企業風險管理流程整合之挑戰。為協助企業完成氣候實體風險評估,本研究以TCFD四項核心揭露要素為主軸,包含治理、策略、風險管理、指標與目標,導入氣候調適演算法中的氣候調適六步法及氣候風險模板,並參考澳洲沿岸氣候調適決策(C-CADS)三層框架之概念,建立TCFD氣候實體風險評估架構,其中包含《細部工作指引》及《對應子工具之應用說明》,除了提供流程與工具的應用,可協助企業完整評估氣候相關風險,並建立因應氣候調適計畫,更全面性整理出應揭露之工作項目,協助企業達成TCFD建議之揭露內容。本研究邀請五位永續發展相關之專家進行深度訪談與交流,分析TCFD實務發展狀況與挑戰並整理其建議後,根據訪談結果進一步修正氣候實體風險評估架構。 最後,以機場公司作為產業案例分析,透過國內外文獻、國際報告與各家機場公司的報告書,分析TCFD氣候實體風險評估架構之實用性。另外藉由機場公司內部問卷調查結果,進行淹水風險相關因子分析,並透過小時合成模式模擬基期與未來淹水危害發生頻率之差異。經由淹水風險的實際分析與風險評估流程之整理,提升TCFD氣候實體風險評估架構於企業風險管理的應用價值,經由此架構可協助企業將氣候變遷因子納入決策中,維持永續競爭力。未來期能整合實體風險與轉型風險,並考量不同產業之特性,進一步建構出適用於各產業的氣候風險評估平台。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | As climate change increasingly affect corporate operations, internal and external stakeholders have paid more attention to climate related disclosures. Following such a trend, the “Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)” has become the main guideline for companies conducting climate related risk assessment. However, when dealing with the climate issue, companies face challenges while trying to integrate enterprise risk management process and climate change. To help corporations conduct successful climate risk assessment, this research took four core disclosure elements (Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, Metrics and Targets) as the main concept, and used Climate Change Adaptation Six Steps and Climate Risk Template to build the TCFD Climate Physical Risk Assessment Framework, including ‘Working guideline’ and ‘Sub-tools Application’. In addition to providing the guideline and tools application, this framework can also promote companies to fully assess climate-related risks, establish the adaptation plans and finish related disclosures. After building the framework, 5 corporate sustainability experts have been invited to conduct in-depth interviews. Based on the interview results, this research analyzed the development situation and challenges in TCFD and revised the risk assessment framework. Lastly, this research used airports as an industrial case study to further analyze the practicality of the TCFD Climate Physical Risk Assessment Framework. Based on the results of the airport company’s internal questionnaire, this research analyzed the flooding risk factors and simulated the frequency of flooding risk in future by hourly precipitation generator. Through the analysis of flooding risks and the integration of risk assessment process, the application value of the risk assessment framework for enterprise risk management can be enhanced. This framework can help companies incorporate climate factors into decision-making, and maintain their sustainable competitiveness. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T12:40:55Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 U0001-0502202118025600.pdf: 6481276 bytes, checksum: ce06ac7b492eb762f2e074e68da9d9e8 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2021 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝誌 i 中文摘要 iii Abstract iv 目錄 vi 圖目錄 ix 表目錄 xii 第一章 緒論 1 1.1 研究背景 1 1.2 研究動機 2 1.3 研究目的 4 1.4 研究流程與架構 5 第二章 文獻回顧 7 2.1 企業永續與風險管理 7 2.1.1 從企業社會責任到ESG治理 7 2.1.2 國際企業永續標準與規範 10 2.1.3 TCFD與其他標準之對應 15 2.1.4 企業風險管理 20 2.2 氣候風險評估 22 2.2.1 企業面對氣候的衝擊狀況 22 2.2.2 氣候變遷風險定義 25 2.2.3 國內外氣候變遷調適架構 28 2.2.4 情境分析 36 第三章 研究方法 39 3.1 TCFD氣候風險評估工具 39 3.1.1 TCFD氣候調適步驟 39 3.1.2 TCFD氣候實體風險評估架構 46 3.2 專家訪談 66 3.2.1 訪談對象 67 3.2.2 訪談大綱 68 3.3 繁衍氣候資料 69 3.3.1 GCMs挑選 69 3.3.2 GCMs空間降尺度 70 3.3.3 氣象合成模式 70 3.3.4 小時降雨合成模式 71 3.3.5 機率點繪法 73 第四章 研究成果 75 4.1 TCFD現行與未來發展之分析 75 4.1.1 TCFD現況發展情形 75 4.1.2 TCFD相關規範之未來趨勢 77 4.1.3 實務挑戰與解決方法 78 4.2 TCFD氣候實體風險評估架構之建議與改善 84 4.2.1 受訪者交流與討論整理 84 4.2.2 TCFD氣候實體風險評估架構之修正結果 85 4.3 主要成果說明 106 第五章 案例分析 107 5.1 研究案例背景 107 5.1.1 實體風險 107 5.1.2 轉型風險 108 5.1.3 機會 109 5.2 TCFD氣候實體風險評估架構實務應用 109 5.2.1 治理面向 109 5.2.2 策略面向 114 5.2.3 風險管理面向 135 5.2.4 指標與目標面向 140 5.2.5 評分標準之應用 145 第六章 結論與建議 149 6.1結論 149 6.2建議 151 參考文獻 153 附件一:中英文名詞對照表 161 附件二:機場公司實體風險問卷調查 164 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | TCFD氣候實體風險評估與管理架構之建立:以機場公司為例 | zh_TW |
dc.title | The Establishment of TCFD Climate-Related Physical Risk Assessment and Management Framework: The Case of Airport Company | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 109-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 葉欣誠(Hsin-Cheng Yeh),李明旭(Ming-Hsu Li),謝宜桓(Yi-Huan Hsieh),郭財吉(Tsai-Chi Kuo) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 氣候實體風險評估,氣候相關財務揭露,企業永續,企業風險管理,氣候變遷調適, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Climate physical risk assessment,Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD),Corporate Sustainability,Corporate Risk Management,Climate Change Adaptation, | en |
dc.relation.page | 170 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202100613 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2021-02-08 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 氣候變遷與永續發展國際學位學程 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 氣候變遷與永續發展國際學位學程(含碩士班、博士班) |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
U0001-0502202118025600.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 6.33 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。