Whose risk counts? Climate risk frames in global green finance governance complex

In recent decades, global green finance governance institutions (GGFGIs) have developed diverse frames for understanding climate-related risks. Understanding these risk frames is crucial because they lead to distinctive “de-risking” policies, empowering different types of actors. This paper examines how GGFGIs produce different climate risk frames, and what the prevailing climate risk frame is and whose risk it addresses. We investigate these questions by analyzing the current global green finance governance complex applying a constructivist approach emphasizing contestation over normative issues and a Critical Political Economy perspective. Our mapping based on 74 GGFGIs shows exercise that a risk framing focusing on climate impact on business actors became prevalent over other types of climate risks imposed on people and nature. Our finding shows the dominant influence of the Task Force on the Climate-Related Financial Disclosure created by G20's Financial Stability Board. This development reflects broader trends of climate capitalism. • Global Green Finance Governance Institutions (GGFGIs) predominantly frame climate change as risks to business. • This risk framing prevailed as GGFGIs adopted the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures’ recommendations. • However, some GGFGIs—such as those under UNEP—reinterpret the risk frame by emphasizing climate risks to people and nature. • The overall evolution of the global green finance governance architecture reflects broader trends of climate capitalism. • This dominant framing, protecting business over people or nature, may hinder just and transformative pathways.