Method · climate resilience
How to run climate scenario analysis: a step-by-step guide
Climate scenario analysis asks one question of a strategy: what would happen to it if a given climate future came to pass?
This guide sets out a working method in nine steps, built on the TCFD’s 2020 guidance for non-financial companies, which UK SRS S2 says its own application guidance draws on.
What the standard requires you to disclose is on climate scenario analysis under UK SRS S2; this page is about doing the work.
Before you start
Get organised before you model anything
The 2020 guidance is written for large and mid-sized non-financial companies in the early stages of scenario analysis, and says smaller companies will also find it useful.
It is explicit that scenario analysis is not standalone: it supports strategy, governance and risk management, so it should be planned alongside all four pillars.
It also says it is not a checklist and does not add to the 2017 recommendations.
UK SRS S2 adds a first question the TCFD guidance leaves open: how sophisticated does your analysis need to be?
The answer comes from two assessments in ¶B2, your exposure to climate-related risks and opportunities and the skills, capabilities and resources available, and it must be revisited each time you run the analysis (¶B3).
Board ownership matters because the output is a judgement about strategy; how UK SRS frames the board’s role is on UK SRS board oversight.
Inform, educate and engage.
Build the case for scenarios.
Clear governance and executive-level leadership.
A strong, dedicated scenario team.
Internal and external resources.
TCFD, Guidance on Scenario Analysis (2020), §B
The method
Nine steps from question to conclusion
Steps 2 to 7 follow the scenario development process in §C.2 of the TCFD guidance; step 8 follows §D; steps 1 and 9 come from UK SRS S2.
Scope the work to your circumstances
Assess exposure to climate risks and opportunities and the skills, capabilities and resources you have (UK SRS S2 ¶B2). Both set how sophisticated the analysis needs to be.
Engage the people who will use it
Board members, executives and the heads of risk, finance, sustainability and strategy. The TCFD guidance warns that scenarios with no legitimacy for managers have little impact.
Frame a focal question
A crisp question tied to a real decision — a capital plan, a product line, a site — gives the analysis direction and a link to action.
Identify the driving forces
Scan the context with a STEEP lens (social, technology, economic, environmental, policy). A driver persists over time and influences the focal question durably.
Choose or build the scenarios
Each scenario has an outcome and a pathway. Aim for three or four, covering transition and physical risk, anchored on public sets and adapted to your context.
Write narratives, then quantify
A coherent storyline first; numbers where they help and where your exposure and resources warrant them. Quantification is the goal of a mature process.
Check quality and set a refresh date
Test structure, internal logic and plausibility. Scenarios have a shelf life; refresh them with your planning cycle.
Work through the strategy
How would current and proposed strategies perform in each scenario? Turn the implications into options and decide which to adopt.
Conclude and disclose
State the resilience conclusion (¶22(a)) and the inputs, assumptions and period of the analysis (¶22(b)).
The guidance warns that excessive focus on quantification in stakeholder discussions can impair strategic thinking, and that business-as-usual mental models can impair engagement (§C.2.1).
On the focal question it is blunt: scenario analysis needs “crisp, concise, and focused questioning” on the decisions it is meant to inform (§C.2.2).
A driving force, in its terms, must be continuous over time and influence the outcomes of the focal question durably and consistently (§C.2.3).
On quantification its key message is to develop “a sound scenario narrative first and then proceed to quantifying the scenario if necessary”, while noting that investors expect potential impacts to be quantified.
UK SRS S2 turns that expectation into a rule for some companies: with high exposure and the necessary resources, a more advanced quantitative approach is required (¶B17).
Step 5 in detail
Choosing scenarios: outcome, pathway, diversity
A scenario describes two things: an outcome at a time horizon, and a pathway from today to that outcome.
The TCFD guidance distinguishes exploratory scenarios, which explore a range of possible futures, from normative scenarios, which start from a preferred outcome and work back to the present (§C.1.2).
On numbers, it says most methodologies recommend three or four scenarios; two “bookend” scenarios invite a good-and-bad reading, and three tend to collapse into high, medium and low versions of a favoured case (§C.1.3.3).
It cautions that “orderly” pathways simplify reality and are not predictions (§C.2.4.3).
Public sets are the usual anchor, and UK SRS S2 treats authoritative public scenarios as available without undue cost or effort (¶B11).
The NGFS long-term scenarios were published in version 5.0 in November 2024, and the NGFS now carries a notice to users of Phase V because a paper behind some physical loss estimates has been retracted.
The IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2025 was published on 12 November 2025 with a Current Policies, a Stated Policies and a Net Zero Emissions by 2050 scenario.
The IEA says its current NZE is no longer a limited-overshoot scenario, which matters if your narrative assumes warming never exceeds 1.5 °C.
Whichever you use, name the vintage, and say whether one scenario aligns with the Paris Agreement, because UK SRS S2 ¶22(b)(i)(4) asks.
| Public set | What it offers | Risk it surfaces best |
|---|---|---|
| NGFS — orderly | Early, gradually tightening policy | Transition and physical both relatively subdued |
| NGFS — disorderly | Delayed or divergent policy | Higher transition risk |
| NGFS — hot house world | Insufficient global effort | Severe physical risk |
| NGFS — too little, too late | A late, uncoordinated transition | Transition without limiting physical risk |
| IEA — Current Policies / Stated Policies | Exploratory: existing policies and settings | Context for transition assumptions |
| IEA — Net Zero Emissions by 2050 | Normative: the 1.5 °C goal for energy | Transition risk |
Two directions of travel
Top-down and bottom-up, and why you need both
Neither term appears in UK SRS S2. They describe where an analysis starts, and most credible analyses meet in the middle.
| Top-down | Bottom-up | |
|---|---|---|
| Starts from | A global or regional scenario pathway | The company's sites, assets, suppliers and products |
| Moves towards | The business unit and the asset | The strategy and the group |
| Good at | Transition drivers: carbon prices, demand shifts, technology | Physical exposure: floods, heat, water, supply disruption |
| Hard part | Downscaling global variables to a company, which the TCFD guidance names as a challenge | Aggregating local findings into a group-level judgement |
| UK SRS S2 hook | ¶B11–B12: authoritative scenarios, a reasonable basis for choosing them | ¶B13: inputs relevant to activities and their geographical location |
The TCFD guidance names the difficulty directly: linking global climate scenarios to a company-level scale is a challenge in writing scenario narratives (§C.2.5).
The standard’s own examples point both ways: an orderly-transition scenario where emissions are regulated, and a localised current-policies scenario where physical exposure is high (¶B12).
For UK physical data, the Met Office’s UK Climate Projections (UKCP18) provide climate model projections for the UK, and the Environment Agency’s long-term flood risk service gives the risk for an area, not a specific property.
For the carbon baseline that transition scenarios act on, start from your own inventory built with the UK emission factors, and for the grid, UK grid carbon intensity.
Value-chain exposure usually needs supplier data; Scope 3 reporting under UK SRS covers how that data is built.
A worked structure
What a first analysis looks like on paper
The panel shows the skeleton of a first analysis, with no figures, because the figures are yours.
Each row maps to something the report must say under UK SRS S2 ¶22(b): scenarios and sources, diversity, risk type, alignment, horizons, scope and assumptions.
Build the evidence file as you go: why each scenario was chosen, where each variable came from, and who reviewed the narratives.
The translation step is where most first attempts stall, so decide early which drivers deserve numbers and which can stay qualitative, and write down why.
A resilience conclusion should say what the entity would need to do in the harder scenarios, which is the language ¶22(a)(i) uses: “how the entity would need to respond”.
If the analysis feeds a transition plan, the plan’s key assumptions should be the ones the scenarios stress; see transition plans in the UK.
Illustrative only — a UK manufacturer with three sites
- Focal questionDoes our ten-year capital plan hold?
Tied to the next board decision on the largest site.
- ScenariosFour, from two public sets
An orderly and a disorderly transition; a hot house world; a current-policies case. Vintages named.
- HorizonsShort, medium, long
Defined to match the planning cycle (¶10(d)).
- DriversCarbon cost, energy price, demand, flood, heat
Each traced to a scenario variable or a UK data source.
- TranslationNarrative, then ranges
Qualitative impact per site first; ranges for the drivers with most exposure.
- ConclusionResilient, with named conditions
What would have to change, and the capacity to adapt (¶22(a)(iii)).
Quality
Common failures, and the check for each
| Failure | The check |
|---|---|
| One scenario, or two read as good and bad | Three or four scenarios with genuinely different driving forces |
| A favoured "probable" case with variants around it | Scenarios built on different assumptions, not high, medium and low versions of one |
| A global scenario pasted in without translation | Inputs tied to your activities and locations (UK SRS S2 ¶B13) |
| Numbers the business does not recognise | Narratives agreed with managers before quantification |
| A resilience claim with no working | Every ¶22(b) input and assumption written down |
| Last cycle's analysis presented as new | The reporting period of the analysis stated (¶22(b)(iii)); the conclusion refreshed each year |
The TCFD guidance recommends a quality-assurance step that tests structure, internal logic and plausibility, and may include review by selected external parties such as investors (§C.2.6).
It also notes that companies generally update scenarios from as often as annually to every three to four years.
For tools, its Appendix 3 summarises selected scenario tools and information; this site does not rank commercial products.
From analysis to report
Disclosing it, and who has to
The disclosure is the last step, and the requirement is covered in full on climate scenario analysis under UK SRS S2.
For listed companies, the FCA’s final rules of 30 September 2026 apply UK SRS on a comply-or-explain basis for accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027.
The consultation before them, CP26/5, had proposed making UK SRS S2 mandatory; the final rules did not.
The standards themselves remain available for voluntary use by any entity, according to the government’s UK SRS guidance.
Companies under the Companies Act climate duty give a resilience analysis under different scenarios unless they explain its omission; see TCFD reporting in the UK.
The rules and dates are on UK SRS and the FCA, and the rest of the climate standard on UK SRS S2 climate disclosures.
Independent specialists can run or review a first analysis, and you can book a free 15-minute call to scope one.
Frequently asked
Running scenario analysis — frequently asked
How do you do climate scenario analysis?
Scope the work to your exposure and capability, engage the people who will use the results, frame a focal question tied to a real decision, identify the driving forces, choose a diverse set of scenarios, write narratives and then quantify where it is useful, check quality, work through the implications for strategy, and draw a resilience conclusion that you disclose with its inputs and assumptions. This order follows the TCFD's 2020 guidance for non-financial companies, which UK SRS S2 says its application guidance draws on.
How many climate scenarios should a company use?
The TCFD's 2020 guidance says most scenario methodologies recommend three or four. Two "bookend" scenarios are a practical start but tend to be read as one good and one bad future. Three scenarios risk becoming a high, medium and low version of a preferred case. UK SRS S2 asks only that you disclose whether the range was diverse.
What is the difference between top-down and bottom-up climate scenario analysis?
These are working terms rather than terms defined in UK SRS S2. A top-down analysis starts from a global or regional scenario and downscales it to the company, business unit and asset. A bottom-up analysis starts from the company's own sites, assets, suppliers and products and asks how each is exposed. Most analyses use both, because UK SRS S2 paragraph B13 requires inputs relevant to the entity's activities and the geographical location of those activities.
Which scenarios should a UK company use?
UK SRS S2 mandates none. The standard treats publicly available scenarios from authoritative sources as available without undue cost or effort. The NGFS long-term scenarios group into orderly, disorderly, hot house world and too little, too late categories; the IEA's World Energy Outlook 2025 presents a Current Policies Scenario, a Stated Policies Scenario and a Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario. Choose a set that covers both transition and physical risk and state the vintage used.
Where can UK companies find physical climate data?
The Met Office's UK Climate Projections (UKCP18) provide climate model projections for the UK. The Environment Agency's long-term flood risk service gives the flood risk of an area, not a specific property. Global scenario sets such as the NGFS scenarios include physical risk estimates, with caveats the NGFS itself publishes.
Can a small company do scenario analysis qualitatively?
Often, yes. UK SRS S2 paragraph B15 says qualitative scenario narratives, alone or combined with quantitative data, can be a reasonable and supportable basis for a resilience assessment. Paragraph B17 adds that a company with high exposure and access to the necessary skills, capabilities or resources is required to use a more advanced quantitative approach.
How often should climate scenarios be updated?
UK SRS S2 paragraph B18 requires the analysis to be updated at least in line with the strategic planning cycle, which may be multi-year, and the resilience assessment to be refreshed every year. The TCFD's 2020 guidance observed that companies generally update their scenarios from as often as annually to every three to four years.
What tools are there for climate scenario analysis?
The TCFD's 2020 guidance carries an appendix summarising selected scenario tools and information, alongside an overview of public scenarios and models. Public scenario portals such as the NGFS portal publish their data. This page does not rank commercial tools: a tool is only as good as the inputs and assumptions you would have to disclose under UK SRS S2 paragraph 22(b).
Can I achieve net zero through scenario analysis?
No. Scenario analysis tests how a strategy would fare in different futures; it does not reduce emissions. A normative scenario that works back from a net zero outcome can show what would be needed to get there, which is useful input to a transition plan, but the plan and its delivery are separate.
Sources
Primary sources
Every figure, date and status on this page traces to the instrument’s owner. Secondary commentary is never the source for a number.
- TCFDGuidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies (October 2020)
The process this page follows: §B getting organised; §C.2.1–2.6 the scenario development process; §C.1.3.3 number of scenarios; §D strategy implications; Appendix 3 tools.
- Department for Business and TradeUK SRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures (PDF)
¶22 and ¶¶B1–B18, including footnote 2 (the guidance draws on the TCFD's 2017 Technical Supplement and 2020 guidance), B13 (inputs relevant to activities and locations), B15, B17, B18.
- TCFDRecommendations of the TCFD — Final Report (June 2017)
Strategy c): resilience "including a 2°C or lower scenario".
- Network for Greening the Financial SystemNGFS Scenarios Portal
Version 5.0, November 2024; orderly, disorderly, hot house world and too little, too late categories.
- Network for Greening the Financial SystemNGFS Climate Scenarios — Phase V, with notice to users
The Kotz et al. (2024) paper behind some Phase V physical loss estimates has been retracted; the NGFS asks users to take account of it.
- International Energy AgencyWorld Energy Outlook 2025 — Net Zero Emissions by 2050
Published 12 November 2025; the NZE "translates the 1.5 °C goal into a global pathway for the energy sector".
- International Energy AgencyNet Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario — Global Energy and Climate Model
The IEA updates the NZE each year; the current vintage is no longer a limited-overshoot scenario.
- UNFCCCThe Paris Agreement, Article 2
The "latest international agreement on climate change" that UK SRS S2 ¶22(b)(i)(4) asks about.
- Met OfficeUK Climate Projections (UKCP18)
Climate model projections for the UK.
- Environment Agency (GOV.UK)Check your long term flood risk
Flood risk of an area, not a specific property.
- Department for Business and TradeUK Sustainability Reporting Standards — guidance
UK SRS S1 and S2 published 25 February 2026, available for voluntary use.
- Financial Conduct AuthorityCP26/5 consultation page
The consultation that PS26/19 answered; its mandatory S2 proposal was not adopted.
- Financial Conduct AuthorityPS26/19 landing page
Final rules of 30 September 2026: comply or explain across UK SRS for periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027.
Continue reading