Canadian banks can classify a sustainable asset, sell a federal bond that funds marine conservation, and structure a blue bond in Mexico. What I cannot find is the condition of the ocean inside a Canadian credit decision.
Where Things Stand
Collecting and processing ocean data has got cheaper and faster. Knowing what we are doing to the ocean has not. Observation, interpretation and assurance are three different problems.
A bank can be diversified by geography, sector and borrower, yet still depend on the same natural system. Canadian concentration rules do not ask banks to look for that exposure.
Where Things Stand
Flood, fisheries exposure, port disruption. Each one sits on a bank's register as its own category, and the ocean condition connecting them sits on none of them. What OSFI's climate guidance measures, what it leaves out, and why a risk nobody can measure well ends up mispriced.
Where Things Stand
Canada has spent hundreds of millions establishing marine protected areas. The harder question is whether the funding and governance behind them are built to last as long as the protection itself.
