Kesiapan Manajemen Risiko Keberlanjutan dan Resiliensi Perbankan: Studi Komparatif Berbasis PESTEL pada Bank-Bank Utama di Indonesia

Abstract

This study analyzes the readiness to integrate sustainability risks across five major Indonesian banks—Bank Negara Indonesia (BNI), Bank Rakyat Indonesia (BRI), Bank Mandiri, Bank Central Asia (BCA), and Bank Syariah Indonesia (BSI)—by linking PESTEL-based external environmental pressures with internal risk management capabilities. The research employs a document-based comparative qualitative approach, supplemented by descriptive quantitative data from 2025 annual reports, 2025 sustainability reports, prudential disclosures, regulatory publications, and academic literature. Sustainability Risk Management (SRM) readiness is analyzed across twelve dimensions: governance, strategy integration, risk appetite and sectoral policies, materiality identification, data and models, scenario analysis, monitoring and escalation, underwriting, pricing, portfolio management, capital/liquidity considerations, and corrective actions and learning. To ensure consistency, financial resilience contexts are compared using the same individual bank indicators—CAR, gross NPL/NPF, ROA, and LDR/FDR—along with LCR and NSFR as additional liquidity resilience indicators where available and comparable. The results indicate that sustainable finance has become a material portfolio for all the banks: BNI at IDR 196.7 trillion (22.3% of loans), Bank Mandiri at IDR 315.84 trillion (21.1%), BRI at IDR 811.86 trillion (approximately 60.4% of loans based on combined conventional and sharia portfolios), BCA at IDR 255.38 trillion (25.8%), and BSI at IDR 73.92 trillion (23.18% of financing). However, the size of the portfolio does not equate to the depth of risk integration. Comparative evidence indicates that all the banks have moved beyond mere disclosure toward specific forms of substantive integration, albeit with differing areas of strength: BNI in credit decisions, limits, and pricing; Mandiri in policy architecture and scenario planning; BRI in risk governance and links to capital planning; BCA in ERM, sectoral policies, and scenario governance; and BSI in underwriting, portfolio-wide scenario analysis, capital considerations, and portfolio limits. Across the cases, pricing and the corrective action-learning cycle remain the areas with the most limited public evidence. This study proposes an empirical readiness framework that distinguishes sustainability disclosure from substantive risk integration and elucidates the strategic implications for banking resilience.