- 86-21-63895588
- Harbour Ring Plaza, No.18 Middle Xizang Road Huangpu District, Shanghai, China 200001
Release time:2021-08-23
Authors: Christoph Nedopil Wang, Fudan University and Jingying Han, Green Belt and Road Initiative Center.
The deployment of global green finance
needs to be rapidly accelerated to close the massive infrastructure investment
gap and to allow a transition to green forms of energy, transport, industry,
urbanisation and agriculture. Yet so far, green finance lacks harmonised
definitions on types of projects, disclosure requirements, impact thresholds
and applicable instruments.
As two of the major markets for green
finance, China and the European Union are working on adopting a common green
taxonomy. The People’s Bank of China (PBoC) has confirmed it will discuss a
globally recognised green taxonomy with G20 member countries at the upcoming
G20 summit in Rome. This development could have important benefits for the Asia
Pacific region to close the massive gap in sustainable infrastructure finance.
Green finance is considered a key element
to tackle the dual challenges of climate change and biodiversity loss. It aims
to provide relevant incentives to accelerate investments in green economic
activities and, ideally, accompanying disincentives to reduce and phase out
harmful investments. China, through its green credit system, bond markets and
related taxonomies, as well as the European Union through its Sustainable
Finance Taxonomy and Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation have set global
standards and developed the largest green finance markets in the world.
To finance the green transition, massive
mobilisation of green finance from global investors is needed, particularly in
Asia. But currently, international capital flows are hampered due to frictions
caused by different standards and requirements in different markets, leading to
high transaction costs.
To overcome these frictions, China and the
European Union have worked on harmonising their green finance standards, with
some success. In October 2019, the European Union and China, with six other
countries, launched the International Platform on Sustainable Finance to
coordinate rules and standards on green finance. The European Union and China
co-chaired the platform to provide a ‘common ground’ taxonomy by mid-2021.
But harmonising green finance between China
and the European Union has been challenging. Since its initial publication in
2015, China’s green bond catalogue encouraged ‘green’ investments in ‘clean coal’
— undermining the EU green finance taxonomy goal to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. To coordinate their green financial systems, the PBoC published an
updated green bond catalogue in April 2021 that left out coal. The catalogue
also adjusted the categorisation system to match the EU Taxonomy and adopted
the EU ‘Do No Significant Harm’ principle to avoid investing in
climate-friendly but biodiversity-destroying assets. Yet, gaps still exist.
The EU Taxonomy focuses on the
environmental impacts of activities through the provision of specific
thresholds for climate mitigation, compared to a project list in the Chinese
green bond catalogue. The EU Taxonomy’s agriculture-related criteria focus more
on greenhouse gas reduction and less on broader sustainable farming aspects
that may be relevant in other markets, including China’s. This includes reduced
use of pesticides, biodiversity-friendly techniques and water conservation.
The EU Taxonomy includes six environmental
objectives which are interlinked through the multi-dimensional ‘Do No
Significant Harm’ requirement. In comparison, China’s green bond catalogue does
not explicitly define any environmental objectives.
The EU Taxonomy also recognises three
different types of environmentally sustainable economic activities:
sustainable, transition and enabling activities. By contrast, the green bond
catalogue does not include transition and enabling activities.
As two of the largest green finance markets
with advanced regulatory environments, China and the European Union have also
been influencing green finance development in other countries. For example, the
PBoC and the EU Commission are both members of the International Platform on
Sustainable Finance that aims to facilitate dialogue. The European Central Bank
and the PBoC are also founding members of the Network for Greening the
Financial System. Its goal is to contribute to the development of environment
and climate risk management in the financial sector.
With strong green finance track records,
Chinese and EU institutions are also working together to share green finance
experiences learnt across Asia. For example, in 2019, Tsinghua University
supported the development of the Mongolia Green Taxonomy, while the European
Bank for Reconstruction and Development supported Mongolia’s green capital
market development in 2021.
Developing countries in the Asia Pacific
require an additional US$900 billion per year on infrastructure investments. To
lower barriers for international investors, green and sustainable finance
standards are an essential building block. Greater harmonisation between China
and the European Union would allow further mobilisation of green finance.
Accordingly, policymakers and financial
institutions in the region should coordinate a China–EU green standard. But
with China–EU harmonisation still ongoing, policymakers and investors should
not use a lack of standards as an excuse for a lack of green finance action.
Climate change will not wait.
*Christoph Nedopil Wang is Professor at
Fanhai International School of Finance, Fudan University.
*Jingying Han is a researcher in the Green Belt and Road Initiative Center at the International Institute of Green Finance.